Selected quad for the lemma: england_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
england_n	king_n	name_n	scotland_n	3,955	5	8.5404	4	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A25987	A reply to a paper of Dr. Sandersons, containing a censure of Mr. A.A. his booke Of the confusions and revolutions of goverment [sic]	Sanderson, Robert, 1587-1663.	1650 (1650)	Wing A3923; ESTC R13687	15,713	23

unlawfull but in submitting their Tutela is inculpata For it is easie to understand how we may have a right to receive what another may not have a right to give as a Necessary alms begd and received from one who got his riches by wrong and oppression as also in borrowing mony upon biting Usury when a man cannot by Morall diligence get it other waies As for the dues here mentioned I shall speak to them in the next Proviso Here I must observe that the Author of the Exercitation hath an expresse Chapter against no other Author which I know of but the Doctor in this his forth Proviso highly blaming him for giving way to the temporizing reservations of Allegiance during the intervall and prevalency of another Power at which Power some profess themselves so much scandalized that they cannot see how they may with a good Conscience ever go to Law in the present Courts of Justice for their debts and rights But for their ease this Exercitation hath found out an excellent expedient for them tho not moulded from that equity whereby Saint Paul appealed to Caesar which is That they may now recover their dues in those Courts provided they give not such titles to the Iudges and Officers as they should give to the Lawfull Magistrates I wonder whether this Gentleman thinks the like exception and scruple might not have been made against their Courts during the Parliaments first War with the King when Judges and every thing else was regulated here only by his name and absolutely against his Will Such another expedient for the Kingdom of Scotland would set all right in their justice too For I beleeve the King of Scotland hitherto hath made no more Judges in Scotland then the Prince of Wales hath done in England But the grand Case of Conscience p. 10. will tell this Gentleman how truly let him look to it that his expedient salves not half the difficulty and that after he hath received that which he judges in himself is j●stly his own by the might and power only of an unjust Court yet he hath not his own because a thing in itself just is not recovered by their help justly For Justice and Judgment is then only just when it derives from the Just Legall Magistrate and Justice as he saith p. 26. looks upward as well as downward The like Note doth he recommend to the Clergy p. 24. advising them not to preach on such unseasonable days as a wrong Magistrate shall appoint for some Religious duty yea though the Parishioners were willing to heare the word of God Surely he cannot think but they will follow Saint Pauls authority rather then his who enjones them to be instant both in season and out of season The fifth Proviso is That this submission be only to the {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} not with an acknowledgment of the {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} of the prevailing Power I know not to what purpose this Criticisme is inserted to weigh against the consequence of such important Cases and Arguments unless it be to indispose people by perplexing them Though the difference betwixt those two Greek words be no more then is betwixt Potentia and Potestas or as is more Critically betwixt power and Authority yet our Author p. 2. ch. 11. 9. proves that the inequality of force or Potency is the originall ground of ruling as well as Impotency is of subjection For which reason Master Hobbes his supposition That if there were two Omnipotents neither could obey one the other is very conclusive But if I shew that {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} Rom. 13. 1. signifies no more then the establishment of a supreme {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} when it comes at last to be as Saint Paul saith {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} and without further contests actually possesses all other Powers and that every Country hath not a Prophet to give assurance of Gods extraordinary reveal'd will then I suppose this Proviso will signifie noting That such is the meaning of {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} Rom. 13. is evident Because v. 1. the Apostle speaks onely of the Powers which de facto are and that by this very word {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} Moreover hee interprets it clearlier v. 3. {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} They who actually rule are a terrour to evill workes but how the answer is in the same verse Because they carry or hold not the sword in vaine which can in no sense be understand of those who have actually lost the sword by which dispossession they are disinabled to fright any body being in the sense of the Law Civilly dead themselves Seing then the change of Gods Vice Roys or of the hands which carry swords is of his secret disposing not by meere chance or humane contrivance it will concerne us to submit to them after an establishment as to an Authority or {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} and that for Conscience sake lest by continuall disturbance and without assurance for the successe of more then our Morall endeavours have attain'd to wee unnecessarily breed a publique disturbance to our owne and others destructions But if by {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} he meane a cleare right without interruption deriv'd ab origine from some Capitall family or Compact hee might put all the World into an endlesse suffle before he should finde such Persons for all Kingdomes And Princes quietly possest or as Henry the Seventh would have it establisht are but little beholden to him for this doctrine of Allegiance as little as the People are to him for his Divinity who for want of that which they cannot get are by him necessitated ever to do all just things doubtingly and without faith If hee speak as a Casuit he cannot argue Prescription for the cleare right of one against the present Possession of another For Prescription of it selfe proves only a Comparative right as one may bee some what better then the other onely because ancienter Prescription is but a kind of Penalty in a State and therefore is allow'd the Opinion and effects of Right and in a tryall makes an Excellent exception against the claime of another as when Iept●a objected 300. yeares Possession to the Ammonites The C. Law presumes that what cannot appeare to be anothers is therefore the Possessours because men have so much interest in the continuall preservation of those necessary rights which truly belong to them therefore in the sence of that Law that thing cannot appeare to be anothers which hath been for so many years neglected by him for such negligence the Law judges him worthy to be punisht with the losse of what he pretends to This perhaps is an inconvenience to particular men yet States allow it as an Equity to avoyd a greater inconveniency viz. Publique disquiets perpetuall controversies and uncertainty of