Selected quad for the lemma: book_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
book_n	bishop_n	church_n	king_n	3,230	5	3.5319	3	true

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A05345	A full confutation of the covenant lately sworne and subscribed by many in Scotland; delivered in a speech, at the visitation of Downe and Conner, held in Lisnegarvy the 26th. of September, 1638. Published by authority.; Speech, delivered at the visitation of Downe and Conner, held in Lisnegarvy the 26th. of September, 1638	Leslie, Henry, 1580-1661.	1639 (1639)	STC 15497; ESTC S102367	22,621	42

not abjured in the Negative confession nor so much as mentioned If any man shall say That Episcopacy is included under the Popes wicked Hierarchy which there is denied he will prove himself ridiculous for it is well known unto all that ever looked into the Ecclesiasticall history that the Church was governed by Bishops 600 yeers before the Popes wicked Hierarchy began And as that government was not abjured so neither is it any innovation at all for it is evident that in the yeere 81. they had Bishops and it is yet to be seen registrate in the Books of Councell and subscribed by the Commissioners for the time how that but a little time before the publishing of that Confession the generall Assembly did agree with his Majesties Regents in his minority Kings declaration that the estate of Bishops which is one of the estates of Parliament should be maintained and authorized But about foure or five yeeres after about the yeere 83. the generall Assembly tooke upon them contrary to their own subscriptions to discharge the estate of Bishops and to declare the same to be unlawfull commanding all the Bishops in the kingdome to dimit their places and Jurisdictions under paine of Excommunication and in like manner commanding the King and his Councell under the like payne not to choose any others in their place But when that wise King saw their proceedings and how they took more upon them then ever the Bishops had done and under the pretence of their new discipline trod upon his Scepter labouring to establish an Ecclesiasticall tyranny of infinite Jurisdiction and perceiving withall that their new erected government was the mother of all faction confusion and rebellion And that it tended to Anabaptisme and popularity and to the overthrow of his State Crowne and kingdome 1584 he called a Parliament and by the consent of all his States hee overthrew their Presbytries and restored againe the Bishops to their places But indeed at that time the Sonnes of Zerviah were too strong for him that hee could never invest the Bishops with their full power and authority untill that happy time that his Majesty came unto the Crowne of England And then not long after by a free Generall assembly held at Glasgow he did not erect but ratify and confirme the estate of Bishops The acts of which Assembly were immediately after confirmed by Act of Parliament So that Episcopacy is no Innovation as is pretended in this last Oath And as for the 5. Acts of Perth Assembly they were never intended to be abjured in the Negative confession for there is no mention of any of them neither can they be comprehended under popish rites Kneeling at the Communion is no popish rite for I have upon another occasion proved it to be the gesture used in the Primitive Church at the receiving of the Sacrament And that the first that ever did sit after their fashion was the Pope to expresse his state So that we may justly charge them that the gesture which they use is abjured in that confession amongst the rest of popish rits The Five Holy-dayes established by the Assembly of Perth are not Popish rites but such as were observed in the Church since the dayes of the Apostles as may appeare by that bitter contention between the Easterne and Westerne Churches about the observation of Easter And as for the other three Articles for private Baptisme the Communion of the sick and Confirmation of Children There is no man in his right wits who will not acknowledge that they were in use many hundred yeeres before Popery was hatched and are in themselves things not onely lawfull and expedient but in some cases necessary But yet they will say that these things are abjured in generall termes when they sweare to continue in the obedience of the doctrine and discipline of that Kirk For answer wherunto I shall desire you to consider First that they say not they will continue in the present discipline of this Kirk as these new men doe interpret it but indefinitely that they will continue in the discipline of this Kirk Secondly albeit they had said so yet by the discipline we must understand that discipline which was established by authority and Law And not that which was violently brought in by some factious Ministers and their adherents Now I have shewed that Episcopall government was ratified and confirmed by divers Acts of Parliament but never dissolved by any and that their Presbyteriall government was put down by act of Parliament but never established by any Thirdly say that by discipline we should yeeld to understand that discipline which then was used though brought in by private authority Yet certainly it ●●s never their intent to sweare to maintaine that ●●scipline in all particulars without alteration or ad●●tion for such an oath had been simply unlawfull because that thereby they should have made a per●●●uall Law concerning ceremonies and rites which 〈◊〉 themselves and must be changeable according 〈◊〉 the Exigency of the times And so if that inter●●●tation which is now given of the words were ●●…e it would follow 1 That their negative Confession were directly ●●ntrary unto their positive Confession which is the ●nly true Nationall confession of the Church of Scotland For in that confession in the 20th Article touching matters of Policy and order they say Not that we thirk that one policy and one order in Ceremonies can be appointed for all ages times and places For ●s Ceremonies such as men have devised are but temporall ●o may and ought they to be changed when they rather suffer Supersition then that they edifie the Church using the ●ame So that by these mens Interpretation here is Confession against Confession The positive Confession declares matters of Policy and order to be alterable and such as upon occasion both may and ought to be changed But these men do so interpret the negative Confession and Covenant as if they were bound by an oath to preserve the same Orders that were used in the yeer 81. inviolably for ever 2 Such an Interpretation is against all right reason For the condition of the Church being changeable the same Orders cannot be convenient for her at all times As the same policy is not fit for the Church in all places so neither for one and the same Church at all times 3 Such an Interpretation shall condemne the practice of the ancient Church which did upon occasion often change her rites as namely dipping in Baptisme which she changed from once into thrice and again from thrice into once 4 It is contrary to the Judgement of all Divines Mr. Calvin tells us that In externall discipline and Ceremonies Christ would not particularly prescribe what we sho●… to follow Quod istud pendere a temporum varietate pravideret And again he saith That sometimes it profiteth and is expedient that there be a difference in these things lest men should think that Religion were tyed unto outward

treasonable fact But the seditious ministers being assembled in Synod and taking themselves to be the Supreame Judicatory did pronounce that Treasonable fact to be most just and lawfull threatning with all the sentence of Excommunication against all who did not subscribe unto their judgement therein They did usually inveigh against the King in their Sermons and rayle at him io his face for to bring him in hatred with his owne Subjects And when some of them were convented before the Councell-boord for so doing they declined his Majesties authority alleadging that he was no Judge over them in Church-matters They used ordinarily to proclaime Fasts without the Kings privity especially when some factioners were about to attempt some great enterprize against the King And then the Ministers were taught all to sing one song crying out upon the abuses of the Court and State whereby they set the people a madding All this you may read more at large in the Kings declaration printed Anno 1585. I will now adde some other of their practises that come within the compasse of my own remembrance When the Earle of Bothwell was in the act of Rebellion against the King and had divers times attempted to take away his Majesties life there were great gatherings in Scotland for the relief of Geneva then straitly besieged by the Duke of Savoy The Ministers who were the Collectors gave a great part of it to maintain the Earle in his rebellion against the King Afterwards when the Gawries conspired against his Majesty and he miraculously rescued by the vasour of his Servants his Majesty desired that there might be a publick thanksgiving in all Churches within the Realme for his deliverance But divers of the ministers the ringleaders of that faction did refuse and did plainly insinuate that they did neither beleeve the King nor his Nobles nor his Servants who were witnesses that ever there was such a conspiracy But that it was a plot of the King to murder the Gawries I shall not need to tell you of the 17th day of December Therein none of you who hath not heard in what feare and danger of life the King was then by an insurrection which was raised by the seditious Sermons of some of these fiery preachers One thing I cannot omit how that they called a Nationall Assembly to be held in Aberdeen the King suspecting the event as he had good cause and having long before by Act of Parliament all Authority in causes Ecclesiasticall and particularly for calling of Assemblies declared to belong to his Royall Person He sent to inhibit them by open Proclamation but they would not desist whereupon being questioned they declined the Kings authority contrary to the Lawes of that Ki●gdome for which they were indired found guilty and condemned of Treason Yet that mercifull Prince did neither take life nor goods from them But only banished six of them And when some of these could not live abroad upon the acknowledgment of their offence he not only gave them leave for to returne but also provided livings for them And yet one of these who holds both his life and his living by the Kings mercy Dr. Sharp is at this day a principall Firebrand in this Rebelli●n And thus they used King JAMES which occasioned him in that golden Treatise intituled 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to protest that he had found more truth and honesty in the barbarous high-land-men and bloody borderers then ever he did in the men of that Faction Thus have I given you a brief taste both of their Doctrine and Practice concerning the opposing of Princes But here lest this should be thought a Nationall sinne and so Jerusalem upbraid her sister Samaria I will shew unto you that they of this faction in England had been as deep in this condemnation but that God be praised they had not so much power And besides that some there have suffered death for their seditious practises against authority in seeking to bring in their new Discipline as Hacket Coppinger and others You may judge of the intentions and desires of the rest by their writings One of them who wrote a Book intituled A Dialogue of whice Devils which was a most fit Title for these mens Books for if ever there were white Devils or Devils transformed into Angels of light it is in their persons who under the pretence of Sanctity labour to bring in all manner of disorder into the Church and confusion into the Common wealth That Author sayes expresly that If Princes do hinder the bringing in of their Discipline they are Tyrants and being Tyrants they may be deposed by their Subjects Another who calls himself Stephanus Junius saith Miles c. Is is lan full for the people by force of Arms to resist the Prince if he hinder the building of the Church A third railes at Queen Elisabeth for exercising that lawfull Authority in causes Ecclesiasticall which was united unto her Crown resembling her unto all the wicked Kings and others who took upon them unlawfully to intrude themselves into the Priests office as unto Saul for his offering of sacrifice unto Ozias for his burning of incense Yea and to Nadab and Abihu for their offering of strange fire It is well known how that Martin in his first Book threatned fists And the Authour of the second Admonition sayes plainly that There is many a thousand that desire the same that he doth and that great troubles will come of it if it be not proviaed for Another of that crew directing his speech unto the Bishops saith that The Presbytery must prevail Demonst of disciplin in the Preface And if it come to passe by that means that will make your hearts to ake then blame your selves I could present unto you a great deal more of such stuffe but I will onely alledge one passage of Master Cartwright whom for his learning I honour far above all that ever were of that faction he saith that the Church is not in the Common wealth but the Common wealth in the Church and therefore as a wise man will not frame his house to his hangings but his hangings to his house So the Church is not to be fitted unto the Common wealth but the Common wealth unto the Church Whereupon it will evidently follow that as in his opinion there ought to be a parity in the Church so likewise a parity in the Common wealth so that it is more then manifest that the thing which they aime at is to have no King at all And therefore it is remarkable how that the Traitour Calderwood in his blasphemous Book called Altare Damascenum doth not onely rail against King James charging him with perjury persecution but also doth inveigh against all Kings whatsoever saying Naturâ insitum est o●n●bu● reg●bus in Chris●um odium It seemes this mad deg did not remember Gods promise made unto his Church That Kings should be her Nursing-fathers and Queens her Nursing-mothers And God

Craig for the detecting of some disguised Papists who by Equivocation or out of hope of Papall dispensation did for feare of the Laws subscribe unto the former confession That negative confession I say was never confirmed by any Parliament What Confirmation it had was onely from the Kings mandate whom they procured not only himselfe to sweare and subscribe but also to command all his Subjects to do so But here I pray you to consider first What age the King was of then not full Fifteen yeeres by foure moneths And how easie a matter was it to abuse his tender youth Let us therfore appeale from K. Iames a minor unto himselfe when he was of riper yeeres And we shall find that he did utterly disallow of that fact insomuch that in the Parliament held the yeere 84. he procured the first confession to be confirmed but without any mention of the latter and so in divers Parliaments following And in the Conference at Hampton Court he did fully manifest his dislike of that Negative confession saying that Mr. Craig with his I renounce and I detest did multiply so many particulars that simple people were not able to conceive And so being amazed did either fall backe into Popery or remaine still in their ignorance And saith he If I should hold my selfe to that forme the confession of my faith must bee in my table-Table-booke and not in my head So that it hath no civill confirmation at all But you will say that a Sinodicall confirmation by a generall Assembly held at Edenburgh another at Glasgow wherunto I answer that the act of the Synod had onely relation unto the Kings mandate For thus the words runne Forasmuch as the Kings Majestie hath set forth and proclaimed a Godly Confession of faith This present Assembly doth appoint that all Ministers shall conforme themselves therunto under paine of deprivation So that whatsoever strength is in the Synodicall confirmation depends upon the force and vigor of the Kings mandate while that was in force the confirmation of the Synod was in force and that being expired the confirmation of the Synod is likewise expired But the Kings mandate is expired because upon mature judgment hee did retract and disallow it in his life time and though he had not yet the same being a personall act of the Kings without the consent of the States of Parliament is now certainly expired with his royall breath For Mortuo mandatore expirat mandatum So that indeed this Confession which they now urge so violently upon the Kings Subjects hath no legall confirmation at all And as it hath no confirmation So it never had the honour to be received into the body of the Confessions of reformed Churches as was the former Confession neither indeed was it worthy for it is not a Confession of faith at all but a Confession of unbeleefe The author tels us not what he doth beleeve but what he doth not beleeve And I hope you will all confesse that faith consists in assenting to revealed truths and not in dissenting from errors Besides is it not more fit for a Minister to teach his people positive truths of Christian Doctrine then to spend his time in telling them of unknown heresies And as that Negative Confession is not the nationall confession of that Church so the Oath that is now ministred is not the same with that which was received by the Kings Majesty and his Subjects in the yeere 81 as is pretended But is substantially different from it in many respects 1 In the former Oath or Covenant they did swear with the King and by his commandement and their is no doubt but it is most lawfull for Subjects if the matter of the Oath be true and Lawfull to swear by the commandement of the king to whom primarily and Originally belongs the power to minister an Oath and to others only by Commission and power delegated from him But this new Oath is not only without the King but against him and flat contrary to his commandement For since the time that his Majesty manifested his Royall pleasure requiring them to renounce their covenant they have proceeded and sworn many thousands of people So that I am sure by the Lawes of our Kingdome they are in a great Premunire 2. In the first Oath or Covenant there is no bond of mutuall defence But in this new Oath there is a bond of mutuall defence of one another Against all persons whatsoever the King himselfe not excepted 3. Although there had been such a bond of mutuall defence in the former Covenant yet ought it not to be in this for Subjects may lawfully make a Covenant of mutuall defence by Armes by the consent of the King who only hath the power of the Sword within his dominions But they who made this late Covenant had not the Kings consent but did it contrary to the Kings expresse will and pleasure wherein they have violated the lawes of their own kingdome which they were bound to maintaine for by an act of Parliament Anno 1585 all leagues or bonds of mutuall defence made without the privity and consent of the King are expresly forbidden And as in this respect their Covenant is contrary to the Lawes of their kingdome So I am sure it is contrary unto the Law of God for I never knew any Divine who doth not maintain that unto the undertaking of a just warre there is required not only a good cause but also lawfull authority A just cause of warre doth not warrant every man to undertake warre though against a stranger much lesse against the King against whom no cause though never so just can make a warre undertaken by his Subjects warrantable But a just cause doth only warrant the King or supreme Magistrate in whom authority is originally and Primarily and without whose commission the Warres undertaken by private men are no better then robbery and murther That rash and heady adventure of the Israelits against the Canaanites Num. cap. 14. v. 44. was without authority for neither Moses nor the Arke went up with them and therfore Moses doth call their attempt a presumption and they prospered accordingly for they were smitten unto Hormah a name answerable unto the event namely destruction Lastly this Oath is not the same with the former because it contains not only the old Covenant or confession but also their owne interpretation of it For they do plainly insinuate that Episcopall government and the 5. Articles of Perth are abjured in that Confession Now it is reasonable that a few factious spirits who are the Authors of this conspiracy should take upon them to interpret a Nationall confession and obtrude their interpretation upon the whole Church forcing all men to sweare unto it This were too much though their interpretation were true because it wants publique authority and approbation But indeed the interpretation is most notoriously false and like the glosse of Orleance which destroyes the Text. Episcopall government is