Linguistic DNA - Concept Modelling Demonstrator

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
duty_n	bind_v	law_n	nature_n	1,568	5	5.4669	4	true

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A94135	The Jesuite the chiefe, if not the onely state-heretique in the world. Or, The Venetian quarrell. Digested into a dialogue. / By Tho: Swadlin, D.D.	Swadlin, Thomas, 1600-1670.	1646 (1646)	Wing S6218; Thomason E363_8; ESTC R201230	173,078	216

therefore no lesse then Laics are subject unto the secular Prince Let every soul be subject unto the higher Powers As none is exempted from the obedience that he owes to God so none is exempted from the obedience that he owes to his lawfull Prince For all power is of God as the Apostle there subjoynes This was it which moved the Kingly Prophet and propheticall King David to stile Kings and secular Princes Gods with a Deus stâ—tit God standeth in the assembly of Gods he judgeth among the Gods For as it is truly and religiously avouched by King Jehosaphat secular Judges do not execute the judgements of men but of God himselfe the very same former text of David our Saviour Christ speaking of secular Princes and Judges hath cited in the Gospell and there makes it good that unto them doth belong the name of Gods If he called them Gods unto whom the word of God was given as Cardinall Bellarmine hath learnedly noted and observed Hetrod If you had in this manner drawn your conclusion to a head Ecclesiastics therefore and seculars too are not by Gods Law subjâ—ct unto the secular Prince but seculars by mans law and ecclesiastics by no law at all neither of God nor man then your conclusion had been aptly deduced from your premises For it hath been proved before that Princes attaine to Soveraignty over their people not by divine title but olny humane If it be otherwise I pray let me have it well proved by some plain passage of Scripture that for instance the LL. of Venice are Jure divino the LL. Paramount of Padua Verona with other like Cities and if any question should grow concerning the Kingdome of Cyprus what faire title would the Venetian State alledge for the same Some goodly Charter of sacred Scripture Surely no but either some title of donation or ancient possession or some other like humane title Now then if they shall fall short in proving their title over the Laics of Padua Cyprus c. by divine authority when will they prove their pretended title over Clerics by the same authority I dare passe yet a whole degree further namely to maintain that all degrees and sorts of Laics yea that Soveraign Princes are by Gods Law in the state of subjection to Priests and that by the same Law of God Priests are quitted and freed from subjection to secular Princes My reason because according to Gods holy writ and word the positive law of God priests are pastors or shepheards to feed and Laics though never so great Princes are sheepe to be fed Priests are Fathers and Laics are sonnes Now according to the light of nature the law naturall of God the sheep are under tearmes of subjection to the Shepheard and the Shepherd is bound under no such termes to the sheep as the sonne also lives in state of subjection to the Father whereas the Father owes no duty of that nature to the sonne moreover the comparison made by Gregory Nazianzene between ecclesiasticall and secular is most excellent and usually taken up of holy Divines as in mans nature there is reason and flesh of which two united the whole frame and composition of man doth consist so in the Church their ecclesiasticall or spirituall power and secular or temporall power of which two the mysticall body of the Church is aptly composed and as in man reason hath superiority over the flesh and the flesh is never superior over reason except it be in some fit of rage and fury of Rebellion Againe as reason directs rules commands the flesh and sometime brings her to a kind of rack I meane doth chastise the flesh and puts her to a certain pennance of long fasting watching whereas the flesh never directs rules commands nor layes any hard lawes of punishment upon reason even so the spirituall power hath a superiority over the secular by vertue and force whereof it both may and ought also to give direction to rule to command and punish the secular power whensoever it kicks or spurnes or proves refractory or makes any breach into the inclosures of ecclesiasticall Regiment whereas the secular power is not superior to the spirituall nor can it direct rule command or punish the same De facto in cases of Rebellion and Tyrannie which by Heathen Princes or by Heretics hath been sometimes put in practise true it is that all power is of God but how either immediately or else by meanes And as none is exempted from obedience due to God so none is exempted from obedience due to the Prince provided alwaies that a man be the said Princes vassall or Subject and in cases likewise wherein he owes vassalage or subjection to the said Prince It is no lesse true that Princes as Princes are Gods Lievtenants and therefore to be honoured yea served with due obedience as God himselfe in such causes and matters as lye within their power Servants be obedient to those who are your masters according to the flesh even as unto Christ And whereas you say Cardinall Bellarmine hath averred in writing that secular Princes in Scripture are called Gods he was you must understand induced so to write of purpose to confound hereticall Anabaptists who teach that neither secular Princes nor tribunals nor judgements nor other like politick and civill regiments are to be tolerated in the Church of God But as that Cardinall hath written and witnessed that secular Princes are Gods in respect of their Subjects even so he hath justified that priests are Gods in respect of secular Princes If you therefore Orthodox like a good Roman Catholique would have trod in the steps of that Cardinall you should have taken up his weapons and should have made use of them against Heretics not against our mother the Church nor should you like the Spider have suckt such poyson from the same flowers out of which the Bee sucks and gathers hony Orthod I am not able to reach the bottome of your deep conceptions would you have your own conclusions to be drawne out of my premises If I had been inspired with a spirit of divination and by the gift of Sooth-saying could have foreseen that your selfe or Cardinall Bellarmine was to be the Champion that would undertake to cudgell my coat I mean so subtilly to trounce me and to play such trumps in my way I would have directly drawn two distinct conclusions the one true and built upon my own true certaine and infallible premises the other false obliquely derived from your premises or those of his illustrious Lordship but for as much as the spirit of divination doth not harbour in my brest or braine I must only shape and lay in this answer for my selfe that from the same premises which I have now framed I would wish none other but mine own conclusion to be inferred and from your premises and those of the Lord Cardinall your own or his own conclusions to be inducted for as my conclusion is true because it

c. except it be for some evident benefit and most honourable acquist unto the Crown and State 9. You contend that secular Princes may suffer losse of their Subjects whereas the Pope lyes not obnoxious or obvious to hazard in that kind Oh that I could here truly say There speakes an Angell but see see how many Countries Nations Tribes and Kindreds have quitted their obedience to the Roman Church A word shall suffice that most beautifull flourishing nobilitated renowned Cedar of Libanus which in former ages hath spread it selfe both farre and wide over the face of the universe is now reduced to such pight and pickle that she hardly hath two or three Arms left growing to ward much lesse to beautifie the whole aged Trunke 10. Your tenth errour layes it selfe open and perspicuous in a most pernicious nice and tickle assertion That neither by the Generall Councell nor by the whole Corporation and body of Cardinals the chiefe Bishops power can suffer the least diminution and yet by the Subjects the secular Princes power may be plumed of the bravest feathers Touching the former branch of this assertion I have signified my mind before that I have no humour to draw into dispute whether Papall power when death seizeth upon the chiefe Bishop his mortall body doth remain in the Church or whether the Councell be above the Pope only this I hold to be indubitable that In causa haeresis est supra Papam in case of Heresie the Councell is above the Pope and that in case of scandalous offences the Church never wanted requisite and convenient remedies for the maintenance of her own rights and priviledges against Popes themselves But what shall I say to the other branch of your assertion Let us measure the truth thereof by the standard of common reason tell me then what People hath power to crow over the authority and power of any Soveraign and absolute Prince Surely none for by what authority Who dares now shew himselfe upon the Stage to broach and to draw the vessell of such pestiferous and scandalous doctrine What Is there a power in any people to depose their lawfull and Sovereign Prince To pare the nayles of his power To make a Soveraign Prince In esse no Prince De facto but a meer Subject To pull the Imperiall Crown from his head the royall Scepter out of his hand the purple robe or mantle royall from his shoulders and to kick him after a sort or to tumble him down from his Regall Throne Can there be a more desperate device more dangerous and forcible Bellows to blow the coales and to kindle the flames of most detestable rebellions of odious and insupportable Seditions of dreadfull conspiracies of Absolom-like or Judas-like treasons in the very bowels of the State I am loth to be a medler or a stickler and to have any hand in choaking or drowning the venemous seeds or in quenching the pestilentiall sparkes of these horible combustions with inke of Pen It is for noble and heroicall Princes themselves in these cases interested In Capite to rowse up their brave spirits and if the matter must needs come to blowes to draw the Sword in defence of their own so just and honourable a quarrell I must confesse it sorts well with a Princes honour to rule out his absolute power by his grave Councell of State and the wholsome Lawes of his Realmes and Kingdomes as it concernes and beseems the chiefe Bishop himselfe no lesse to square and to compasse out his power by the councell of his Cardinals provided they be no way interested or ingaged and overborn with passion but still have an eye to reflect upon the good of the Pope and the good of the Church alwaies directed by the laudable Canons and the venerable Councell For howsoever the absolute Prince perhaps Non tenetur suis legibus quoad obligationem is not liable to the conserving of his own lawes by plain termes of obligation tenetur saltem quoad directionem yet without perhaps or peradventure he stands bound to the conserving of his own Lawes at least for the office and duty of direction 11. You assume or presume rather that Monarchicall Rule of Laic Princes is changed sometimes into free States and free States of Laics are sometimes changed into Monarchies But as for the Church you affirme that she is not subject like the Moon unto the like mutation and change First if the case be put concerning Christ himselfe who is the supream soveraign Pastor of the Church there is no question but his Monarchie shall stand remain and endure for ever without all change Because of his Kingdom there shall be no end which comes not by reason of Title or no Title as you seem to inferre but by reason that Christ himselfe is not subject unto the least inward or outward violence the proper cause of all such mutation and change But make the case to concern Christ his Ministers and who can deny the Church was governed at the first after the form of a republick Let men read the fifteenth of the Acts there Peter proposes the case he puts down the Proposition he makes the Declararation Simeon hath declared as proloqutor then Iames gives the sentence or determination as President of the Councell wherefore my sentence is Lastly the Decree is ratified in the name of the whole Assembly or holy Convocation The Apostles Elders and Brethren unto the Faithfull send greeting It hath seemed good to the Holy Ghost and to us c. Whether S. Peter was then installed in the primacy like the Venetian Duke who holding a most honourable preheminence and ranke in that most illustrious and renowned State is neverthelesse restrained and kept in a State of Subjection to the whole body of that Republick I leave the matter to be discussed and sifted by those whom it may or doth chiefly concern It sufficiently makes for my purpose that whereas Decrees were published in the Primitive Church under the name of the republick or whole Assembly now edicts and constitutions are published under the name and authority of one alone And whether any mutation or change is imported thereby speak your selfe Hetrodox by whom it hath been denyed before 12. Your last errour is palpable in inferring this for a reason of difference between the two powers The rule of the one is immediate from God whereas the title of the other hath no such immediate derivation here I say you misse the marke and erre from the sense two manner of wayes For if by Title you meane the Power there is no such matter because neither is the Title the power nor the power the Title And if by Title you understand the means or manner of reaching to the height or top of power the one is no lesse humane or of men then the other The Conclave it selfe shall never be able to prove me a lyar in this point but I here put on a step further The power

Hetrod Is this your seven-fold Ajax shield which no sword can cut or pierce what say you then to this one stoccado It is true that Christ commanded tribute to be paid unto Cesar but it makes nothing to the purpose shall I tell you the why so forsooth because it is denyed of none That Poll-money or Tribute is due to Princes ought out of all question to be paid by those who are bound to such payment as Paul saith â—om 13.7 Give to all men their due tribute to whom tribute c. But now touching the tribute which Christ paid for himselfe Peter it seems thou hast sipped at least of Marsilius poysoned cup I meane that Marsilius of Padua's Heresie who was not ashamed to affirme That Christ paid the said Tribute not by condescention but by compulsion as thereunto constrained by necessity His Heresie was condemned by Pope John XXII For thou hast alledged none other exemption to prove that Christ was not bound to pay the said tribute five onely because he was native of the soyle and the native people were called the children and because he had the Divinity according to which being the Sonne of God he was not bound The first reason is wholly frivolous and vaine for not onely those of the soyle were not exempted but in very deed they onely were bound to pay the tribute And this we find in Moses Law where Layes Exod. 3â— Levies and Tributes were imposed and charged upon the Children of Israel that every one should pay halfe a sicle which makes two drachmes which Tribute was afterwards taken up and received by the Romans Lib. 7. dâ— bel Jud cap. 26. as Iosephus writeth The second reason exempts Christ as God not as man and therefore as man according to thy words he was bound that was the assertion of Marsilius the Paduan the very same is gathered from thy discourse for thou goest about to prove that Christ was no temporall Prince this to make good thou bringest in for thy last and best reason that Christ commanded to pay tribute unto the secular Prince which reason hath not so much as one graine of pith or force if thou adde not another graine that Christ himselfe really paid the tribute And for so much as herein rests the whole force of thy Argument therefore thou comâ—st in with an objection against thy selfe that some by way of opposition do teach that Christ was not bound to pay tribute and yet paid it down lest he should give offence to the Tollers appointed for that purpose Now this I demand whether was Christ as man bound or not bound to pay tribute If thou say he was bound then thou makest thy selfe brother-heretic or fellow-heretic to Marsilius of Padua condemned for an heretic If thou shalt say that Christ was not bound then by thine own confession thy reason is made to be of no force and to no purpose The plain truth of the point is this that Christ even as man and his Apostles also were not bound to the payment of the said tribute and wherefore Because Christ as a man was no humane but a divine person and no adoptive but a naturall son of God King of all Kings and so not bound to pay tribute unto any King And for so much as when the Prince himselfe is not bound to pay his Family much lesse is bound to that service or duty therefore the Apostles who were the Family of Christ were in like manner not bound to come off to the said payment ã€ˆâ—Šã€‰ cap. 17 â—at lib. â—uest Eâ—ng q. 23. From hence both S. Ierome and S. Augustine have rightly framed this collection and conclusion that Clerics are not bound to pay tribute unto secular Princes because they are of Christs own Family and exempted from all such payments in honour of Christ I forbeare to relate the rest of thy words touching this thy Proposition because they are points of light stuffe and small moment and also because not making against our cause they need not our answer Orthod Nay Sir by your patience the reason by me last alleadged is to good and speciall purpose For had Christ been a temporall King he would never have commanded to pay tribute unto Cesar but rather would have said Reddite mihi give tribute unto me because I and not Cesar am your temporall King But I hasten to have your errours by the eares 1. First it is an errour in point of creance or common courtesie and civill carriage at least it is a slâ—p of your tongue to give a man the thou at every word you do it not I perswade my selfe for lack of good manners or because you are to seeke in the termes of civility or by way of disparagement but in some angry humour and passionate mood So it comes many times to passe indeed that men falling to some friendly quarrell or contention in cold blood begin with you and after when the blood is up and the quarrell grown to some heat they end in thou true it is that no man should suffer himselfe to be overcome with wrath or anger or any other like disordinate or distempered passion but should shew himselfe conformable to the Apostles words â—hil 4. Let your moderation be known to all men howbeit I need not marvaile that you are pleased to thou a man whom being none other then a good Catholic you needs will marke and stampe with an hereticks brand not in his Fist but in his Fore-head 2. Againe Marsilius of Padua professed some say that Christ payed tribute as compelled by necessity You lay to my charge that I affirme the same and yet I affirme the cleane contrary namely that Christ not being bound as the sonne of God to paye tribute paid the same neverthelesse with a willing mind and a free hand lest otherwise he should have left some block at which the Ministers of the secular Prince might have tripped at least if not stumbled in their way He that makes this affirmative doth not affirme that Christ paid tribute as constrained by necessity but of his own condiscention that is lest he should offend 3. Again you are absolute and positive in putting down the tribute whereof wee now speake to be the same which God commanded to be paid unto the Temple Exod. 3â— and that in Exodus to be the same taxation by Poll or head which Augustus imposed and was exacted in the time of Christ our Lord To make this good you cite Iosephus whereas Iosephus writes not of the tribute imposed by Augustus lib. 7. c. 2 but of that which was imposed by Vespasianus and that imposition was many yeares after the death of Christ and of Augustus 4. Again Doctors doubt what tribute this was whether it was the tribute of the temple according to Hilarius or the tribute of Augustus according to modern Authors or the tribute of the First-born according to Chrysostome or the tribute imposed upon strangers or

Selected quad for the lemma: duty_n

Text snippets containing the quad