Selected quad for the lemma: friend_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
friend_n	army_n	party_n	warrantable_a	12	3	15.8373	5	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A85944	Katadynastēs: might overcoming right. Or a cleer answer to M. John Goodwin's Might and right well met. Wherein is cleared, that the action of the Army in secluding many Parliament men from the place of their discharge of trust, and the imprisoning of some of them, is neither defensible by the rules of solid reason, nor religion. / By John Geree M.A. and pastour of Faith's under Pauls in London. Published by authority.	Geree, John, 1601?-1649.	1649 (1649)	Wing G598; Thomason E538_24; ESTC R18662	36,380	49

be supposed that by their Commission they were limited to judge only those enemies who were in Arms with the King and his partakers Those Parliament-men whom they have excluded have notoriously discovered themselves to be men of this engagement But was ever any accusation more unjust or senseless Did not they in the Treaty hold the King so hard to it as to justifie them and the Army in the war to the vertual condemning of himself and his And to grant all for which they ingaged against him and his party And can they for this be traduc'd as apparently friends and abettors of that party But he comes on with a third answer Page 4 5. That if the Parliaments call were warrantable to levy Forces against the King and his party then was the Armies call to act in the businesse under Debat● warrantable likewise But this consequence is very weak for the Parliament is the supreme Court and Councel in the Kingdom and in your apprehension I beleeve the supreme authority who were indeed called to that Trust by the people but being by their call made members of Parliament they became clothed with authority to consult and provide m●ans for the safety of themselves and the Nation according to the Laws and Constitutions of it And so issued out Commissions c. but this as private men they could not do But now the Army was not by any Commission clothed with any authority over the Parliament And therefore they cannot justifie their actings against the Parliament over whom they had no authority by what the Parliament did having so great authority yea in the conceit of our new Lords the greatest authority in the Land But he argues further Page 5 6. That if the Parliament-men by being made Parliament-men had formally and really power to raise an Army then that Army hath power to act whatsoever lies within the verge of their Commission c. This is not doubted But the thing which we doubt and deny is That the tenor of their Commission should be by strong hand to suppress all that by rationall grounds they should judg enemies of the peace of the Kingdom without dependance on Parliamentary judgment for they were as raised so to be regulated by the Parliament in their proceedings The power of judging being reserved in the Parliament The power of executing committed to the Army especially in case of doubt or difference Never would never did any State raise an Army on other terms unles they meant to make them Lords not Servants For who is likely to be more skilful in judging what is conducible to peace and publick weal A Councel of War or a Councel of State Therefore its clear that the Army in assuming power to judg their raisers authoritatively and so using force against them have exceeded the bounds of their Commission falsifyed trust and are injurious usurpers on the Parliament men Sect. 5. But he raiseth an Objection That it is not likely that the Parliament would give Commission to act against themselves He answers pag. 6. 1 That Law-givers when in their righe mindes may give out Laws against mad men which may be put in execution against themselves when they become mad And in case any of the Parliament men from whom the Commission issued had turned Cavaliers c. But this is a wilde answer for the excluded Parliament-men are in the same way and in the same principles in which they first gave out Commissions that is to have the King home separated from his evil Counsellors that his Throne might be establish'd in righteousness Therefore to argue That because their Commission might have been used against them if they had left the Body that gave it and united with the Kings party that Now it may be so used when they continue in Parliament and act on the same principles on which they issued out the Commissions is as poor a come off as could be expected from the weakest Sophister Nor hath his 2 Answer any more strength where he affirms That what one * Traiane Emperor spake expresly to an inferior Officer is said implicitly to al inferior Officers by their superiors to use the power they have for them if they rule well against them if they rule ill pag. 6.7 for they are also for the punishment of evil-doers and that without partiality And S. Peter requires submission not only to the King as supreme but unto governors sent by him for the punishment of evil doers But first if there were nothing peculiar in that saying of Trajane why is it so often mentioned of him as a note of eminency and honor Again though inferior officers should use their power and be respected in the use of it yet they must also remember their limits A Justice of Peace hath power but it is with limits in regard of place which if he exceed though his act be never so just he usurps and is punishable And so is he limited also in regard of persons Subordinate Magistrates are to govern to be obeyed by those under them but they are to be governed by the powers above them and not exercise authority over them for their Commission extends not so far Though we are to be subject to subordinate Magistrates yet in case of opinion of wrong we may appeal from them as Paul to Caesar which shews the supreme Magistrate is to censure their Sentences not they his You might have spared that Scripture which here you too lightly bring in that in this Armies Commission there cannot be pretence for that exception which is in that of Christ 1 Cor. 15.27 But when he saith all things are put under him it is manifest that he is exempted that did put all things under him God the Father being incapable of sin For though the superiour magistrate is not exempt from sin yet is he excepted out of the Commission of the inferiour Magistrate because his superiour in Magistracie and Par in Parem much lesse inferior in superiorem in codem genere non habet potestatem equall hath no authority over his equall much lesse the inferiour over the superiour in the same kind especially where the supreme Magistrate thinkes he doth well for whose judgement shall controll shall the inferiours controll the superiour Neither doth Mr. Prinne or any judicious Divine that I know affirm that any other inferiour Magistrates but the representatives of a Kingdom shall take order with the restraining of Tyrants or if any inferiour Magistrate may do it yet they and the representatives are to proceed by taking order with their ministers which are under the penalties of the law and within the verge of authority And there is no usurpation in this when penalties are inflicted on them that are under jurisdiction But he adds If the Army had not so for mall a call as the Parliament yet had they a call as materiall for the one had it from the persons of the people and the other

once served their turnes to comply with the King against the minds of the Parliament and now to imprison Parliament men and to threaten the destruction of the King and who knowes what designe it may carry on next And is not this course a means to irritate an opposite party and who knowes where God may cast strength and then what a gallant plea is here for them Qu●dlibet audendi adventuring upon any thing Sect. 4. Lastly he argues 37. that if that action of the Army is not disproveable by any likelihood of evill that it may bring upon this Kingdom hereafter no more then preservation of a man from imminent death is reproveable because by it he is occasionally exposed to dye another time There were something in this if there were any iminency of death over our Nation but this is denied upon better grounds then they can give to the contrary and that by those that are the legall judges of it which the Army was not You adde they who conceive the Army had better have sate still for feare of after disturbance plead as if a man shall counsell a friend dangerously sick not to use a Physician because if he do recover his recovery might prove an occasion of more sicknesse afterwards But this answer hath wit without reason for first it presupposeth that to bee sicknesse of the Common-wealth which indeed was good Physick for her recovery And secondly to make the similitude hit the Physick that is disswaded must be to have an influence by the hazardous cure of one malady to have procured more And truely I should not think him mad but wise that should disswade such Physick nor is the example of Hezekiah any better that he was to be thankefull for his recovery though hee were to dye fifteene yeares after For first it runs upon the former false supposition And secondly that which recovered Hezekiah was not the cause of his death afterwards But here it is objected against the medicine that hee saith revives that it will have an influence to kill afterwards Nay after a pretended cure that medicine which he saith revives is not like to preserve long not fifteene yeares nor fifteene moneths for where there is one in the Kingdom that accounts this act of the Army medicine it 's conceived there be an hundred that count it a cup of poyson and so to be broken And what a Paroxysme this is like to beget shortly in this poor Kingdom let the prudent Reader judge CHAP. VI. Sect. 1. Master Goodwin proceeds to a sixth Objection counted hee saith by some impregnable It is taken from Rom. 13.1.2 Let every soule be subject to the higher powers for the powers that be are ordained of God He therefore that resisteth the powers resisteth the Ordinance of God and they that resist shall receive to themselves damnation And this I doubt not will yeild an Argument too hard for Master Goodwin to answer or else sure all Protestant Divines have been much mistaken It may be formed thus VVHosoever resisteth the higher powers resists the Ordinance of God and receive to himself damnation The Army in secluding and imprisoning Parliament men did resist the higher powers therefore thereby they did resist the Ordinance of God and receive to themselves damnation For the minor Master Goodwin will not deny but the Parliament are higher powers to which the Army are to be subject This he saith he hath considered in the second objection yet because he would give surplusage in such urguments as pretend to Scripture he will take it in hand againe let us see whether he can acquit himselfe better then he did before And first he presents us with a distanction betweene the power and the abuse of the power the abuse of the power is not of God pag. 38. and so the resistance of that not forbidden nor damnable Now that the Army did only resist the abuse of the power he saith he hath proved in his book And I reply that it hath been as often disproved in my Answer Again this distinction between the powers and abuse of powers is to be taken with caution or else it may deceive Mr Burroughs his distinction in his Lord of Hoasts page 32. contains better divinity which is between the commands of abused anthority and the commands that are from the wills of men in authority That is abused authority when those to whom power of making lawes doth belong shall make evill lawes in this case there is no help but passive obedience or flight untill some way bee taken to rectifie the authority that is abused that is disannulling those evill lawes but when men that are in authority command any thing out of their wils c. So that in his judgement abuse of authority being legall is to be borne with patience not resisted by violence And indeed if we consider that these powers were in St. Pauls times Heathens and how bloudy their lawes were against Christians and how impious they were in many other things one might judge it had been sitter after Master Goodwins light to have taught them his new doctrine of resistance rather then to have prest subjection on them Magistracy is the Ordinance of God the lawes of the land the rule of it while it keepes within that sphere though the lawes be corrupt the Magistrate is no tyrant so he is a power ordained of God and we are to be subject in obeying or suffering but may not resist Sect. He adds pag. 35. it is manifest that they did not resist Parliamentary power because this power remaines quiet and indisturbed but is he in good earnest Is not Parliamentary power a power represence of the whole Nation Doth it remayn undisturbed when so great a part are secluded and so many thereupon think it unlawfull for them to handle the affaires of the Nation without the concurrence of their fellow Trustees that as they say ordinarily searce a sixth part of that number that ought to sit meet in the House Secondly he sayth that they have care to settle Parliamentary power on better tearms Yes by their new Modell What disturbers of present Governance were over found without that pretence but how few if ever any effected it He objects against himself That the Parliamentary pawer is under force now He answers That they are no more under force now then they were before the Army secluded the Members I answer Why is that which hee cals Parliamentary power free from force now but because they act after the Armies misguided fancy but should they crosse them in their Idoll Designe doth Mr Iohn Goodwin think they would be more exempt from * One Parliament man told me that as he was comming from the House the day after the seizing one of the Souldiers cryed roome roome another said knock him down so he never came there since Was not hee forced a way And are not many m●●● not of their principles kept away in like manner