Selected quad for the lemma: lord_n

Word A Word B Word C Word D Occurrence Frequency Band MI MI Band Prominent
lord_n bill_n house_n pass_v 12,480 5 7.4741 4 false
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
A56809 The conformist's second plea for the nonconformists wherein the case of the non-conformists is further stated and the suspension of the penal laws against them humbly moved with all due submission to the magistrate / by a charitable and compassionate conformist, author of the former plea. Pearse, Edward, 1631-1694. 1682 (1682) Wing P979; ESTC R11214 81,044 88

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

Sence of an Honourable Member of the Parliament at Westminster in the Debate of the Bill for uniting Protestants But suppose we should follow this Advice and make new Laws and require a severe Execution of the old how can you imagine that as long as the Popish Interest is so prevalent the Execution of such Laws shall be continued longer than may be subservient to the Interest of that Party Have we not had a sad Experience of this Hath the Oxford Act or that of 35th of Queen Elizabeth or any other against Dissenters been executed in favour of the Church note this all that think it a Service to the Church Are not the Dissenters as many if not more now than ever And is there any thing more visible than these Laws have been made use of to serve the Popish Interest or as Engines rather for the Affairs of the State than the Church If the Oxford Act and other Acts against Dissenters were projected in favour of the Protestant Religion it was strange they were so much promoted as many Members now here who did serve in those Parliaments do remember by Sir Tho. Clifford Sir Solomon Sweale and Sir Rogen Strickland who have since appeared to be Papists Sir I am afraid the name of the Church hath been strangely made use of to bring in Popery c. upon which resolved that the said Bill be committed upon the Debate of the House for uniting Protestants The last Act to be executed is that of 22 Ch. II. c. 1. Seditious Conventieles prevented and suppressed The Persons against whom it is levelled are described to be Seditious Sectaries Disloyal Persons who Hypocrites under pretence of tender Consciences have or may contrive Insurrections Concerning this Act let us observe the Time when it was enacted it was Anno 1670. Since which time we may not pass over without loss to the Argument how the Thoughts of our Governours and Law-makers have turned to another point and that very Parliament which was observed for a very great part of it to be young Gentlemen growing older grew more cool and moderate towards differing Protestants more suspicious of Popery and the more resolute they grew in maintaining Property and the Protestant Religion and to break the Arms and the Legs of growing Popery the more temperate they grew towards the Nonconformists not to take any Strength from His Majestirs Declaration of March 15 1671 2 because it seemed to tend to the Propagation of Popery and was recalled upon the Parliaments Representation altho some wise Protestant States-Men thought that Declaration would be a kindness to Dissenters and no greater Injury to the Church and Protestant Religion from Popery than they received by Popery growing apace under the Benignity of a Connivance and Favour of great Men. Not to take hold of this to shew that the King thought fit to mitigate the rigor of that Law the very next Year after it was enacted That which gives Strength to my Argument is this that at the next meeting of the Parliament which began February 24 1672 an Act passed against the Papists and a Bill was presented by the House of Commons to the Lords in favour of Dissenting and for uniting Protestants which as some that have as much reason to know as any who write would have passed if they had had time to sit and from that time that long Parliament who had made the Act against Conventicles how resolute soever they were against an Indulgence February 15 1662 they saw the incompatibility between Execution of their own Law and the Preservation of the Protestant Religion and saw a necessity of uniting Protestants at the same time when they saw our increasing Dangers from the Increase of Popery And our several Parliaments since have reasoned upon the same Principles and Foundations once again so far as to commuit a Bill to unite all Protestants And now I have prepar'd my self for this Argument It is not well done and cannot be good for the Church or Kingdom and if not good to them it should not be thought good by Protestants which that very Parliament that made the Act and many other Parliaments thought not good for the Church and Kingdom For some particular Magistrates upon the Information of some self-seeking Informers to execute the Laws against the sense of the Legislators who should and certainly did best know what was for our good is to oppose a private Opinion to a publick Deliberation and a private Spirit against a publick That I may draw these Reasonings to a Conclusion it is not a due Execution of the Laws except it be upon the Persons and to the ends intended in the Laws But if you would execute the Laws upon the proper Objects you must execute them upon Seditious Sectaries disloyal Persons very Hypocrites that do under pretence of Religious Exercises instil Principles of Schism and Rebellion into the Minds of the King's Subjects The Law goes upon such a Supposition and to prevent such Mischiefs but if there be no such Meetings to such a Tendency there are no Persons that deserve such Executions If there be let them be tried if there be not of all times is there no time but this for Protestant Magistrates to go upon the Information of Informers to give Countenance to a Scandal that Protestant Dissenters are as pernicious to the Government as confederated Papists And that Protestants should act contrary to their Principles contrary to their Interests to bring certain Ruine upon Themselves Families and Friends without any the least hope of Relief or mending their Condition A Game indeed to set Informers to find a Hare when they should run down the Fox If this be not to sin against Love to Protestants because of some Omissons or against Knowledg it is sin against Sence and many Years Experience If you do really believe and can prove by full and honest Evidence that such Men have preached such Doctrines take them as Traytors and never proceed against them as Dissenters for preaching in a manner different from the Liturgy These Arguments proceed from consideration of the Laws and are but my first Head of Arguments The second sort of Arguments is drawn from the Fact for which the Dissenters are to suffer The Crime primâ facie is preaching in a manner different from the Church of England and not according to the Liturgy to numbers above Four besides the Houshold This is the Fact The Proof of it is either by Confession of the Parties which we will not suppose or the Notoriousness of the Fact which needs further proof it all depends upon the Oaths of two Witnesses What do they depose They who perhaps know not what an Oath is nor what a Sin Perjury is depose that A. B. preached at such a time or times in such a place or places to such numbers against the Statute But what if the Preacher preach'd true Doctrine exhorted to Peace and Holiness Obedience Justice Mercy and not one