Selected quad for the lemma: england_n
Text snippets containing the quad
|
ID |
Title |
Author |
Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication) |
STC |
Words |
Pages |
|
A38980
|
An Examination of the case of the suspended bishops in answer to the Apology for them.
|
|
1690
(1690)
|
Wing E3726; ESTC R21500
|
16,321
|
37
|
be perswaded the Parliament will take his Counsel in accepting the Bishops Parole of Honour for a Formal Oath In the Old out-of-fashion Trade of Knight Errantry a Parole of Honour might be of sufficient Value But the World we know is become Stricter in such Points than to follow the Martial Dictates of such Don Quixots as our Author is It had been a Thousand Pities this Gentleman and the rest of his Gloucester Addressers were not present at that Session of Parliament wherein the Oaths were enacted for he had certainly by his Eloquence and Knight-errantoratory perswaded the Parliament to pass from so Silly a kind of Assurance as an Oath and to revive in its place the Sacred Sanction of Parole of Honour as in the days of Amodis de Gaule or the Seven Champions of Christendom But pray forgive me to ask one Question of this Learned Author How comes it that the Six Bishops refuse to take the Oaths and yet as he says are willing to give their Parole of Honour For if they be willing to give their Honour and which is a thing most Sacred among Men of Probity as a Pawn of their Faithfulness to the Government Why should they stick at giving their Oath for it But our Apologist tells us that one Huddelston tho a Papist was by an Act of Parliament in King Charles his time excused from taking the Oaths What then Must the Suspended Bishops be so too I do not remember that any of these Reverend Persons had the Good Fortune to preserve the Life of a King when sought for by Enemies nor can I find any of their Names mentioned in our History of King Charles's wonderful Escape after the Fatal Battel of Worcester Until they have as great a Stock of Merit on a like Score as Mr. Huddelston had we must even allow them to come under the Act of Parliament with the rest of England and allow Mr. Huddelston to stand alone in the Act of Parliament without the Honour of a Clergy-man to bear him company This is not all our Apologist is extreamly vex'd That the Convention I believe he would say the Parliament did not Copy out something in Favour of the Bishops which if it had done he tells us would have sav'd him and his Friends the labour of an Address Alas that the Parliament did not call the Grand-Jury of Gloucester and with them this Learned Author to set a Copy for them how to treat the Bishops that would not take the Oaths Sure the Parliament would have alter'd all their Measures if they had had the good Fortune to consult so wise and sedate Heads who are not for rapid and critical Haste in Counsels as he says are the Fate of a great many Men. We never knew before of setting a Copy to the Two Houses of Parliament nor till now could we have fallen upon the Men to do it far less did we know such Mighty Politicians were confin'd to the County of Gloucester But which was yet a greater Omission in the Parliament They not only forgot to follow a Gloucester Copy in Favour of the Bishops but by this neglect they have had the ill Manners to put so many Great Men as our Author and his Colleagues to the labour of an Address which must certainly be a great Loss to the Nation considering the Mighty Importance of their Time and Pains It 's hoped the Parliament will in time coming occasion no such Loss to the World as the putting these Gentlemen to the Labour of any more Addresses And yet methinks it could be no Labour to appear in favour of Persons for whom they have so blind a Veneration and whom they treat so often with the Title of Holy But at last our Author from making an Apology for the Bishops to make one for himself and his Colleagues the Grand-Jury of Gloucester or rather for their Address And now it is he tells us what the Intent and Heads of the Address was In short It was says he no other than the return of Thanks to His Majesty for His repeated Assurances to maintain our Religion by Law established and for his Gracious Resolution to grant to all his Subjects except such Persons as he in his Royal Wisdom should distinguish from the rest his Gracious Pardon And Praying that the like Favour might be extended to their Pious Bishops particularly their Diocesan that the Incapacity he lyes under by not taking the Oaths might no longer disable them from serving their Majesties in their several Provinces This is the Address if we believe our Apologist in its full Force and we need not put our selves to the pains of making a too large Commentary upon it since it neither deserves nor requires it I shall only hint at a few Reflections that rise naturally from it I. They return Thanks to His Majesty for his reiterated Assurances to maintain our Religion as by Law established This is Just indeed and never Prince deserved a greater return of Thanks than His Majesty does upon this Score for it was for the Preservation of our Religion that he ventur'd his Life and his All in coming over to England at first and if it had not been for him it is more than probable we had been beyond the possibility of a Retreat from Ruine before now But the manner of Thanks in this Address seems to be the very same words of our rediculous Addresses in the two preceding Reigns when our Gloucester Gentlemen among others besieged King Charles and King James with their Thanks for the reiterated Assurances to maintain our Religion as by Law established when in the mean time every Body of common Sense saw our Religion was every day incroach'd upon and that Popery was breaking in upon us like an impetuous Torrent I am apt to think our Gloucester Grand-Jury has been so accustomed to these words of thanking the Kings that designed the Subversion of our Religion for their Assurances to maintain it that they cannot get rid of the old rot they then used now when we are under a King that tho he were desired would not alter our Religion by Law established II. They thank His Majesty for his Resolution to grant all His Subjects a Gracious Pardon A Man would naturally infer that our Grand-Jury found themselves in some need of a good Act of Indemnity for we all know what sort of Men were most Earnest for having such an Act even those that needed one most For my part I do think His Majesty did express a great deal of good Nature in granting so Universal an Indemnity and it was likewise an extraordinary piece of good Policy so to do at that Juncture But of all Men living those that needed it should not have endeavoured to abuse it by making Addresses afterwards prejudicial to His Majesties Interest and Honour and to the Safety of the Government as this Address of our Grand-Jury was III. Our Addressers have by their ordinary inadvertence and Folly