Selected quad for the lemma: england_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
england_n	book_n	church_n	write_v	2,919	5	5.8866	4	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A62284	The reformation of the Church of England justified according to the canons of the Council of Nice, and other general councils, and the tradition of the Catholick Church being an answer to a paper reprinted at Oxford, called (The schism of the Church of England) demonstrated in four arguments, formerly proposed to Dr. Gunning and Dr. Pearson the late bishops of Ely and Chester, by two Catholick disputants, in a celebrated conference upon that point : in which answer the unworthy and false dealings of the papists are shewed, and the charge of schism returned upon them, and the Church of England proved truly Catholick and apostolick in her doctrine and constitution / by Dr. Saywell.	Saywell, William, 1643-1701.	1688 (1688)	Wing S804; ESTC R34023	26,158	36

THE REFORMATION OF THE Church of England Justified according to the Canons of the Council of Nice and other General Councils and the Tradition of the Catholick Church BEING AN ANSWER to a Paper reprinted at Oxford called the SCHISM of the Church of England Demonstrated in four ARGUMENTS formerly Proposed to Dr. Gunning and Dr. Pearson the late Bishops of Ely and Chester by two Catholick Disputants in a celebrated Conference upon that Point In which Answer the unworthy and false dealings of the PAPISTS are shewed and the Charge of SCHISM returned upon them and the CHURCH of ENGLAND proved truly Catholick and Apostolick in her Doctrine and Constitution By Dr. Saywell CAMBRIDGE Printed by John Hayes Printer to the University For Edward Hall Bookseller there And are to be sold by Luke Meredith at the Angel in Amen-Corner London 1688. TO THE READER READER THOU hadst not now been troubled with the following Papers if a Relation of part of a pretended Conference with Bishop Gunning late Lord Bishop of Ely and Bishop Pearson late Lord Bishop of Chester had not been afresh Reprinted at Oxford and sent abroad into the World as a piece unanswerable by these two Eminent Prelates of our Church In which tho' there be nothing new and which has not been long ago answer'd yet to satisfie the World about the Truth of that Matter and to remove any prejudice that some might otherwise conceive concerning these Learned and Pious Bishops I will give a short account as near as I can at this distance of time of the Matter of Fact and then proceed to a particular Answer to the several Arguments in order as they lie The Conference was managed in writing about 30 Years ago and by mutual agreement nothing was to be made Publick without the allowance and consent of both Parties But such was the disingenuity and unworthiness of one of the Romish Disputants that contrary to the Faith and Promise he had made he sets forth a Book and pretends it to be an account of the Conference with Bishop Gunning and Bishop Pearson when he had left out changed and misplaced Matters as he pleased himself insomuch that his Partner was very much ashamed of his dishonest and unfaithful Dealing and did utterly condemn him for what he had done and renounced his having been engaged in approving or consenting to such a hase and disingenuous Proceeding and did openly own and acknowledge so much to the Persons concerned An account whereof was given to the World by Mr. Thomas Smith of Christ-College in Cambridge in a little Book called a Gagg for the Quakers with an Answer to Mr. Denn's Quaker no Papist Lond. Printed for J. C. and are to be sold near the North-door of St. Paul's Church-yard 1659. That which follows in your Book about Mr. Gunning and Mr. Pearson who disputed against the Romanists all who know these Ministers know to be superfluous and frivolous However I think fit to tell you the Romanist who put forth an Edition of that Dispute hath so changed transposed added diminished and made of it what he list that I believe it will be as soon owned for your I mean not J. S. but H. D's Conference as Mr. Pearson's or Mr. Gunning's I must now tell you further what you have been oft enough told that that Relation cannot expect to be regarded by Mr. P. or any sober Person which is disclaimed and disowned by Three of the Four who were Disputants viz. by both the Protestants and half the Papists But chiefly I must entreat you to consider whether the inserting above 200 Lines at a time as a part of the Conference which never was part of it besides all professed Additions secondly whether the leaving out whole Sheets of the Protestants which the Papists thought too hard to answer and thirdly the scarce suffering any one Argument and Answer of both to come together but casting usually parts of the same Paper of Mr. G. many score Leaves asunder one from another be not a scandal that any Christian would desire might be cover'd with silence And I would gladly know from any Ingenuous Person whether this might not be Answer enough to a Book put out at the charge of the Romanist's own Purse and Conscience A Discourse by being mangled rendred so unintelligible that scarce any Man ever read it over or will. Reverend Mr. William Moor the deceased Library-Keeper was perswaded by J. S. to read one Leaf but professed before many Witnesses he would not read another if you would give him the whole Impression because it was so unintelligible for the Causes above-mentioned This account was thought sufficient to satisfie the World that the Relation of that Conference ought not to be regarded and that it needed no other Answer But perhaps some will demand why was not the Conference then Printed whole and intire Now the reason of that was because the Popish Adversary did run all the Dispute into obscure and metaphysical Niceties that few could understand and fewer would take the pains to read it and so it was not thought fit and a needless charge to trouble the World with it Besides both the Bishops did tell their Friends when they discoursed with them about a fuller Answer that they thought it altogether unnecessary because though the Dispute were mangled and misrepresented yet that which they had Printed was still unanswered by them and unanswerable by any of their Party and they were perswaded that all Men who would carefully read the Book would be of the same mind And as for this Paper that is added at the end of the pretended Conference and now Reprinted at Oxford the Author do's not so much as say that it was part of their Dispute but a pure Addition of his own wherein they were no more concerned than other Divines and they did not think they were bound to answer whatsoever he should afterwards write and publish to the World and yet this Oxford Paper would without any ground or the least colour impose upon the World that this is a part of that forementioned Conference Neither did the Cause it self or the state of Affairs then require any particular Discourse upon that subject the Books of Bishop Fern Arch-bishop Bramhall Dr. Hammond and Dr. Heylin being then in every Bodies hands wherein they had fully vindicated the Church of England from any imputation of Schism and the learned Men of that time were so well satisfied with what they had written that it was needless to trouble the World upon that account But now 't is expected every thing that peeps out should receive a due Answer I have therefore endeavour'd to prove from truly Catholick Principles such as our Adversaries themselves cannot gain-say that not only the Doctrine and Constitution of our Church is most sound and Catholick but even the Order of our Succession and the Method of our Reformation was truly Regular and Canonical and that all the Author 's own Arguments do return