Selected quad for the lemma: hand_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
hand_n	david_n	enemy_n	lord_n	6,577	5	4.4912	4	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A41307	Observations concerning the original and various forms of government as described, viz. 1st. Upon Aristotles politiques. 2d. Mr. Hobbs's Laviathan. 3d. Mr. Milton against Salmatius. 4th. Hugo Grotius De jure bello. 5th. Mr. Hunton's Treatise of monarchy, or the nature of a limited or mixed monarchy / by the learned Sir R. Filmer, Barronet ; to which is added the power of kings ; with directions for obedience to government in dangerous and doubtful times.	Filmer, Robert, Sir, d. 1653.	1696 (1696)	Wing F920; ESTC R32803	252,891	546

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 Condemn their Soveraign Prince The Subject is not only 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 Counsel or Consent thereto yea if he have Concealed the same or but so much as Thought it Which Fact the Laws 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 died in whole and perfect Estate except he have conspired against the Life and Dignity of his Soveraign Prince This only thing they have thought to be such as that for which he may worthily seem to have been now already judged and Condemned yea even before he was thereof Accused And albeit the Laws inflict no Punishment upon the Evil Thoughts of men but on those only 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 Laws 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 razed it down to the ground burnt the Temple and defiled 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 himself 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 Jews then in Captivity in Babylon will 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 himself 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 than he who not contented to be Himself Worshipped 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 evil Spirit caused the Priests of the Lord to be without just Cause slain 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 himself into David's Hands who blamed of his Souldiers for that he would not suffer his so mortal Enemy then in his power to be Slain being in assured Hope to have enjoyed the Kingdom after his Death he detested their Counsel saying God forbid that I should suffer the Person of a King the Lords Anointed to be violated Yea he himself 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 slain and that a Souldier thinking to do David a pleasure presented him with Saul's Head David caused the same Souldier to be Slain 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 Himself 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 Himself being become Stronger than the King besides he was the Chosen of God and Anointed by Samuel to be King and had Married the King's 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 Rebel against him but chose rather to Banish himself out of the Realm than in any sort to seek the Kings Destruction We doubt not but David a King and a Prophet led by the Spirit of God had always before his Eyes the Law of God Exod. 22.28 Thou shalt not speak Evil of thy Prince nor detract the Magistrate neither is there any thing more common in Holy Scripture than the forbidding not only to Kill or Attempt the Life or Honour of a Prince but even for the very Magistrates although saith the Scripture They be Wicked and Naught The Protestant Princes of Germany before they entred into Arms against Charles the Emperour demanded of Martin Luther if it were Lawful for them so to do or not who frankly told them That it was not Lawful whatsoever Tyranny or Impiety were pretended yet was he not therein by them Believed so thereof ensued a Deadly and most Lamentable War the End whereof was most Miserable drawing with it the Ruine of many great and noble Houses of Germany with exceeding slaughter of the Subjects The Prince whom you may justly call the Father of the Country ought to be to every man Dearer and more Reverend than any Father as one Ordained and Sent unto us by God The Subject is never to be suffered to Attempt any thing against the Prince how Naughty and Cruel soever he be lawful it is not to obey him in things contrary to the Laws of God to Flie and Hide our selves from him but yet to suffer Stripes yea and Death also rather than to Attempt any thing against his Life and Honour O how many Tyrants should there be if it should be lawful for Subjects to kill Tyrants How many good and innocent Princes should as Tyrants perish by the Conspiracy of their Subjects against them He that should of his Subjects but exact Subsidies should be then as the Vulgar People esteem him a Tyrant He that should Rule and Command contrary to the good Liking of the People should be a Tyrant He that should keep strong Guards and Garrisons for the safety of his Person should be a Tyrant He that should put to death Traitors and Conspirators against his State should be also counted a Tyrant How should good Princes be assured of their Lives if under colour of Tyranny they might be Slain by their Subjects by whom they ought to be

case you or any other Sheriff of our said Kingdom shall be elected And at the Day and Place aforesaid the said Election made in the full County-Court you shall certifie without Delay to Us in our Chancery under your Seal and the Seals of them which shall be present at that Election sending back unto Us the other part of the Indenture aforesaid affiled to these Presents together with this Writ Witness our Self at Westmin By this Writ we do not find that the Commons are called to be any part of the Common Councel of the Kingdom or of the Supream Court of Judicature or to have any part of the Legislative Power or to Consult de arduis regni negotiis of the Difficult Businesses of the Kingdom The Writ only says the King would have Conference and Treat with the Prelates Great men and Peers but not a Word of Treating or Conference with the Commons The House of Commons which doth not minister an Oath nor fine nor imprison any but their own Members and that but of late in some Cases cannot properly be said to be a Court at all much less to be a part of the Supream Court or highest Judicature of the Kingdom The constant Custom even to this day for the Members of the House of Commons to stand bare with their Hats in their Hands in the Presence of the Lords while the Lords sit covered at all Conferences is a visible Argument that the Lords and Commons are not fellow-Commissioners or fellow-Counsellors of the Kingdom The Duty of Knights Citizens and Burgesses mentioned in the Writ is only ad Faciendum Consentiendum to Perform and to Consent to such things as should be ordained by the Common Councel of the Kingdom there is not so much mentioned in the Writ as a Power in the Commons to dissent When a man is bound to appear in a Court of Justice the words are ad Faciendum Recipiendum quod ei per curiam injungetur which shews that this Word Faciendum is used as a Term in Law to signifie to give Obedience For this we meet with a Precedent even as ancient as the Parliament-Writ it self and it is concerning Proceedings in Parliament 33 Ed. 1. Dominus Rex mandavit vicecom ' quod c. summon ' Nicolaum de Segrave ex parte Domini Regis firmiter ei injungeret quod esset coram Domino Rege in proximo Parl. c. ad audiendum voluntatem ipsius Domini Regis c. Et ad faciendum recipiendum ulterius quod curia Domini Regis consideraret in Praemissis Our Lord the King commands the Sheriff to summon Nicholas Segrave to appear before our Lord the King in the next Parliament to hear the Will of the Lord our King himself and to perform and receive what the Kings Court shall further consider of the Premises Sir Edw. Coke to prove the Clergy hath no Voice in Parliament saith that by the Words of their Writ their Consent was only to such things as were ordained by the Common Councel of the Realm If this Argument of his be good it will deny also Voices to the Commons in Parliament for in their Writ are the self-same Words viz. to consent to such things as were ordained by the Common Councel of the Kingdom Sir Edw. Coke concludes that the Procuratores Cleri have many times appeared in Parliament as Spiritual Assistants to Consider Consult and to Consent but never had Voice there how they could Consult and Consent without Voices he doth not shew Though the Clergy as he saith oft appeared in Parliament yet was it only ad consentiendum as I take it and not ad faciendum for the Word Faciendum is omitted in their Writ the cause as I conceive is the Clergy though they were to assent yet by reason of Clerical Exemptions they were not required to Perform all the Ordinances or Acts of Parliament But some may think though the Writ doth not express a Calling of the Knights Citizens and Burgesses to be part of the Common Councel of the Kingdom yet it supposeth it a thing granted and not to be questioned but that they are a part of the Common Councel Indeed if their Writ had not mentioned the Calling of Prelates Great men and Peers to Councel there might have been a little better colour for such a Supposition but the truth is such a Supposition doth make the Writ it self vain and idle for it is a senseless thing to bid men assent to that which they have already ordained since Ordaining is an Assenting and more than an Assenting For clearing the meaning and sense of the Writ and Satisfaction of such as think it impossible but that the Commons of England have always been a part of the Common Councel of the Kingdom I shall insist upon these Points 1. That anciently the Barons of England were the Common Councel of the Kingdom 2. That untill the time of Hen. 1. the Commons were not called to Parliament 3. Though the Commons were called by Hen. 1. yet they were not constantly called nor yet regularly elected by Writ until Hen. 3. time For the first point Mr. Cambden in his Britannia doth teach us that in the time of the English Saxons and in the ensuing Age a Parliament was called Commune Concilium which was saith he Praesentia Regis Praelatorum Procerumque collectorum the Presence of the King Prelates and Peers assembled No mention of the Commons the Prelates and Peers were all Barons The Author of the Chronicle of the Church of Lichfield cited by M. Selden saith Postquam Rex Edvardus c. Concilio Baronum Angliae c. After King Edward was King by the Councel of the Barons of England he revived a Law which had lain asleep three score seven years and this Law was called the Law of St. Edward the King In the same Chronicle it is said that Will. the Conquerour anno regni sui quarto apud Londin ' had Concilium Baronum suorum a Councel of his Barons And of this Parliament it is that his Son Hen. 1. speaks saving I restore you the Laws of King Edward the Confessor with those amendments wherewith my Father amended them by the Councel of his Barons In the fifth year as Mr. Selden thinks of the Conquerour was a Parliament or Principum conventus an Assembly of Earls and Barons at Pinenden Heath in Kent in the Cause between Lanfranke the Arch-bishop of Canterbury and Odo Earl of Kent The King gave Commission to Godfrid then Bishop of Constance in Normandy to represent His own Person for Hearing the Controversie as saith M. Lambard and caused Egelrick the Bishop of Chichester an aged man singularly commended for Skill in the Laws and Customes of the Realm to be brought thither in a Wagon for his Assistance in Councel Commanded Haymo the Sheriff of Kent to summon the whole County to give in Evidence three whole days spent in Debate in the End Lanfrank