but in the Hands of his Officers) and they could fatisfy themselves. But fome Particulars in his Speech, wherein he mention'd the fubfcribed Copy that was in his own Hands, made them ask, what Originals HE had,viz. in his own Cuftody,either formerly, or at that time. For it must be remembred, that his Palace at Lambeth, and confequently his Paper Study there, had been rifled long before; and the Papers prepared for his Defence had been newly taken from him: by one of which Methods they were already Mafters of the fubfcribed Copy, which afterwards Mr. Selden obtained, and is now lodged amongst his Books in the Bodleyan Library, as I fhall foon fhew. They were defirous therefore to know, whether he had formerly had more Origi nals than those which they had actually gotten into their Hands, and whether he had any then by him in the Tower, which had efcaped the ravenous Claws of Mr. Prynne.

Now, when they were thus upon the fearch, can it be imagined, that they would neglect that very Regiftry to which he had appealed for the authentic Record of the Articles? Or would they have concealed it, if any of the Records had been miffing; or if the recorded Articles had read otherwise than he pretended? I muft own, the Archbishop's Appeal to the Records in his Registry, is in my Opinion, by reafon of fuch wonderful and unparallel'd Circumftances to ftrengthen and confirm it, equal to the Oaths of a Thousand Witneffes. And confequently it demonftrates, that the Paper above recited is an authentic Tranfcript from the Records in the Office of his See, and that we may intirely depend on the Contents of it.

Secondly, There is now in the Poffeffion of Charles Battely, Efq; Receiver of the Church of Westmin

Westminster, a Quarto MS. Volume, containing things of various Natures, but efpecially Tranfcripts from the Records of Convocation, and particularly the intire Regifter of the Upper Houfe in 1562. This Book did manifeftly once belong to Archbishop Parker; for his Hand Writing appears in feveral Places of it, and his red Lead Pencil very frequently. From this Volume a Copy of the Acts of the Upper House in 1562 was taken, from which Tranfcript Dr. Gibson printed the Register of the Upper Houfe of that Convocation in his Synodus Anglicana.

Tis certain, that the Register in this Quarto MS. is not an Original. To prove this, I might urge, that 'tis not only found in company with a Mif cellany of great Variety, but alfo writ in fuch a Manner, as I dare fay no Original Acts of the Upper House were ever written in. Befides, there are no less than two Sheets of Paper, filled with Particulars of different Kinds, in the Body of thefe very Acts; by reafon of which the Account of what paft on Feb. 26. is divided into diftinct Par cels at a confiderable diftance from each other.

But what I chiefly infift upon is this. The Paper produced by Archbishop Laud fhews, 1. That the Articles of Religion, with the Ratification, were exhibited at large in the Original Register of the Upper Houfe, and that the Pages were numbred; whereas in this Quarto MS. the Articles and Ratification are omitted, and the Pages are not numbred. 2. That in the Original Regifter the Seffions were numbred; whereas in this MS. nothing of this Kind is to be found. And as for the Numbers of the Seffions found in the printed Copy, they were added for Convenience only; and are fomewhat different from those in the Record. For Arch

Archbishop Laud's Paper makes the 19th of Jan. the Third Seffion, whereas the printed Regifter makes it the Fourth. The Archbishops Paper alfo makes the 29th of Jan. the eighth Seffion, whereas the printed Regifter makes it the ninth. This was occafioned by reckoning (in the printed Regifter) Jan. 12. for the Firft Seffion; whereas, tho' the Convocation met on Jan. 12. yet it was not opened till the 13th, as the printed Acts fhew. And accordingly, in Dr. Heylyn's Abstract, of which I fhall presently give an Account, tho' Jan. 13. is not exprefly called the firft Seffion, yet (which neceffarily implies as much) fan. 16. is exprefly called the fecond Seffion, and Jan. 29. is exprefly called the eighth Seffion. And the other Seffions are also numbred in like manner, perfectly agreeable to the Course of the printed Acts and Archbishop Laud's Paper.

"Twill be convenient alfo to take notice, that in the printed Regifter fome few things are abbreviated. Particularly the Names of the Suffragan Bishops are not recited, as they are in the faid Quarto MS. in exact Conformity with Archbishop Laud's Paper. See the Editor's Preface, p. 9.

Thirdly, Francis Lord Bishop of Rochefter has a Quarto Volume written, for the most part, by Dr. Heylyn's own Hand, entituled, Remembrances of Affairs in Church and State, and containing, amongst a great Variety of other Particulars, what the Dr. calls, An Abstract of the Records of Convocation from the Year 1528. to the Year 1580. inclufively. This Abstract, which is written by the Doctor's own Hand, is manifeftly drawn from the Records of the Upper Houfe only. For I do not remember, that he ever mentions any thing relating to the Lower Houfe, but what muft have been of courfe recorded in the Upper Houfe Books. СНАР.

CHA P. III.

The Proceedings of the Convocation with relation to the Articles down to Jan. 29. 1562.

HA

AVING thus prepared the Way, I fhall now give an Historical Account of the Proceedings of this Convocation with respect to the Articles, gathered from the several Papers above mentioned.

Jan. 19. 1562.

The Upper Houfe conferr'd de quibufdam Articulis ad Chriftianam fidem pertinentibus, &c. Synod. Anglic

P. 193.

The Prolocutor, not to mention other Particulars, acquainted the Prefident, Quod Articuli in Synodo Londinenfi, tempore nuper Regis Edwardi Sexti (ut afferuit) editi, traditi funt quibufdam aliis viris ex catu dicta domus inferioris, ad hoc etiam electis, ut eos diligenter perfpiciant, examinent, & confiderent; ac prout eis vifum fuerit, corrigani & reforment, ac in proxima Seffione etiam exhibeant. Et tunc Reverendiffimus hujufmodi negotia per dictum Prolocutorem & Clerum incepta approbavit, ac in eifdem erga proximam Seffionem juxta eorum determinationem procedere voluit & mandavit. Archbifhop Laud's Paper, and Synod. Anglic. p. 193.

Jan. 20.

The Upper Houfe de & fuper quibufdam Articulis facrofanitam Chrifti Religionem concernentibus, de quibus in Actis befterni diei fit mentio, per fpacium trium horarum. aut circiter inter fe tractarunt & communicarunt. Synod. Anglic. p. 194..

Jan. 22, 25, 27.

The Upper Houfe conferr'd, probably about the Articles. Synod. Anglic. p. 194, 195.

Chap. IV. In all the foregoing Particulars Dr. Heylyn's Ab ftract confirms what the printed Regifter fays. Only the Abstract does not mention what paffed on Jan. 25, and 27. as being of fmall Moment: but paffes from Seff. 5. to Seff. 8. All which is perfectly confiftent with the full Account of the printed Regis fter, and moft futable to the Design of an Abstract.

And thus are we come to the famous 29th of Ja nuary, on which the Upper Houfe figned the Articles, as the Latin MS. in Bennet College Library, and the Poftfcript to Wolf's Edition, and the printed Regifter in Synodus Anglicana, p. 196. and Dr. Heylyn's Abstract, exprefly teftify. Wherefore, tho this MS. which was then fubfcribed, has been faithfully exhibited in the Collation already; yet I fhall now present the Reader with a fecond (and in fome Refpects, a more distinct and particular) View of it.

An Account of the Latin MS. in Bennet College Library, which was Sign'd by the Bishops on Jan. 29. 1562.

TH

HERE is, amongst many others, in a Folio Volume called Synodalia, in Bennet College Library, a Parcel confifting of fix Sheets of Paper, which are all of them fowed in together, being all of them folded one within another, Folio wife.

Of these fix Sheets the firft, third, fifth and fixth are of the fame Finefs, and bear the fame Mark, viz. a Flower Pot with the Letters H D upon the Belly of it. The fecond and fourth Sheets are mark ed with a Flower Pot without H D upon the Belly

of