Selected quad for the lemma: england_n
Text snippets containing the quad
|
ID |
Title |
Author |
Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication) |
STC |
Words |
Pages |
|
A46813
|
Beaufrons, or, A new-discovery of treason under the fair-face and mask of religion, and of liberty and conscience : in an answer to the Protestant reconciler ... / by one of His Majestie's chaplains.
|
Jenner, David, d. 1691.
|
1683
(1683)
|
Wing J657; ESTC R32980
|
46,367
|
116
|
decayed to Reform the Church when corrupted and to Protect the same when Reformed This is the Supremacy which the German Princes being the first Reformers Assumed to themselves exercising their own Authority in Ordering and Setling Church-Matters within their own Dominions And because they all Protested against the Pope's Supremacy and Defended that of their own Therefore were they called Protestants In like manner King Henry the Eighth was the first Protestant Prince in England for no other Reason But because he was the first King of England since the Reformation who strenuously vindicated his Own Regal Supremacy And Protested against the Pope's Usurpation and Tyranny over Kings and their Subjects For which the Pope of Rome Excommunicated King Henry the Eighth and Branded him with the Name of Heretick and Protestant And notwithstanding King Henry's being a perfect and Rigid Papist in all points of Doctrine according to the Church of Rome yet because he Assumed his Own Supremacy and Abjured that of the Pope's he is Therefore styled and that very truely A Protestant And our Statute-Laws call all them who deny the King's Supremacy Recusants whether they be Presbyterians Independents Anabaptists or Quakers The Law Names all Recusants and indeed such They are and Not Protestants For as in the Church of Rome no man is counted a Papist but onely he who declares for the Pope's Supremacy So in the Church of England no man is nor ought to be reckoned a Protestant but onely he who in Thought Word and Deed is for the King's Supremacy as above stated These things being Premised We are of Opinion That the Reconciler has Mistaken his own Title for in equity and honesty he should have Entitled Himself and his Book The Recusant and not the Protestant Reconciler For we know no Protestants in England that need any Reconciliation unless it be the Beaufronts alias Fair-faced Protestants Who have God and the King in their Mouths but the Devil in their Hearts Who Speak their Prince fair to his face but will Wound his Reputation and cut his Throat behind his Back Who will take and swallow all Oaths particularly those of Supremacy and Allegiance And yet will enter into a Scotch-Covenant or into a Shaftsburian-ASSOCIATION and Plot Treason and Rebellion against their King and his Government Who will cry-up the Church of England and yet cry-down the Bishops Who will on a Sunday-Morning go to Divine-Service in the Parish-Church and receive the Sacrament Kneeling and yet in the Afternoon Contrary to their Oath of Allegiance will go to a Seditious Conventicle These are the Tares among the Wheat the very Pests of the Nation And indeed They want a Reconciliation that is Of their ungodly Principles and Practices to Piety Of their Knavery to Honesty Of their Perjury and Hypocrisie to Truth Of their Faction to Loyalty Except these dissembling Beaufronts we know no Protestants that need any Reconciliation for in England there are no Protestants except the Beaufronts but onely the true-hearted and Loyal Episcopal men who in Heart and Conscience Own and Protest for according to our Churches Articles 34 36 37. 1. The King's Supremacy 2. The Churches Authority in Ordering Rites and Ceremonies 3. The Episcopal Government as now established Asserting the Distinct Orders of Bishops Priests and Deacons 4. Who give due Obedience to the Churches Orders and Constitutions These are the onely Protestants in England As for all others the Laws of the Realm Notifie them by the Name of Recusants So then it is a most Certain Truth though a Paradox to the Vulgar That although there be Myriads of Men in England who pass for Protestants and call themselves Protestants yet in truth and reality they are Recusants They all Combining and Siding with the Papists against the King's Supremacy do by so doing declare themselves to be No Protestants And the onely way to Reconcile these Recusants unto our Church is in the first place to persuade them to become Protestants that is to say to persuade them to Own and Protest for the King's Supremacy in Ecclesiastick Matters and to become Obedient to his Laws Civil and Ecclesiastick for till this be done as was said before They are No Protestants And of this Nature and Character are all the Dissenters in England to wit Recusants and not Protestants For they all deny the King's Supremacy which is the Essence and Foundation of Protestantism in Opposition to Popery And whoever pleads for them to be Reconciled to the Church of England without an open Recantation of their Popish Principles as does the Reconciler is guilty of a Praemunire and smells more of a Papist than of a Protestant This then being the proper Notion of a Protestant We once more petition the Reconciler That he would be pleased to inform us who are the Protestants for whom he so earnestly pleads and unto whom he so passionately craves a Condescension may be granted by the King and the Governours If he says They be the Dissenting-Brethren as he has it in his Title Page then he grosly mistakes himself For the Dissenters are No Protestants Because they all deny The King's Supremacy Which is the onely Badge and Characteristical Note of a Protestant Now that All the Dissenters do so is easily proved by their own Avowed and Declared Principles and Practices The Dissenters in England although they be very numerous yet they may be reduced unto four Ranks and Sects which will comprehend them all at least all those which are of any Bulk and Note among us Such as the Presbyterians Independents Anabaptists Quakers All which Sects we shall in order prove to be No Protestants CHAP. II. The Presbyterians No Protestants THe Presbyterians are no Protestants in as much as They Deny The King's Supremacy And in Opposition thereunto They Set up their own Ecclesiastick Consistory above the King and his Power For by their Consistorian Power They pretend they may and actually they have censured and deposed their own Natural Prince raised War by Oath and Covenant against Him when he would not yield himself a slave to their Demands and Consistorian Tyranny This is too well known in Scotland and England and needs no farther proof And although they do declare with the French Presbyterians French Disci Eccles c. 5. of the Consistory That a Magistrate may be called and employed in the charge of an Elder in the Consistory yet it is with such a Restraint and Limitation as that the Execution of one of the Functions must not hinder the other and bring no prejudice to the Church that is to their Consistorian Power which is to over-rule and controll the Magistrate in matters Ecclesiastick It is to be Noted That the first Presbyterian Consistory erected in Opposition to Monarchy and Episcopacy that ever we heard of was first in Geneva Setled by Calvin and Beza And the First Presbyterian Confistory Setled in Scotland was by John Knox who came from Geneva and brought from thence the Platform
of Presbytery And the First Presbyterian Consistory Bishop Bancrost English Scotizing l. 3. c. 1. Full. Hist l. 9. p. 103. that ever was in England was held at Wandsworth in Surrey Anno Dom. 1572. And most of the Chief Men of this Presbyterian Consistory which was the First-Born of all Presbytery in England came from Geneva especially Mr. Tho. Cartwright and Walter Travers who both meeting with discontents in Trinity College in Cambridge travelled to Geneva and there were Catechised in the Presbyterian Doctrine and Discipline And Mr. Travers G. G. Ch. Hist p. 237. after he had left Geneva went to Antwerp and there having received Ordination of the Presbyterians upon his return he in England bitterly exclaimed against the Episcopal Government of our Church as then established in Queen Elizabeths Reign Thus Geneva and Antwerp gave the first Breath to Presbytery in England and Scotland And that all these Presbyterian Consistories in their very first Foundation and Erection were against Monarchy and Regal Supremacy is evident from John Calvin the Primo-Pater of them all who has openly in Print Declared his Judgment in Two Remarkable Points concerning Kingly Government 1. That Aristocracy or Democracy is to be preferred before Monarchy 2. That if Kings prove Heretical Vngodly or Tyrannical Then they may and ought to be Deposed by the Tribunes or Primes of the people As to the first Point Calvin delivers himself in these words scil Equidem si in se considerentur tres illoe quas ponunt Philosophi Calvin Instit l. 4. c. 20. §. 8. p. 306. Regiminis Formoe minimè negaverim vel Aristocratiam vel temperatum ex ipsa Politia Statum aliis Omnibus longè excellere c. That if all the Forms of Government which Philosophers and Ancient States-Men have propounded were well weighed and considered then in his judgment That of Aristocracy or a Common wealth Modelled out of it would appear to be infinitely the best Form And that because Rarissimè contingit Reges ità sibi moderari c. It rarely happens that Kings Govern either themselves or others well Wherefore says Calvin Vt libenter fateor nullum esse Gubernationis genus isto beatius sic Beatissimos censeo quibus hac conditione frui licet c. As I freely confess there is no kind of Government more happy than that of a Free Common-Wealth So I judge them most happy who are permitted to enjoy the same And Patrioe suoe Proditores c. They are all Traytours to their Country who do not use their utmost endeavours to promote and maintain the same These expressions are sufficient to shew what a bad opinion Calvin had of either Kings or Monarchy As to his Second Position That Kings may and ought to be deposed if they be wicked and ungodly and do not Govern according to God's Word Be pleased to reade his Comment on Dan. 6.22 25. where he assures his Reader That Calvin in Dan. 6.22 earthly Princes abdicant se devest themselves of all right to Power when they Rebell against God and are unworthy to be accounted in the number of Men that is as Dr. Nalson descants upon his words in plain English Nalson's Common Inter. p. 226. They do not deserve to live and men ought rather to spit in their faces than to obey them ubi sic proterviunt when they become so malepertly proud or froward as to endeavour to despoil God of his Right c. And in his Institutes (a) Si qui nunc sint populares Magistratus ad moderandam Begum libidinem constituti quales olim erant qui Lacedaemoniis Regibus oppositi erant Ephori aut Romanis Consulibus Tribuni Plebis aut Atheniensium Senatui Demarchi Et qua etiam fortè potestate ut nunc res babent funguntur in Singulis Regnis Tres Ordines quum Primarios Conventus peragunt adeo illos ferocienti Regum Licentiae pro Officio intercedere non veto ut si Regibus impotenter grassantibus humili Plebeculae insultantibus conniveant eorum dissimulationem nefariâ perfidiâ non carere affirmem quia Populi Libertatem cujus se Dei Ordinatione Tutores positos nôrunt fraudulenter produnt Calvin Institu l. 4. c. 20. §. 31. p. 311. Mr. Calvin confesses That although it be not lawfull for Private Men to rise up against their King yet Si qui nunc sint Populares Magistratus ad Moderandam Regum Libidinem constituti c. Where there are Magistrates elected out of the People or where there are Three Orders or States such as of King Lords and Commons There the People ought by their Representatives to moderate their King 's Ill Government to punish his Vice and Tyranny and to Over-Rule Him as the Ephori did the Lacedemonian Kings and as the Peoples Tribunes did the Roman Consuls whom they Deposed and turned out of Office when they thought fit These Treasonable Positions of Calvin made Adrian Seravia a Dutchman whom Learning and Piety preferred in England Heyl. Hist of Queen Eliz. hate to be called a Calvinist As Calvin so also in like manner did John Knox the other Founder of a Presbyterian Consistory in Scotland in Opposition to Episcopacy and Regal Supremacy Declare himself thus To wit Knox Hist of Refor of Scotland p. 392. That Subjects may not onely lawfully oppose themselves against their Kings whensoever they doe any thing that expresly oppugns God's Commandment but also that they may execute judgment upon them according to God's Law So that if the King be a Murtherer Adulterer or Idolater he shall Suffer according to God's Law not as a King but as an Offender And Knox is seconded in his Treason by his Countryman Buchanan whose Maxime was this Populo jus est imperium cui velit deferat That the People may alter the Government and bestow the Crown upon whom they please And the Learned Archbishop Spotswood though a friend to Knox when he heard Bishop Bancroft Preach at Hampton-Court-Conference before King James and heard his Learned Arguments against Knox for the King's Supremacy did declare That he was wonderfully pleased and satisfied with the said Arguments though as he reports in his History l. 7. p. 497◠The Scotch Ministers then present at Court Heyl. in vit Laud. p. 49. were grieved at Heart to hear their Scotch-Presbytery and Popery so often equalled in their Opposition to Sovereign Princes And this caused our English Cyprian Archbishop Laud so often to say and more particularly in his Sermon at Oxon 1614. That the Presbyterians were as bad as the Papists Because they deny'd The King's Supremacy And he Good Man found them to be so by wofull experience for it was the Factious Scotch and English Presbyterians and not the Papists that Cut off his Head Which lead them the way soon after to Act a Blacker Tragedy upon the Sacred Person of their Dread Sovereign the King Nor is it to be forgotten What Samuel