Selected quad for the lemma: england_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
england_n	english_a	king_n	scot_n	6,292	5	9.4575	5	true

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A92075	The Cyprianick-Bishop examined, and found not to be a diocesan, nor to have superior power to a parish minister, or Presbyterian moderator being an answer to J.S. his Principles of the Cyprianick-age, with regard to episcopal power & jurisdiction : together with an appendix, in answer to a railing preface to a book, entituled, The fundamental charter of presbytery / by Gilbert Rule ...	Rule, Gilbert, 1629?-1701.	1696 (1696)	Wing R2218; ESTC R42297	93,522	126

meaneth I know not but it is not a wise comparison of one man to have so many Families to maintain on nothing and each to have his own I affirm that one man who suffered Torture Intercommunning was forc'd to lodge in Dens and Woods and in daily hazard of his Life who was sold for a Slave in the remote places of the Earth suffered more tho' his loss of Money did not amount to so great a Sum than all they did I find nothing in what followeth to disprove what I had said and therefore pass to another piece of Impudence which yet is a repetition of what he had said before that Presbyterians are no Rebels To prove this he very pertinently alledgeth a Contradiction between first Vindic. ad Q. 2. § 3. where it is said that Episcopacy raised a Tumult and § 5. they the Episcopal men raised no Tumults This last is ad Q. 3. § 5. Answ The former is spoken as plainly appeareth to them who will see of the War between the King and Parliament The other of such Tumults as our Author chargeth the Rable with and it is expresly said that they did what they could to raise a War Here then is that horrible Contradiction that he findeth or fancieth a War managed by potent Armies and for a long time is in one place called a Tumult and yet Scuffles among a confused Rout which are soon over are distinguished from such a War Here is neither Contradiction nor Impudence The Impudence that followeth is injuriously imputed to me it is vindicating the Presbyterians from being Rebels for what himself seemeth to applaud in other more modest persons he might find frequently said by me But if it be Impudence to deny Presbyterians to be Rebels what kind of quality must he be of who chargeth them with it while his own Party is guilty of Actions of the same nature and were as universally engaged in them What hath lately fallen out might teach him either to justifie what he so freely calleth Rebellion or to lay the blame of it on Protestants and not Presbyterians only and then if no share of it fall on himself let us know what Party he is of § 15. He next challengeth some Insinuations as if the Presbyterians in Scotland were the only Protestants which cannot be inferred from any Words he citeth Neither can it be inferred that I thought or said that the Gospel was not preached but by the Presterians One word he layeth weight on that if the Presbyterians had not used the Indulgence given to them and Papists these would have occasion to mislead People without any to oppose them None who had a mind to understand Words as they are plainly meant would so construct this Passage such universal Expressions most frequently suffer a Limitation also in that case they had done what in them was that none should oppose Popery as if a Batallion in an Army flee they act such a part as tendeth to hinder any opposition to be made to the Enemy Beside all this tho' there were some privat Episcopal Ministers appear'd faithful in this Case it is well known how litle most of the Bishops and the generality of the Clergy appeared and how they that did speak any thing that way were discouraged by some Bishops I wish he had better cleared to us how absurd it is to say that the true Protestants in the Nation were for the late Revolution than by telling us that being against it was no Popery most men think it was too much to favour it and was a defect in that Zeal that should have in such a Juncture been shewed against it The secret Instructions from Holland that he giveth as the Cause of Presbyterians complying with the Dispensing Power I never heard of them but from that Epistler whom he mentioneth and I could answer nothing to it but by denying it and now when he calleth for an Answer to it I say First Presbyterians did never comply with the Dispensing Power but groaned under it as a Grievance their using the Indulgence could not be so constructed as I have else-where shewed Secondly I solemnly declare that I know nothing to this day of these secret Instructions Thirdly What moved such Presbyterians as I was acquainted with to scruple using the Indulgence at first and to accept it at last was that some Conditions and Limitations that they could not submit to were left out in the last Edition of it The Villany that he chargeth the Presbyterians with in Addressing King James for his Indulgence while they were on Intrigues to supplant him must be charged on them who were so guilty I knew of no such Intrigues nor any such design then on foot tho' now I perceive that such Designs were then hatching neither can I name one person among all that accepted of the Indulgence who knew of such Designs § 16. He next bringeth instances of Impudent Shifts used by G. R. when he or his Cause is put to it The rabbled Ministers were not deprived of their Possessions I mean Stipends by an Act of Parliament as he alledgeth but thrust from their Places by the Rabble and the State judged that they could not relieve them without palpable Inconvenience and because of the notoriety of the Scandals of not a few of them which had been so outed as appeareth from the then Prince of Orange's Declaration on which followed the loss of their Benefices What the State did they can best give Reasons for I never defended what the Rabble did that way For what is said of Parliaments calling King James's Retirement from England his Abdicating the Government that is plain to be meant of the Parliament of England for tho' it was written by a Scots-man it was said of English Affairs of Retirement from England not from Scotland wherefore here is no Impudence unless on his own side tho' the Scots Parliament speak nothing of Abdication This and what followeth is picking a Quarrel without cause given The long Story he hath of the Viscount of Dundee's Plot and the Forces that came from the West to defend the Convention containeth such Matters of Fact as he contradicteth what is confidently affirmed by them who were on the Place and had occasion to know these things as well as he and are fully as credible persons as he is Let the Reader judge who deserveth most Credit I was Witness to none of these things but shall give my Vouchers if duely called to it if he can do the like let unbyassed Men judge of the whole History If I had said the whole Nation knoweth the whole of this Passage to be true as he affirmeth that the whole Nation knoweth it to be a Figment I might have been branded with Impudence on better ground than any thing that he hath brought to prove his Charge against me § 17. What was said against Dr. Strachan's Defence he spendeth many Words upon it on which I observe a few things First I