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 |
|
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
|
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
as was possible from Themselves upon the Fanaticks and to stir up an ignorant outragious clamour against them the Presbyterian Plot sound in the Meal Tub and all the late Pamplets and discourses of the popish Agents are but so many continued and undeniable Proofs of this Now were L'Estrange their Pensioner as 't is not improbable but he is and as much ingag'd in their Service as Nevil-Payne he could not have more effectually assisted them in the carrying on of this base and Villanous Project than he has along done How earnestly has he labor'd to revive the Memory of forty in contemptof the Act of Oblivion and terrifi'd the people with groundlesse Apprehensions of a new Fanatick Warr How constantly has he patch'd up his loose Discouses with unseasonable thread-bare Comments on the Disorders of the late times and colour'd his malicious enmity to the Liberties of England with violent Invectives against Fanaticks Their Defamation has been the chief aime of all his Writings since the Plot the Burden of his overflowing Impertinence and the Common place Topick of his Railing Now let us suppose the Fanaticks as errant Devils as this Inquisitionman has a mind to paint them yet what have they done of late what new provocation have they given since his Majesties Restanartion nay since the PLOT I meane the Fanaticks of England that we should thus fall upon them Pell Mell without either Fear or wit Rhime or Reason I say what is the matter That just after the Discovery and in the midst of the Examination of a Horrid Popish PLOT we should all of a suddain be hounded on Fanatickes There is sure some Mystery in this Alas The Artifice is evident and grosse Who sees not that the Designe of it is to save the Papists from the growing Rage of the Peoples Hate with which their whole Faction was almost run downe and brought to a Bay by starting and inviting their Prosecutors to fresh Grame This it seems is the Under-PLOT to their great Tragedy and Mr. L'Estrange next to some Provincial Jesuite the chief Manager Can there be any Doubt then however he appear a Protestant in shew and Profession but that he is a PAPIST either in Principle or Interest if not in both and these Interest-Papists are the most dangerous ol all For his Panegyrick of the Religion establish'd and his high Expressions of Zeale for it with which at every turne he flourishes his Mischievous Pamphlets and guilds the poyson he would have the People Swallow they are like the Complement of Judas when he betray'd his Master and like the Courtesie of Joab when he murder'd Abner But God be thank'd Protestants now know him too well to believe in his Flatery or be wheadled to their Ruine by his soft Words His Writings have discover'd soe palpable an ill-Will to the true Interest of the true Protestant Cause and the Constitution of the Government for they are at present both wound up in the same Bottom and he has pursu'd his Malice with so restlesse a diligence and so furious a Zeal that he 's grown a Common Nusance to all good Englishmen and ripe for 〈◊〉 Correction I doubt not therefore besides what he may expect from a Parliament but some new Marvell will rise to bridle the Intemperance of his Mercenary Pen and put his poor prostitute wit out of countenance an Adversary who shall baffle him more notoriously than Mr. Bagshaw and persecute him worse than my Lady Boltinglasse who shall crush his little Plausibilities with a Masterly Reason and shame him into silence by the Justnesse of his Satyre I shall leave him then to the Fate of Bayes which he cannot long escape and to the severe Reprimands of his own Conscience that full confutation of all his Works and that only one too which he wants confidence to reply to and begging the Reader 's pardon for this long but perhaps useful Digression returne to the Compendianist And as to what concernes the present Argument between him and me I question not but upon an impartial weighing of what is here offer'd it will appear to every reasonable man That nothing is more perfectly opposite to our Civil as well as Religious Interests than Popery that nothing could be more prejudicial to the Mona rchy nor more fatal to the prosperity of England than if after having with soe just abhorrence spew'd up that filthy Load of Superstition and Idolatry with which she was so long oppress'd she should be forc'd either by conquest from abroad or by a Popish Succession at home to returne once more like the Dog to his Vomit or like the Sow when she has been wash'd to her wallowing in the Mire For his Objections of the Protestant Rebellion in Hungary the late Rising in Scotland the Murder of the Archbishop of Saint Andrews and that Home-Blow of his the Gazette Advertisement of The Tryalk of twenty nine Protestant Regicides they are of the same nature and grounded on the same pitiful Fallacy with those I have already answer'd and when he can shew us any Principle of the Prostant Religion that justifies Rebellion or Murder especially that of Princes or does but in the remotest degree encourage men to commit those Detestable Crimes I shall again consider them In the mean time let him not waste his Paper and tire his Reader with the Repetition of such fulsome Sophistry But perhaps it may not be amisse to give a more particular Answer to his Home-blow because he has such an opinion of its force and does so triumph with the conceit of his Victory I shall endeavour therefore to take him down in the height of his Rapture and shame his ignorant Malice The Reader will remember the Point he should prove is That Protestant Principles are destructive to Kings for those are the very words of the Introduction to his terrible Argument of Instances of Fact Now did the Twenty nine Protestant Regicides ever pretend to justifie their abominable Villany by any Principle of their Religion Nay did they not pretend the quite contrary and ground it wholly upon a Civil Authority Did they not argue the lawfulnesse and justice of it from a Power they fancied in the People to call the King to an Account for his Actions Though in this they were as absurd Logicians as the Compendianist has all along shew'd himself and reason'd not only against the very first Principle of Civil Policy but point blank contrary to the most fundamental Maxims of the Law of England which says That the King can do no wrong and therefore makes his Ministers questionable for the miscarriages in Government because he himself is in his own Person inviolable and sacred but this concerns not the present businesse These men I say as bad as they were had not the impudence to interest the Protestant Religion or any Protestant Church whatever in the guilt of their impious Treason by pretending to derive any Warrant or Encouragement for it from them or