Selected quad for the lemma: king_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
king_n	edward_n	england_n	year_n	23,637	5	4.8786	4	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A52063	A vindication of the answer to the humble remonstrance from the unjust imputation of frivolousnesse and falshood Wherein, the cause of liturgy and episcopacy is further debated. By the same Smectymnuus.	Smectymnuus.; Marshall, Stephen, 1594?-1655. aut; Calamy, Edmund, 1600-1666. aut; Young, Thomas, 1587-1655. aut; Newcomen, Matthew, 1610?-1669. aut; Spurstowe, William, 1605?-1666. aut	1654 (1654)	Wing M799; ESTC R217369	134,306	232

who have laboured about the Reformation of the Church these five hundred yeeres of whom he names abundance have taught that all Pastors be they intitulated Bishops or Priests have equall authority and power by the Word of God and by this the Reader may know Doctor Reinolds his judgment concerning Episcopacie There is one thing more belongs to this Section as to the proper seat and that is the establishment which he seeks to Episcopacie frō the laws of the Kingdom to which we having answered that Laws are repealable the Parliament having a Nomotheticall power He answers though laws are repealable yet fundamentall laws are not subject to alteration upon personall abuses Secondly that he speaks not against an impossibility but an easinesse of change which our guiltinesse would willingly overlook But consider we beseech you how fitly is Episcopal Government made a piece of the fundamentall Laws of the Kingdome How did the Kingdome then once stand without Bishops as in the very page you had now to answer you might have seen once it did For doth not the Marginall tell you from Sir Edward Coke or rather from an Act reported by him in the 23 yeere of Edward the first that the holy Church was founded in the state of Prelacie within the Realme of England by the King and his progenitors which your guiltinesse will needs overlooke for feare you should see that there was a King of this Realme of England before there was a Prelacie And how then is Episcopacie one of the fundamentals of the Kingdome And whereas you say you spake onely against an easinesse of change read your words in the eighteenth page of your Remonstrance A man would thinke it were plea enough to challenge a reverend respect and an immunitie from all thoughts of alteration is this to speake against an easinesse or rather against a possibility of change For your conclusion that things indifferent or good having by continuance and generall approbation beene well rooted in Church and State may not upon light grounds be pulled up Good Sir never trouble your selfe about such an indifferent thing as Episcopacie is Never feare but if Episcopacie be rooted up it will be done by such hands as will not doe it upon light grounds SECT V. THey that would defend the Divine right of Episcopacie derive the pedigree of it from no lesse then Apostolicall and in that right divine institution so did this Remonstrant This we laboured in this Section to disprove and shew that it might be said of our Bishops as of those men Ezra 62. These men sought their Register among those that were reckoned by Genealogie but they were not found therefore were they as polluted put from the Priestho●d For the Bishops whose pedigree is derived from the Apostles were no others then Presbyters this we evinced by foure mediums out of Scripture but insisted onely upon two the identitie of their name and office Before wee come to the Remonstrants answer wee will minde the Reader of what the Remonstrant saith That we have a better faculty at gathering then at strewing which if we have we shall here make good use of our faculty in gathering the choice flowers which himself hath scattered yielding unto us the mayn Scripture grounds whereby the Patrons of Episcopacie have endevoured to uphold their cause For himselfe confesseth the Bishops cause to be bad if it stand not by divine Right and compares the leaving of divine right and supporting themselves by the indulgence and munificence of religious Princes unto the evill condition of such men who when God hath withdrawn himselfe make flesh their arme And whether himselfe hath not surrendred up this divine right judge by that which followeth Our main argument was That Bishops and Presbyters in the originall authority of Scripture were the same Hee answers in the name of himselfe and his Party This is in expresse terms granted by us We argue it further That we never find in Scripture any other orders of Ministery but Bishops and Deacons He answers Brethren you might have spared to tell mee that which I have told you before And adds That when wee alleage the Apostles writings for the identity of Bishops and Presbyt●rs we oppose not his assertion because he speaks of the monuments of immediate succession to the Apostolike times but we of the writing of the Apostles And for the two other arguments drawn from the identitie of the qualifications of Bishops and Presbyters for their Office and Ordination to their office hee answers Ne 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 quidem And yet notwithstanding that the Reader may not perceive how the Remonstrant betrayes his own cause he deals like the fish Sepia and casteth out a great deal of black inke before the eyes of the Reader that so hee may escape without observation But wee will trace him and finde him out where hee thinks himselfe most secure For first he falsly quotes our answer Whereas wee say That in originall authority Bishops Presbyters are the same he tels us we say That Bishops and Presbyters went originally for the same That is saith he There was at first a plain indentity in their denomination Which two answers differ Immane quantum And yet howsoever this very identity of denomination in Scripture is of no small consequence what ever the Remonstrant makes of it For the proper ends of Names being to distinguish things according to the difference of their natures and the supream wisdome of God being the imposer of these names who could neither be ignorant of the nature of these offices nor mistake the proper end of the imposition of names nor want variety to expresse himselfe the argument taken from the constant identity of denomination is not so contemptible as the Remonstrant pretends Especially considering that all the texts brought to prove the identity of names prove as intrinsecally the identity of Offices which we did cleerly manifest by that text Titus 1. 5 6 7. Where the Apostle requiring Presbyters to be thus and thus qualified renders the reason because Bishops must be so Which argument would no ways evince what the Apostle intended if there were onely an idenditie of names and not also of offices and qualifications When the names are the same and the Offices distinct who but one that cares not what hee affirmes would infer the same offices as a consequent from the identity of their names Who would say that the properties of the Constellation called Canis ought to be the same with the bruit creature so called because they have both one name And this we desire the Reader to take the more notice of because the Remonstrant passeth it over in silence Secondly the Remonstrant seemes to recant that which he had before granted tels us that though in the Apostolike Epistles there be no nominal distinction of the titles yet here is a reall distinction and specification of the duties as we shall see in due place

Curialibus cap. 9. Eum Senatum vero Athenienses Areopagum dicebant eo quod in illis totius populi virtus consisteret We hope our Remonstrant hath now recovered his stumble and next we find him leaping being as good at leaping over blocks as hee is at stumbling at straws it is his practice through his whole booke what ever objection made by us he finds too heavy to remove he over-leaps it This course hee begins here for wee having charged him with some words sounding to contempt in his Preface he falls a quarrellling with our Logick for calling that a Preface which hee intended as one of the main pieces of the substance of his book Which certainly if Captatio Benevolentiae be the work of a Preface he that reads the Remonstrance to the ninth page will find that the preceding pages have been but by way of insinuation and there he comes to the proposition and narration of his cause But if our Logick was bad hee knew his Ethicks were worse and therefore these misdemeanours which we justly charged upon him and he knew not how to excuse or answer his Politicks taught him to leap over Counting all to the fourth page as light froth that will sink alone which seems to us a strange piece of Physik and if we would cry quit with the Remonstrant make our Reader as merry with him as he would make his Readers with us wee could tell him a Tale in the margent But some thing it seems is of a little more solid substance it is as scum that will not so easily sink alone wherein you appe●l to indifferent eyes to judge whether we do not endevour to cast unjust envy upon you against the cleer evidence of any knowing mans conscience Content Onely put the case right you tell your Judges that you had said That if Antiquity may be the rule the Civill policie as in generall notion hath sometimes varied the Sacred never the Civill came from Arburary Impos●rs the Sacred from men inspired now these gracious Interpreters would draw your words to the present and particular government of our own Monarchie as if you implied that variable and arbitrary and are not ashamed to mention that deadly name of Treason Our charge upon this is that in the judgement of this Remonstrant if any had dared to attempt the alteration of Monarchicall Government they had been lesse culpable then in petitioning the alteration of Episcopall and conclude that if he had found such a passage in any of those whom he cals lewd Libellers all had rung with Treason Treason Now let the indifferent Reader let the most Honourable Parliament let the Sacred Majesty of our King Judge whether we doe the man wrong First this we know that one of the most confident Advocates of Episcopacie hath said it that where a Nationall Church is setled in the orderly regiment of certain grave Overseers to seek to abandon this forme and to bring in a forreigne Discipline is as unreasonable as to cast off the yoke of just an● hereditary Monarchy and to affect many headed Soveraignty which wee thinke is an assertion insolent enough that sets the Mitre as high as the Crowne God blesse our sacred Monarchie from such friends But this Remonstrant rises higher and sets the Mitre above the Crown Telling us that Civill Government comes from Arbitrarie Imposers this from men inspired and is in that respect by the Remonstrant challenged to be of divine right If Civill Government here include Monarchie as by the Remonstrants owne explication it doth certainly this is to advance Episcopacie above Monarchie and to make it more sinfull and dangerous to alter Episcopacy which according to the Remonstrant challenges God for the founder then Monarchie which saith this Remonstrant according to originall Authority had its foundation in the ●●ee Arbitrement of men Yet did we never say that this was Treason knowing such crimes to be above our cognizance wee mentioned indeed the name of Treason but as from your mouth not our own We said If you had found any such in any c. the world would have rung with the loud cryes of treason treason it was our conjecture which you have now made good in this defence For you that are so full of charity to impute it to us as if that wee had vilified the judgement of King Iames as you do pag. 23. whom we mentioned not but as a most famous and ever admired Prince had any ●ord faln from us which through the grace of God we hope never shall tending to the disparagement either of the Royall Person or power What work would you have made with that Be sparing Sir of charging your poore Neighbours so impetuously with malice and uncharitablenesse till yee have taught your selfe to be more charitable and lesse mali●ious To what wee alleaged in the instance of William Rufus King and Pope Pius to shew that Episcopall Government which he calls sacred naturally tends not onely not to depend upon but to subdue the civill authority to it selfe His answer is first That William Rufus was a Prince noted for grosly irreligious That those were tyrannicall Popish Bishops That the Pope was Antichrist That he answered so because hee was unwilling they should shew as good cards for their standing as hee pretended for his own And lastly all this makes nothing against our Bishops who professe notwithstanding the divine right of their calling to hold their places and the exercise of their jurisdiction wholly from the King So then here is no Falsification all that was produced is granted true onely exception taken against the persons produced King William hee was irreligious Daniel observes that former times being unhappy in their compilers of History the Scepter which rules over the fames of Princes who for the most part were Monks had all their Princes personated either Religious or irreligious as they humoured or offended the Bishops Rochet and the Monks belly No wonder then if so small a friend to Bishops be condemned as irreligious But then those Bishops were Popish Tyrannous Bishops But it was not their Popery but their Episcopall dignity that made them tyrannize and it was their Tyranny and not their Popery that made them odious to their King who was Popish as well as they And it hath beene ever usuall to both former and latter Bishops to tyrannize over such as feare them and to flatter such as they feare The Pope hee is Antichrist wee are glad to heare you call him so some thought a yeere agoe you would scarce have given him such a nickname unlesse you meant to have falne out with the rest of your brethren and what if the Pope be Antichrist may wee not bring the testimony of Antichrist against Antichristian Bishops As Paul brought the witnesse of a Cretian Poet against Cretian Liers May not we alleage Beelzebub against Beliall without honouring him But the Pope so answered because he was unwilling they should shew as

which they have made who have beene intoxicated with the Golden Chalice of the whore of Babylons abominations hath so alienated the affections of people from them as that what doome so ever they are sentenced unto it is no other then what they have brought upon themselves As for our part we are still of the same mind that honourable maintenance ought to be given to the Ministers of the Gospell not onely to live but to be hospitable Indeed we instanced in many that did abuse their large revenues But you are pleased to say That in this Ablative age the fault is rare and hardly instanceable We thinke the contrary is more hardly instanceable And as for your Ablative age if you meane it of poore Presbyters who have beene deprived of all their subsistance by the unmercifulnesse of Bishops whom they with teares have besought to pitty their wives and children we yeeld it to be too true Or if you meane in regard of the purity of the ordinances the frequency of preaching the freedome of conceived prayer We denie not but in this sence also it may be called the Ablative age But if you relate it to Episcopacy and their Cathedrals with whom it is now the Accusative age We hope that the yeere of recompense is come and that in due time for all their Ablations they may be made a gratefull ablation We have done with this section and feare not to appeale to the same judicious eyes the Remonstrant doth to judge to whose part that Vale of absurd inconsequences and bold ignorance which hee brands us withall doth most properly appertaine SECT XIV IN this Section hee comes to make good his an●wers formerly given to some objections by him propounded and by us further urged The first objection was from that prejudice which Episcopacy challenging a divine originall doth to Soveraignty which was wont to be acknowledged not onely as the conserving but as the creating cause of it in former times The Remonstrant thinks this objection is sufficiently removed by telling us there is a compatiblenesse in this case of Gods act and the Kings And what can wee say to this Sir you know what we have said already and not onely said but proved it and yet will confidently tell us you have made good by undeniable proofes that besides the ground which our Saviour layd of this imparity the blessed Apostles by inspiration from God made this difference c. Made good when where by what proofs Something you have told us about the Apostles but not a word in all the defence of any ground laid by our Saviour of this imparitie yet the man dreams of undeniable proofs of that whereof he never spake word Wee must therefore tell you againe take it as you please that if the Bishops disclaime the influence of Soveraignty into their creation and say that the King doth not make them Bishops they must have no being at all Nor can your questions stop our mouthes Where or when did the King ever create a Bishop Name the man and take the cause Wee grant you Sir that so much as there is of a Presbyter in a Bishop so much is Divine But that imparity and jurisdiction exercised out of his own demandated authority which are the very formalities of Episcopacie these had their first derivation from the Consent Customes Councell Constitution of the Church which did first demandate this Episcopall authority to one particular person afterwards the Pope having obtained a Monarchie over the Church did from himself demandate that authority that formerly the Church did and since the happy ejection of the Popes tyrannicall usurpations out of these Dominions our Princes being invested with all that Ecclesiasticall power which that Tyrant had usurped that same imparity and authority which was originally demandated from the Church successively from the Pope is now from the King Looke what influence the Church ever had into the creation of Bishops the same the Pope had after and looke what influence the Pope had heretofore the same our Laws have placed in the King which is so cleere that the Remonstrant dares not touch or answer There was a Statute made the first of Edward the sixth inabling the King to make Bishops by his Letters patents Onely Hence all the Bishops in King Edwards the sixt time were created Bishops by the Kings Letters patents ONELY in which all parts of Ecclesiasticall jurisdiction are granted them in precise words praeter ultra jus divinum Besides and beyond divine right to be executed onely nomine vice Authoritate nostri Regis in the Kings royall stead name and Authority as the patents of severall Bishops in the Rolls declare But besides the Kings Letters the Bishop is solemnly ordained by the imposition of the hands of the Metropolitan and other of his brethren these as from God invest him in his holy calling As from God Good sir prove that prove that the Metropolitan and Bishops in such imposition of hands are the instruments of God not the instruments of the King prove they doe it by Commission received from God and not by command of the King onely Produce one warrant from Scripture one president of a Bishop so ordained by a Metropolitan and fellow Bishops and without more dispute take all Shortly resolve us but this one thing what is it that takes a man out of the ordinary ranke of Presbyters and advanceth him to an imparity and power of jurisdiction is it humane authority testified in the Letters of the King or is it divine authority testified by the significative action of imposition of hands by the Metropolitan and fellow Bishops if the former you grant the cause if the latter consider with what good warrant you can make a form of Ordination by the hands of a Metropolitan and fellow Bishops which is a meer humane invention to be not onely a signe but a mean of conveying a peculiar and superiour power from Divine Authority and of making a Presbyter a Bishop Iuredivino Finally Sir make as much as you can of your Ordination by a Metropolitan slight as much as you please your unworthy comparison between the King and our Patrons yet did the Kings Conge d'eslire give you no more humane right to Episcopacie then the hands of the Metropolitan and fellow Bishops give you of right Divine you would be Bishops by neither It is not your confident re-inforcing of your comparison that shal call carry it till you have first proved it from Scripture that God never instituted an order of Presbyters or Ministers in his Church as wee have proved God never instituted an order of Bishops Secondly that by the Laws of the land as much of the Ministeriall power over a particular Congregation is in the patron as there is of Episcopall power in the King Till then wee beseech you let it rest undetermined whether your self or we may best be sent to Simons Cell We say no more