Selected quad for the lemma: war_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
war_n	england_n	king_n	scot_n	5,306	5	9.8558	5	true

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A59789	An answer to the Amicable accommodation of the difference between the representer and the answerer	Sherlock, William, 1641?-1707.	1686 (1686)	Wing S3263; ESTC R37544	18,103	34

upon themselves Neither they nor we pretend to dispence with Vows made to God but we think no Vow can oblige men to Sin and since all men have not the gift of Continency as our Saviour says If such Persons are ensnared in a rash Vow it may be while they were Children or before they understood their own Temper and Complexion since we cannot think the Fornication of Priests a more holy State than Marriage we think it more justifyable to repent of a rash Vow than to live in a constant state of Temptation and Sin It is likely enough as he says that Dissenters may complain of Persecution tho they themselves have been declared Enemies to an unlimited Toleration and it will be hard to find a medium between a general Liberty of Conscience and those restraints which are laid on Dissenters But it must be considered whether the Church or the State be chargeable with this The several Laws which have been made against Dissenters have been more for the security of the State than of the Church have been occasioned by a restless humour which has threatned the publick Peace and have been rarely executed but at the instance of Civil Authority to provide for the security of the State and I suppose he will not parallel this with some other Persecutions But to make the Dissenters quarrel at the Assistance given to the Low-Countries and proffered to the French in their Rebellion and the hard usage of the Queen of Scots and the late Murder of Charles I. argues he matters not much what he says and to charge these Intrigues of State upon the Church of England is to forget that he is in England and not at Rome where Kings make Peace and War not the Pope with his Council of Cardinals And yet our Accommodator has kept the sweetest bit for the last For he brings in the Dissenter accusing the Church of England for giving every man a liberty of Judging and yet requiring Obedience to her own Constitutions which the meanest Sectaries among them challenge and practice and it is not very modestly done of them to blame that in us which they do themselves They all judg for themselves and therefore form Churches and Communions of their own and they will not receive any into their Communion without owning their Faith and submitting to their Order and Discipline and this is all that the Church of England challenges only with this difference that being established by Law her Communion and Government is enforced by Laws And what a mighty Absurdity and Contradiction is this that men should be taught to use their own Reason and Judgment in Religion and yet required to submit and conform to a Church whose Faith and Worship is consonant both to Scripture and Reason Well but after all this Liberty granted by the Church of England Whosoever will follow her must shut his Eyes stifle his Reason and be led only by the Nose Why What 's the matter now The charge is no more but this That in matters of Order and Decency and such things as are left to the Determination of Church Governours as are neither forbid nor commanded by God we must submit to the Determinations of Authority whatever private Judgement or Opinion we may have of things A great fault this that tho every man must judge for himself in good and evil yet every private mans Judgement must be over-ruled by the publick Judgment in matters of Order and external circumstances of Religion Much of the same nature is his concluding Charge That we are a wavering and unsetled Church subject to continual Variations because some Rites and Ceremonies formerly used are now laid aside And what then Does the settlement of the Church consist in external Ceremonies Is it any fault in a Church which challenges to her self a Power to appoint and constitute and alter external Rites to exercise this Power as She shall think most for the Edification of the Church which is the only Rule of right and wrong in this Case which may therefore change with the Change and Alteration of times and Persons and other external circumstances of Affairs Now let every man judg whether there were ever such a Speech made for a Dissenterbefore which in every Point of it is directly contrary to his own Profession and Practice It is time for our Author to have done with his Trade of Representing for no man would know what it was he Represented did he not take care with the unskilful Painter to write over his uncouth Figures what they are This is an Horse and this an Ass. And thus this hopeful design of Representing and Misrepresenting ends only in ridiculing the Church of England a Liberty which if we needed it is not mannerly for us to use at this time but we are contented they should ridicule our Church if they will permit us truly to Represent theirs But to proceed Our Accommodator grants that he is still in Arrears and certainly never any Bankrupt paid less in the Pound than he offers and this is his Accommodating which Merchants call Compounding In my Answer to his Reflections I proved that what he calls the Character of a Papist Misrepresented has nothing of Misrepresentation in it properly so called for there was no matter of Fact misreported in his Answer which he calls Papists protesting against Protestant Popery instead of justifying his Character he seeks out for new Misrepresentations this in my last Answer I enquired the reason of Why instead of justifying his own Misrepresentations which he had so unjustly fathered upon us he should hunt about to pick up some new Misrepresentations for me to Answer And the Reason he now assigns for it is Because I had little to say against the former except that they were not to be called Misrepresentations in a strict Sense Now the less I had to say it was the more easily answered tho I know not what more need to be answered to the charge of Misrepresenting than to prove that it is false But he says he fathered his Misrepresentations on no Body and so much the worse for that for a general charge includes every Body And yet he was as unfortunate in his new Misrepresentations as in his old ones He brings in the Arch-Bishop of York for a Misrepresenter whereas the Misrepresentations he Transcribes out of the Arch-Bishop the Arch-Bishop cites out of Popish Authors and names the Authors where they are to be found but the Protester to make a Misrepresenter of him conceals all these Authorities and sets down the Words as the Bishops own and this he did only to consult the Credit of the Prelate In what Sir That he might have the entire Glory of being a Misrepresenter without being thought to steal out of Popish Authors But he saies The Bishop is still a Misrepresenter in charging these sayings of private Doctors upon the Church But where does he do that Yes He saies He that is the