Selected quad for the lemma: england_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
england_n	france_n	king_n	kingdom_n	14,965	5	6.1241	4	true

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A46860	The Jesuites plea In ansvver to a letter written by a minister, entituled, Lying allowable with papists to deceive Protestants.		1679 (1679)	Wing J722; ESTC R216571	7,275	15

knows not that when by the Prophet 't was declared to David that his Sin was forgiven him yet he was not so innocent but that God punished him afterwards temporally for it as in Scripture is declared and who knows with such certainty as is requisite for an Oath whether he had a due Disposition necessary to Absolution No Man knows whether he be worthy of Love or Hatred from God is the sense of the Scripture and Doctrine of the Catholick Church and that we must work our Salvation with fear and trembling with Christian humility and not presumptive confidence Moreover should it be granted that Absolution before hand might justifie that expression of being as innocent as the Child unborn yet could it not justifie Mr. Whitebread saying that to pray to God to bless his Majesty is all the harm that he ever intended or imagined against him and that he never did learn teach or believe that it is Lawful upon any occasion or practice whatsoever to design or contrive the death of his Majesty or any hurt to his person Mr. Harcourt saying We hold it in all Cases unlawful to Kill or Murther any person whatsoever much more our lawful King Mr. Gavan I do attest that I never in my life did machine or contrive either the deposition or death of the King Mr. Turner I never accus'd my self in confession of any thing that I am charged with Mr. Fenwick I know nothing of it viz. Of plotting the Kings death but what I have learned from Mr. Oates and his Companions and what comes originally from them Mr. Langhorn I neither am nor ever was at any time or times guilty so much as in my most secret thoughts of any Treason or misprision of Treason whatsoever These sayings even supposing a Revelation that Absolution has taken away all guilt so as to render them as innocent as the Child unborn cannot be allowed without having been ever innocent of the fact charged against them for even the absolute power of God cannot effect that not to have been which was nor could their Absolution take away their memory or allow them to declare they knew not that which was in their memory But say you If they sinned in that their declaration of Innocency yet they might safely do it having a power to absolve each other just as they were going out of the World as I believe they did when they laid their heads together Sir Give me leave to teach you again what is the Catholick Doctrine for I find you have very gross mistakes therein Observe then Sir That there is not one Catholick nor Christian Author I believe extant in the World that holds it sufficient to have the words of Absolution pronounced over him but that then is requisite in the Penitent a real aversion detestation or turning away in his heart from sin and conversion to God to render him a fit or disposed subject to receive the effect of Absolution Is it then likely that any Christia should be so presumptive at the hour of his death as wilfully to sin upon confidence of such disposition immediately after knowing that his sorrow must be from a supernatural motive and not in his power but by the grace of God whom he then offends this is certainly the highest presumption imaginable and not to be paralled What Sinner knowing he had but three Moments to live would make use of two to offend God upon confidence of the last Who can think so meanly of God as to imagine him so subservient to Man as that he as it were may lure down from Heaven supernatural grace at his will and pleasure who has that faculty to love and hate the same thing so immediately as if the one were a disposition to the other its contrary and not Sin the punishment of preceding Sins but grace as a● reward How stands this with that place of Scripture Neque volentis neque currentis sed miserentis est dei What more absurd and wicked than such proceeding or more nonsensical and uncharitable to suppose it not only in any learned Christian but even in any illiterate Mahometan this is to bid farewell to all Charity Religion Reason Prudence and Common sense But say you If to Rob Spoil kill Protestants burn their Cities and depose Kings be no sin but good and lawful then they might declare themselves innocent though never so guilty for Romanists tell us 't is no sin to take from those they count Haereticks all they have For this you cite the Lateran Councel sub Innoc. 2. and Syloc●ter N. 23. Q. 3. Cap. 1. First in Answer to it we must distinguish betwixt the Articles of Faith declared in Councels and the Constitutions of Government or Laws The first are unalterable infallible and irresistable the other fallible alterable and resistable and may be suspended and abrogated and are so upon sundry occasions For example the Counsel of the Apostles Condemned that Doctrine holding Circumcision necessary this Article of Faith can never be opposed but the Decree they made against eating of strangled meats and blood became quickly of no force and is now wholly abrogated Secondly The Canon Laws so farr forth as they relate to temporals oblige or are in force only there where they are received or approved by the temporal Authority of the Kingdom Principality or State and where do you find the Three States of England the antient and present Government of this Kingdom consenting to depose Kings for Haeresie or to dispose of their Lands c. and such Canons must be formally promulged there by the Governing Authority in due method otherwise they are of no validity this is seen by the Councel of Trent which though it be received throughout the Catholick World as to its Decrees concerning Belief or Articles of Faith yet as to in other Canons or Constitutions of Government is in some places wholly rejected in other places in part received in others wholly And this Kingdom when Catholick in part rejected the Canons of the Third Councel of Lateran for making Children legitimate after Marriage born before saying Nolu●●s leges Anglia mutari So that upon the whole matter it implies no more then to say that any King Prince or State may make or agree to such penal Laws against Dissenters in Religion as they in prudence shall think fit and so may either take or reject the advice of Pope or Councel Thirdly That Canon of the Lateran Counsel was made against the Subordinate and Fuditary Princes of Germany and France as the Prince of Berne Earl Cominge the Earl of Foix and the Earl of Tholous who then countenanced and abetted the Albigenses the Emperors of the East and West the King of France and most Kings thereto consenting by their Ambassadors and their Authority used to suppress those Albigenses and to prevent dissention and rebellion in the Empire of France and other Kingdoms this was the motive of that Canon which begins Si Dominus terrae

c. not naming Kings Emperors or absolute Princes but inferior Lords nor Kingdoms but Lands Terras and not Regna Fourthly Were such a Canon in force in England yet could not such a Law be executed against the King who was never denounced Haeretick nor any personal Excommunication pronounced against him or was ever heard or admonished by Pope or Counsel the fame may be said of all the Protestants in England so that I say were any such Canon admitted even by Act of Parliament or Constitutions of this Kingdom it would not reach his Majesty nor England as guilty Fifthly Though I should suppose contrary to truth that such a Canon did reach the King and this Kingdom yet could it not be executed by private persons no more than a Jesuite or Priest can by a private Person or Authority be hang'd drawn and quarter'd He or they must be first publickly Tryed and legally Condemned and then Executed only by the appointed Executioner that Canon then doth no ways Impower or Authorize in the least any person living Jesuite or other to perpetrate those Crimes you mention wherefore upon many demonstrative Reasons those aforementioned Crimes must by all be accounted or denied horrid and unchristian and no one can justly declare himself innocent who hath committed them Next as to your proving it law ful by Dr. John Dun-Scotus c. To Swear with Equivocations upon just Cause makes not at all to your purpose nor what you alleadge of Bonnacina For the Jesuites in their last Speeches tell you with great Asseverations that they make use of no Equivocation mental Reservation c. Nor from those Authors can it be proved that any one may Swear contrary to the sense the words properly bear but all you can deduce is that is words Amphilogious doubtful or of two senses I may swear to that sense I think the truth though it perhaps be understood in another sense by him that hears me and this only upon a just cause as Abraham did about Sarah his Wife calling her his Sister which he there explains The Jesuites protested they spoke in the plain sense the words bear and averred it with great imprecations and I believe you nor any body living can find any proper or other sense to their words but that of Innocency and I did hope with Fenwick That Christian Charity would not have let you thought that by the last Act of his life he would cast away his Soul by sealing up his last breath with a damnable lye Were not this greater want of Charity than to say He that dies an obstinate Haeretick cannot be saved The usual Objection against Catholicks In the next place you cite Soto saying Mendacium si non habet c. A Lye if it have no other malice than that of falsehood it is no mortal sin What is this more than to say every Lye is not a mortal Sin for every Lye has the malice of falshood and doth this argue or can any one deduce from hence that no Lye is a mortal Sin that a Lye that has besides the malice of falshood the malice of prejudice or wrong to my Neighbour a false accusation of another by protesting my own Innocency with a Lye or to lye with perjury and imprecations upon falshood can any inferr from thence these not to be mortal and such had been the Lyes of the Jesuites were they guilty of what they were accused Lastly You ground your calumny upon these words Certum est obligationem hujas praecepti c. It is certain that the Obligation of this precept to conceal what is reveal'd in Confession in no Case and for no end even the defence of the Commonwealth from very great ill either Spiritual or Temporal can be violated or broken to this you alleadge Durand Scotus and many more What of all this did the Jesuites if guilty know of the Plot only by hearing the Confessions of others If so they could not be Actors in it as they were accused to be and Condemned for where do you find a Precept of not revealing or owning my own Actions although I had confessed them before Now give me leave here mention being made of this Precept to shew you that this Precept is so far from being of any ill consequence to any Kingdom as that on the contrary 't is very advantagious a great hindrance and no incouragement to Treason Whosoever Sacramentally confesseth Treason owns it a Crime the Priest that has a precept of concealing it has also a precept not to absolve him unless he heartily repent and if the Treason be only intended he must indispensably require him to desist from such intention he must with all possible diligence exhort him to detest such Intention or Treason in his heart and to discover his Complices if he have any as in Conscience he is absolutely bound to do here is Confession by the admonition and direction of the Pastor and Spiritual Physitian of his Soul who hereby knows the Disease and State of his Soul a great means to his Spiritual Cure to cast out of his Heart all Treasonable thoughts and to prevent the Actions but if there were not that precept of secresie who would confess to be Accused and Impeached 'T is Confession that is the great security of all Catholick Kingdoms from Treason for when any guilty in fact or intention come to this Sacrament they are pressed to declare their Complices and obliged to retract and hinder what is not effected therein knowing they cannot be Absolved without it whereby most Treasons are timely prevented For this Reason we find that success in Rebellion against Government has commonly been joyned with Rebellion in Religion as pretended Reformation in Religion and Rebellion against their Sovereign set up together in Holland and in several Principalities of the Empire whereas Catholicks remaining such contradict by Treason their own Principles and must acknowledge such practice damnable wherefore had the Jesuites been guilty you would have had from them an acknowledgement of the Crime as done or acted contrary to their Conscience and Principles of their Religion but 't is no Principle of any Religion to accuse ones self falsly Wherefore wonder not that they should rather dye professing Innocency to the Crimes objected against them with hope of Salvation and Pardon of God for all their real Offences than to live by his Majesties Pardon with false accusation of themselves and others and displeasure or anger of God And I must not wonder to find their Words and Speeches so misrepresented whereas even the Word of God is dayly traduced by false Glosses to the ruine of many And what wonder that those Five Jesuites and many more though never so Loyal have been thus Condemned and Executed as Traitors to his Majesty Where by pretended Justice and course of Law one of the best of Kings has been Condemned and Executed as a Traitor to his Country By thus suffering they have as Christians imitated Christ and as loyal Subjects imitated their King Charles the First God bless King Charles the Second Amen FINIS