Selected quad for the lemma: kingdom_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
kingdom_n	king_n	people_n	subject_a	1,872	5	7.6486	4	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A86677	Lazarus's sores licked; or, An answer to these three positions: I: that Christ paid tribute to Cæsar. II. That Cæsar was an usurper in Judea, and had onely bare possession, but no right at all. III. That bare possession, without any right to a throne, gives title sufficient to the usurper, and is ground sufficient for people to subject to that usurper.	Hall, Edmund, 1619 or 20-1687.	1650 (1650)	Wing H326; Thomason E615_19; ESTC R202495	17,108	24

unto them for me and thee Now saith he though Matth. 22. 19 20 21 prove nothing but that Caesar had the possession not the right yet since in Matth. 17. 24 25 it was the practice of Christ to pay Tribute to Caesar it was also the opinion of Christ in Matth. 22 that Tribute ought to be paid to Caesar an Usurper who had possession but no right by those that had right to the Crown yet were out of possession and that because the practice of Christ and the opinion of Christ were one and the same otherwise we should make a strange Christ of him But he did pay Tribute to Caesar Mat. 17. 24 25. though he were by right King of the Jewes but out of possession By this 't is manifest that the Doctor holds these opinions upon which he grounds his Discourse 1. That Christ paid Tribute to Caesar 2. That Caesar was an Usurper one that had no right but bare possession onely of the Kingdome of Judea 3. That bare possession without any right is ground sufficient for any people to subject to that power Now because I am resolved to be briefe I will avoid all ambages and forthwith enter the list and grapple with the Doctor by denying every one of these Propositions viz. 1. Christ did never pay Tribute nor give order to Peter to pay Tribute to Caesar 2. That Caesar had more then bare possession of the Kingdome of Judea 3. That bare possession without any right as it gives no true Title to any power so neither is it a sufficient ground for any people to subject to such a power 1. Christ did never pay or order any Tribute to be paid to Caesaer This I prove thus 1. Argum. If the Scripture no where prove it then there is no ground for me to believe it But the Scripture no where proves it Ergo 2. Argum. If those Scriptures alleaged for to prove Christs paying of Tribute prove the contrary then I am bound to believe the contrary But these Scriptures alleaged prove the contrary Ergo The onely place alleadged to prove that Christ paid Tribute to Caesar is Matth. 17. 24. 27. where the Collectors of the Didrachme came to Peter to demand it of him and his Master in verse 27. Christ bids Peter pay a Stater for himself and Christ his Master and he doth it Now this they say was Tribute-money to Caesar Not onely the Doctor but many learned men are of this opinion In the Margin of one Bible I finde these words This was an Attick Didrachme which the Romans exacted after they had subdued Judea So saith Deodat's But Beza denies that for saith he Hoc postea factum the Romans did not exact this money untill 75 yeeres after the birth of Christ Joseph de Bello Judaico Lib. 7. Cap. 26. Therefore he refers it to Matth. 22. 17. where the word Census he thinkes containes both the Didrachmes that Christ paid which Taxe he conceives was a Taxe of Augustus which he laid upon every head because Peter and Christ paid a certain sum I do not know in any thing that Beza stumbles and rambles so much as in this He proves out of Josephus that the Didrachme was never paid away from the Temple untill 75 yeeres after Christs birth and therefore he conjectures 't was some other certaine Taxe laid upon every person by the Romans but brings not the least proofe for it out of Scripture or History that the Romans exacted the Didrachme Some other learned men conjecture that Augustus exacted this Didrachme when Cirenius was Governour Luke 2. 1. when all the world was taxed but neither Dio Chrysostom nor Josephus nor any other Historian that ever I heard of maketh mention that the Didrachme should be put upon every mans head Indeed there were Surveys taken of the Grounds and Mechanicks names taken Luke 2. 1. Vt discriberetur totus terrarum orbis id est ut discriptis omnium Civitatum capitibus intelligeretur quae cujusque regionis vrbis familiae domus facultates essent saith Beza and Deodate is of the same opinion but this is farre from proving that the Romans exacted the Didrachme of the Jewes Cornelius è lapide is of opinion that this Didrachme which Peter paid was not sacrum but prophanum and that it was paid to the Romans and he onely endeavours to give reasons for this opinion the one is from Christs words to Peter ver. 26. Of whom doth the Kings of the earth demand Tribute or Custome There the word Censum saith he declares it to be not the money of the Sanctuary but the Kings money the Roman Tribute for the word Census is a Romane word which signifies the Estimation or Valuing of goods But grant all that Cornelius è lapide saith his consequence will not hold that therefore that which Peter paid was money to Caesar because Christ to shew Peter how little reason they had to exact it from him who was born King of the Jewes and was the naturall Son of the King of kings puts an allusive question to him or as Chrysostome holds proposeth an argument à minore ad majus drawing it thus from Peters Concession If Kings of the earth do not exact Tribute from their naturall Sonnes being of the Royall bloud because 't was their Prerogative royall to receive then much less reason have these to demand this money of me who am their King and the naturall Son of the King of kings to whom of right this Tribute belongs For this was no other money then the Shekel of the Sanctuary and for that end it was gathered and for that end it was paid as we shall prove anon So that Cornelius è lapide's reason is invalid unless he will also thence inferre that Christ was of the Royall blood of the Caesars and Christ drew the force of his reason from thence which no man will affirm His other Argument is false which he grounds upon Josephus lib. 14. Antiq. cap. 8. where he saith after that Pompey had won the City Jerusalem by conquest he subdued them to the Romans and from that day exacted the Didrachme Whereas Josephus speaks not one word of the Didrachme He saith As for Jerusalem he made it Tributary to the Romans taking away from the Jewes those Cities in Coelosyria which they had Conquered and assigning them a proper and peculiar government Pompey was so farre from robbing the Temple of the Didrachme that saith Josephus in the same Book and Chapter though he saw the Table of Gold and golden Candle-stick with divers other rare and precious things in the Temple besides two thousand talents of silver there put through the reverence he had of God he touched nothing of all which he saw So that è Lapide's Reasons herein are both destitute of strength and truth and therefore none at all I finde learned Weemes and Godwin no less learned in the Jewish Antiquities both of this opinion that Christ paid this Didrachme

arise and contrary to their Vows Oathes Protestations and Covenants rise up against overthrow imprison behead and overtop the three Estates all which three never resigned the least of their power but all three openly protested against them as publike enemies to the Kingdome and Traytors I say in such a case notwithstanding that party be in possession and have suppressed the ancient Government of the Kingdome yet this gives them no just Title to the Government neither doth it disengage people from their former Oaths to the ancient Government nor oblige the People to subject to the Usurper For if this should be true that an Usurper that hath no right but being in possession ought therefore to be subjected to then this must necessarily follow that all resistance made against an Usurper is Treason or Rebelion and then the Priests and the Captaines and People in 2 King 11. who deposed Athaliah the Usurper and set up the lawfull heire the Kings Son in her stead rebelled but the Scripture doth not affirme anywhere that they were Rebels or Traytors nor dares any sober-minded man affirme it I shall say no more but this because I am unwilling to exceed or be tedious upon this Discourse that he that shall affirme that Obedience is due to an Usurper because he is in possession of the Throne affirmes that which 1. Iscontrary to the Law of God 2. To the Law of Nature 3. He maintains a damnable sin 1. He opposeth the Law of God for the fifth Commandment injoynes every man Honour thy Father and thy Mother Now an Usurper is he that deposeth and murthereth my Civil Father and I am no more bound to obey him then the natural Son is bound to observe him who murthers his Father on purpose to take possession of his family and estate nor no more then the Apostles were bound to obey Judas because he betrayed his Master though he should have got Christs Coat on after he had murthered him Againe 'T is contrary to that Commandment Thou shalt not steal for he that gives to an Usurper that which is due to his lawfull Magistrate plainly robbs his Magistrate of his due S. Paul injoynes the Romans to pay Tribute to whom Tribute is due but no Tribute is due no nor Honour to an Usurper one that hath neither Humane nor Divine right Indeed many times people have been forced to pay Tribute to an Usurper and to sit silent under the Tyranny of Usurpers but a forced subjection is so far from being an argument that subjection is due that it proves the contrary 'T is contrary to that Command Thou shalt not beare false witnesse against thy neighbour for in subjecting voluntarily to an Usurper the lawful Magistrate is slandered as a Tyrant and an Usurper and the Tyrant and Usurper is honoured as a lawful Magistrate 'T is also contrary to that Commandment Thou shalt not kill for in setting up and worshipping the Usurper the Authority Honour and Majestie of the lawfull Magistrate is stifled and killed and as Augustine saith He that goeth about to destroy a King as much as in him lies indeavours to dethrone God for Kings are Gods representatives on earth But I shall bring the Fathers anon within the Ordinance of speaking Treason 2. 'T is contrary to the law of Nature for Justice which is the Queene of Nature's Laws bids me Suum cuique tribuere give to every one his due It forbids me to give that to the Servant which is due to the Master it forbids me to set the Foot where the Head should be and the Head where the Foot should be Solomon observed this as a great evil which he saw Princes on foot and Servants on horseback If that were so great an evil what would he have said if he had seen Princes heads on the block and their sworn servants yea those that were scarce worthy to eat with the doggs of their flock judging and condemning their Masters heads to be cut off This sin is so much against the light of Nature that the Ravens of the field shall pick out his eyes that is so presumptious as to behold such iniquity with approbation But this sin and great evil even against Nature are they guilty of who shall yeeld subjection and obedience to those who are such Usurpers inasmuch as they allow of all their actions and justifie their authority 3. 'T is a damnable sin to subject to Usurpers who have no Right but bare Possession because they that so subject themselves resist the powers that are ordained of God Rom. 13. 2. and they that resist shall receive to themselves damnation Now he that subjects to an Usurper who in the sight of all the world hath by Treason against the Higher Powers got possession of the Throne consents to and allowes of the evil of the Usurper and so comes into the same condemnation with him If under the Law Lev. 20. 9. He that cursed his Father was surely to be put to death of how much greater judgement is he worthy who shall crucifie his Civil Parents the Parents of the Kingdome who shall presume to make by his Rebellion and Treason a whole Kingdome Fatherlesse This sinne of Rebellion is so abominable that in one place 't is put in the ballance with Witch-craft to shew that Witches and Rebels as they are two abominable parties in a Kingdome so they are fittest to be linked together They are fit Companions the one renounceth his Allegiance to God and the other renounceth his Allegiance to Gods Vicegerent to his Soveraigne In deuteronom. 27. vers. 16. the second Curse to which all the People were to say Amen was this Cursed be he that setteth light by his Father and Mother This is put next to the Curse of the Idolater to shew that Rebellion against a lawful Magistrate is next to Rebellion against the Sacred Majesty of God himselfe Now if Rebellion be so great sinne in those that act it How much greater is their sinne that set up such Rebels in the Throne and by subjecting to them give them the Honour due to those they murthered and dethroned If God doth say Thou shalt not suffer a Murtherer to live that God saith Thou shalt not exalt and magnifie that Murtherer I shall conclude all with Revel. 13. vers. 4. where Christ himselfe stiles those that subject to an usurped power Worshippers of the Dragon Vers 1. The Beast of the Sea that is a Beast rising out of the Church that is say learned Interpreters the Government by Popes Vers 2. The Popes got to their greatnesse by Subtilty and Murther and Treason by dethroning their lawfull Masters the Roman Emperours Vers 3. All the World wondered after this Beast that is the greatest part of the Western Empire subjected to the Pope and this subjection to the Pope that Grand Usurper is called Vers 4. Devil-worship And they worshipped the Dragon and why the Dragon Because he gave power to the Beast Usurpers have not the power from God but from the Devil and he that subjects to an Usurper subjects to the Devil Now as for that man that dares presume to preach for subjection to Usurpers and bring our blessed Lord and Saviour for an example I pity that man and wish him hearty and speedy repentance before that God whom he hath blasphemed by a ly fall upon him FINIS ' Ei {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} Chrysost. in Mat. 17. a {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} Chrysost. Hom. 56. in Matth. 17. Those that endeavour to read this text otherwise offer violence to the Hebrew copie

the Doctor's we contradict by affirming that bare Possession without Right gives no true Title to any Power neither is it ground for any people to subject to such a power This my Position hath been already proved by more learned Pens therefore the less shall be said at this time onely we 'll state what bare possession meanes rightly by putting a right Case We 'll suppose that Eutopia's Kingdome is governed by a King whose power is measured by the Lawes of his Kingdome which are the rules of government those Lawes are made not by the King alone but by a Convention of to Estates who are joyned in equal power with the King in making a Law for those two Estates have Negative voices which is their grand priviledge equal with the King In this respect there is no Subordination in the three Estates sitting for they are concauses of the same effect which admits not of Subordination Yet this King is Principium Caput Finis Parliamenti for he is Primus motor he is created by none nor chosen by none but he creates the Lords who make one of the two Estates which he assembles to him to make a Law and the other by vertue onely of the Kings Writs Summons are inabled to be chosen by the People and sent up to the place mentioned in the King's Summons there to consult de arduis Regni This King hath power to continue or to dissolve a Parliament when he pleaseth but this power he invests his Parliament with which done He and the Parliament differ whereupon the King forsakes his Parliament which by Law he cannot do the Parliament sitting for neither of the three Estates can depart upon any pretence from the other two withoutt he joynt consent of the whole if either do the other two will act protempore as if the third were present because otherwise through the obstinacie of one the whole would run to ruine by reason of the third's absence This difference at last breakes into a Civil War betwixt the King and the two Estates whereupon necessity inforceth the two Estates to lay hold on the Kings Sword the Militia which was the Kings undoubted Right and the Parliament could not have touched it had the King continued with them The King complains that the Parliament takes away his right the Parliament say the King 's mistaken and misled by evil Popish Councel who under pretence of establishing him seeke his ruine and the ruine of Religion and the Parliament they protest they intend not to take it from him but secure it for him which they may do in time of such apparent danger and to shew their Loyalty they voluntarily enter into a Solemn League and Covenant to defend Religion Lawes Parliaments and the Kings Person against Papists on the one hand and Sectarians on the other hand After they have thrown down the Papists party who were the King and Parliaments Enemies on the one hand up starts a Subtile Politick Religious Hypocrite who by undermining and supplanting his betters gets at last to have the power of the whole Militia of the Kingdome in his hands which when he hath it contrary to his former Oathes Vows Protestations and Covenant all which he solemnly took in publicke he lays violent hands on the King allures by promises and terrifies by threats the two Estates who hereupon are divided the timerous and guilty party flie to this Hypocrite who presently ingageth them to live and die with him which done by the power of his Sword he removes those that did oppose him and puts in his own party who vote what he commands them This done he claps up the King close prisoner and then puts on his party to inforce him to resigne his power which the whole Kingdome seeing rise up in Armes against this Traiterous Hypocrite and divert Him and his and party from proceeding in their intended designe Whereupon the two Estates assemble and sit freely and vote a Treaty with the King The King yeelds to it and signes the Propositions especially these three 1. To root out Popery 2. To establish the Protestant Religion 3. To give the power of the Militia to the Parliament This the two Estates vote to be sufficient ground for the setling of the Kingdomes Peace Hereupon this aspiring Hypocritical Traytor persorce pulls down those that voted this and sets up againe his own party which were formerly ingaged to him Whereupon the secluded Members make this Protest We the Knights Commons and Burgesses of the Parliament above a hundred in number being forcibly seized on and kept by violence from sitting in the House do in our owne and the names of the Counties for which we serve protest to the Kingdome that since the execrable force upon our Persons against our Ordinances and Commands all Acts or Votes made or to be made during our restraint are null and void and all Assistants or Abettors in the same Treasonable armed violence are hereby proclaimed open Enemies and professed Perverters of the Kingdomes Priviledges Thus the third Estate protesteth notwithstanding the pact party in the third Estate of the Kingdome of Eutopia sits by the power of the aspiring Trayterous Hypocrite who hath the power of the Militia thorowout the Kingdom into his hands these few proceed in their exorbitant and illegal courses to destroy the chiefe of the three Estates and for this end desire the said Estate of Lords to joyne with them which by the law of Nature they cannot do for neither of the three Estates are capable of being attached as Estates for then two might joyne together to destroy any one of the three and so the Government must necessarily by its own power be confounded The Lords reject the motion hereupon this pact party by the power of the Sword which now was wholly theirs clap a Lock and a Guard upon the doore of the House of the second Estate of Lords and forthwith dubb themselves Kings by voting these three Votes 1. That the People are the original of just Power 2. That the Commons are the Supreame power of the Nation 3. That whatsoever is declared by the House of Commons to be Law hath the force of a Law Against this the House of Lords who are the second Estate in the Government of the Kingdome protest as also against their violence in secluding them from sitting in the Parliament This pact party proceed by their owne power and erect a Court and appoint the men who shall sit judge and condemne the King who is the first Estate who upon the Scaffold where they behead him protesteth that would he have yeelded to have given away his power he needed not to have come there but for the Government Lawes and Liberties of the Kingdome he there died a Martyr Now in such a Case where a whole Kingdome is ingaged by Oathes Vows Protestations and Covenants to defend their lawfull Governours and Government all the dayes of their life if such a party shall