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	prince_n	realm_n	3,797	5	8.1318	4	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A54842	An impartial inquiry into the nature of sin in which are evidently proved its positive entity or being, the true original of its existence, the essentiall parts of its composition by reason, by authority divine, humane, antient, modern, Romane, Reformed, by the adversaries confessions and contradictions, by the judgement of experience and common sense partly extorted by Mr. Hickman's challenge, partly by the influence which his errour hath had on the lives of many, (especially on the practice of our last and worst times,) but chiefly intended as an amulet to prevent the like mischiefs to come : to which is added An appendix in vindication of Doctor Hammond, with the concurrence of Doctor Sanderson, Oxford visitors impleaded, the supreme authority asserted : together with diverse other subjects, whose heads are gathered in the contents : after all A postscript concerning some dealings of Mr. Baxter / by Thomas Pierce ...	Pierce, Thomas, 1622-1691.	1660 (1660)	Wing P2184; ESTC R80	247,562	303

Kings Prerogative as well as Magna Charta is proved by Iudge Ienkins to be a principall part of the common Law and Royal Government a Law fundamental Nay 9. It is proved by the same most learned and pious Iudge That the Supreme power even in time of Parliament was declared by both Houses to belong unto the King 10. The Kings Supremacy hath been proved by so many Arguments out of Bracton as may be seen in Dudley Diggs The Reasons of the Vniversity of Oxford Iudge Ienkins and the like that I shall onely translate some few short passages into English The King saith he hath power and Iurisdiction over all who are within his Kingdome and none but He. Every one is under the King and he under God onely He hath no Peer or equal with his Kingdome m●ch less is inferiour unto his subjects God alone is his superiour and to God alone is he accomptable In a word The things that concern Iurisdiction and Peace or are annexed to peace and Iustice do belong to none but to the Crown and the Kingly Dignity nor can they be separated from the Crown for as much as the Crown consisteth in them 11. The Kings supremacy is evinced from the Nature of all his subjects Tenures they holding their Lands of him in Fee Whi●h though it gives a perpe●ual Estate yet is it not absolute but conditionall as depending on the acknowledgement of superiority and as being forfeitable upon the non-performance of some duties on which supposition it still returns unto the King For the breach of Fidelity is loss of Fee In short it is agreed among the most learned in the Law ● That the King alone hath such a property in all his Lands as Lawyers are wont to call Ala●dium because he doth hold in his own full Right without any service or payment of Rent because from God onely 2. That subjects of all Degrees do hold their Lands ut Feuda in the nature of Fee which implyes Fealty to a Superiour 12. The Oath of Allegeance hath the force of another Oath of Supremacy For Legiancy is defined to be an obligation upon all subjects to take part with their Liege Lord against all men living to aid and assist him with their bodies and minds with their advise and power not to lift up their arms against him nor to support in any way those that oppose him Now as no Liege Lord can acknowledge any Superiour and though bound to some duties is not bound under pain of Forfeiture so subjects on the other side are Homines Ligii all Liege-men owing him Faith and Allegiance as their Superiour Which Faith if they violate He is enabled by the Law as being the Fountain of Iurisdiction saith Master Diggs to seiz upon their Goods and Lands and to destroy their persons too Whereas if He fail in the discharge of his duty he is not subject to any Forfeiture by any Law of the Land I could ever hear of and Mr. Diggs hath challenged all the world to name any Doctor Sanderson also affirmeth That if a King who is Supreme should do the things that are proposed 1 Sam. 8. and Rule as a Tyrant by no other Law then his own hearts lust he would yet be unaccountable on this side Heaven however liable to the wrath of the Soveraign Iudge of all the World For however such a Tyrant may abuse his power yet the power is His which he abuseth and who shall say unto the King what dost thou Eccles. 8.4 a Text produced by the late King of most blessed Memorie against his own most unnatural and Blood Triers 13. There is an antient Monument saith Mr. Diggs p. 83. which shews the manner of holding a Parliament before the conquest The King is the head the beginning and the end of the Parliament and so he hath not any equal in his Degree This I cite to anticipate Mr. Hi●kman's possible objection 14. The King by Law hath just power to pass acts of Parliament by his great Seal to grant out Commissions of Oyer and Terminer for the holding of Assisses to adjourn the Term to whatsoever place he pleaseth To make Iustices of Peace which wholly depends on his will and pleasure To pardon Delinquents and Malefactors a priviledge by law estated solely in the King To choose his Officers to protect all persons to coin money to make leagues with forrein Princes to dispose the Militia to call and dissolve Parliaments And to be in one word Le dernier Resort de la Iustice. 15. In the thirty seventh Article of the Church of England The King or Queen is declared to have the chief Power in this Realm of England c. to whom the chief Government of all Estates of this Realm whether they be Ecclesiastical or Civil in all Causes doth appertain And this called the Prerogative which hath alwayes been given to all godly Princes in holy Scripture by God himself that they shall rule all Estates and all Degrees Ecclesiastical or Temporal and restrain with the Civil sword the stubborn and evil Doers 16. And accordingly in the Canons by law established in the Church A Supreme Power is declared to be given by God in Scripture to the sacred order of Kings which is there also declared to be of Divine Right And that for any person or persons to set up maintain or avow in any their said Realms respectively under any pretence whatsoever any Independent co-active power either Papal or popular whether directly or indirectly is to undermine their great Royal office and cunningly to overthrow that most sacred ordinance which God himself hath established and so is treasonable against God as well as against the King This I earnestly recommend to Mr. Hickman his consideration and that which follows in the Canon viz. That for subjects to bear Arms against their Kings offensive or defensive upon any pretence whatsoever is at the least to resist the powers which are ordained of God And though they do not invade but onely resist 17. Saint Paul tells them plainly They shall receive to themselves damnation The most excellent Recognition which was made by both Houses in the first year of King Iames is so worthy to be written in Letters of Gold and so needfull to be rivetted in the hearts and memories of the people who desire to have a conscience void of offence towards God and men that I think I shall deserve many an honest man's thanks who hath either never known or hath forgot what once he knew by inserting some part upon this occasion The King is our onely rightfull and lawfull Leige Lord and Soveraign we do upon the knees of our heart adnize constant Faith Loyalty and Obedience to the King and his Royall Progeny in this high Court of Parliament where all the body of the Realm is either in Person or by representation we do acknowledge that the true and

indeed object against him his Dissent from the Doctrine of the Church of England so to their shame if they had any he freed himself from that charge Master P●m's Report to the House of Commons is no proof at all that he was censur'd by the Parliament And the Order of that House in the behalf of the Articles was not hurtfull to him who oppos'd them not but understood them better and declar'd as much for them as the Commoners could doe § 44. To Mr. Hickmans rare Question p. 28. How comes it to pass that those who now follow Arminius did heretofore follow Mr. Calvin I thank him for the occasion to make this Answer That the older men gr●w they grow the wiser and more impartial To what end do men study both men and books but to discover the mistakes of their giddy youth Is it not fit that the aged Bishop of Winchester should understand things better then young Mr. Andrews But he was a Bishop and one who lived at such a Time when it was safe to leave Calvin as King Iames his Great Master had also done And therefore to satisfie Mr. Hickman Let the Question be put of Dr. Sanderson whose change of judgement was never publish'd untill the last and worst times whilst yet the Followers of Calvin had power to persecute their opponents why did he follow the way of Calvin in point of Doctrine I mean his sublapsarian way before he considered and compar'd it with other wayes and at last forsook it after such consideration The very Question suggests the Answer which in all reason is to be made And may suffice for a general answer to the farr greatest part of Mr. Hickman's long Preface Observe Good Reader the most Ingenuous Confession of that so eminently learned and holy man Giving himself to the study of practicall Divinity he saith he took up most other things upon trust And this he did so much the rather because Calvin at that time was not so wholesomely suspected as blessed be God he since hath been But to express it in the words of the Judicious Doctor Sanderson The honour of Calvin's name gave Reputation to his very errours And if so great a Scholar as he did take up opinions upon trust and was carried down the stream of the common errours his weaker brethren could not choose but be swept away with so strong a Torrent § 45. But they were farr from being such whose Questions in the Act Mr. Hickman reciteth from Mr. Prin as he hath done the greatest part of his tedious Preface For Doctor Iackson might well acknowledge all lost in Adam when he supposed a Recovery of all in Christ. And here it is observable that Mr. Hickman hath not stoln fairly For Mr. Prin expressed very honestly what his jugling Transcriber thought it his Interest to conceal It was the very first of the Doctors three Questions An Peccatum originale contineat in se aliquid positivi And this was held in the affirmative The other Act-questions were Doctor Frewin's the now-Right Honourable and Right Reverend Father in God the Bishop of Coventry and Litchfield whom I am never able to name without a preface of honour and veneration Who if he did once Calvinizare as Bishop Andrews and King Iames before the times of their conversion let it suffice that his latter judgement is much preferrable to his former It is no more to the disparagement of Doctor Goad and Master Hales and Daniel ●ilenus the Synodist at Dort and Doctor Potter and Doctor Godwin and Melanchthon himself and the late Primate that as soon as they saw they forsook their errours then it could be to Saint Paul that though as long as in comparison he was a child he spake as a child understood as a child and thought as a child yet when he grew to a perfect man he put away childish things And hence Mr. Hickman may take the reason why I parted with those opinions I first embraced which now he reproacheth me withall p. 29. though more to my honour then he imagin'd But he must know that by the first of the three last Questions An praedestinatio ad salutem sit propter praevisam fidem he seems to be ignorant of the difference betwixt the foresight of Faith and Faith foreseen as betwixt ex and propter a condition and a cause secundum praescientiam Fidei propter fidem praescitam And so he is like the vain Ianglers of whom Saint Paul speaks to Timothy that they desired to be Teachers understanding neither what they said nor whereof they affirmed § 46. Of Lambeth Articles that they were caused to be suppress'd by Queen Elizabeth See Doctor Heylin his Examen Historicum p. 164. That King Iames before he dyed was an Anti-Calvinist appears by the Conference at Hampton Court and by his great approbation of all that was preached by Bishop Andrews which was as opposite to Calvin as light to darkness and by his high esteem of B●shop OVERALL who was wont to call the Calvinists The Zenonian Sect and by his singular favour to Bishop Montague whom he imployed in composing his Apparatus and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and whose Appeal he adorned with his Royal Patronage and Protection which yet he could not have done if he had not been that which they call Arminian That Bishop Montague was incouraged by the special Direction of King IAMES to Dedicate that Book to his Royal self is most apparent to every man who wil● but read his own words in his Dedication If any Reader can yet be ignorant of King Iames his deliverance from that captivity into which he had been l●dd by his first and worst Teachers let him peruse that Epistle with which the learned Tilenus Senior did dedicate his Book to that learned King even his Book of Animadversions upon the Synod of Dorts Canon There the Reader will be inform'd how Tilenus his Paraenesis had pleas'd that King who gave a proof of his special liking by his speciall command to have it Printed How a little after that the King invited him by a Letter to come over into England and here to try the effects of his Royall Favour How his Majestie took care that care might be taken by other men Not to blaspheme with the Puritanes in making God the Author of sin How he assented to Tilenus whilst he inveighed against the Error of irrespective decrees especially that of Reprobation A more impious errour then which he said a Synod of Divels was not able to invent Thence he styled it the Horrendum illud Calvini decretum and professed to see nothing throughout the whole Calvinian Scheme which did not either flow out of Zeno's porch or from the Tables of the Destinies or from the stinking Mephitis of the Manichees By all which it is apparent that Mr. Hickman is unexcusable as far as his 38. page where he grows less guilty

sincere Religion of the Church is continued and established by the King And do recognize as we are bound by the law of God and man the Realm of England and the Imperiall Crown thereof doth belong to him by inherent birthright and lawfull and undoubted succession and submit our selves and our posterities for ever untill the last drop of bloud be spent to his rule and beseech the King to accept the same as the first fruits of our Loyalty and Faith to his Majesty and his posterity for ever and for that this Act is not compleat nor perfect without his Majesties assent the same is humbly desired This proves saith Judge Ienkins 1. That the Houses are not above the King 2. That Kings have not their titles to the Crown by the two Houses but 3. by inherent birth-right and 4. That there can be no Statute without his express assent and so 5. It destroyes the Chimaera of the Kings virtuall being in the Houses 18. The Kings Proclamations heretofore to severall purposes were of no less force then Acts of Parliament And the ground of it was that the supremitie of the Regal power is given by God And however that Act was indeed repealed by the meek concession of King Edward the sixth yet the Reason of the Repeal is recorded to have been this A willingness in the King to gratifie his people up●n trust that they would not abuse the same but rather be encouraged with more faithfulness and diligence to serve his Highness So when Charles the First passed a Bill for the continuance of the long Parliament indefinitely it was upon their promise that the gracious favour of his Majesty expressed in that Bill should not encourage them to do any thing which otherwise had not been sit to be done And so good is the Rule in the Civil Law Cessante causa cessat Lex That the Lords and Commons even of that very Parliament did d●clare it to hold good in Acts of Parliament 19. When 't was declared by all the Iudges and Sergeants of Law that it cannot be said the King doth wrong it was by a Periphrasis A Declaration of his Sup●emacy For the meaning of it must be say the greatest Lawyers That what the King doth in point of Jurisdiction he doth by his Iudges who are sworn to deal legally between the King and his people So as the Judges may be questioned for violation of Law but the King is unaccountable and on his person or power no Reflection is to be made § 78. Thus I have given such an account of the proper subject of Supremacy as my Notes of Observation suggest unto me at this time I gather'd my Notes more especially for my private use and information that I might know what Party I ought to own in these times of Triall and Temptation partly out of the Papers which passed betwixt the King and both Houses of Parliament partly from the writings of Mr. Prin Mr. Diggs Iudge Ienkins and Dr. Langbane partly out of the Book of Statutes though I have not time to consult them much Many more Arguments I could urge out of the works of Iudge Ienkins but that I find them too many to be transcribed in this Appendix and withall I consider that book is cheap and little and I hope easily to be had which makes me choose to referr my Readers to his whole Lex Terrae from page 8. to page 63. I have been so convinced by all put together which hath been said as I cannot but conclude with the most Learned and moderate Doctor Sanderson That at least amongst us here in England there can be nothing more certain or conspicuous unless we will not use our eyes but rather choose to be blind at noon by stoutly winking against the Sun then that the power of these Three Kingdoms doth onely belong to his Serene and Supreme Royall Majesty This is said by that great and judicious Casuist in his stating the obligation and efficient cause of humane Lawes After which if Mr. Hickman shall yet contend that the Oxford Visitors were commissioned by the Supreme Authority of the Nation though by the two Houses onely not onely without but against the pleasure of the King I will onely referr him to certain Notes on the Oathes of Supremacy and Allegiance in a late-Printed Book which is thus ●ntitled The Resurrection of Loyalty and Obedience out of the Grave of Rebellion § 80. But I printed saith Mr. Hickman as if I had right to two Fellowships and asks how else he is but one of my receivers p 46. To which I answer 1. That for any thing I know Mr. Hickman succeeded him that succeeded me And my words of him were these that for ought I know he may be in possession of mine own fellowship c. Or 2. If he did not succeed my successor but that his Robbery is immediate not once removed I will give him an Answer to chew upon out of the Digests When a number of men do jo●● their strength to steal a piece of Timber or any thing else which is anothers which none of them singly could have carried away Vlpian saith that each of them severally as well as all of them joyntly is lyable to an action for the double value of the thing And so when the right of a Society is invaded by a Society which was our case in Magd. Colledge when almost all were at once bereaved by men of violence all may require their right of all and every man from every man For every man by partnership is an Accessary to all that have done the wrong as well as principall in part and indefinitely and so responsible to all who receive the wrong or do require a reparation I could prove to Mr. Hickman that he is guilty of the Visitor's sin by accepting the spoils of their injustice But I am ready to pardon though not to dissemble my being injur'd § 81. I had but said by such a figure as is allowable in Scripture It seems the Visitors made him one of my Receivers and Vsu-fructuaries when taking my words by the wrong handle he pretends that His is the usus-fructus p. 46. But 1. he knows I there added That my legitimate Successor they could not make him which is a proof that what I spake was of what they did not ought to do And a Facto ad Ius no good Argument is to be drawn The Visitors made him my Receiver as they made their strength the law of justice Or as Lambert made Cromwell the Kings Receiver 'T is easie for one man to be m●de an other man's Receiver and yet by a Proverb to be as bad as the thief that made him The sons of violence and rapine made one another what they pleased as opportunity and power was in their hands So it was said by Doctor Heylin that Mr. Hickman had made a Book But he presently added As

as a secret not according to the vote of his guilty Brethren who never charged me with ought no not so much as a suspicion Much less did they dare to let me know my Accuser for fear I should prove him a false Accuser and spoil the trade they then were driving Much less yet would they indure that I should have the least tryall fair or foul because they were conscious of the nothing that they were abl● to say against me Their dealing with me in that affair puts me in mind of what I read in an English book There was nothing so common in those Times as a charge without a● Accuser a sentence without a Iudge and a condemnation without a hearing But I was condemned without a charge too And it seems by no Judge that will own the Judg●ment For § 85. Mr. Hickman is fain to say that I was turned out of my Fellowship not by the Visitors but by the Committee of Lords and Commons for non-submission to the Authority of Parliament in visiting the Vniversity p. 47. To which I answer 1. That my Answer to the Visitors was judged rational and modest by Doctor Reynolds who therefore told me it was impossible I should be banished onely for that but rather for being at least suspected to have written some Books but what books they were or why I was suspected the Author of them he either could not or woul● not tell me 2. Mr. Hickman layes the whole fault on the Lords and Commons which I ascribe unto the Visitors transgressing the Commission by which they sate For would the Lords and Commons undo an Orphan for being modest and conscientiously desirous to gain some time to the end he might not answer but upon due consideration This would justifie Philanglus in the book above mention'd when he said That many were outed their Free-holds Liberty and Livelyhoods before any examination much less conviction and that the order of a Committee was commonly made to controlle the fundamentall Lawes of the Land I rather think that the Visitors did return a false answer and so abused the Lords and Commons then that persons of so much honour would be the authors of such a fact as Doctor Reynolds although a Visitor so much abhorred and never would give his consent unto But Mr. Hickman doth acknowledge that the two Houses may do amiss for he dares not undertake in all things to acquit them p. 48. § 86. But why doth he call it the Authority of Parliament which he confesseth at other Times to be no more then two Houses A Parliament without a King much more against him is a contradiction in adjecto Well said Judge Ienkins The leggs Arms and Trunck of the body cannot be above the Head nor have life without it So that supposing the King to be but one of the 3. States of which a Parliament doth consist He is a part and that the highest But in truth saith the learned Judge The King is none of the three estates but above them all The three estates are the Lords Spiritual the Lords Temporal and the Commons And so Mr. Hickman is unexcusable in beheading the Parliament by excl●ding the King from his Royal Birthright § 87. Again Mr. Hickman proceeds to ask Is it not Impudence to say that the Visitors authorized by the two Houses under the broad Seal of England could not make me his legitimate successor p. 47. To which I answer 1. that the Visitors were never authorized by the two Houses to condemn me without some little hearing or to huddle up their sentence and Execution without Accuser or witness or accusation face to face 2. The two Houses could onely make an Ordinance not an Act of Parliament which is a Law as the Houses themselves have oft confessed And Laws are the things which bind the people Nay 3. If any statute shall be made against Magna Charta and so against Bishops provided for by Magna Charta and confirmed by thirty two Acts of Parliament or against any man's right without a triall according to Law It is by Law declared null 42. Ed. 3. ch 1. But it seems Mr. Hickman is like Oliver Cromwell whose foul-mouth'd by-word was wont to be Magna Charta Magna Farta Nay 4. It is resolved in Law Books that if an Act of Parliament referr to or confirm a thing which is not as for a man to be a Iudge or witness in his own case or a thing that is misrecited or repugnant or impossible to be performed there the common Law shall controll and adjudge such an Act to be meerly void Now we who were of the Dispersion through the Avarice and Revenge of the cruel Visitors did find those Visitors in very great part at once our Iudges our Iuries our Executioners and our Heirs Had they dealt sincerely with us and bid us plainly leave our Fellowships because they had Sons and Nephews or other good friends to be cared for as the Fox was syncere when he bid the Cock come down from the Tree alledging this reason that he was hungry I should not have used them as now I do though I use them better then they did me But their pretending to Reformation and Iustice too did make their sin exceeding sinfull 5. The Broad Seal which he speaks of is called by Judge Ienkins a Counterfeit Seal And the Counterfeiting of that he proves High Treason Last of all I will add that we were taught in our Catechism by our common mother the Church of England that we are bound by God in the fifth Commandment to honour and obey not the two Houses but the King not the two Houses and the King but the King and his ministers Saint Peter accordingly commanding us to Submit our selves to every ordinance of man for the Lords sake instructs us to do it to the King as Supreme and unto Governours as sent by him Now were the Visitors really sent by him Or were they not flatly sent against Him Whether so or so Let it be judged by the Case of the University the most materiall part of which shall now become my next Section § 88. The onely question which is by these men propos'd to every single person in the University is Whether we will submit to their Visitation or to the power of Parliament as they call it in this Visitation That without the Personall Consent of the King to this Commission as far as it respects the University in General and us as members thereof we cannot now submit to any Visitation without incurring the guilt of manifold perjuries In reference to our Vniversity oathes we have long since given an Account by way of Plea to these men That our particular Locall or Collegiate Statutes which define us particular Visitors in our particular Colledges bind us under the same most evident perjury to submit to no other Visitation but that which the