Definition
Latin: "praying for the king and the kingdom." An ancient English writ issued in the period before a standing collect existed for a sitting parliament, directing the clergy to offer prayers for the peace and good government of the realm. The writ was an instrument of religious obligation tied to parliamentary process: before the Reformation, it was customary at the opening of a new parliament for a petition to be made to the king requesting that the clergy be commanded to pray for the kingdom and for harmony between the king and parliament. The king would then issue this writ in response, formalizing that command. The writ fell into disuse following the English Reformation, when liturgical arrangements for parliament were regularized and the ad hoc need for such a directive disappeared.
Why It Matters in Research
This term is of purely antiquarian significance. No researcher should expect to encounter it in operative legal documents, statutes, or case law beyond passing historical reference. Its primary value in the Law Mind corpus is contextual: it illuminates the intersection of ecclesiastical obligation and parliamentary procedure in pre-Reformation English law, and it demonstrates the degree to which medieval and early modern English governance relied on formal writs to initiate what later became institutionalized ceremonial or liturgical practice.
Researchers working on the history of Parliament, the medieval writ system, or the relationship between church and state in English legal history may encounter this term in treatises and abridgments organized around the writ forms. It is unlikely to appear in any American legal source, and its presence in the standard law dictionaries (Black's, Bouvier's, Rapalje & Lawrence) reflects those dictionaries' commitment to comprehensive coverage of the classical writ vocabulary rather than any continuing practical relevance.
Note that the Black's first-edition entry in the source material contains a textual corruption — the definition appears to have been merged with unrelated stock-exchange terminology (calls, puts, straddles). This is an artifact of OCR or typesetting error in the digitized source and should be disregarded. The correct definition, consistent across all other sources, describes the writ as stated above.
Historical Dictionary Support
All four source dictionaries agree in substance. Black's (both editions) and Rapalje & Lawrence give nearly identical one-sentence definitions. Bouvier's is the most informative, supplying the pre-Reformation practice that gave rise to the writ: a new parliament would petition the king to require clerical prayer for the kingdom and for good understanding between king and parliament, whereupon the writ de orando pro rege et regno issued. Bouvier's entry appears to have been cut off in transcription before completion, but the essential mechanism is clear.
No source provides authority for when the writ was last issued, nor do any of the dictionaries trace its precise statutory or common-law basis. The treatment in all sources is definitional and historical rather than doctrinal, reflecting the writ's status as a curiosity of legal antiquity rather than a living instrument. Researchers seeking deeper treatment should consult works on medieval parliamentary procedure and ecclesiastical writs, such as Stubbs's Constitutional History of England or Anson's Law and Custom of the Constitution, neither of which is represented in the dictionary sources here.