Selected quad for the lemma: england_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
england_n	britain_n	york_n	young_a	19	3	6.5273	4	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A29746	An apologeticall relation of the particular sufferings of the faithfull ministers & professours of the Church of Scotland, since August, 1660 wherein severall questions, usefull for the time, are discussed : the King's preroragative over parliaments & people soberly enquired into, the lawfulness of defensive war cleared, the by a well wisher to the good old cause.	Brown, John, 1610?-1679.	1665 (1665)	Wing B5026; ESTC R13523	346,035	466

solide peace agreement for the time to come offered to K. Iames. 5. Then unmarried his doughter to make him King of great Britane after his d●…ath in the mean time to give him the stile of the Duk of yorke King Iames pleasing these proffers assenteth c●…descendeth on a day on which he should meet with the King of England accord upon all matters But at the instigation of the popish-Church men other courtiers who were driveing on their own d●…signe he breakeh his promise with the King of England And when Anno 1540. Ambassadours were sent againe from England to desire that the King would goe to York there treat with the King of England conforme to the last agreement The priests stood in the way here also with which the King of England was offended resolved to raise warrs against Scotland The result of which war was that at length the scottish forces were all scattered broken at the report of which defeate the King was so grieved vexed that within few dayes he died Againe when King Iames 5. Dieth the King of England communeth with the Scottish prisoners whom he had taken at the last battell concerning the marrying of his sone with the young Queen King Iames his doughter when they promised to do what they could without wronging either the publick good or their own credite he sent them home appoynting them to leave some pledges in their room at New castle This was in the end of the year 1542. when the Parl. conveened in March next the businesse was concluded thereafter the contract was signed by both Kingdoms solemnely subscribed in the abbay of Halirood house the sacrament was broken as the forme was betwixt the Governour of Scotland Mr Sadler Ambassadour from England But the old Queen the Cardinall being against the match stirre up all to a breach perswade those who had been prisoners in England not to return thither to relieve their pledges only the Earle of Cassiles from whose constancy faithfulnesse the Earle who now is is not degenerated but as his predecessour was sole in keeping Covenant so is he singular went according to his promise relieved his owne pledges being approven by Henry for his constancie faithfulnesse was freely set at liberty sent home But what followed upon this breach of Covenant Many sad intestine broiles and commotions tending to the weakening breaking of the Kingdom at length King Henry took occasion to avenge this breach of Covenant sent his Navy towards Scotland landing ten thousand men at Leth who did burne Edinb many places thereabout againe his army did enter the borders waste burne all about Kelso jedburgh thereafter they spoile waste all the Mers Teviotdale Lauderdale some yeers thereafter viz. Anno 1547. He sendeth a great army againe into Scotland when it lay about Pinckie there was a letter sent unto the scottish forces shewing the ground of the war not to be avarice hatred or envy but a desire of a firme ●…asting peace which could not otherwise be had then by the marriage which was proposed assented unto by the Estates an agreement thereupon sworne subscribed But the scottish army would not hear of this but resolve on battell at length were overcome suffered great lose For almost all the young nobleman of Scotland with their friends followers were killed This 10. of Septemb. 1547. may yet preach unto Scotland how God will avenge perfidy all the nobles and others of Scotland who have now broken Covenant may remember pinckie field The french History sheweth us what way the Lord avenged the bloody perfidiousnesse of Charles 9. who had broken five or six severall pacifications conclusions of peace solemnely made ratified betwixt him the protestants For he was smitten with a vehement desease causeing him to wallow in his own blood which he vomited out in great abundance by all the conduits of his body for divers houres till he died And how Henry the 3. Who had been perfidious in breaking the articles of peace concluded with the protestants first about the year 1576. where among other things he avowed by solemne declaration that the Massacre committed Anno 1572. was against all right law of armes then againe An. 1580. Was stabbed in the belly with a knife by Iames Clement a Iacobin Friar in the very chamber where the former King contrived that Barbarous massacre on S. Bartholomew's day Anno 1572. Any who is well versed in History may fill up many pages with such sad lamentable Histories concerning Gods avengeing Covenant breaking these which have been mentioned may suffice for a taste SECTION XXII The solemne league Covenant vindicated And the author of the seasonable case caet Answered THe last thing which remaineth is to shew the vanity of their pretensions who plead the nullity or non obligation of those Covenants It is matter both of admiration of grief sorrow that there should be any found within the Church of Scotland who had so far forgotten themselves as now to turn not only enemies to piety Christianity but enemies also to very humanity not only break Covenant-tyes themselves but also teach others to do the fame that without any fear of punishment either from God or man But God who is Jealous will not be mocked let men dream of exemption as they please by sophisticall chifts think to blinde their owne eyes the eyes of others God who will not hold them guilt lesse that take his name in vaine will no doubt by sad answers from heaven discover the impiety folly of these patrons of prophanity inhumanity Severall in the Kingdom of Engl. have vented their skill in that blake art of looseing the bonds of sacred Covenants But their principles tending to all prophanity have been sufficiently discovered answered by Ms Crofton Timorcus there is one in Scotland who in a late pamphlet intituled The seasonable case of submission to the Church Government c. tryeth how far his skill will reach in this art O how fitly may that of Plautus be applyed to this generation Nostra ●…t as non mul●…um fidei g●…rst Tabulaeotani●…r adsunt 〈◊〉 d●…odecim Tempus ●…cumque s●…bit actuarius Tamen inven●…r Rh●…r qui factum negat But who the author is who can tell For though the pamphlet be published by order●… so countenanced by authority Yet he putteth not to his name being as would appear ashamed to patronize such a bad cause least of all can he be known by the description he giveth of himself in the frontispiece 〈◊〉 lover of the peace of this Church Kingdom unlesse he meane such a peace as is the plague of God upon the heart filling it with senslesnesse stupidity lulling it asleep in his iust judgment

not put to take that acknowledgement they could not refuse the oath upon the account of these consequences contained in the acknowledgement Ans. So is the Declaration dated Sep. 2 1662. Set down as distinct from the Acknowledgement yet who ever sweareth subscribeth the Acknowledgement doth sweare subscribe the Declaration upon the matter so is it here who ever taketh the oath of alleagiance doth upon the matter take the acknowledgem also for it is not possible to see any discrepancy betwixt them save such as is betwixt the text the commentary for the acknowledgm is nothing else upon the matter then an explication or Exegesis of the oath in the acknowledgem the same thing is said assirmed in plaine full clear tearmes which is but in generall affirmed in the oath By their Acts they declare what things they account privileges of the crowne all these they comprehend under his supremacy so in their account his supremacy over all persons the prerogatives royall or privileges of the crowne are all one Therefore they could not acknowledge this supremacy because they could not acknowledge the prerogatives royall See this objection further answered above Pag. 168. In the next place there are objections of another nature which must be answered as 1. Obj. Such as refuse this oath of alleagiance declare that they are not dutyfull loyall subjects which Ministers Christians ought not to do Ans. It hath been showne at the beginning of the tenth Section what difference there is betwixt this oath the oath of alleagaince there is no Minister or Christian who would scruple at the taking of the pure oath of alleagiance Yea they would account themselves obliged to take the same if there were any necessity or just suspition of disloyalty in them which might occasion the same King Iames in his book called God the King sheweth that those treacherous persones who occasioned the frameing of the oath of alleagiance were the Pope's bloody emissaries following the principles of Rome practiseing unparalleled treacherie against King Queen Parliament among whom none will have the fore head to reckon such as did now refuse the oath as it was tendered It is the supremacy in Church state which only was scrupled at the acknowledging of this supremacy is no part of alleagiance for one may acknowledge his father to be his father though he should not say that he hath power as a father over his soul conscience one may acknowledge the King of Britane lawfull King of his dominions though he should not acknowledge him to have as much dominion power over them as the great Turk usurpeth over his dominions And therefore letnone so interpret that passage of the Apology for the ministers of England pag. 2. Where they prove that they cannot be challenged as guilty of Laese Majestie because they acknowledge that the King is defender of the faith in all causes the supreme head Governour over all persons as well ecclesiastik as civil as if they would assert that all in Scotland who do refuse this oath acknowledgement were guilty of Laese Majesty merely upon the account of their refuseing of the oath seing as hath been showne their case the case of Scotland is not every way the same though they give out this as an evidence of their loyalty yet they do not pitch upon it as proprium quarto modo unto a true loyal subject 2. Obj. Will you allow his Maj. no power in Church matters Ans. yes Even all that power which the first confession of the Church of Scotland doth allow viz. tho conservation purgation of religion the maintenance of the true religion the suppressing of idolatry and superstition as also all that which the later confession concluded by the Assembly of divines at Westminster doth allow As also as much as sound reformed divines grant unto him according to the word of God He hath power over the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 things extrinsecall that properly belong unto the outward man are common to the Church with other societies He is Custos ut●…sque tabulae in a civill manner must have a care of both the tables of the law It were tedious here to set down all the particulars See Gillespy in his Aarons rod blossoming lib. 2. cap. 3. the CXI Propositions which are full enough to this purpose 3. Obj. Why then was this oath refused seing no more was required thereby Ans. More yea much more was required as appeareth by what hath been said cleared from their Acts actings especially from their refuseing of the sense given in by these Ministers who were detained so long prisoners in the Tolbooth thereafter banished which was large enough possibly larger then some of these who gave it afterward upon second thoughts would approve It is beyond questioning that this Parliament giveth unto the King by vertue of this prerogative as annexed to the crown far more then ever the confession of faith of that Chuch or any other protestant reformed Church did give And as they give so he taketh more as might be evidenced by his letter unto the Archbishop of York if it were now at hand 4. Obj. But whatever they assume to themselves it is not much matter Seing none 〈◊〉 put to affirme that so much power doth belong unto him the oath tendered hath not so much in it in terminis Ans. When an oath is contrived in such generall comprehensive termes as may take in much when there is no other way to finde out the iust latitude meaning of it but by their Acts actings who tender it it is of much concernment to know what sense their actions will put upon it for by their actions the true sense must be learned For it is a received known principle that oaths must be taken according to their known sense meaning of the words who tender the same because oaths were first invented for their security therefore whosoever would deal honestly Christianly in taking an oath must take it in the very sense that it is understood in by such as tender it Otherwise the holy name of God shall be taken in vaine the takers of the oath shall deal deceitfully in frustrating the end of the oath the designe of the tenderers thereof To take an oath Quatenus Eatenus in fo far will not satisfie as worthie D. Voetius judgeth de Pol. Eccl. p. 283. 5. Obj. This shienesse were good in case the oath as worded could bear such a sense as is supposed to be meaned by the tenderers But it is not so here Ans. It is certane the oath as to the part controverted is conceived in generall termes It is certane that their sense who tender it is not sound it is certane that there is nothing in the oath contradicting their sense meaning Yea it is certane that the very