Selected quad for the lemma: authority_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
authority_n	good_a	king_n	power_n	4,538	5	4.8909	4	true

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A49781	The right of primogeniture, in succession to the kingdoms of England, Scotland, and Ireland as declared by the statutes of 24 E.3 cap 2. De Proditionibus, King of England, and of Kenneth the third, and Malcolm Mackenneth the second, Kings of Scotland : as likewise of 10 H.7 made by a Parliament of Ireland : with all objections answered, and clear probation made : that to compass or imagine the death, exile, or disinheriting of the King's eldest son, is high treason : to which is added, an answer to all objections against declaring him a Protestant successor, with reasons shewing the fatal dangers of neglecting the same.	Lawrence, William, 1613 or 14-1681 or 2.	1681 (1681)	Wing L691; ESTC R1575	180,199	230

doth he not then who compasseth his Death compass the Death of the King himself And doth not he who slanders him to be Illegitimate compass his Death 2. Because this exposeth Majesty and the eldest Son likewise to contempt by depriving both of the hopes of a Lincal Successor And this is complained of by no less a Prince than Alexander the Great who chargeth his Army as related in Curtius p. 6. Orbitas mea quod sine Liberis sum spernitur my being childless causeth your contempt of me which want of Children inheritable put him in the same condition of being despised as was he who said Isa 56.3 I am a dry Tree And the want of a Son capable to succeed him was the Ruine of so great a Monarch his Mother House and Empire his Enemies Poisoning him in the flower of his Age securely as knowing he could leave no Son of himself to revenge his Death 3. Because who affirms the eldest Son Illegitimate doth it to the intention to seize on his Inheritance and who intend to seize on his Inheritance will compass his Death as Matth. 21.38 They said amongst themselves This is the heir come let us kill him and let us seize on his Inheritance And they caught him and cast him out of the vineyard and slew him A Comparison of the Popish Slanders of Illegitimation against Queen Elizabeth and the King 's eldest Son Queen Elizabeth was not only declared and proclaimed Illegitimate by the Pope's Divinity but the Popish Party so far misinformed her own Father H. 8. in Matters of Law and over-wrought on the King as they compell'd him by weariness to rest on Implicit Faith in them and to declare his own Daughter Illegitimate an Error which not only he but many other Princes have been the more easily drawn into in regard by the Subtlety of Ecclesiastical and Temporal Lawyers the Laws of Marriage Filiation Aliment and Succession and the Comments on them have been increased to so huge heaps and confused Volumes and so many Writers of contrary Religions and contrary Jurisdictions have had their Power and Profit concerned in them as is impossible for Princes who have so many Affairs of State to look after besides to Read them over as long as they live and such faithful Protestant Subjects as have indeavoured humbly to represent the truth as to the Law of God and of the Land have been by the same Popish Party not only intercepted and Prohibited to Write or Publish any thing against but so much as to dispute the Romish as well as Turkish Alcoran of their Laws One great Example of which appears in these two great Descendents of the Blood Royal the Famous and Pious Queen Elizabeth and the Valiant and Virtuous eldest Son of the King To go on therefore in their Comparison of Suffering wrongfully 1. It may be observed that Queen Elizabeth was a Protestant and so is the Kings eldest Son a Protestant 2. Her Prosecutors were Papists so are the Prosecutors of the King 's eldest Son Papists 3. Papists laid Plots to Assassinate and Poison Queen Elizabeth so have Papists laid Plots to Assassinate and Poison the King 's eldest Son 4. The final Cause why Papists would have destroyed Queen Elizabeth was to seize on her Inheritance so the final Cause why Papists would destroy the King's eldest Son is to seize on his Inheritance 5. Queen Elizabeth was Innocent so is the King 's eldest Son Innocent 6. Queen Elizabeth was deprived of the help of a Mother by her Death so is the King 's eldest Son deprived of the help of a Mother by her Death 7. Queen Elizabeth was deprived of the help of a Father by the unjust Prosecution of Papists as appears 28 H. 8. cap. 7. by which Act she is declared Illegitimate to all intents and purposes and utterly foreclosed excluded and barred to Claim Challenge or Demand any Inheritance as lawful Heir to the King her Father And it is further Enacted That it shall be High Treason so much as to call the said Lady Elizabeth Legitimate yea the Act of Parliament is so furious against the poor Innocent Lady as if they desired to Destroy and Damn the Conscience of all good Protestants at once with hers and her They Enact further That it shall be High Treason to believe Oh miserable Thought it self is made High Treason the Marriage of the Lady Ann with the King her Father to be good lawful or not void Let it be left to Supreme Authority to consider how far the Papists have endeavour'd to proceed in the same Nature against the King's eldest Son 8. Queen Elizabeth might say as David saith Psal 27.10 When my Father and my Mother forsake me then the Lord will take me up So may the King 's eldest Son say the same 9. Queen Elizabeth notwithstanding all this was Legitimate and lawful Heir of Blood by the Moral Law of God and the Protestant Religion and so is Recognized and acknowledged by Parliament 1 Eliz. cap. 3. and accordingly God gave her the happy Succession to the Kingdom So the King 's eldest Son by the Moral Law of God and the Protestant Religion is Legitimate and the next Lineal and Lawful Heres Sanguinis Heir of Blood for Jus Sanguinis is the Law of God and Nature and Jura Sanguinis as hath already been said Nullo Jure Civili divini possunt 10. It was the Interest of Queen Elizabeth when she obtained the Lawful Power to Maintain and Defend the Moral Law of God and the Protestant Religion So will it be the Interest of the King 's eldest Son to use what lawful Power God gives him to Maintain and Defend the Moral Law of God and the Protestant Religion against Popish Ceremonial Laws and Superstitious Religions A Comparison of the Popish Slanders of Illegitimation against King Edward the Sixth Queen Elizabeth and the King 's eldest Son And the Sons and Daughters of the whole Protestant Clergy This Slander against the Sons and Daughters of the Clergy could not have been raised without another Slander first raised against the Marriages of the Mothers Both which are taken notice of by the Statute 5. 6. E. 6. cap. 12. which Statute making first a recital of the Stat. 2. 3. E. 6.21 of Repeal of all Laws of Man against the Marriage of the Clergy proceeds in these words viz. Yet since the making of the said Act divers evil-disposed Persons taking occasion of certain words and Sentences in the said Act comprized have and do untruly and very Slanderously report of Priests Matrimony saying That the same Statute is but a Permission of Priests Matrimony as Usury and other unlawful things be now permitted for the eschewing of greater inconvenience and Evils so that thereby the lawful Matrimony of Priests in the opinion of many and the Children Procreate and Born in such lawful Matrimony rather be of the greater number of the King's Subjects accounted as Bastards than Lawfully Born to the

Wife of God's making shall by him be call'd though he false Translate Scripture for it Concubine and Whore And a Whore and Adulteress of the Bishops making shall be call'd a Wife of God's making of which Episcopal Abuses to get Money I shall only cite one Practique in Scotland and after some others in England Craig Feudorum Fo. 230. saith Memini Robertum Magistrum de Semphil Patrem Roberti nunc Principem illius familiae cùm ex concubinatu Joannae Hamiltoniae hunc ipsum filium suscepisset ei impensè faveret in Articulo Mortis cù sibi decedendum videret ad Aedem sacram se in Lecticâ deferri curaret ibique nuptiis solemniter peractis cùm domum rediisset Octavo pòst die fatis concessisse Ex quo subsequente Matrimonio licet in Lecto agritudinis in quo Decessit solemniter peracto filius antea susceptus non minùs in Haereditate successit quàm si ex legitimo Matrimonio natus fuisset I remember that Robert the Master of Semphil Father of Robert now chief of that Family when he had begotten him by his Concubine Madam Joane Hamilton and intirely loved him He being at point of Death when he saw himself past hopes caused himself to be carried to the Holy Church in a Litter and there the Ceremonies of Marriage being solemnly perform'd when he was brought back again to his House he died eight dayes after from which subsequent Marriage although in the bed of Sickness wherein he deceased the Son begot before did as Lawfully succeed to the Inheritance as if he had been begot in Lawful Matrimony And why should not the Lady have been call'd Wife but Concubine and the Son have succeeded without so barbarous a Ceremony as hurrying a Dying Man to a Priest and a Temple when he was gasping for another world to get a Wife in this an Act more proper to hasten his Death and Burial than Marriage and to have been abhorred by all Dutiful Children had they not been compell'd by the Tyranny of such Popish Ecclesiastical Laws as to the Dishonour of the two so Renown'd Protestant Kingdoms in Great Britain are Tolerated to prey worse than Death on them and their Posterity But of the false Translations of Scripture by Bishops in all other words related to Marriage see more at large Lib. 2. cap. 1. 142 ad 162. Of certain differences between a Wife of the Bishop's making and Wife of God's making which make the first neither within the Law of God nor the Statute There 's no Protestant Nation in Christendom wherein the Jurisdiction usurped by Bishops is so high and Extravagant in making other Mens Wives and Children for them as in England 1. The first difference between a Wife of the Bishop's making and of God's making is The former lets herself to Hire to him who will give most Jointure Dower or Thirds for her but the latter doth neither buy nor sell her Husband but he keeps his own and she hers both Money Goods and Lands Concerning mercenary Marriages Vid. Lib. 1. cap. 6.113 Vsque ad 118. 2. A Wife of the Bishops making hath Power to Steal and Esloigne all her Husband's Substance and to put it into the hands of his Enemies for her own use and he can have no account against her because as is already shewn Lib. 1. p. 70. The Bishop by his Sacrament of Marriage hath Transubstantiated two persons into one person but the Wife of Gods making is under account and nothing keeps a Steward Faithful but Account 3. The Wife of the Bishops making hath Power given her by the Benediction of a Priest in a Temple if she is not able her self to hire unknown persons with her Husbands Goods to Rob Beat and Disseise her Husband and Esloigne his Goods and no remedy against her But a Wife of Gods making though she hath Gods Benediction which is above the Priests hath no such power but there 's remedy against her 4. The Wife of the Bishops making hath Power to lay all her secret and unknown debts true and feigned by her Confederates and as many as she will on her husband and to undo him and no remedy against her 5. The Wife of the Bishops making hath Power by the Benediction of a Priest in a Temple to commit as many Trespasses either with Tongue or hand truly or by Confederacy with complices as often as she pleases making her husband pay Damages till undone and he hath no remedy 6. A Wife of the Bishops making hath full Power by virtue of the said Benediction to hire Adulterers with her Husbands Goods and Money to get Children to succeed to them and he has no remedy Adulteresses protected and the Son of an Adulterer made Heir before the Lawful Child of the Husband by Episcopal Certificat 7. A Wife of the Bishops making if she hath a Daughter by her Husband and Elope and run away from him with another man and hath Issue by her New Companion the Adulterer her Eldest Son this Son of the Adulterer shall be Heir to the Husbands Inheritance though he were the greatest Peer in the Land Yea though he had an Elder Daughter before of his own begetting by her As appears 7 H. 4. fo 9. Where the Case was That Julian took to Husband John de C. in the County of York and was Married at Fleetsham and the said John had Issue by her W After the said Julian Eloped and went into the County of N. and it being not Felony in those daies took to Husband W. B. and he had Issue by her W. her Eldest Son who after sued to be Heir to John and the true Heir of John objected against him the Elopement of his Mother ●●dian and his being begotten by the Adulterer and not by John On which Justice Rikhill gives Judgment That if John were within the Four Seas at the time of the begetting of W. then W. was the Son and right Heir-Male of John The Calf his whose Cow is Bull'd by anothers Bull. And of this he giveth a good Lusty Reason For saith he who that Bulleth my Cow the Calf is mine And my Lord Coke Com. 244 doth on the Margin refer to this Authority of Justice Rikhill and agrees with him as right as a Gun and adds over That no Proof ought to be admitted to the contrary and therein I think none will Envy Justice Rikhill or my Lord Coke who I think were within the Four Seas and never out to enjoy the Liberty of Conscience in disposing their own Goods how they please But there appears no Reason why they should deny the same Liberty of Conscience to all the rest of their fellow Subjects who live within the same Four Seas to dispose of their own Goods as they think Just neither ought they by so unequal a Sentence to have given away the Successions of True and Lawful Heirs without allowing them hearing or witnesses to those who are false and adulterous And

vers 20. Thou knowest the Commandments And Rom. 7.8 Sin taking occasion by the Commandment wrought in me all manner of Concupiscence for without the Law Sin was dead By which appears that where there 's no Commandment there 's no occasion for a Nitimur in Vetitum to kindle Concupiscence to Sin nor much less can there be Sin it self For where there 's no Prohibition nor Command there 's no Law and where no Law as is already said there 's no Transgression Salvation by no Legislator Judge or Law but of God 3. The Scripture teacheth That men can be saved by no Law but the Law of God nor by any Legislator or Judge but God which is proved Jam. 4.12 There 's one Lawgiver who is able to save and to destroy who art thou that judgest thy Brother And vers 11. He that speaketh evil of his Brother and judgeth his Brother speaketh evil of the Law and judgeth the Law but if thou judge the Law thou art not a Doer of the Law but a Judge And Isa 33.22 The Lord is our Judge the Lord is our Lawgiver If therefore the Law of God is the only Law by which Men and Women are saved in Marriage Matrimony and Child-bearing as well as all other Acts of Humane life and God is the only Legislator and Judge of them then ought their Lawfulness without Ceremony to be judged only according to the Law of God and where there 's no Law of God Prohibiting Marriage without Ceremony nor Commanding it with Ceremony the Law of God declares it Lawful without Ceremony because nothing can be Lawful or Unlawful but in reference to the Commandments and Laws of God Ceremonies rejected by the Scripture 4. The Scripture rejecteth all Ceremonies done without Commandment from God Isa 1.12 When ye come to appear before me who hath required this at your hands to tread my Courts Bring no more vain Oblations Incense is an abomination unto me c. Ceremonies false Translated Ordinances 5. The Scripture teacheth all Rites and Ceremonies to have been only Temporary till a Time of Reformation and to be abolished by Christ as Heb. 9.1 The first Covenant had Ceremonies For the Original word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ought to be Translated Rites or Ceremonies and not Ordinances or Laws as the Latin Translation is and appears to be intended and is so Expounded by the Text it self Vers 2 3 4. which names a Tabernacle Candlestick Table and Shewbread Vayle Golden Censer and Ark overlaid with Gold And v. 9. Gifts and Sacrifices which could not make him that did the service perfect as pertaining to Conscience And vers 10. Meats and Drinks and divers washings and carnal Ceremonies imposed on them until the time of Reformation All which are an Enumeration of what we call in English and should have been Translated Ceremonies and not Ordinances or Laws As likewise Colo. 2.14 ought to have been Translated Blotting out the hand-writing of Ceremonies that was against and which was contrary to us And took it out of the way nailing it to his Cross And ought not to have been Translated Ordinances or Laws Mission to teach is no Mission to make Ordinances For the Original words used in this Text are 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The word Dogma is a Derivative from 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which signifies to Teach which word Teach gives not Authority to be a Legislator or to Command or give Ordinances or Laws as Ex. 24.12 And the Lord said unto Moses Come up to me into the Mount and be there and I will give thee Tables of Stone and a Law and Commandments which I have written that thou mayest teach them Here Moses hath no Authority to be a Legislator nor to make a Law or Commandments or Ordinances but only to teach those made by God In like manner Mat. 28.19 Christ saith to his Disciples Go therefore and teach all Nations And vers 20. Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you So neither doth here the Authority of teaching make the Disciples either Legislators or Judges nor give them Power to give Laws Ordinances or Commandments to the Nations but only to teach them the Commandments which Christ gave to the Teachers themselves If therefore the Original word Doceo gives no pretence to Translate what signifies only Teaching to be making Ordinances much less doth the Derivative word Dogma which according to Isidore Derivatur à Putando i. e. hoc puto esse verum hoc puto esse bonum is derived from thinking that is to say I think this to be true I think this to be good And is the Thought or Opinion of Doctors on a Law or Ordinance much less pretence I say doth such Derivative give to call Thoughts and Opinions the Laws and Ordinances themselves These Thoughts and Opinions then ought not to have been Translated Ordinances but Ceremonies because Ceremonies have only Thoughts and Opinions of men and no Law of God for them And so doth the Text expound it self that it intendeth not Ordinances but Ceremonies as ver 20. Wherefore if ye be dead with Christ from the Rudiments of the world why as though living in the world are ye subjects to Ceremonies Touch not taste not handle not which all are to perish with the using after the Commandments and Doctrines of Men which things have in deed a shew of Wisdom in Will-worship So the Pope is but a Thinker of all his Ceremonies of Marriage And all his Ceremonies of that and the rest are but Thinkings as the Bell tinketh Ceremonies are Will-worship and abolished by Christ so the Fool thinketh and hath taken so many first and second Thoughts on the tinking of this Silver Bell of his Profit that he knows that if once the Truth of the Doctrine should be spread and believed That Christ hath abolished all Ceremonies The Commandments of God of Marriage cannot be limited by or to the Ceremonies of men because Marriage where commanded by God is not a thing indifferent it would ruin him and all other Popes who are Masters of them 6. It being made the Express Command and Ordinance of God Be fruitful and multiply and replenish the Earth And 1 Tim. 5.14 That the younger women marry and bear Children if the adding or diminishing or limiting of this Law or Commandment of God by prescribing to them Papal or Episcopal Ceremonies should make them unlawful then first would it be in the power of Popes and Bishops to make God's Commands things indifferent which they might change or null or they might set all Carnal Copulation and Childbirth to Sale by imposing such Ceremonies as none shall be able to pass without first giving notice to the Priest and paying him what Fees he pleaseth of which see more Lib. 2. p. 96 97. Secondly this prescribing or Compulsion to Ceremonies in Marriage punisheth Lawfuld Childbirth in Mothers and causeth infinite Murders of Children which Vid.

was written indeed by Parsons Doleman's bitter Adversary Cardinal Allen and Francis Englefield the Scope of which book was to exclude from Succession all Persons whatsoever and how near soever unless they were Roman Catholicks contending farther for the Right of the Infanta of Spain as being descended from Constance Daughter of William the Conqueror Foreign Papist Princes will declare a Successor for the Protestants if they shall not declare one for themselves Protestant Princes Marrying foreign Papists shall lose their own Kingdoms but not gain theirs from Eleanor Eldest Daughter to Henry the Second Married to Alphonse the Ninth King of Castile from Beatrix Daughter to King Henry the Third so if the Protestants will not take the pains to declare a Successor for themselves 't is plain the Foreign Papist Princes will declare one for them to the purpose and first they declare for Religion he ought not to be a Protestant but a Catholick Then for Blood he ought not to be a Brittish but a Foreign Blood And in all Countries the Pope's Laws shall be a Salique Law to exclude Protestant Blood from Catholick Dominions and to intitle Catholick Blood to Protestant Dominions so as if Protestant Princes Marry with Catholicks they must play all against nothing Most Excellent Nonsence in the Papist Law of Successions 11. Danger of Counterfeit Wills and Testaments It exposes Succession to Counterfeit Wills and Testaments Though the Law is sufficiently clear That Kingdoms which are Publick Offices of Trust are not devisable by last Will and Testament as private Inheritances are yet because the Papist Power of the Sword may pretend to any thing unless the Protestant Subjects have an Act of Parliament declaring a Protestant Successor as a Sheild under God to defend themselves against it the same will be necessary to prevent even this Danger likewise For what Monarch or Emperor is so great as when sickness hath arrested and bound him with the fatal Cords of his Death-Bed where every Woman every Priest every Doctor are his Gaolers can promise himself Liberty to make a free Will Yea that he shall not have less than a private Subject when his Keepers shall make use of his own Publick Name and Authority against himself to exclude from him those faithful Friends who will force their way through to relieve a private Person from those Furies of his Bed which Torment him Or how can he promise himself though he make his Will in his perfect Health that as soon as he is dead it shall not be destroyed For did not H. 8. use all the Caution possible to secure his Will after his Death Had he not an Act of Parliament which gave him Power to Nominate Successors by his Will and made it High Treason for any to prejudice the Titles of the Persons so Nominated Did he not solemnly inrole it in Chancery yet when before the Death of Queen Elizabeth an inquisition was made after the Will of H. 8. to see whom he had Nominated to succeed The Will of H. 8. stoln off the file where inroled in case she should happen to dye without Issue they found the same to be taken by Bribe or Stoln off the Cursitors File by some who intended to advance their own Title for there were Sixteen Titles then on foot Osborn Tit. Queen Eliz. 99. Plotina the Empress Wife of the Emperor Trajan who was with him at his Decease Adrian got the Empire by a Counterfeit Will. in regard she had a great favour for young Adrian Plotted with him to help him to the Empire and to that end feigned that Trajan had adopted him for his Son and shewed a Counterfeit Instrument or Writing to ●●at Effect which matter was so cunningly handled that it took such effect as she desired And the Army presently swore Obedience to Adrian notwithstanding he was absent at Antioch in Syria where he was left General who being advertised thereof and the Legions whereof he was General consenting thereto he presently wrote to the Senate intreating to be Confirmed in the Empire And when the Senate had received his Letter and understood what had passed his Request was easily granted for there was no denyal by old Men to young Men when once they had given so great a share of the Sword as they had not reteined a greater in their own hands wherewith to recall the same when they thought good William the Conqueror pretended a Will and Promise and thereby excluded Edgar Atheling the right Heir William the Conqueror likewise pretended a Will and a Promise of the Kingdom of England from Edward the Confessor which though Edward notwithstanding his Holiness had no Authority or any thing to do to give away from the Right Heir Edgar Atheling nor to enslave the Land to a Foreigner yet it s known how ill effect these Pretences had and the same might have been prevented if Edgar had been declared Successor by Act of Parliament in the life-time of Edward It incourages Usurpers For the ascertaining the Heir by Supreme Authority 12. Danger of Incouraging Usurpers wherein both the Assent both of the King and People is included takes away and the not ascertaining feeds Pretenders and their Parties with hopes So Tacitus lib. 3. Annal. Sic Cohibere pravos aliorum spes rebatur by declaring a Successor in certain he thought the wicked hopes of others were Checkt and in another place Plena Caesarum Domus Juvenis filius Nepotes adulti moram cupitis Sejani adferebant his House full of Caesars his Son in Strength of Youth his Nephews grown up deterred the Ambition of Sejanus And the best remedy King David used against Adonijah Proclaiming himself was to Proclaim Solomon In Titles Doubtful 13. Danger it leaves an Interregnum The infinite mischiefs of Interregnums either on doubtful Titles of Successions or on doubtful Powers or Elections appearing in Histories are too many to be here recited and lest some should be so far deceived as to believe there can be no Interregnum by the Law of England he is desired not to place his Faith in the Fictions of Lawyers That the King never dyes and there is no Interregnum lest if by not declaring a Successor in his Life-time whom God grant long to live the contrary Effects appear when it will be too late to provide a Remedy It Cantons Kingdoms 14. Danger of Cantonizing Kingdoms For so writes Justin of Alexander the Great Alexander rogatus quem Haeredem faceret Imperii respondit dignissimum qua voce veluti Bellicum inter Amicos cecinisset aut malum discordia immisisset ita omnes in aemulationem consurgunt ambitione vulgi tacitum favorem Militum Alexander being asked whom he would make Successor to his Empire answered The most Worthy By which as though amongst his own Friends he had sounded a Charge to Battel one against another or had thrown the Apple of Discord amongst them so did they rise together in