Selected quad for the lemma: parliament_n
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
|
Id. Serm. Apr. 1645. did exhort the Parliament to take care of the just Liberties of God's People not such Licentiousness a sis abus'd for a Cloak of Naughtiness c. to set up Unity in Faith that God's Name be not blasphemed his Day be sanctified his Gospel preached his Worship kept from Idolatry and Superstitions Innovations his Ministry purged planted Serm. Mar. 26 1645. encouraged Sacraments purely celebrated It is more than necessary and would take up too much time and place to examine all That which they were against was a general Toleration of all Religions of Idolatry Heresy Blasphemy and for all Men to do what they pleased They were against Mens publishing by preaching or printing dangerous Opinions such as Poligamy Arbitrary Divorce Mortality of the Soul no Ministery no Churches Mr. Case ' s Sermon May 26th 1647. Serm. Feb. 8th 1646. no Ordinances no Scriptures denying the Divinity of Christ and the Holy Ghost and other Opinions destructive of the Souls of Men. Mr. Newcomen is most full in stating the case of Liberty Which saith he is not to be granted in such things as are injurious to God and destructive of the Souls of Men nor wherein the difference of Judgment will necessarily and unavoidably ex natura rei produce a Rent or Schism If a Liberty of Judgment be lest it is first in such things as are not positively laid down in Scripture therefore not in Fundamentals of Faith and Worship 2. In things of private Practise Care is to be had of keeping those Opinions to our selves not perplexing the Consciences of others with them Private Persons of a differing Judgment if they live quietly frequent the publick Assemblies of Worship and are not discerned to disturb the Peace either of Church or State by any secret underminings are to be tolerated in hope of their Conversion and for publick Peace sake Much hath been yielded yea almost any thing but that one thing that would lay a Foundation of perpetual Division and Disunion in Families Church and Kingdom Thus he And what is there in all this that hath Conviction or any Reason to silence them that they cannot open their Mouths for a Connivance to themselves Yea I humbly conceive there is nothing but what commends the Ministers of the like Perswasion to publick Favour as being Orthodox and sound Men fit for a greater Favour than a bare Permission or Toleration Obj. The Presbyterians were against the Toleration of Independency Letter of Presbyterian Ministers of Lond. to the Assemblies of Divines against Toleration Dec. 18th 1645. therefore it is unreasonable for them to ask and as unfit for the Church to grant the same to them the Consequences of which Concession if made to them will be as prejudicial to the Church and State as Independency would have been to them Answ 1. There hath been no such thing desired since the King's Return that I know of as a Toleration of the Presbyterian Government 2. One great Reason against the Toleration was because the Independents bad not declared what they held nor circumscribed the Persons and the things which they desired 3. How far the Assembly and the Presbyterians condescended and indeed how amicably both Parties debated the Controversy is to be seen in the Papers of Accommodation there was a Committee apppointed for Accommodation November 6th 1645. After the Paper of the Dissenting Brethren in Answer to the Committee of Divines December 23d 1645 It is resolved upon the Question That they which agree in the Substance of the Worship of God in the Directory according to the Presace and agree in the Confession of Faith and with the Doctrine of the Reformed Churches contained in their Confessions and Writings as we do who differ from our Brethren in matters of Discipline Reasons of the Dissenting Brethren c. London 1648. shall have the benefit of this Indulgence P. 42. This I historically relate to shew tho the Presbyterians of Dond. were against a Toleration of they knew not what yet the Assembly took pains by way of Accommodation till they were diverted from all Proceedings And now if they had Power to assign it the Congregational should have a Brotherly Indulgence that are sound in Faith c. Obj. But the Dissenters are under the ill Eye of the Law and no more innocent than the Papists in the Eye of the Law and there is fear of them so the Fol. Pamphlet of Rebellion printed by B. Took Answ I say the Protestant-Dissenters are not under the evil Eye of the Law altho under the ill Opinion of some that wish them executed If they sowed Seditious Principles moved Insurrections or poysoned the King's Subjects they were most deservedly under the angry Brows of just Laws 2. What if they were what then Those over-voting Numbers in that House of Commons are under the ill Opinion of the Land have been noted by that very Parliament and since 3. That very Parliament in 1672 and all our Parliaments since have entertained better Thoughts of them 4. The King hath deserved some more Respect and Reverénce from them that seem to exceed in Loyalty than to have his Desires in his Speech at the passing the Act of Oblivion disregarded as it is and he expressed himself more graciously of them in many Passages of his Declaration about Ecclesiastical Affairs offered Dignities Bishopricks and gave Degrees to some of those very Men that this Gentleman thinks to prejudice by his Paper 5. Till the Act de Heretico Comburendo was taken away this very Writer if he be a resolute Protestant was under the evil eye of the Law and may be under the evil eye of the 35th of Elizabeth if he continue so and the whole Protestant Part of the Kingdom and who were under the Aspect of the Law of the six Articles But I say the Protestant Dissenters are not under the evil eye of the Laws but the Seditious and his many Lines are so many Slanders in many places and impose upon the Reader things which are contrary to our senses I can as soon believe Popery as that Protestant Dissenters are Enemies to the Government But what can be answered to such a Gentleman that says An Angel from Heaven might manage his Argument with greater Skill but not produce more Demonstrative Truth That is to say An Angel from Heaven might write more like an Orator than he but not be a better Logician than he But he seems to be one of that strange sort of People among our selves that as Dr. Burnet says in his late excellent Sermon before the Lord Mayor of London are not ashamed to own a greater Aversion to any sort of Dissenters than to the Church of Rome Thus I have made my way to the Conclusion and as I did begin so I will end with humble Application to the Magistrates But to all this the Magistrates will say they have an Answer ready viz. They do the Duty of their
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