Selected quad for the lemma: book_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
book_n	church_n	holy_a	time_n	2,975	5	3.4034	3	true

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A40071	An answer to the paper delivered by Mr. Ashton at his execution to Sir Francis Child ... together with the paper itself.	Fowler, Edward, 1632-1714.; Ashton, John, d. 1691.; Child, Francis, Sir, 1642-1713.; Stillingfleet, Edward, 1635-1699.	1690 (1690)	Wing F1695; ESTC R30132	19,700	32

the Intention from the Overt Act but that Overt-Act must be manifestly proved The Overt-Act in this case was the carrying over Treasonable Papers into France in order to an Invasion The sole Question then was Whether there was manifest proof as to these Papers That the Papers were found about him was manifestly proved and he owns Fol. 110. that they were unfortunately found upon him but he saith that he knew not the Importance of them It was manifestly proved that he had an extraordinary Concernment to have these Papers thrown Over board which he saith was perfectly out of Friend ship and whether that was a true Answer was left to the Consciences of the Iury who were to judge of this by all the Circumstances antecedent concomitant and subsequent by which they did conclude him Guilty And I cannot see how they went against Common Iustice therein especially since Mr. Ashton well knew that one of the most material Papers taken was of his own Hand writing not the first Draught but the Copy which was shewed him in the Court and when it was so he desired Fol. 106. that the Original may be read and not the Copy and he had good reason for it For as far as I can judge upon perusal of both it is the very same Hand in which this Speech was written But what said Mr. Ashton to the Iury to clear this matter He faith Fol. 129. That his hand was not proved to any of the Papers and therefore there was nothing but supposition or suspicion against him It is true there was no direct and plain proof of the Hand as there was in the case of my Lord Preston and it is a wonder it was omitted for that would have been plain proof of his knowing what was in those Papers However all the other Circumstances put together were a sufficient proof of his Privity to the Contents of them And I wonder how Mr. Ashton could so confidently in his Paper declare himself Innocent as to the matter for which he was Sentenced to Die when he knew the Paper was of his own Hand writing and plain proof hath been since made of his own delivery of it to a third Person Can a man be Innocent and Guilty of the same thing The only thing to be taken notice of which remains is a Reflection on the Government for his Close Imprisonment and the hasty and violent Proceedings against him If there were any thing more than usual in such cases as to his Imprisonment he ought to have mentioned the particulars for otherwise it is to Arraign the Common Iustice of the Nation As to the hasty and violent Proceedings of his Trial it was then told him That the greatest Advantage he had was in putting off his Trial For by that he knew how to lay the Papers on my Lord Preston which yet could not clear him as to those Papers which were not written with my Lord's Hand nor related any ways to him but one of them was Written with his own Hand Upon the whole Matter I cannot see how he hath either Proved his Innocency or that he acted according to the Principles and Doctrins of the Church of England As to his Concluding Prayer I cannot but observe That in the Beginning of the Speech the Reason he gives why he would not make any to the People was because he would employ his last Minutes in Devotion and holy Communion with God Which I hope he did But those who contrived the Speech were to make a Prayer for him too but not a Prayer of Devotion but rather of Faction and Sedition For it hath no other meaning than that God would overturn this Present Government and restore the Former in order to the Flourishing of the Church of England notwithstanding the Wounds she hath received from her Prevaricating Sons I cannot imagine how a Man could joyn these things together in a Prayer unless he could think all those are Prevaricating Sons who are against Popery For I know no Bottom large enough for Popery and the Church of England to stand upon together But this I do not think of Mr. Ashton and therefore Conclude as I began That this seems rather the Speech of a Party than of Mr. Ashton who made use of his Name and Hand to convey into the Minds of the People the most malicious Insinuations against this Present Government and all who live in Obedience to it A Catalogue of some Books lately Printed for R. Clavell FORMS of Private Devotion for every Day in the Week in a Method agreeable to the Liturgy with Occasional Prayers and an Office for the Holy Communion and for the Time of Sickness Humbly recommended to all the Pious and Devout Members of the Church of England A Sermon Preached before the Queen at White-Hall February the Fifteenth 1690 1. By Henry Dove D. D. Chaplain to Their Majesties Roman Forgeries in the Councils during the first Four Centuries together with an Appendix concerning the Forgeries and Errors in the Annals of Baronius By Thomas Comber D. D. Precentor of York A Scholastical History of the primitive and general Use of Liturgies in the Christian Church together with an Answer to Mr David Clarkson's late Discourse concerning Liturgies in Two Parts in Octavo By the same Hand Seasonable Reflections on a late Pamphlet Entituled A History of Passive Obedience since the Reformation wherein the true Notion of Passive Obedience is setled and secured from the Malicious Interpretations of ill-designing Men. The Golden Rule or the Royal Law of Equity explained By I. Goodman D. D. The Frauds of the Romish Priests and Monks set forth in Eight LETTERS lately written by a Gentleman in his Journy into Italy A late Letter concerning the Proceedings in Scotland and Sufferings of the Episcopal Clergy there in Quarto price 6 d. Political Arithmetick or a Discourse concerning the Extent and Value of Lands People Buildings Husbandry Manufacture Commerce Fishery Artizans Seamen Soldiers Publick Revenues Interest Taxes Superlucration Registries Banks Valuation of Men Increasing of Seamen of Militia's Harbors Situation Shipping Power at Sea c. As the same relates to every Country in general but more particularly to the Territories of His Majesty of Great Britain and his Neighbors of Holland Zealand and France By Sir William Petty late Fellow of the Royal Society Their present Majesties Government proved to be throughly setled and that we may submit to it without asserting the Principles of Mr. Hobbs shewing also That Allegiance was not due to the Usurpers after the late Civil War occasion'd by some late Pamphlets against the Reverend Dr. Sherlock FINIS D. 25. Tit. 4. Bract. l. 2. c. 32. Fleta l. 1. c. 15. In the Case of one Robins's Child at Hereford Assizes about An. 1668. Alberic Gent. de Jure Bel. l. 1. c. 16. Life of Archbishop Laud sol 161. Motifs de la France pour la guerre d' Allemagne p. 94 95 117.

of the Reformed Religion as plainly appeared in the Affairs of Germany had such an Influence on the Councils of France as to make them break Promise in such a manner as hazarded the loss of the whole Party in Germany The next is That he had broke his Articles with his Protestant Subjects when he had been a Mediator of Peace between them and they had done nothing to violate them So that a Design to suppress the Protestant Religion in a Neighbour Country was looked on as a just Cause of War when he was concerned to preserve it And then another Form of Prayer was Appointed to be used suitable to that Occasion which plainly evidence That such a Design was no ways thought repugnant to the Doctrins and Principles of the Church of England But since the French Conduct seems to be now admired by this sort of Men I shall bring some remarkable Instances from them It is Notorious to the World what Powerful Assistance the French gave to the Confederate Princes of Germany against the Emperour their Lawful Prince and what Defence they made for this They Published an Account to the World of the Reasons of it and the Chief was this viz. That they had Reason to suspect that from Charles the Fifth's Time the difference of Religions had been secretly supported by the Emperours in order to their making themselves Absolute and that the Changing the Form of Government in the Empire was sufficient for a Neighbour Prince to interpose by force of Arms. In the Revolt of Catalonia from the King of Spain their Lawful Prince the French King accepted of the Sovereignty over them being offered him by the States of that Country and caused Discourses to be written in Justification of their Transferring their Allegeance And yet their Complaint was nothing but the Severity of the Spanish Government and a desire of some greater Liberties than they enjoyed under it Why then should it be now thought an Unjust thing for a Sovereign Prince so nearly related to the Crown of England to espouse the Cause of our Religions and Civil Interests when the Design was so apparent for the Suppressing them If that Opportunity had been lost they might before this time have been past all reasonable hopes of Recovery II. But suppose this were allowed yet here is another Difficulty ariseth concerning the transferring Allegeance from a Lawful Prince to him that met with unexpected Success in his Design And here I shall endeavour to make it plain That this is not against the Doctrins and Principles of the Church of England If we allow the Church of England to have declared its Sense in the Matter of Government it can only be with respect to Subjects But I think the Measures of our Obedience are not to be taken from the Rules of the Church but from the Laws of the Realm Because they are not the same in all Countries where the same Religion is Professed as is plain in the Case of France and Poland The Reason of the different Measures in these Countries is not from the Church but from the different Constitution of the Kingdoms And I do not see how the Rules of the Church can alter the Fundamental Laws For the Church only enforceth the Duty of Obedience on the Consciences of Men but it doth not prescribe or limit the Bounds of it Whether our Monarchy be Absolute or Limited or if Limited whether in its Exercise of Power or in the Right of Sovereignty how far the Limitation gives a Right of Resistance in case of the Breach of it are nice Questions but not to be Resolv'd by the Rules of the Church but by our Legal Constitution and the General Reason of Mankind And therefore in such Cases where the Right of War and a Foreign Power are concerned we are not to judge meerly by Municipal Laws but we are to proceed by a more General Law viz. that of Nations which takes in the Effects of a just War which the particular Laws of a Country have n● regard to But where hath the Church of England declared its sense about the Right of War The Articles of our Church declare that the chief Government of all Estates of this Realm doth appertain to the Civil Magistrate But they no where say that in a just War the Supream Power cannot be acquired or that God doth never confer it in an extraordinary method The Book of Homilies is very severe against Disobedience and wilful Rebellion but it is no where said that where the Right of Sovereignty is transferred by a successful War there is no Allegeance due to those who possess it On the contrary it is said in the first Part That If God for their wickedness had given them an Heathen Tyrant to Reign over them they were by God's Word bound to obey him and to pray for him Can it then be agreeable to the Doctrins and Principles of our Church to refuse Allegeance to good Religious Princes whom God hath made the happy Instruments of preserving our Religion and Liberties In the same Part the Iews are commended for praying for the King of Babylon when they were in Captivity that they might live under his Protection and do him Service and find Favour in his sight And what is this short of Allegeance to one who had nothing but bare Success in War to plead for his Title to it If any Princes of their own Religion had rescued them from that Captivity would they have scrupled Allegeance to them when we see how far the Maccabees went in the Defence of their Religion and Laws In the Second Part the obedience of the Iewish Nation to Augustus is commended and it is evident that he had no Authority over them but by the Right of War And our Blessed Saviour's example is mentioned who being brought before the Roman President acknowledged his Power and Authority to be given him from God And how was this Authority conveyed to him but by the success of War So that we can find nothing in the certain established Doctrin and Principles of our Church which is repugnant to our Allegeance to the present Government I might easily produce considerable Testimonies of some of the greatest Divines of our Church which assert that Soverignty may be transferred by a just War but I leave that to others and proceed Mr Ashton saith That we were born leige Subjects to another that we have solemnly professed our Allegeance and often confirmed it with Oaths I know no body denies it But is this all Is our Allegeance so inseparable from the Person we have once sworn to that no Case whatsoever can alter it Not the Case of plain voluntary Dereliction Not the Case of putting the Kingdom under a Foreign Power Not the seeking the utter Ruin and Destruction of the People Is Allegeance inseparable in these Cases because we were Born Subjects and did swear Allegeance If not then it is not always so notwithstanding the Oaths For