Selected quad for the lemma: england_n

Word A Word B Word C Word D Occurrence Frequency Band MI MI Band Prominent
england_n henry_n king_n richard_n 15,475 5 9.2713 4 true
View all documents for the selected quad

Text snippets containing the quad

ID Title Author Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication) STC Words Pages
A34079 The Protestant mask taken off from the Jesuited Englishman being an answer to a book entituled Great Britain's just complaint. Comber, Thomas, 1645-1699. 1692 (1692) Wing C5484; ESTC R22733 44,472 73

There is 1 snippet containing the selected quad. | View lemmatised text

he would have no Bounds set to the Prerogative but his Will and his constant Actings accordingly For he told his Judges what he would have to be Law but this King enquires of his Judges what they think legal He grants the late King used a Dispensing Power and that too in other Instances besides Liberty of Conscience which Liberty our Author contrary to the Opinion of his Friend K. Lewis calls That desirable and necessary Good of Mankind Well let it be so where then is the Parallel Why K. James granted this against Law and without a Parliament and K. William grants the same Liberty not by a Dispensing Power or by Prerogative but by Parliament that is K. James he granted it arbitrarily K. William settles it by Law A most exact Parallel no doubt and a good proof of K. William's Design to be arbitrary To get off this Difficulty the Prince's Agents are topt upon us again and all the blame laid on him and them they managed poor K. James with invisible Wires who followed them blindfold to his Ruine And if he were so easily wheedled by corrupted Protestants may he not more easily be wheedled into illegal Acts by fierce and dangerous Papists And is it not then our wisest way never to wish for the return of a Prince so apt to be misled If he be in the best Humour in the World with the Bishops upon his Restauration how soon may some Popish Emissary incense him once more against them and run them again into the Tower and from thence to the Bar It was truly urged against King James that his Affection to Catholicks was too strong for the Law And he will prove King William guilty of the same Crime because in time of War he hires a few Foreign Papists into his Army Men who stay no where have no Interest to serve no Design but on their Pay and no Concern about the Religion of any Countrey which employs them which with inexpressibly Effrontery he saith is worse than K. James Cashiering in Times of Peace great Numbers of Military and Civil Protestant Officers and putting English and Irish Papists in their Places whose Interest obliged and inclined them to assist their King in changing the Laws and Religion of their Native Country Again he asks if Catholicks so he calls them falsely in most places not Roman Catholicks be not countenanced as much and do not exercise their Religion as freely now as ever I reply they are permitted but not at all countenanced Do their Fryars walk in their Habits Do they ring Bells and invite all People to see and hear their Foppery or make publick Shews Are they promoted to Churches and Colleges and to be Privy-Counsellors If not how absurd is his Query and where is his Parallel But he fancies we were safer when his Catholicks held their Liberty meerly by the Favour of English Protestants that is surely he means in King James his Time than now when Foreign Princes of the Romish Communion desire this King to tolerate them Now I dare appeal to the Papists Whether they did not believe it was King James not English Protestants who gave them the Liberty in that Reign And whether they did not think their Religion more likely to be restored by a Prince of their own Faith in League with France than by a Protestant King Confederate with the House of Austria And if they think their Religion likely to be restored by King William let them make it evident by fighting for him against the late King and his French Allies otherwise all these Suggestions are as groundless as they are malicious Yet upon a review of these Bug-Bears of his own dressing up Pag. 18. he is terribly affrighted and falls to pray to avert these imaginary Evils using at the same time all his Rhetorical Amplifications to excite us to run into certain and real Mischiefs by destroying this Government that can and will defend our Religion and Civil-Rights to set up another which will destroy both But the Cheat is so visible and his Parallels so ridiculous that no Man of Sense can be deluded by such Stuff Wherefore I conclude this Point and have shewed that King James was the Aggressor and hurt himself we injured no Body and only warded off the Blow which aimed at the very Vitals of our Church and our Ancient Government and which would have turned it from a Limited to an Absolute Monarchy a Change infinitetly worse for this Nation than our Author can pretend hath been made by this Revolution Which brings me to his second Pretence for restoring King James Pag. 19. viz. the settling the Government upon its old Basts And here while he seems to cite a long Passage out of his Adversary See the Pretences examined p. 10. he jumbles the Sense alters the Phrases puts in his own Comment and leaves out some of the Author's Words and then accuses the Writer whom he blindly and falsly guesses to be the Earl of Nottingham of Ignorance in the History and Affairs of England want of Judgment Disingenuity Impudence and what not But it will be easily proved to all that know that accomplished Peer and read this Libel this is not his Lordship's but this Libeller's own Character And his Reply to this Passage confirms the Observation for he owns that the Convention declared the Throne void therefore he mistakes in saying they made it void Declaring supposes a thing done already and he may as well charge a Judg with committing that Fact which he declares to be Treason as to say the Convention made the Throne void But we utterly deny his infallible Mark viz. That a Vacancy certainly proves a Monarchy Elective and that in an Hereditary Monarchy the Throne cannot be without a Possessor one Moment For Scotland is and ever was accounted to be no Elective but an Hereditary Monarchy yet upon the Death of Alexander there was a Vacancy for above five Years while the Hereditary Titles of six several Pretenders were under Examination And there was a Vacancy in England See Spotsw History of Scotland An. 1279. from the two and twentieth of August when King Richard the Third was slain till Henry the Seventh was declared King Yea there was more than a Moment between the Resignation of Edward and Richard the Second and the Entrance of Edward the Third and Henry the Fourth I grant that where there is no Doubt concerning the next Heir upon Cession or Death there the right Heir succeeds immediately But while the next Heir is ambiguous in an Hereditary Monarchy till the Title be examined cleared and declared none of the Pretenders can assume the Royal Dignity And his other Maxim of our Kings never dying is not literally true in any other Case but where there is a certain known and undoubted Heir So that an enquiry into and declaring the right Heir doth not make an Hereditary Monarchy Elective But he denies that the present Queen was the