James Wayland Joyce.

England's sacred synods : a constitutional history of the convocations of the clergy, from the earliest records of Christianity in Britain to the date of the promulgation of the present Book of common prayer; including a list of all councils, ecclesiastical as well as civil, held in England, in whic online

. (page 24 of 83)
Online LibraryJames Wayland JoyceEngland's sacred synods : a constitutional history of the convocations of the clergy, from the earliest records of Christianity in Britain to the date of the promulgation of the present Book of common prayer; including a list of all councils, ecclesiastical as well as civil, held in England, in whic → online text (page 24 of 83)
Font size
QR-code for this ebook


nities in unmistakable language. On these occasions they
did not spare their king, to whose conduct, in uniting himself
with the Pope against the clergy of this kingdom, may very
justly be ascribed much of the blame for the treatment which
they experienced, and, their remonstrances were undisguised,



" Nec° pavidum jam murmur erat, nee pectore tecto
Ira latens."

Thus, when at ^ the instigation of K. Henry III. Otho came
over here as legate, a.d. 1237, and convened synods, our coun-
trymen did not hesitate to use this language respecting their

' " Illinc sine cappis et mantellis discincti et discalceati usque ad hospitium
legati procederent." — Cone. Mag. Brit. vol. i. p. 663, citing Matt. Par. in an.
1238, p. 397.

* " Insuper jam de clero pars magna ad nutum suum carceri mancipatur." —
Cone. Mag. Brit. i. 603, citing Matt. Par. in an. 1238, p. 397.

3 "Ut banc contradictionem communem domino Papse insiuuare velitis, pro
statu Ecclesise Anglicanse, presentiam Domini nostri Jesu Christi appellantes, et
concilii universalis aliquo tempore per Dei gratiam convoeandi." — Cone. Mag.
Brit. i. 688, citing Matt. Par. in an. 1246, pp. 625 et seq.

1 "Per mandatum regis venit legatus in Angliam." — Cone. Mag. Brit. i. 047,
citing Matt. Par. in an. 1237-



™ Cone.
Mag. Brit.



" Lucan.
Phars. lib.
7. 55-6.



220



ANGLO-NORMAN SYNODS AND COUNCILS,



[chap.



A.D. 1070
—1279.

° Cone.
Mag. Brit,
i. W?.

PS.Matt.xii.
2.5. S.Lukc
xi. 17.
q Cone.
Mag. Brit,
vol. i. p.
647.



■■ Collier,
vol. ii. p.
496.



* Collier,
J-:<cl. Hist,
vol. ii. 548.



' Cone.
Mag. Brit,
vol. i. p.
709.



sovereign : " He has secretly introduced " a legate to pervert
the whole realm . . . and thus day after day, according to the
words of the Gospel, our kingdom divided against itself p is
brought to desolation." Edmund, then archbishop of Canter-
bury, also joined in like remonstrances. "He also greatly •>
blamed the king for having invited a legate, to the prejudice
of the dignity of the see of Canterbury, and at the risk of com-
promising the interests of the kingdom." This Edmund, it
may be remarked, suffered for this heroic maintenance of the
liberty of the English Church, and of the independency of his
see ; for the treatment he experienced at court, and the ill
usage he met with from the legate, made him retire to the
abbey of Soy.sy in France, where he died, his life having been
shortened "■, as it was thought, by the sorrow he experienced
on account of the encroachments of Rome.

This union of the king of England with the Pope's legate
to degrade the national Church and despoil her clergy of their
just rights, though a subject far more fit to beget sorrow and
shame than laughter and amusement, did not fail, it seems, to
excite the merriment of the king and his Roman ally, upon
which some wag of that day, taking up the same strain, said,
that " since a league had been entered into between the shep-
herd and the wolf, he was led to the conclusion that cruel
slaughter awaited the sheep ^" A somewhat like idea seems
to have been entertained by Sewal, archbishop of York ; for
when in writing a few years afterwards* a sharp remonstrance
upon similar subjects to Pope Alexander lY., he took " the
freedom % amongst other things, to tell him that when our
Saviour commissioned S. Peter to feed his sheep. He did not
give him any authority either to flay or eat them."

But not only did the conduct of Otho excite the indignant
opposition of the English prelates and clergy; Rustand, his
successor in the ofiice of legate, received perhaps less courteous
treatment. When he appeared as legate in the legatine Synod of
London*, a.d. 1255, not only endeavouring to exercise unwar-

2 "Quidam satyricus satis satyrice regem et legatum, dum ad iiivicem jocose
confabularentur, et in omnibus agendis sese coadjutores fore contra omnes promit-
tercnt, reprsehendit dicons, ' Eia, Eia, nunc bene novi quod, ex rjuo pastor et lupus
foedus inierint concordise, ovibus imminet strages truculenta.' " — M. Paris, ad an.
1240, p. 48G, ed. 1G84.

* About the year 1258.



VIII,]



ANGLO-NORMAN SYNODS AND COUNCILS.



221



rantable jurisdiction over our Church, but seeking also to exact
contributions for the papal service, there were found among
our ecclesiastical chiefs some with courage enough to exhibit
manifest signs of resistance. Fulco, then bishop of London,
after several days' debate in council, thus delivered his mind.
With a deep sigh he said, " I will certainly " bear to have my
head cut off before I will consent to such slavery on the part
of our Church, and to such injustice effected by intolerable
oppression." Nor was Walter, bishop of Worcester, less plain
or less courageous in his language than his brother of London.
"I would sooner be condemned' to be hanged," he said,
" than that the liberty of our holy Church should be subject
to such an overthrow." Perhaps the language barely rises in
dignity to the position of the speakers or the solemnity of the
occasion, but it has the rare merit at least of being unmis-
takable. Nor were these empty boasts ; for though the king '
and the Pope with his legate seemed banded together in
opposition to the liberties of the EngHsh Church, our prelates
did not hesitate to resist still further. Rustand complained
most grievously of this conduct, declaring to the king that
the Bishop of London excited all the other prelates to oppose
the royal and the papal will ^, for Fulco remained incompliant,

" Ille X iter antiquas Solymorum instaurat ad arces,
Sit licet invisus magnse primoribus urbis."

The king's wrath was so far excited by this information, that
he made bold to say that neither the bishop nor any of those
who acted with him loved their king, and that "he would
take good care that the Pope should both rebuke and punish
such conduct y." Still, nothing daunted, the bishop firmly
replied, " The Pope and king ^, stronger than I, may deprive
me of my bishopric, though indeed they cannot do that with
justice ; yet let them take my mitre, I shall change ^ it for a
helmet." The reply is somewhat warlike, but the provocation
was extreme. The alliance between an English sovereign and
foreign legate for the overthrow of the liberties of this national
Church was surely calculated to excite honest indignation ; and
we are induced not only to forgive, but to honour language

* " Patuit enim luce clarius, quod Papa et rex in gravamen Ecclesiae et cleri
confoederabantur."— Cone. Mag. Brit. i. 711-

^ " Tollant mitram galea remanebit." — Cone. Mag. Brit. i. 710-



A.D. 1070
—1279.



' Cone.
M.'ig. Bi-it.
vol. i. p.

ru9.



" Cone.
Mag. Brit.
vul. i. 1).
710.
^ Vid.

Christ, lib. i.
204-5.



y Cone.
Mas. Brit. i.
710.
■^ Cone.
Mag. Brit.
vol. i. p.
710.



222



ANGLO-NORMAN SYNODS AND CIOtTNCM-S.



[chap.



A. D. 1070
—1279.



a Luc.
Phais. V.
296 - 2y7.



•> Cone.
Mag. Br
vol. i. p.
712.



which under ordinary circum.stances would be far from respect-
ful or courteous.

" Sic a eat, o superi ! quando pietasque fidesque
Destituunt: moresque malos sperare relictum est."

Nor was this by any means a singular instance of such an
unholy alliance. The sharp rebukes excited by such proceed-
ings seem at that day to have been common. One which the
king received from the abbot of Buildwas Abbey, in Shrop-
shire, was less rough, though perhaps equally severe, and cer-
tainly more consistent with the character of a Christian
clergyman than the language of the indignant bishops. In
the same year (125.5) in which they remonstrated so loudly,
and in which the Bishop of London foresaw the possibihty, not
of beating swords into pruning-hooks, but of changing his
mitre for a helmet, the king united himself in the bonds of
strictest alliance with the legate Rustand to despoil the Cis-
tercian order of their property. Upon their unwillingness to
consent to such an aggression on their possessions, which I
suppose stood upon the foot of the law and upon the common
conditions of the rights and property of the subject, Rustand
betook himself to the king, as a " hurt" and whining child to
his mother's lap," and complained most bitterly of the Cister-
cian abbot. The king's wrath being excited by the miscar-
riage of his friend and ally, and some suggestion having arisen
that he ought to seek the intercessions rather than the pro-
perty of the religious, "he swore '^ he would have their prayers
and their money too." " That," said the abbot of Buildwas,
" cannot be ; you must be content to dispense with the one
or the other. If you violently extort from us our scanty sub-
stance, how can we pray for you with devout and sincere
hearts ? and prayer without devotion will avail to profit little
or nothing ^"

Notwithstanding, however, the abbot's very righteous reply,

s " Magister igitur Rusfandus, sicut solet infans Ircsus ct qucrulus ad sinum
matris, ad regem festinavit." — Cone. Mag. Brit. i. 712, quotes Matt. Par. in an.
1255.

' " Non credo hoc posse contingere— altcrutro oportet te carere. Si enim sub-
stantialas nostras a nobis violenter extorqueas, quomodo devote et sinceris oordibus
pro te orabinius. Oratio nempe sine devotione parum vel nihil prodesse pra;va-
lebit."— Cone. Mag. Brit. i. 712, quotes M. Par. in an. 1255.



ANGLO-NORMAN SYNODS AND COUNCILS.



223



the king still lent his secret aid '^ in undermining the interest
of the whole order. In such sort did K. Henry III, contribute
his assistance to Roman legates while trampling on the rights
of the English clergy ; and it must ever be a most humiliating
and distressing occupation for Englishmen to contemplate the
sovereign of their country uniting with any external force,
whatsoever form, character, or condition it may assume, to
oppress the most sacred and time-honoured institution of
this land — the national Church. It was such a union which
caused the frequency of legatine synods in this country, ap-
pearing as dishonourable blots among the fairer pages of our
ecclesiastical records.

XII Constitu ^^ ^^ necessary now to make a careful inquiry
tion of national into the Constitution of our ecclesiastical synods
synods ^ir^ThL between the accession of Archbishop Lanfranc
''^'^' and the resignation of Archbishop Robt. Kil-

warby, the period embraced in this part of our investigation,
and during which it will be seen that our provincial synods
or convocations took that form under which they exist to this
day.

As regards the "great councils," it has been remarked
that as in the case of the mixed councils and wittena-gemotes
of the earlier ages of our history, they were frequently held
concurrently with synods. But synods were now more often
convened at times and places distinct. When, however, the
two were held concurrently, the ecclesiastics, as of old time,
so also now, went apart from the laity ; and though being
the same persons, yet as members of the great council or of
the synod, they sat and acted in different capacities. In the
former they united in giving their counsel for the promotion
of the common weal ; in the latter they acted as the governors
and representatives of the Church within the proper limits of
the "power of the keys." Of this separation of the two
orders of ecclesiastics and laity, when a synod and great
council were held concurrently, we have a clear example in
the great Council of Westminster, held a.d. 1102. On that
occasion " at the feast ^ of Michaelmas K. Henry I. was in
London at Westminster, and with him all the heads of the king-
dom, both ecclesiastics and laymen ; and there also Anselm,
the archbishop, held a great synod concerning such matters



A.D. 1070
—1279.



d Cone.
Mas:. Brit,
i. 383, quotes
Florence,
Wore, ad
an. 1102.



224



AXGLO-NORMAN SYNODS AND COUNCILS.



[chap.



A.D. 1070
—1279.



e Chapters
iii. iv. V. vi.
vii.



f Cone.
Mae. Brit,
i. 736.



as pertained to the Christian rehgion *." But to couie more
directly to our present object — the constitution of our na-
tional and provincial synods of this period — it is plain that
the constituent members of those assemblies were generally
— 1. Archbishops. 2. Bishops. 3. Deans. 4. Abbots.
5. Priors. 6. Archdeacons, 7. Chosen Pre.sbyters.

XIII. Arcii- As regards the fact that archbishops and
shops^comtituent hishops werc constituent members there is of
members. coursc no doubt ; it is therefore unnecessary to
cite proofs on this head.

But as endeavours have often been made to shew that none
other than they were members of national and provincial
synods of old, it has been necessary to prove in former parts
of our inquiry^ that such statements are unfounded. And so
now it seems desirable to shew also by examples, that in this
period of our history the second order in the priesthood were
admitted as constituent members of such assemblies ; for thus
we shall have the sanction of a continuous stream of authority,
beginning from the time of the primitive Church and extending
through every age of our national history, for the present con-
stitution of the English convocations as pure provincial synods.
It is not for a moment meant to insinuate that the examples
about to be adduced exhaust by any means the instances
which might be brought forward to prove the points before
us. Some only of those which might be quoted are given ;
but as, for the most part, they extend over the whole space
embraced within the limits of this period, they may justly be
considered as fair evidence of the constant usage of that
time.

XIV. Deans That deans of cathedrals were members of
constituent mem- the greater ecclesiastical synods during this

period of our history, appears plain from the
records which remain. .

In the mandate of Archbishop Boniface, calling upon
Roger, bishop of Lichfield and Coventry, to summon the
members to the national^ Synod of Merton, a.d. 1258, the
bishop is connnanded to call the deans of the two cathe-

' " Ubi ctiam Ansclmus archiepiscopus tenuit magnum concilium de his quae
ad Cliristianitatem pertinent."— Cone. Mag. Brit.i.3«3, quotes Flor, Wore. Chron.
ad an. 1102.



VIII.]



ANGLO-NORMAN SYNODS AND COUNCILS.



clrals "and" of other churches." Now whether m this latter
term the rural deans were included or not, the summons of
the deans of the two cathedrals of Lichfield and Coventry is
clear and explicit. In the archiepiscopal mandate of Stephen
Langton directed to the Bishop of London, and desiring him
(according to our present practice) to summon a provincial ^
synod to meet in S. Paul's Cathedral, London, on the day
following the feast of the Epiphany, a.d. 1226 n.s., the
deans ' of the cathedral churches are specially mentioned. Li
the mandate of Archbishop Boniface, directed to the diocese
of Lichfield and Coventry, and summoning the members to
the provincial Synod of Canterbury, held in London*^, a.d.
1257, we find a special^ order that the Dean of Lichfield
should be cited to attend. In the account of the provincial •"
Synods of Canterbury and York, held concurrently at Lam-
beth and Beverley, a.d. ]261, among the members are men-
tioned " the ordinaries of churches '^," an expression which must
certainly include deans : and as they have been mentioned as
constituent members of several previous synods, it would
seem reasonable to suppose that they were here intended.

XV Abbots "^^^^ evidence that abbots were constituent
constituent mem- members both of our national and provincial
synods of this period is abundant.

At the national Synod of London, a.d. 1075, twenty abbots
subscribed ^ In the national Synod of Lambeth, a.d. 1100,
the presence of the ahhots^ is mentioned in connexion with
that of the bishops. In the national Synod of Westminster,
A.D. 1127, the abbots^ are mentioned, in conjunction with the
bishops, as being constituent members. To the national Synod
of London, a.d. 1129, the abbots ° were summoned with the
bishops. At the legatine Synod of Winchester, a.d. 114ii,
the abbots'^ are represented as sitting with the archbishops
and bishops. There were collected at the national Synod of
Pipewell, A.D. 3189, "the abbots^ from almost the whole of
England." The abbots "" are mentioned as sitting in the na-
tional Synod of S. Alban's, a.d. 1206 ; and to them by name,

3 " Vocetis etiam decanos cathedralium et aliarum ccclesiai'um." — Cone. Mag.
Brit, citing Annal. Burton, p. 388 seq.

^ " Et vocent decanos cathedralium eccleiiarum," &c. — Cone. Mag. Brit, citing
Reg. Poore. Sarum, fol. 109—138. i



225



a.d. 1070

-1279.



s Cone.
Mas. Brit,
i. (;U2.



I' Cone,
iMag. Brit,
i. 723.

' Cone. Mag.
Brit, quotes
Burton, An-
nals, p. 381.
J Cone.
Macr. Brit,
i. 75.5 &
note, & 746.
^ Cone.
Mag. Brit.
quotes Matt.
West, in



' Cone. Mag.


Brit. i. 3b'4.


'» Cone.


Mag. Brit.


i. 375.


" Cone.


Mag. Brit.


i. 410.


Cone.


iMaer. Brit.


i. 411.


P Cone.


Mag. Brit,
i. 422.


1 Cone.


Mag. Brit.


i. 492.


'■ Cone.


M«g. Brit.


i. 514.



226



ANGLO-NORMAN SYNODS AND COUNCILS.



[chap.



A.D. 1070
—1-279.



Cone.
Mag. Br



t Cone.
Mag. Brit,
i. 476.
" Cone.
Mag. Brit.
i. 504.



' Cone.
Mag. Brit,
i. C02.



w Cone.
Mag. Brit,
i. 603.
" Cone.
Mag. Brit,
i. 723.
y Cone.
Mag. Brit,
quotes Bur-
ton, Anna],
p. 381.
^ Cone.
Mag. Brit,
quotes Matt.
West, in
an. 1261.
» Cone.
Mag. Brit,
i. 755 &
note, 746.
b Cone.
Mag. Brit,
ii. 19.
•^ Cone.
M.ag. Brit,
quotes MS.
CCC. Ox.
Num. 154.



among others, was a prohibition directed on that occasion by
K. John. By a mandate directed by Archbishop Boniface to
Roger, bishop of Lichfield and Coventry, the latter was called
to the national^ Synod of Merton^ a.d. 1258, and directed
to summon to that assembly the abbots of his diocese.

From such instances, by no means all that might be ad-
duced, but yet spreading over almost the whole of this period,
it is plain that abbots were constantly constituent members of
our national synods.

That they were also members at this time of our provincial
synods is equally clear.

The Abbots of S. Alban's, S. Edmund's, of Romsey, and
of Boxley are specially mentioned as having been present with
the bishops at the provincial' Synod of AVestminster, a.d.
1175. At the provincial" Synod of AVestminster, a.d. 1199,
the abbots w^ere present with the bishops, having been parti-
cularly summoned by Archbishop Hubert to treat of eccle-
siastical affairs '. The provincial synod which met at S. Paul's
Cathedral^, London, a.d. 1226 n.s., was summoned by the
archbishop, as has been observed above, through the instru-
mentality of the Bishop of London, as dean of the province,
according to the present practice. In the mandate which
was issued on that occasion by Archbishop Langton, the
abbots^ are specially summoned. To the provincial Synod*
of London, a.d. 1257, the abbots were summoned, as is plain
from the mandate ^ of Archbishop Boniface directed to the
diocese of Lichfield and Coventry. Abbots^- are mentioned
as constituent members of the provincial Synods ^ of Canter-
bury and York, held at Lambeth and Beverley respectively,
A.D. 1261. In the provincial synod held at the New Temple**,
London, a.d. 1269, the gravamina of the clergy of the pro-
vince were proposed to the assembly, and among others the
abbots '^ are specially mentioned as members of it.

XVI. Priors Priors also, during this period, are continually
eonstitucnt mem- mentioned as members of the greater eccle-

bers. . . , , °

siastical synods.

2 For evidence that tliis synod was national, not provincial, see Cone. Mag. Brit.
vol. i. p. 73C, and p. 740, note.

' " Qui ad vocationcni Domini Cantuarensis eo convenerunt, ut de causis ecclesi-
asticis tractarent."— Cone. Mag. Brit, citing Rad. de Diceto, col. 70?.



ni.]



a^:glo-korman synods and councils.



227



To the national Synod '^ of London, a.d. 1129*, all priors
were summoned. Together with the bishops and abbots at
the national Synod ^ of Pipewell, a.d. 1189, there were col-
lected the priors^ of almost all England. In the mandate
directed by Archbishop Boniface to Roger, bishop of Lich-
field and Coventry, bidding him to summon the members from
his diocese to the national Synod of Merton, a.d. 1258, the
priors of that diocese are specially included.

From such examples, spread over this period, we surely
gather that priors were members at this time of our national
synods. That they were also called to our provincial synods,
ready proof may be adduced.

In the provincial Synod*' of Westminster, a.d. 1190, we
find the Prior of Canterbury rising in his language even so
far as "to command ^ the legate that nothing should be done
in derogation of the rights of the Church of Canterbury."
To the provincial Synod ^ of Westminster, a.d. 1199, the
priors were specially summoned by Archbishop Hubert to
treat of ecclesiastical affairs \ To the provincial synod held
at S. Paul's '*, London, a.d. 1226 n.s., the priors were
specially summoned by the mandate ' sent from Archbishop
Stephen Langton to the Bishop of London, and by him to be
transmitted to the suffragans. Priors were specially sum-
moned to the provincial Synod J of London, a.d. 1257, and by
the mandate of Archbishop Boniface were commanded to
bring with them letters of proxy * from the bodies whom they
represented. Of the provincial Synods'' of Canterbury and
York, held concurrently at Lambeth and Beverley, a.d. 1261,
priors^ are expressly mentioned as constituent members. To
the provincial synod held at the New Temple", London, a.d.

* " Cunctos item priores." — Cone. Mag. Brit, quotes Chron. Sax. in an. Xti.
1129.

5 " Et prioribus fere totius Angliee." — Cone. Mag. Brit, quotes Rog. Hoveden
in an. 1189.

6 " Episcopus Roffensis et Prio)- Cantuar. legatum rogaverint imo jusserint, ne
quid in hoc concilio contra jura Cantuarensis Ecclesiee," itc. — Cone. Mag. Brit,
citing Gervasius, sub an. 1191.

7 " Et prioribus diversi ordinis, qui ad vocationem Domini Cantuarensis eo con-
venerunt, ut de eausis ecclesiasticis tractarent." — Cone. Mag. Brit, citing Rad. de
Diceto, col. 707.

* " Et alii priores cum Uteris procuratoriis nomine congi-egationum suarum con-
fectis." — Cone. Mag. Brit, citing Annal. Burton, p. 381.



A.D. 1070
—1279.

J Cone.
Mag. Brit,
i. 411.
<^ Cone.
Mag. Brit.
i. 492.



' Conr.
Mag. Brit.



e Cone
Mng. Brit,
i. 504.



h Cone.
M:>s. Brit,
i. G02.
i Ibid. 603.



J Cone.
Mag. Brit,
i. 723.



k Cone.
Mag. Brit,
i. 755 &
note, & 746.
1 Cone.
Mag. Brit.
uotes Matt.



qu(

w



est. m
an. 1261.
I" Cone.
Mag. Brit,
ii. 19.



Q2



228



ANC.LO-NORMAN SYNODS AMD COUNCILS.



[C,



A.n. 1070
-1270.



° Cone.
Mag. Brit,
citing MS.
CCC. Ox.
Num. 154.



o Cone.
Mag. Brit,
i. 364.
P Cone.
Mag. Brit,
i. 375.
'1 Cone.
Mag. Brit,
i. 411.
'' Cone.
Mag. Brit,
i. 514.
* Cone.
Ma?. Brit,
i. 736.



« Cone.
Mag. Brit,
i. 736.



" Cone.
Mag. Biit.
i. (i()-2.
' Il)id. 603.



1269, the gravamina of the clergy of the province of Canter-
bury were proposed, and among the members addressed the
priors'^ are specially mentioned.

XVII Arch- That archdeacons were commonly members
deacons eonsti- of the national and provincial synods of this

tuent members. . i i i i , i t ^

period, we are assured both by the records and
subscription-lists of those assemblies, as well as by the man-
dates which summoned them.

At the national Synod of London, a.d. 1075, we find the
subscription of the Arclideacon ° of Dover. In the national
Synod P of Lambeth, a.d. 1100, the Archdeacons^ of Canter-
bury and Salisbury took a prominent part. To the national
Synod of London, a.d. 1129, the archdeacons^ as a body were
summoned. Of the national vSynod ^ of S. Alban's, a.d. 1206,
the archdeacons are mentioned as constituent members ; and
they ^ are named specially in the prohibition which K. John
directed to that assembly. To the national Synod ^ of Mer-
ton, A.D. 1258, the clergy were summoned by mandates sent
out by Archbishop Boniface to the bishops. By that trans-
mitted to the Bishop of Lichfield and Coventry, he was ordered
to call to the synod all the archdeacons * of his diocese, who
were on this occasion ' bid to bring procuratorial letters from
the clergy of their respective archdeaconries, so that they
might act in the name of those who committed authority to
them in that behalf. And this custom, for archdeacons to be



Online LibraryJames Wayland JoyceEngland's sacred synods : a constitutional history of the convocations of the clergy, from the earliest records of Christianity in Britain to the date of the promulgation of the present Book of common prayer; including a list of all councils, ecclesiastical as well as civil, held in England, in whic → online text (page 24 of 83)