Selected quad for the lemma: religion_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
religion_n	england_n	king_n	parliament_n	3,428	5	6.3449	4	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A87881	The observator observed, or, Animadversions upon observations on the history of King Charles wherein that history is vindicated, partly illustrated, and severall other things tending to the rectification of some publique mistakes, are inserted : to which is added, at the latter end, the observators rejoinder.	L'Estrange, Hamon, 1605-1660.	1656 (1656)	Wing L1188A; ESTC R179464	41,478	51

the abrogating of the Articles of Religion established in the Church of Ireland and settling in their place the Articles of the Church of England Anno 1633. Answer Was ever man so shamefully out as this Observator is here out of the Story beyond all measure and out of charity beyond all Religion First these Bishops were not sent by the Parliament to the King but sent for by Him Secondly they were five not four Thirdly if any of them depended upon the judgement of the others it was the Bishop of London who at the last meeting and consultation spake not one syllable As for the Bishops of Durham and Carlile they spake as freely as any other insomuch as the King faulted one of their Syllogismes because it had in it four terms Fourthly the Lord Primate had no sharp tooth against the Lieutenant as the Observator or Malice it self suggests a calumny so absurd as nothing but the sin thereof can defend it from being ridiculous not a syllable relating to it being true for First the Articles of Religion established in the Church of Ireland were never abrogated as is evidenced by this Certificate We who were present at and Members of the Convocation holden at Dublin Anno Domini 1634. doe hereby certifie that upon the proposal of the first Canon wherein for the manifestation of our agreement with the Church of England in the confession of the same Christian faith and doctrine of the Sacraments as was then expressed we did receive and approve the Book of Articles of Religion agreed upon in the Convocation holden at London in the year 1562. One of the Assembly stood up and desired that the other Book of Articles agreed upon in the Convocation holden at Dublin in the year 1615. should be joyned therewith Vnto whom it was then answered that this addition was altogether needless that Book having Been already sufficiently ratified by the Decree of the former Synod But that the least motion was then or there made for the suppressing of those Articles of Ireland hath no truth all in it And therefore the Observator and whosoever else hath or doth averr that the said Articles either were abolished or any motion made for the suppressing or abolishing of them are grosly mistaken and have abused the said Convocation in delivering so manifest an untruth March 18. 1655. Wil. Bernard Samuel Pullein Now the Foundation failing the superstructed grudge must needs fall also Again that there was not between the Lord Primate and the Earl any the least umbrage of discontent that all was most amicable most friendly between them is further so likely as it is almost demonstrable For before his final Sentence the Lieutenant did from time to time both at the Black-Red and in the Tower advise with the Primate concerning his Answer to his Charge For after Sentence he desired and obtained of the Parliament that the Primate might be sent to him to serve him with his Ministerial Office in his last and fatal extremity he cheerfully entertained his spiritual instructions he prayed with him sent Messages to the King by him took him by the hand and led him along with him to the Scaffold All which sure he would never have done had he taken notice or but suspected such a grudge levant and couchant in the Primates breast Fifthly whereas this Trifler deriveth this forged grudge from this occasion because saith he Dr. Bramhil once the Lieutenants Chaplain and then Bishop of Derry had appeared most in Abrogation of those Articles I must tell the man that there was never any controversie in that Synod between the Lord Primate and that Bishop concerning those Articles About the Reception of the English Ecclesiastical Canons some disagreement there was indeed the Bishop of Derry moving they might be there admitted intirely which the Lord Primate opposed as prejudicial to the liberty of the Irish Church and prevailed that only some selected Canons of the English Church should be received with the addition of others of that Synods framing which was done accordingly Sixthly whereas the Observator placeth the Synod of Ireland in Anno 1633. his alter idem Dr. Heylins History of the Sabbath part 2d page 259. could have told him it was in 1634. Lastly whereas this Observator demands an account of our thoughts whether the King was likely to be well informed in his Conscience when men so interessed were designed to the managing and preparing of it I can assure him that the Bishops only sent him to the resolution of his own judgement for matter of fact and to the opinions of the Judges for matter of Law and that the restless and insatiable scruple which so discomposed his Majesties Conscience was this That notwithstanding he most earnestly pressed the Judges to declare the particular Article of the Earls charge which if proved was Treason by an expresse Law of the Land he could not extort from them one single instance nor any thing else but that the Earl was guilty upon the whole matter which he thought was too confused a general upon which to shed the blood of one of the basest much more of the Noblest Orb. Thus have I finished my Animadversions upon the Observators Matter I should next proceed to his Alphabetical Table or Vocabulary of my uncouth words which really is the Comical part of his Tragedies against me and it were pity to lose so much mirth I shall therefore in liew of that Alphabet present thee Reader with a Catalogue first of mine own and then of his mistakes with some things of remark resulting from them both and first for mine own Fol. 6. In King James his interment May the 4th is put for the 7th Ibid. Concerning the Marriage of the Queen May the 8th for the first Fol. 20. Dr. Laud Bishop of Bath and Wells for Bishop of St. Davids Fol. 71. Archbishop Abbot his Keeper for the Lord Zouch his Fol. 129. Guild-Hall for Alderman Freemans house Fol. 131. All Counties for all Port Towns within the Realm Fol. 136. Earl of Norhumberland for the Earl of Lindsey Fol. 184. Arch-Bishop Whitgift mistaken one remove Other things as errors there are I confesse charged upon me by the Observator but some are dubious and no constat they are errors Some are infallibly demonstrated to be no errors and the rest that are errors are none of mine Of mine these are a true and perfect account and how far these comply for quality and number with what I pretend to in my Preface I shall now examine My words in that Preface are Confident I am I stand secure against substantial falshoods Dares the Observator though he as daring as another say any one of these falshoods are substantial so as their rectification will destroy the frame of the Narrative to which they relate I presume he will not Circumstantial they are every one and against circumstantial though I durst not assume confidence yet I hoped I stood secure also And now

And whereas the Observator is become a stout advocate for the Spanish faith in the point both of the match and the Pallatinate had he perused the letter of King Philip the third to the Conde of Olivares extant in the last Cabala and recited in Parliament he might there have found that neither was sincerely intended but meerly delayes sought for by the Spaniard to accomplish his perfidious ends And as for Bristowes letter insisted upon by the Observator it signifyeth nothing to the vindication of the Spanish faith that Earl being articled against in Parliament for abusing both the King and Prince with a false perswasion of Spains sincerity Page 12. Fol. 4. Which being new and the businesse propounded it was entertain'd with an unanimous consent and a motion made that an Ambassador should be sent over to negotiate that Treaty I somewhat doubt of your intelligence the marriage of the Prince containing such a branch of the Royal Prerogative as King James was not likely to communicate with his Houses of Parliament For when he was Petitioned by both Houses not long before that for the avoyding of some dangers which did seem to threaten the whole Kingdom he would marry the Prince to a Lady of the Protestant Religion he entertain'd the motion with no small disdain Answer The Logick of the Observator The King was angry when the Parliament moved him concerning the mariage of the Prince Ergo which is in English therefore he would not communicate with them in one of his own liking Again it was no more lessening of his Prerogative to communicate with them in the entrance into then in the breach of a Treaty of that nature as he did in that of Spain which was the main businesse debated in the Parliament 21. Jac. Page 13. Ibid. In the stile of the Court he went for Great Britaines Solomon That he was Great Solomon that is to say either the wisest man or wisest King of the British Nation I am not Courtier enough to defend or say It is true indeed that he much pleased himself with boasting of his King-Craft but I have heard many wise men say that they could never find what that King-Craft was Answer The Observator here falls foul upon King James inveighing against and withal detracting from his King-Craft Pitty it is his Observations came so tarde into the world that Squire Sanderson took no notice of them in this particular who would else have taught him either more wit or manners Page 14. Fol. 5. A stout adversary he was to the Arminians and Semipelagians whom he call'd as Prosper before him the enemies of Gods grace In this short Sentence there are many things to be considered 1. What these Arminians were which our Author speaks of 2. Whether they were the enemies of Gods grace or not 3. What the Reason was why King James shew'd himself so great an adversary to them Answer In the persuance of these three particulars the Observator spends not lesse then 10. pages wherein though I am very little concerned yet I shall take the liberty to observe these few things First he saith St. Augustines zeal against the Pelagian heresy transported him into inconvenient expressions It were a very proper work for this Observator to instance to us those inconvenient expressions and to undertake the confutation of him as he is presented to the world by Jansenius Secondly he imputeth to them of Calvins way this opinion that a man is forcibly drawn and irresistibly with the cords of grace in the work of conversion Let him produce the men who and where they say it They take away indeed an actual resistance of the will as inconsistent simul semel with efficacious grace but none I think assert this irresistibility the Observator mentioneth Nor is this all but they hold also saith he that man contributeth nothing to his own eternity A thing I am confident never declared in terminis by any but seeing the man seems to account it as one of their errours I would gladly learn and have the Observator explain this Metaphysical whimwham how Eternity for so he saith not Salvation can recipere majus minus receive either augmentation or diminution from man Lastly he endeavoureth to shew that King James was much governed by Doctor Mountague Bishop of Winchester who being of a contrary perswasion put him upon many harsh and severe expressions against those poor men But this Mountague being dead he began to shew himself more favourable unto those opinions especially upon the comming out of a book of another Mountague then Prebend of Windsor whose judgment in those points he liked very wel A thing most unlikely for in Theological controversies it is well known King James was able enough to go alone needed not like a child be led up and down by the hanging sleeves from one opinion to the other by either the one or the other And whereas Mr. Mountague is made the man who first reformed King James his judgement I offer it to consideration how probably it is asserted when An. 1628. this Mr. Mountague then Bishop together with Dr. Neal Bishop of Winchester being Remonstrated to the King as abetters of those Tenets and the King declaring dislike of those Novelties both he and the other Bishop with tears in their eyes protesting they hated those opinions and before his Majesty and his Councel on their knees renounced them So Sr. Humphrey Mildmay averred in open Parliament 30 Careli nomine contradicente No one neer the Chair contradicting Page 25. Fil. 6. The Kings Corps on the 4th of May was conveyed to Westminster and there inhumed c. Our Author tells us in the end of his Preface what a special care he hath of his temporalitie and yet he failes us here in the first beginning For neither was the body of the King interred on the 4th of May not the letters of procuration kept undelivered until the 8th nor the Marriage Celebrated after the Funeral of the King For upon Sunday May the first c. Answer That the 4th of May was put for the 7th is confest to be a mistake and it must be either in the Printer or a meer clip of my pen for that I intended it so I have these reasons to perswade the contrary First all my informations not one and four they were dissenting fixt the Kings interment on the 7th and I were a mad Historian to vary in so impertinent a matter from those informations Secondly my mentioning that that solemnity would be past May the 8th may probably imply I intended to assign the 7th for it for else the 5th day had been more proper But this is not all I am mistaken also in the celebration of the marriage which though at first designed to be on the 8th as I am able in fallibly to demonstrate was as I am now informed on the first of May as we account So that two errours are in point

of that War by introducing the Liturgy amongst them Sc. spe quidem laudabili eventu verò pessimo with a good intent but exceeding ill successe why so Hinc siquidem c. For from hence proceeded Tragedies Tumults War and Invasion Now that War which an Arch-Bishop occasion'd and which was entred into for maintaining that Hierarchy may I hope without offence be called the Bishops War But here I am cut off the Observator telling us that Religion was but the vizard to disguise that businesse which covetousnesse and sacriledge had the greatest had in which he confirmes by this ensuing Narrative The King being engaged into a War with Spain and deserted by those who engaged him in it amongst other wayes of assistance was minded of a purpose his Father had of Revoking all Grants of Abby Lands c. which being vested in the Crown were by his Protectors in his Minority conferred on many of the Nobility and Gentry c. Being resolved upon the same course he intends a Parliament in that Kingdome appoints the Earle of Nidderdale to preside therein and armes him with instructions for passing of an Act of Revocation accordingly who being on his way as far as Barwick was there informed that all was in Tumult at Edinburgh that a rich coach which he had sent before to Dalkeith was cut in pieces the poore horses killed the people seeming onely sorry that they could not doe the like to the Earle himselfe Things being brought to this stand and the Parliament put off with a sine Die the King was put to a necessity of second Councels c. Answer That many had other then Religious designes there is little doubt they hoping to obtain that honour or wealth in a troubled State which they were consident they should never arrive at in a calm Now as concerning this Relation the Observator being a person to whom I am so much obliged I cannot but as part of requital of his own labours adde something for illustration of his Story and rectifying some mistakes thereof Know then Reader that this Earl of Nidderdale of whom the Observator speakes was then no Earle but the Lord Maxwell no more but so and the very Man or I am deceived mention'd in Habernfield Discovery For a rank Papist he was and Anno 1624. went to Rome to receive the Popes extraordinary Benediction which the Councel of Scotland hearing of they set out a Bar or Prescription against him for departing the Kingdome without leave Soon after King James dying he came over into England and by the Dukes favour whose Kinswoman he had married was Anno 1625. joyned in Commission with the Earle of Anandale Murrey for summoning a Parliament not for Revoking of Church and other lands formerly invested in the Crown but for contribution of monies and ships against the Dunkirkers and was designed to preside there with power to place and displace what Officers he pleased In Order and Pomp sutable to so great a Trust the Lord buyes him a Coach most radiant and richly gilded this he sends before him to Dalkeith The Councel of Scotland having early notice of this conspire to adhere and stick close together and to oppose his commission And the surer to frustrate the Lords designe they send to all the chief Towns informing them what was comming desiring they would send in the money with all expedition The Townes conformed instantly and all was done yea the very undoing and destruction of his glorious Coach before the Lord Maxwell came to Barwich and further he durst not go being informed his person so generally hated might be in great danger there but posted a main to the Court of England where finding the King cool in the businesse having had an account from the Councel of Scotland of al their proceedings advertised by them how displeasing a President that Lord was like to prove in respect of his Religion h the Duke gone to the Hague after him he goes and returnes with him into England The Duke and this Lord being come to Court possesse the King with strange insolences and affronts committed by the Councel of Scotland against his Regal power His Majesty in some indignation thereupon sends for them to come forthwith and answer what he had to object against them up they come to court and being by his Majesty chidden for their miscarriages they defying this Lord openly in his Majesties presence spake withal bug words not very loyal 't is confest whereat his Majesty told them then and not before he would make them restore all to the Crown which they had taken from it in his Fathers Minority This and somewhat more my information from a credible hand and of a date agreeable to the story what succeeded hereupon the Observator tells you Page 163. Fol. 161. The King first named eight Bishops then those eight Bishops those eight Noble men those Noble men chose so many Barons and those the like number of Burgesses c. Observator Not altogether so as our Author hath it for the Bishops and Noble men together chose eight Commissioners for the Sheriffdomes and as many for the Corporations Answer My informer being a Person of such eminency of that Nation and so versed in the affairs of that Kingdome is I think more credible in this particular then a forreigner Page 171. Fol. 182. True it is he had too much and too long favoured the Romish Faction but as upon what account he favoured it is uncertain c. Our Author here acquits the Archbishop from the Popish faith but leaves him under a suspition of favouring the Popish faction which in a man who cannot tell upon what account he favoured it may be thought uncharitable But both King James and King Charles in several Declarations give this Reason for it c. Answer It is I think no uncharitable act to censure any man for what is professedly true no matter upon what account to condemn a man for what is but a bare surmise may be uncharitable And that the Archbishop favoured the Popish faction our Observator doth not only grant but endeavors to shew upon what account it was saying Both King James and King Charles in several Declarations and in their several Answers to Parliament Petitions give this reason for it for it for what for the Archbishops favouring the Popish faction did ever any such thing ever enter into their thoughts as to declare what moved the Archbishop to favour the Romish faction I will not dwell upon this reason which the Observator would perswade us he had for it that is therefore to obtain like favours for such Protestants as lived in the Dominions of Popish Princes nor on what he might have had of keeping the ballance even between them and the Puritans But deliver what having heard formerly but upon dubious report I am I think certainly informed was the true cause thereof For being told by one that he had many an ill look from

but in love that is keeping the unity of the spirit in the bond of Peace This unity of love must be preserved even where there is not an unity of faith in things not fundamental which I take not one of those controversies to be and if they be not so it is a most sad thing for the Church of God to be torn and rent in the entire cloth with diversities of such opinions whose truths will neither carry us to Heaven nor errours to hell what the uncharitable animosities on both sides may produce I tremble to think It was St. Augustines opinion and I wish it entertain'd by our whole Church in such Polemick questions as these Laudandi sunt qui pro bono veritatis tolerant quod bono veritatis oderunt they are to be commended who for Christian verities sake patiently endure what they would else dislike for the avail of Truth To proceed Page 70. Fol. 96. For Arminianism informations were very pregnant that notwithstanding the Resolution of the Archbishop of Canterbury and other Reverend Bishops and Divines assembled Anno. 1595. c. Observator Why man the Articles of Lambeth were never looked upon as the Doctrine of the Church of England nor intended to be so looked upon by them that made them Answer Why Man who said they were not I it was Mr. Pym and the Committee for Religion said so I do but recite what that Committee declared as the product of their inquiries and with this answer legible enough to any who can read I might easily avoyd no lesse then 25 pages of the Observator So that I might justly have this Man in the Moon like Mithridates his soldiers sighting by Moon-shine with his own shaddow Had he not scattered my particulars in my way which detain me First Stating the occasion of making the Lambeth Articles he saith page 74. That the Compilers of the book of Articles and the book of Homiles the publique Monuments of our Church in point of Doctrine differ'd from Calvines since in the point of Predestination and its subordinates Answer This is very probable for it is very rare for two ever of the same party to agree exactly in all parcels of these controversies But if they did in some things vary in opinion I am still to demand Quorsum hoc what then Secondly Page 74. He saith of Petrus Baro at the end of his three first years he relinquished the Professorship and retired not long after into France Answer Three errours in not full so many lines First Petrus Baro relinquisht not his Professorship at the end of his first three years He was Professor Anno. 1574. his Lectures upon Jonas tells us so And the Observator will have him Professor about the time of the Lambeth Articles which were in 1595. So then he relinquisht his place not at the end of his first three years Secondly his first three years are manifestly mistaken for two For by the Statutes of the Lady Margaret Foundresse of that Professorship every Professor is eligible at the expiration of two not of three years The precise words are Et volumus insuper quod de caetero quolibet Bienmio ultimo die cessationis cujuslibet termini ante magnam vacationem universitatis praedictae una habilis apta idonea persona in lectorem lecturae praedictae pro uno Biennio integro viz. a festo nativitatis B. Mariae Virginis tunc proximè sequente duntaxat duraturo eligatur Fol. 105. in nigro codice This I thought fit to insert for the information of very many of a contrary belief Thirdly Peter Baron never went or retired into France after the Resignation of his Professorship but went up to London to Crutched Friers there he lived there he dyed and was buried in St. Olaves Church at whose Interrment the Bishop of London Ordered all the most eminent Divines Ministers in that City to be present Of this I hope I am credibly informed from his own Son still alive Thirdly the Observator laboureth to discredit the Articles of Lambeth by telling us a story perhaps a tale of the Queen the Lord Burly and Archbishop Whi●gift in reference to those Articles To which I answer first This story was never heard of till the year and the reputed father thereof is one Aurelius not Aurelius Augustinus nor Petrus Aurelius to be sure a Kentish-man who was unborn when those Articles were framed Secondly admit his relation true that Assembly was neither the first nor the Greatest that have incurr'd a Praemunire Fol. 96. By the prevalency of the Bishops of London and Winchester the Orthodox party were depressed and the truth they served was scarce able to protect them to impunity Observator A very heavy charge which hath no truth in it for I am very confident that neither of these Bishops did ever draw any man within the danger of punishment in relation only to their Tenets in the present Controversies if they managed them with that prudence and moderation which became men studiously addicted to the Gospel of Peace Answer I fear then the fault will be in their Prudence for that some were snibb'd for matters of like nature restrained from speaking their consciences the same journals relate Sir Daniel Norton and Sir Robert Phillips informing the House the one of Dr. Moor the other of Dr. Marshall who both testify'd they were chid by that B. of Winchester for preaching against Popery and commanded to do so no more Page 80. Ibid. By the uncontrouled Preaching of several points tending and warping towards Popery by Mountague Goodman Cozens and others Observator How again our Author is I think mistaken for neither Mountague nor Cozens were questioned for preaching any thing warping towards Popery c. Answer All the error the Observator can here pick out is in the word Preaching which I confess should have been Publishing though both are sometime of the same never of a much differing import And though I shall agree with the Observator that in Dr. Cozens his Horary there is no direct Popery yet might it raise jealousies of his tendency that way considering the time wherein he published it But seeing that Doctor hath appeared of late a stout advocate for the Reformed Church as I was first informed by my Reverend friend Mr. Lionel Gatford and am now further assured by others I wish all men would indulge him a favourable construction of that his right-hand Error Charity to himself as Christian and to the unity of this distracted Church requires no less Page 85. Observator That Adoration towards the Altar or Eastern part of the Church was generally used by the best and most religious Christians in the Primitive Times Our Author if he be the man he is said to be being well versed in the Monuments of most pure Antiquity cannot chuse but know Answer Because the Observator appeals here to my knowledg though I boast not of any great knowledge of or acquaintance with the