Selected quad for the lemma: england_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
england_n	church_n	king_n	pope_n	13,375	5	6.6469	4	true

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A61429	Important questions of state, law, justice and prudence both civil and religious, upon the late revolutions and present state of these nations / by Socrates Christianus.	Stephens, Edward, d. 1706.	1689 (1689)	Wing S5427; ESTC R228417	11,035	16

and he is in effect only the Supream Officer and a kind of High Reeve of the Nation as the High Shire-reeve of the County who in many respects doth truly represent him And therefore because some have in our Age asserted such an Unaccountableness and Irresistibility in the King as is inconsistent with this Constitution and others from some Clauses and Declarations prescribed in some late Statutes passed soon after the Return of the late King Charles the Second may think themselves bound in Conscience to maintain the same it may be necessary to propose to their serious consideration some few Questions concerning those Clauses and the Oaths and Declarations prescribed in the Statutes of 12 13 14. Ch. 2. 1. WHether they who did take these Oaths and declare accordingly are thereby being only Declarative of their belief at that time and not promissary for the future obliged to persist in the same belief and act accordingly in all cases which may happen without further Inquiring or Examination of the Truth of that matter 2. Whether all or any of those Clauses or the Oaths prescribed in the Statutes aforesaid being all meerly Declarative and not Constitutive do or can make any real alteration in the Laws and in the very Constitution of the Government from what they were before 3. Whether the vulgar sense of those Clauses Oaths and Declarations be not inconsistant with the Natural and Original Right of Mankind to defend and maintain their Rights the special Constitution of the English Government the frequent Practice of English Parliaments and known Principles of Law allowed at this day be not contrary to the Sentiments and Practices of most Nations of this part of the World to the Judgment and Practice of divers Reformed Churches upon great deliberation in their own Case and of Queen Elizabeth King James c. and the State of England in their Assistance to other People oppressed by their Kings and their Ministers and of dangerous Consequences both to Prince and People disposing Princes with more Liberty to transgress the Laws and exposing innocent People if they believe it to oppression by them if not to Wars and Contention with them for the maintenance of their Right and therefore the Clauses and Declarations aforesaid to be either wholly rejected as false or else accommodated with some better and more convenient sense and Explication as that which no Man will deny That neither the King nor his Ministers acting according to Law may be resisted upon any Pretence whatsoever And it may deserve some Considerations 4. Whether considering the Time when these Statutes were made the ambiguous Terms in which the Declarations are drawn neither restraining them to Lawful Actions and Commssions because that would not serve the turn nor expresly extending to Unlawful because that was not likely to pass the Activity and cunning Insinuation of the Romish Emissaries and their real Interest to have the Government absolute in one governable Prince rather than subject to the Counsels and Resolves of an untractable Parliament and the Tricks which they have since imposed upon us it be not likely that in these as well as some other Statutes about and since that time there may not be some of their Projects craftily intermixed and unperceived in the transport the Nation was then in and the rather if the late late King Charles the Second had before that time entred into their Communion as is now believed And because in these things many well-meaning people may be imposed upon not only by the Authority of men whose Judgments may be byassed by Prospect of Favour and Advantage but also by Ambiguity of words as King Absolute Imperial it may be fit to note that the word King doth not necessarily import more than one having Supreme Executive power to govern according to Laws as the King of England certainly hath though the Parliament may judge whether he doth so or no. So that if any claim more that is to be prov'd from the special Constitution of the Government So the word Absolute when that is attributed to the Kings of England it is to be understood not in respect of Laws but of Tenure They hold not of Pope Emperor or any other person or State And in like manner the word Imperial when used of the Crown of England it imports no more than that it is not held of any other Crown II. Question of Law Justice and Prudence upon the Matter of Fact before related 1. WHether the Matter of Fact before related doth not contain divers very high deliberate and resolved Violations of the Laws and Constitution and tending directly and manifestly to the Subversion of the true and ancient Government of this Nation and be not good Evidence and a plain Declaration that the said King James did certainly design and endeavour the Subversion thereof and to make it Arbitrary and was therefore an Enemy to it 2. Whether all this being done at the instigation of the Papists and in favour of their Religion which obligeth them all both Prince and People to use their utmost endeavour for the Extirpation of Hereticks be not also good Evidence and an open Declaration notwithstanding their pretence of Liberty of Conscience that he was also an Enemy to the Religion and People of this Nation being Protestants and by the Pope and his party reputed and condemned for Hereticks 3. Whether the said King James having assumed to himself a power of Suspending and dispensing with the Laws and thereby invaded the Rights of the Lords and Commons and thereby and by many other open Acts declared himself an Enemy to the Government Religion and people of this Nation which are things inconsistent with the Ends and Being of Government and Civil Society and all this contrary to his Solemn Coronation Oath and through the perswasion and instigation of Jesuits and others notoriously guilty by the Laws of High Treason hath not thereby demonstrated himself incapable of the Government of this Nation and not to be further intrusted therewith and therefore 4. Whether the Prince of Orange his Coming in to preserve and maintain the Right of the Princess and himself and to defend and protect an Innocent people in the Legal enjoyment of their Religion Rights and Liberties from Violence Oppression and Destruction designed and prepared as is believed against them contrary to the Laws as Queen Elizabeth and the people of this Nation had heretofore done for his Ancestors and Countrey be not justifiable by the Laws of God and man 5. Whether the Lords Gentlemen and others of this Nation who in this case for the preservation of themselves and their Country invited the Prince to come in or after his coming entred into the Association with him for the Ends aforesaid did any thing therein but what was necessary just and lawful by the Laws of God and Man the Constitution of this Government and many precedents in this Kingdom 6. Whether the Officers and Souldiers who had