Selected quad for the lemma: church_n
Text snippets containing the quad
|
ID |
Title |
Author |
Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication) |
STC |
Words |
Pages |
|
A25313
|
A præfatory discourse to a late pamphlet entituled, A memento for English Protestants, &c. being an answer to that part of the Compendium which reflects upon the Bishop of Lincoln's book : together with some occasional reflections on Mr. L'Estrange's writings.
|
Amy, S.
|
1681
(1681)
|
Wing A3032; ESTC R16932
|
26,021
|
36
|
have already discours'd is more than enough to prove the present Point viz That the Monarchy of England has gotten by the Reformation and that no body but a man who either understands not or cares not what he sayes would affirm the contrary The Compendianist possibly may here object as he seemes to do pag. 77. lib 9. That popish Princes abroad are not sensible of these Inconveniences in their Religion nor do they perceive any such ill Consequences to arise from the Profession of it as the Bishop of Lincoln's Book and this Preface charges it with but altogether the contrary For Who sayes He find themselves so flourishing and great as they I suppose he speaks this of the French King for I know no other popish Prince that is at present either flourishing or great and if he means that Popery has been the cause of his Greatness I shall not dispute it with him but this I will affirme and maintaine against all the World That 't was neither his owne Popery nor that of his Subjects though every Body knows the French Popery is much gentler and more converseable sort of thing than the Spanish or Italian more plyant and submissive to the Civil Magistrate and more hospitable to Strangers and Dissenters and consequently lesse prejudicial to the growth of Power and the greatness of a State than the other The Priviledges of the Gallican Church and the Doctrines of the Sorbonne together with the manners of the people and the Exclusion of the Inquisition have a little qualified this pernicious Imposture and temper'd the Malignity of her Influence as the most destructive Plants do sometimes lose the Virulence of their poisons by a change of Soyle and Mercury it selfe by a mixture of Ingredients is rendred innocent Physick I grant therefore that Popery in some places and under some Circumstances of alloy may not absolutely hinder but it can never be the cause nor of it self in any degree contribute to the prosperity of either Prince or people for 't is plaine That the Principles it teaches and the Consequences it draws after it do evidently tend as I have already made appear to the lessening of the one and the impoverishing of the other indeed to the ruine of both and if Popery have not at all times and in all Places so bad an effect it must be attributed to some such causes as I have now mention'd which do in France serve to take out the sting of this monstrous beast this Spawn of the Old Serpent and prevent the Mischiefe which it is otherwise so apt to doe the Blast it would infallibly bring upon the ordinary fruites of good Government and the common ends of Civil Societies To conclude this point if any Prince or State happen by some favorable conjuncture and fortunate Accidents to be great with or rather notwithstanding Popery there is no doubt but they would be either of them much greater without it 'T is now left to the Reader to judge upon a due considerat ion of the Whole what an excellent Engine this Popery would prove to buoy up a sinking Monarchy and make it again emerge as the Compendianist calls it in his pedantical Latin phrase were ours in that desperate low condition to need it which I hope 't is far from or if it do at present decline I am sure no man in his right wits except this Author will say 't is for want of Popery What kind of men are those Protestants then who if we may take the Compendianist's own word for it would recommend to his Majesty in a case of extremity this dry antiquated Drugge this uselesse Lump of Formality and Foppery this discover'd Cheat this Insulter and Braver of Crown'd Heads this Usurper upon the Rights of Princes this Enemy to God's Annointed I say what kind of Creatures must these be They are certainly a Species by themselves and have not the same common Faculties and wayes of understanding with other Christian people if at least there be any such which I will not be overpositive in upon the Authority of this Writer for some of his stories are as unlikely to use his own words about the Plot as any Romance Extant But Protestants does he term them It is impossible Why will he abuse his Friends at this Rate and call them out of their Names I 'll warrant them they are as good Catholicks as himself Does he indeed thinke to put this upon us that Protestants are for the bringing in Popery He may as well hope to make us believe Transubstantiation it self 't is a Contradiction in Terms an errant Bull. However upon this occasion I cannot but reflect that I have sometimes met with a sort of ridiculous Animals commonly call'd Protestants indeed whose Heads are giddy and whose Brains turn round with the Notion of a Catholicke Church and a visible succession of Bishops ever since the Apostles Who run stark mad in love with reverend Words holy Places consecrated Habits and godly Gestures who have abundance of odde superstitious Zeale with not one grain of true sence Disciples of Heylin and Thornedike in a word a kinde of L'Estrange Protestants men who have listed themselves in our Service and rank'd on our side only to betray our cause and give our Enemies the Victory They seem to have no other designe in the Church of England than Sampson had in the Philistines Temple viz. to pull it downe upon our Heads and bury us in the Ruines Now what discourse these sort of men have had with the Compendianist I cannot tell nor am much concern'd I will not dispute but that 't is possible they may have acknowledg'd some such thing as he affirms for their Politicks are much of a pitch with their Divinity and I know they will say or confess any thing that tends to undermine and weaken the Protestant Faith and Interest though it be never so foolish and absurd Yet do they take it hainously ill to be thought Papists and particularly Mr. L'Estrange seems more than ordinarily disturb'd when he finds himselfe charg'd with this Imputation how does he fling and flounce in his late Pamphlets like a gaull'd Hackney who can neither bear the whipp nor mend his dull Dog-Trot But let him bestow the foamings of his Rage never so fast among the Rabble and in hasty uncorrect Libells throw about the eâ—pty Froth of his Anger Let him fret himself never so lean and talk like a mad man in the overboyling of his Passion Let him make never so many professions of a Protestant Faith and never so many Good-Morrows to the Church of England we shall still believe him a Papist while he soe notoriously promotes the Designes and serves the Interests of that Party I think nothing is plainer than that the great Endeavour of the Papists ever since the Discovery of the Plot has been by all kinde of means and artifices to turn off the Publick Odium under which they have so justly suffer'd as much
and so weak an Adversary Let us suppose then for once That Luther Calvin and as many more as he has a mind to take into his c. have held That Princes may be depos'd upon the Account of Religion By what new Logick can he make this pertinent to the present Discourse Does he thinke it the same thing to hold indefinitely That Princes may be depos'd upon the Account of Religion and to hold That the Church has a Right to depose them upon that Account To hold that they may be deposed by an Authority Civil and to hold that they may be depos'd by an Authority Ecclesiastical Let him now speak his Conscience without a Dispensation Does he in good earnest think these two Propositions equivalent or at least equivalent as to the point in controversie between him and the Bishop of Lincoln and that they equally disgrace the profess'd Religion of him who affirms them He cannot sure be so void of the ordinary reason of a Man though he has swallow'd down never so many Roman Catholick Doctrines as not to perceive a palpable difference between them 'T is not but that the former of these Positions is a very bad Principle dangerous to Princes and destructive to the Peace and Settlement of a Nation though not so much as the latter because it wants the Enforcement of Conscience and Religion to fix it in the Mind and thrust it out upon occasion into action with that Violence which usually accompanies a pretended Zeal for the Honour of God But how bad soever it may be still 't is a Civil not a Religious Principle and though it may be Sedition in the highest degree it can never be Heresie a mans Life and Estate who maintaines it is answerable for it not his Religion To make this a little clearer I say 'T is one thing to hold That Princes may be dedepos'd by the State though upon the Account of Religion i. e. for being of a Religion different from the establish'd grounding this Opinion upon the Laws and Customs of some particular Civil Constitutions or upon the ends of Government in general and quite another thing to hold that they may be depos'd by the Church grounding this Opinion upon the Laws of Religion and a Power suppos'd to be delegated to her by Christ This last is the Principle we charge and the Bishop of Lincoln has prov'd upon the Church of Rome which makes her Religion it self dangerous to Princes On the other side though Luther Calvin or any other Protestant Divines should hold the first though it be a false and a bad yet as I said before 't is a Civil Principle and their holding it could no more reflect on the Protestant Religion than an Error they might be guilty of in History or Mathematicks The Protestant Religion therefore remaines clear from any suspicion of allowing the Doctrine of Deposing Princes the point I undertook to make good though it should be granted the Compendianist that Luther and Calvin c. have had ill Principles in Relation to Civil Governments If he could prove indeed That Luther and Calvin or any other Protestant Divines have held The Lawfulness of Deposing Princes as a Principle of their Religion and plac'd the power of doing it the Church he would say something that were to the purpose and parallel to what we accuse the Church of Rome off but in the Method he has taken he does but beat the Air and fight with Shadows I shall explain this Distinction a little further by some famous Examples in order to meet with the other Cavils of this idle wrangler and make the Inconsequence of his Arguings if it be possible yet more apparent He may remember then That here in England Edward the II. and Richard the II. were actually depos'd in times of Popery and by Papiits yet did our Writers never charge the Church of Rome though she held then the same doctrines and had the same Pride to trample on Princes that now she has with those two disloyal and unjust Usurpations upon the Sovereignty of the Kings of England And for what imaginable reason but this only viz. because they were both acts of the Civil Power and carried on by men who grounded what they did upon Principles though grosly false and mistaken drawn from the Constitution of the English Government and the Rights of the two Houses of Parliament and the Church of Rome contrary to her Custom upon such occasions was only a bare Spectator neither her Authority nor her Principles being made use of to further or justifie those proceedings I would now a k this Collector of Impertinences this teadious Compendianist whether he thinkes this a good reason to clear the Church of Rome from being concern'd in the deposing of these two unfortunate Princes If he sayes T is as no doubt he will with what face can he pretend to charge the Church of England as he would be understood to do pag. 76 lin 38. with the Endeavours that were us'd to keep Queen Mary from the Crown the Death of the Queen of Scots and the Bill of the late House of Commons against the Duke of York's succession since the Cases are directly parellel I mean parallel in all that concernes the present Question Were they not every one of the Acts of the Civil Power and carried on by men who grounded what they did on Civil not Religious Principles Was not the setting up of the Lady Jane Grey and the raising an Army to oppose Queen Mary an Act of the Privy Council in persuance of King Edward's Will and a Law made in the Reign of Henry the VIII for the Illegitimating of this Princess as the Lords of the Council themselves declare in their Answer to her Letter writ from Framingham Castle Was not the Death of the Queen of Scots most notoriously an act of the State and justified by the Laws of the Land Was she not indicted for Treason and known to pretend a better Title to the Crown than Queen Elizabeth Lastly was not the Bill against the Duke of York grounded on a suppos'd Legal Power in the King and the Two Houses to alter the Course of the Succession when they think fit Have not all the Pamphlets that have been writ in Vindication of that Bill argued the Lawfulnesse of it from the Constitution of the Civil Government and wholly disclaim'd the Interesting of Religion at all in the businesse as to the justifying of it in the least degree endeavouring with great paines to prove That true Religion does not meddle with the Civil Rights of Princes but leaves them to be determin'd by the Laws and Customs of particular Countries By what strange consequence then can he entitle the Church of England or the Protestant Religion to things that are so perfectly of a Civil nature unless he will make them answerable for all the Actions of Protestants of what kind soever and resolve to maintaine that childish Sophisme I