Selected quad for the lemma: england_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
england_n	good_a	king_n	scotland_n	3,261	5	8.2381	4	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A85295	The necessity of the absolute power of all kings: and in particular, of the King of England.	Filmer, Robert, Sir, d. 1653.	1648 (1648)	Wing F917; Thomason E460_7; ESTC R202077	8,854	14

when he yet was scarce twenty five yeers old The answers also of the King of Spaine unto the Requests and humble Supplications of his people are given in these words We will or else We Decree or Ordaine yea the Subsidies that the Subjects pay unto the King of Spaine they call Service In the Parliaments of England which have commonly been holden every third yeer the estates seem to have a great liberty as the Northern people almost all breath thereafter yet so it is that in effect they proceed not but by way of supplications and requests to the King As in the Parliament holden in Octob 1566. when the States by a common Consent had resolved as they gave the Queene to understand not to entreat of any thing until She had first appointed who should succeed Her in the Crown She gave them no other answer but that they were not to make her grave before She were dead All whose resolutions were to no purpose without her good liking neither did She in that any thing that they required Albeit by the sufferance of the King of England Controversies between the King and His people are sometimes determined by the High Court of Parliament yet all the estates remain in full subjection to the King who is no way bound to follow their advice neither to consent to their Requests The estates of England are never otherwise assembled no more then they are in France or Spaine then by Parliament writs and expresse commandements proceeding from the King which sheweth very well that the estates have no Power of themselves to Determine Command or Decree any thing seeing they cannot so much as assemble themselves neither being assembled depart without expresse Commandement from the King Yet this may seem one speciall thing that the Lawes made by the King of England at the request of the Estates cannot be againe repealed but by calling a Parliament which is much used and done as I have understood by Mr Dale the English Ambassadour an honourable Gentleman and a man of good understanding who yet assured me the King received or rejected the Law as seemed best to Himselfe and stuck not to dispose thereof at His Pleasure and contrary to the will of the Estates as we see Hen. 8. to have alwaies used his Soveraign Power and with his onely word to have disanulled the Decrees of Parliament We conclude the Majesty of a Prince to be nothing altered or diminished by the calling together or presence of the Estates But to the contrary His Majesty thereby to be much the greater and the more Honourable seeing all His people to acknowledge Him for their Soveraign We see the Principal point of Soveraign Majesty and absolute Power to consist principally in giving Lawes unto the Subjects without their consent It behoveth that the Soveraigne Prince should have the Lawes in his Power to change and amend them according as the case shal require In a Monarchy every one in particular must sweare to the Observation of the Lawes and their Allegiance to one Soveraigne Monarch who next unto God of whom he holds his Scepter and Power is bound to no man For an Oath carrieth alwaies with it Reverence unto whom and in whose name it is made as still given to a Superior and therefore the vassal giveth such Oath unto his Lord but receiveth none from him againe though they be mutually bound the one of them to the other Trajan swore to keep the Lawes although he in the name of a Soveraign Prince were exempted but never any of the Emperours before him so sware therefore Pliny the younger in a Panagyricall Oration speaking of the Oath of Trojan giveth out a great novelty saith he and never before heard of He sweareth by whom we sweare Of two things the one must be to wit the Prince that sweareth to keep the Lawes of his Country must either not have the Soveraignty or else become a perjur'd man if he should but abrogate but one Law contrary to his Oath whereas it is not onely ptofitable that a Prince should sometimes abrogate some such Laws but also necessary for him to alter or correct them as the infinite variety of places times and Persons shal require Or if we shal say the Prince to be stil a Soveraign yet neverthelesse with such condition as that he can make no Law without the advice of his Councel or people he must also be dispenced with by his subjects for the Oath which he hath made for the observation of the Lawes and the subjects againe which are obliged to the Lawes have also need to be dispensed with all by their Prince for fear they should be perjur'd So shall it come to passe that the Majesty of the Common-weale enclining now to this side now to that side sometimes the Prince sometimes the People bearing sway shall have no certainty to rest upon which are notable absurdities and altogether incompatible with the Majesty of absolute Soveraignty and contrary both to Law and Reason And yet we see many men that think they see more in the matter then others wil maintaine it to be most necessary that Princes should be bound by Oath to keep the Lawes and Customes of their Countryes In which doing they weaken and overthrow all the Rights of Soveraign Majesty which ought to be most Sacred and Holy and confound the Soveraignty of one Soveraign Monarch with an Aristocracy or Democracie Publication or Approbation of Lawes in the Assembly of the Estates or Parliament is with us of great importance for the keeping of the Lawes not that the Prince is bound to any such approbation or cannot of himselfe make a Law without the consent of the Estates or people yet it is a curteous part to do it by the good liking of the Senate What if a Prince by Law forbid to kil or steal is he not bound to obey his own Lawes I say that this Law is not his but the Law of God whereunto all Princes are more straitly bound then their Subjects God taketh a stricter account of Princes then others as Solomon a King hath said whereto agreeth Marcus Aurelius saying The Magistrates are Judges over private men Princes judge the Magistrates and God the Princes It is not onely a Law of Nature but also oftentimes repeated among the Lawes of God that we should be obedient unto the Lawes of such Princes as it hath pleased God to set to Rule and Reign over us if their Lawes be not directly repugnant unto the Lawes of God whereunto all Princes are as wel bound as their subjects For as the Vassal oweth his Oath of fidelity unto his Lord towards and against all men except his Soveraign Prince So the subject oweth his Obedience to his Soveraign Prince towards and against all the Majesty of God excepted who is the absolute Soveraigne of all the Princes in the world To confound the state of Monarchy with the Popular or Aristocraticall estate is a thing impossible

and in effect incompatible and such as cannot be imagined For Soveraignty being of it selfe indivisible how can it at one and the same time be divided betwixt one Prince the Nobility and the people in common The first mark of Soveraign Majesty is to be of Power to give Lawes and to command over them unto the subjects and who should those subjects be that should yeeld their obedience to the Law if they should have also Power to make the Lawes who should he be that could give the Law being himselfe constrained to receive it of them unto whom he himselfe gave it so that of necessity we must conclude that as no one in particular hath the Power to make the Law in such a state that there the state must needs be popular Never any Common-wealth hath been made of an Aristocracy and Popular Estate much lesse of the three Estates of a Common-wealth Such States wherein the Right of Soveraignty are divided are not rightly to be called Common-weales but rather the corruption of Common-weales as Herodotus hath most briefly but truly written Common-weales which change their State the Soveraigne Right and Power of them being divided find no rest from Civill warres If the Prince be an absolute Soveraign as are the true Monarchs of France of Spaine of England Scotland Turkey Muscovy Tartary Persia Aethiopia India and almost of all the Kingdomes of Africk and Asia where the Kings themselves have the Soveraignty without all doubt or question not divided with their subjects In this case it is not lawful for any one of the subjects in particular or all of them in generall to attempt any thing either by way of fact or of justice against the Honour Life or Dignity of the Soveraign albeit he had comitted all the wickednesse impiety and cruelty that could be spoke For as to proceed against him by way of justice the subject hath not such jurisdiction over his Soveraign Prince of whom dependeth all Power to Command and who may not onely revoke all the Power of his Magistrates but even in whose presence the Power of all Magistrates Corporations Estates and Communities cease Now if it be not lawful for the Subject by the way of justice to proceed against a King how should it then be lawful to proceed against him by way of fact or Force for question is not here what men are able to do by strength and Force but what they ought of Right to do as not whether the subject have power and strength but whether they have lawful power to condemne their Soveraign Prince The subject is not onely guilty of Treason in the highest Degree who hath slain his Soveraign Prince but even he also which hath attempted the same who hath given Counsell or consent thereto yea if he have concealed the same or but so much as thought it Which fact the Lawes have in such detestation as that when a man guilty of any offence or Crime dyeth before he be condemned thereof he is deemed to have dyed in whole and perfect Estate except he have conspired against the Life and Dignity of his Soveraign Prince This onely thing they have thought to be such as that for which he may worthily seeme to have been now already judged and condemned yea even before he was thereof accused And albeit the Lawes inflict no punishment upon the evill thoughts of men but on those onely which by word or deed break out into some Enormity yet if any man shall so much as conceit a thought for the Violating of the Person of his Soveraign Prince although he have attempted nothing they have yet judged this same thought worthy of death notwithstanding what repentance soever he have had thereof Lest any men should think Kings or Princes themselves to have been the Authors of these Lawes so the more straitly to provide for their own safety and Honour let us see the Laws and examples of holy Scripture Nabuchodonosor King of Assyria with fire and sword destroyed all the Country of Palestina besieged Jerusalem took it rob'd and rased it down to the ground burnes the Temple and defiles the Sanctuary of God slew the King with the greatest part of the people carrying away the rest into Captivity into Babylon caused the image of himselfe made in gold to be set up in publick place commanding all men to adore and worship the same upon pain of being burnt alive and caused them that refused so to do to be cast into a burning Furnace And yet for all that the holy Prophets Baruch 1. Jeremy 29. directing their letters unto their brethren the Jewes then in Captivity in Babylon wil them to pray unto God for the good and happy life of Nabuchodonosor and his children and that they might so long Rule and Reign over them as the Heavens should endure Yea even God Himselfe doubted not to call Nabuchodonosor his servant saying that he would make him the most Mighty Prince of the world and yet was there never a more detestable Tyrant then he who not contended to be himselfe worshiped but caused his Image also to be adored and that upon pain of being burnt quick We have another rare example of Saul who possessed with an evill Spirit caused the Priests of the Lord to be without just cause sl●ine for that one of them had received David flying from him and did what in his power was to kill or cause to be kill'd the same David a most innocent Prince by whom he had got so many victories at which time he fell twice himselfe into Davids hands who blamed of his Souldiers for that he would not suffer his so mortall Enemy then in his power to be slain being in assured hope to have enjoyed the Kingdome after his death he detested their Counsell saying God forbid that I should suffer the Person of a King the Lords Anointed to be violated Yea he himselfe defended the same King persecuting of him whenas he commanded the Souldiers of his guard overcome by wine and sleep to be wakened And at such time as Saul was slaine and that a Souldier thinking to do David a pleasure presented him with Saul's head David caused the same Souldier to be slaine which had brought him the head saying Go thou wicked how durst thou lay thy impure hands upon the Lords Anointed thou shalt surely die therefore And afterwards without all dissimulation mourned himselfe for the dead King All which is worth good consideration for David was by Saul prosecuted to death and yet wanted not Power to have revenged himselfe being become stronger then the King besides he was the chosen of God and anointed by Samuel to be King and had married the Kings Daughter And yet for all that he abhorred to take upon him the title of a King and much more to attempt any thing against the Life or Honour of Saul or to Rebell against him but chose rather to banish himselfe out of the Realme then in any sort so seek the