Selected quad for the lemma: england_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
england_n	bishop_n	crown_n	king_n	3,218	5	3.8858	3	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A48761	Animadversions on the Scotch covenant Wherein all may receive satisfaction as to the illegality of it, and be easily perswaded to the renunciation thereof. By J. L.	J. L.	1662 (1662)	Wing L26; ESTC R216515	18,797	31

charge of subjecting Kings to their modell But you go on to tell us how Subjection of Kings to Bishops is still reteined in England now let the Auditor look for some rare reasons for which he may prepare either his laughter or pity or both For the anointed the King ergo he is subject to them Hear as good an Argument the Marquis of Argyle the grand Patron of the Covenant set the Crown upon the Kings Head Page 21. will you say therefore the King was subject to him I will not say what he and you would have made him but a better Providenc hath delivered him out of those storms and a little time will discover the hidden things of that mischievous League The latter part is as good and to the same tune And swear him to the maintenance of their Prelaticall Dignity you are much out for they present nothing but what his Ancestors ever voluntarily engaged themselves too by Oath and do not force an Oath upon him of their own devising The Oath is not of their imposing but of his own free taking and thereby he engageth himself to nothing but what is by Law established not urged by violence and threats and arms And what if he doth engage by Oath to preserve the Rights of the Church is the matter so hainous Yes Bishops are Limbs of Antichrist You say much but you prove little will you make the Apostles Limbs of Antichrist Nam Alexandriae à Marco Evangelista usque ad Heraclam Dionysium Episcopos Presbyteri semper unum ex se electum in excelsiori gradu collocatum Episcopum nominabant Hieronymus ad Evagrium Epist 85 was Mark Bishop of Alexandria a Limb of Antichrist or Peter at Antioch or Rome or James at Jerusalem or Polycarp at Smyrna what have all Ecclesiastical Writers agreed together to lye in a matter of Fact delivering to us the succession of Bishops in the most principal Sees I will not say much to this the Cause hath been handled by many Learned Pens which either you have not read or if which prejudice St Hierom to whom you attribute more then all the Fathers because you think he doth least to Bishops yet if he might determine the Controversie in his Epistle to Evagrius he would give it against you Et ut sciamus traditiones Apostolicus sumptus de Veteri Testamento quod Aaron filii ejus atque Levitae in Templo suerunt hoc sibi Episcopi Presbyteri Diacani vindicent in Ecclesia Epist 85. I will add no more but look beyond Calvin yet anointing and Bishops must Be put together to the door never to come in again Yes they may and never ask a Scotch Minister leave you must not alwayes think to reign as Kings and censure as you please coupling Popery and Prelacy together without any distinction on purpose to make all that be of that judgement in the same condemnation with the Papists and so fit for your Sequestration and Violence But though he cast out the Ceremony of anointing yet he undertakes to tell us presently after how they are anointed of the Lord Because by the Ordinance of the Lord their Authority is sacred and inviolable Take heed you break not the Ordinance of the Lord for we shall have occasion afterwards to see how sacred and inviolable you make it in your opinion and practise Then you commend unto us in the same Page The spirituall Vnction which you say is common to Believers and then That few Kings are so anointed There are but few Kings therefore there cannot be many so anointed when the whole number is so small but let me tell you there are many Rebels and not one of them is so anointed Anon after you come to reckon up the Enemies to the Authority of Kings and we could enlarge your Catalogue with another name to the third sort who you say are such Who rise against Kings in open Rebellion as Absolom and Sheba who said what have we to doe with David the Son of Jesse To your Tents O Israell For at the first beginning of Rebellion amongst us by Tumults a Treatise bearing this very Title wast cast into his Majesties Coach and by whom they were excited to this is evident so they are Rebels open Rebels and Enemies to the Authority of Kings by their own Description Page 7 Page 7. You say the Photinians allow Kings in Profession but they are against the Exercise of their Power in the administration of Justice I have heard of a Northern People that crowned their King and so allowed Kings in Profession but would suffer him to doe nothing so they denied the Exercise of his Power in the Administration of Justice Are not these Photinians in Mr. Robert Douglas judgement A few lines following he makes a profession That they are far from cutting off a lap of that just power and greatnesse which God hath allowed to the King and we have bound our selves by Covenant not to diminish You mean I suppose not to diminish id est more then the Covenant doth Now in the next place when he comes to the principal Verb the Covenant that Covenant which was between God and the King he refers you to the sum of it 2 Kings 23 3. which conteins nothing we can except against But what is this to their Covenant he after mentions and the particulars of it In Josiahs you meet with none of this muster of Popery Prelacy Superstition Heresie Schisme and Prophanenesse nothing of Incendiaries Malignants or the like or engaging to alter other Nations and reform them These Men if they meet with but the word Covenant they think it is a Blank which they may fill up with what they please and then Christen it with the title of a Scripture Covenant I shall refer him for this to Oxford Reasons which when my Scotch Minister can solidly answer we will take it into further consideration and till then lay it by Now then let him boast what he will how much Scotland hath preference before other Nations for their making a Covenant if they get but as much more by it as they have already gotten a blew Bonnet will buy all Page 8 The 8. Page is such a bundle of Calumnies that I am willing quickly to skip over this Dunghill for the scent is very offensive to any good Subject or modest temper Nothing here but of Dissembling Kings the sins of his Fathers House the House of our King hath been much defiled with Idolatry Complaints of a prophane Court in England If this be to preach there is none of our Tub-men that will not doe it as well for they can make any thing idolatrous or prophane as well as he I even Learning too and I doubt if they had their minds it would be Idolatry for some men to eat their meat Page 9 But in the close of this Page and in the 9. he comes to the Covenant between the King and the People in which he saith

discover the way and means of attaining salvation in this Non deficit so omits not any thing of that which is needfull to acquire this End But on the other side Non redundant in superfluis for although there be scattered up and down some general precepts concerning Magistrates and all Relations yet it being not the end of Scripture to write Politicks we may boldly say that all that is good in Government cannot be learned out of the Book of God much might be said to this but because I mean to make short work with him I shall choak him with an Authority drawn from a Patriarch of his own King-lessening Doctrine Buchanan in his Book De jure Regni when he comes to answer the Objection De jure Regni apud Scotos Pag. 47. That however Idolatrous the Kings of Israel were yet the Prophets never exhorted the people to take up Arms and to set things right by such crooked means Possum saith he apud multas Nationes plurimas saluberrimasque recensere Leges quorum in Sacris literis nullum est exemplum The Government is by Lawes Lawes there are and good ones too it may be besides what are there something it seems by him not only for Government but for governing him that hath the Government that yet there is no Scripture for And he did very ingeniously to confesse they had no Scripture for it for all their practises in that are besides the Text Kings must govern by Scripture but they think they may govern them without He is pleased a little after to commend the Testimonies of God for the best Councellours we deny it not but why are they so Because they will tell the Kings freely both their Sin and their Duty Why who should if they should not God speaks by them but sure I am he likes them the better for their freedom with Kings but let me tell you since the Scriptures are so free you might be a little modester then you are and let something else then railing be the Character of a good Preacher amongst you Page 6 Much troubled he is Page 6. with anointing of Kings and after he hath granted that one of he Cases in which the Jews used it viz in the Case of Interruption by Vsurpation which he confesseth was their Case in the present Coronation yet then he flies to this that it was Typical and taken from the Jewes without warrant They make what they please typicall but though they were anointed and Christ were yet thence to infer it was a type is no sound consequence The Jews used Baptisme before Christ Christ makes use of it also will they say this is a typicall action if so why do they not cast that off the sick were anointed with Oyl James 5.14 was that typicall as for his other that it was taken from the Jews without warrant I must look upon it as affirmed Gratis For in these things where we have not directions in the New Testament why may we not have respect to the Old especially when the action doth not deny Christ come so will not lay any Jewish bondage upon us Now to make it more odious he tells us how that this anointing was Most in use with the Bishops of Rome who to keep Kings and Emperours subject to themselves did swear them to the Pope when they were anointed and yet the Jewish Priests did never swear Kings to themselves as for England although the Pope was cast off yet the subjection of Kings to Bishops was still reteined for they anointed the King and swore him to the maintenance of their Prelaticall Dignity Very good Turpe est Doctori cùm culpa redarguit ipsum What art thou O man that condemnest another and yet dost the same things Sure you were asleep when you delivered this I am sure you forgot your self much look into Page 2 in the Chancellors Speech and see what he moves to the King so soon as he had delivered the desires of the people for his Coronation That he would maintain Religion conform to the National Covenant League and Covenant so in Pa. 10. after the Sermon was done they put him to renew the Covenant they had urged him to take it before this was but a renewing for notwithstanding their Articles at Breda they knew well how they had used him in this particular both before he landed and after contrary to their first agreement for no Coronation nor nothing to be done for him without this and who is this to Engage him too but their Presbytery that is themselves and yet they complain of the Pope and the English Bishops that they swear Kings to themselves Accordingly they fashion the people Page 21 to bear Truth and Faith to him and live and die with him with this limitation In your service according to the Nationall Covenant and Solemn League and Covenant So Page 23. the Lords one by one did promise Truth and Faith to him against all manner of Polkes whatsoever in your service according to the Nationall Covenant and Solemn League and Covenant So no Covenant no Obedience no King Yet they doe not as the Pope or the Bishops of England good men they are guilty of no such practises indeed they are not but of worse they are Where was your reason when you say that in England although the Pope was cast off yet the Subjection of Kings to Bishops was still reteined wherein or how is the King of England subject to the Bishops speak it out Man do they meet without his Order but with the danger of a premunire have any of them opposed him or railed against him in their Sermons or have they undertaken at their Assemblies to order the King to order the Army to direct them when they shall Fight when not whom they shall employ whom cast out how they shall keep their King lockt up as a Prisoner when he shall appear and when 't is fit to take him from the Army lest by being seen he prove too popular and give a Check to the Kirk All which things and many more we know who have done that pretend to nothing but the sword of the spirit Do the Bishops at any time use so much as a bold Expression to him do they not acknowledge though not their calling yet the exercise of it in this or that Precinct to him do they in their Synods offer to oblige the people by their determinations till the things agreed upon have received the Stamp of Royall Authority and so made currant can you say that at any time they have held their Resolution firm in any thing without the King's Confirmation do they not acknowledge him and pray for him as supreme in all causes as well Ecclesiasticall as Civill do you give him so much or do you so pray for him Lastly have the Bishops in England since the Reformation ever used any violent meanes to bring the King to their bow who have you known and let them bear the