Selected quad for the lemma: law_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
law_n	common_a	king_n	time_n	5,545	5	3.5263	3	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A62252	Toleration with its principal objections fully confuted, or, An answer to a book intituled, Sions groans for her distressed, &c. offered to the Kings Majesty, Parliament, and people wherein is pretended to be proved by Scripture, reason, and authority of fifteen ancients, that equal protection under different perswasions is the undoubted right of Christian liberty, but, hereby confuted : wherein the power and proceedings of the Kings Majesty and the Church are vindicated / by H.S.	H. S. (Henry Savage), 1604?-1672.	1663 (1663)	Wing S765; ESTC R24513	70,771	96

distribution of the civil power the Bishop residing in the City or chief place all the Clergy of inferiour places within his Diocess are subjest to him as he is to the Archbishop which is answerable to what the Apostles at first did practise in the very beginning of Christianity and was followed by after times as is observed by Dr. Hammond out of Acts 14. and 15. c. and made good against the Animadversions on the Dissertations touching Ignatius's Epistles c. 7. sect 6. His words are these According to the image of the civil government among the Jews and the like again in their Temple forementioned the Apostles appeared to have disposed of Churches every where and in a●● their plantations to have constituted a subordination and dependance of the Churches in the inferiour cities to those in the chief or metropoles An example of this we have in the story of the Acts concerning Syria and Cilicia and the several Cities thereof in relation to Antioch the Metropolis For when the Question Acts 15. 2. was referred and brought to Jerusalem from the Church peculiarly of Antioch c. 14. 26. and 15. 3. and the Decree of the Council return'd to them by whom the Question was proposed h. e. to the Church at Antioch ver 22. yet in the Epistle wherein the Decree was contained we find the Brethren through Syria and Cilicia i. e. all the Christians of that Province to be expressed and joyned with those of Antioch ver 23. And after when that Decretal Epistle was delivered to the Church of Antioch ver 30. Paul and Silas went over Syria and Cilicia ver 41. and 42. and as they went they delivered to every City the Decrees of the Council c. 16. v. 4. which is an evidence that the churches of those cities related either immediately to Antioch or as Antioch it self did to Jerusalem and were in subordination to it as to the principal Metropolis of so wide a Province according to that of Philo that Jerusalem was in his time the Metropolis not of Jud●a alone but of many other regions in respect of the Colonies which it sent out of the Jews that dwelt in them naming Syria and Cilicia and divers others thus for the learned Doctor The same is proved out of Rev. 1. 14. John to the seven Churches in Asia where St. John directing his letters unto them thus indefinitely without any mention of their particular names he cannot by common intendment be conceived to have understood any other thereby but such as by some degree of eminency were distinguish●ble from all the rest of the churches that were in Asia and in some sort did comprehend all the rest under them for taking Asia here in the most strict sense for the Lydian or as the Imperial constitutions call it the Proconsular Asia it is not to be imagined that after so long pains taken by the Apostles and their disciples therein there should be found no more then seven churches especially since St. Luke Acts 19. 10 20. testifies that all they which dwelt in Asia heard the word of the Lord Jesus both Jews and Greeks so mightily grew the word of the Lord and prevailed And in particular among the Epistles of Ignatius there is one directed to the church in Trallis another to the church in Magnesia and both these were subject to the Metropolitane of Ephesus See the Archbishop of Armagh as above quoted And for these reasons as also for their eminence in learning and wisdom have all Christian Kings of this Realm ever consulted with them in the establishment of Laws We read in Lambert's 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and Mr. Selden's Titles of honour That the Laws of Ina King of the West-Saxons were made by the perswasion and appointment of his father Cenredus and of Hedda and Erkenwald Bishops with Senatours Elders and wise men of the people in a frequent assembly of the servants of God which was between the years 712. and 727. The Laws of Alured the first founder of this Monarchy were made by his authority as those of Ina had been by his but ex consulto sapientum by the advice of the wise which must include the Bishops 1. Because his Laws were grounded on Moses his Laws 2. Because nor these nor those of Ina did reach to life except in case of Treason against King or Master 3. Because he hereby allotted much of the Kingdom to Guthurn on condition of Guthuru's becoming Christian All which are things well beseeming the judgement of Bishops and are especially the first arguments sufficient to convince some of Errour that contend our Laws to have had their Original out of the twelve Tables This was anno 871. about 820. years since The Laws of Ethelstan anno 924. were made by the prudent counsel of Vlfhelme Archbishop and the rest of the Bishops c. wherein an estimate was made of all orders of men that then were or rather a declaration of the Common Law in that point As first The King was esteemed at 30000. Thrymsa's i. e. so many times three shillings an Archbishop at 15000. Thrymsa's a Bishop or Senatour at 8000. Thrymfa's a General of an army at 4000. one initiated in holy orders or a Thame i. e. a Noble man at 2000. whereby it appears that an Archbishop was double to any subject of the Kingdom besides and a Bishop equil to the greatest Lord in the Land and every Priest as good as the best Noble man under the degree of a Senatour so far are any of these orders from arrogating that they have lost much of that ancient honour which belonged unto them by the Common Law of this Nation King Edmund called together a frequent assembly of Ecclesiasticks and Laicks where Oda and Woolstan Archbishop were present with very many other Bishops for the sanction of Laws So did King Eldred anno 948. as Ingulphus testifies So Edgar and Canutus establisht Laws by the advice of the wise So did William the Conquerour with the concurrence of his Princes whereof the Archbishops must be a part since which time no Acts of Parliament are made without the Lords Spiritual And that these things were allowed to the Priests under the Old Testament no man will deny the proofs therein being so frequent pregnant But our adversaries here call for proofs out of the New whereunto I have shall answer hereafter in its due time place contenting my self at present with the Exposition of that one text of Mat. 19. 28. Ye which have followed me in the regeneration when the Son of man shall sit upon the Throne of his Glory ye also shall sit upon twelve Thrones judging the twelve Tribes of Israel This was spoken to the twelve Apostles which were Clergy men and the Predecessors of all Bishops where note that the comma should be put immediately after Me and in the regeneration referred to the Son of man sitting on the Throne of his glory which was immediately after the descent of the

of those which are dear to God they have as they say committed this to the view of all men c. These are the fears and Jealousies which have occasioned the spilling of so much innocent bloud as has b●●n of late shed which cries so lowd against the men of their generation as they call themselves that I do not wonder they are afraid of their own though they fear where no fear is till Cain became the shedder of his brother bloud he never cried that the next man which met him should slay him This fear and jealousy was then and is now a meer slander of the good Laws and practice of the King as I shall have occasion hereafter to shew Sect. 2. THis Epistle ended they date it the eighth day of the third moneth which of it self notes their inclination to thwart all the world though it be for nothing but their mindes sake And albeit they come with a seeming resolution of admitting of no proofs but what are taken out of the New Testament yet have no pattern at all for this their manner of dating but what they are beholden to the Old Testament for for in the New they have no footstep of it at all wherein they become guilty of a threefold vanity which I shall discover upon the resolution of three Queries 1. What the moneths in Scripture were 2. By what names they were called 3. When they began For answer to the first I say That the Hebrews seemd at first to measure their moneths according to the course of the Sun calling them MENSES SOLARES every moneth consisting of thirty daies for the Scripture ●aies that the waters prevailed from the seventeenth day of the second moneth Gen. 7. 11. unto the seventeenth day of the seventh moneth Gen. 8. 4. that is full five moneths and if we will number the daies they were one hundred and fifty Gen. 7. 24. whereby it is evident that every moneth contained full thirty daies After the Israelites departure out of Egypt they measured their moneths by the course of the Moon and because the year of the Synodical or consequential moneths of the Moon which are the longest of LUNAR moneths comes short of the year of the Sun by eleven daies and a fourth part hence the Jewes and Greeks too every eight years made an Embolisme 〈◊〉 an intercalation or interjection of three moneths as the Centurists have noted out of Affricanus Cen. 1. l. ● c. 10. And albeit St. Aug. de Civ Drei l. 15. c. 14. and with him others do hold that they reckoned by M●●ses LUNARES as well before as after the giving of the Law yet the same father in the same place gives to every moneth thirty daies whereas the full Synodical moneth of the Moon is but twenty nine daies twelve hours and fourty four minutes as Lud. Vives hath observed upon him whereunto Gareaus addes three seconds and twelve thirds Tract de Temp. Can. 17. These things being ●o they must tell us what moneths they mean whether the moneths of the Sun or the moneths of the Moon and if of the Moon then whether the periodical or Synodical moneth from the beginning whereof they reckon their eighth day otherwise they might have left out their date to this Epistle in as much as dates are to be certain For answer to the second Before the Captivity in Babylon the moneths in Scripture are almost all reckoned without name according to the order of their Calender by first second and third moneth c. After their return from Captivity they counted them all by names according to the example of the Ass●rians and Ch●ldeans amongst whom they lived and with whom the studie of the Mathematicks flourished some of those they borrowed from the Chaldeans whereof mention is made in Zachary Esther N●hemiah c. neither do I finde that under or after the Captivity they expressed their moneths at all by numeral words 'T is true that Luc. 1. 26 36. mention is made of the sixth moneth but it 's not to be 〈◊〉 of the general account of the whole year but of that particular thing viz. the sixth m●neth from the conception of John Baptist in the womb of his mother Elizabeth which compute might begin any day of any stated moneth as well as the first of the first moneth viz. any day of Jiar Sivan Thomus Cisleu c. as well as the first of Nis●● or Tisri and indeed the Ecclesiastical tradition is that this compute began ●ix moneths before the twenty fifth of March though those that are against the celebration of Christmass which depends hereon contend against it but their arguments are meerly destructive and brought to puzzle the truth not to prove any thing at all Now to apply all this If the people of God did not ●cruple to call their moneths by the same name as the Chaldeans did among whom they lived and never after by the first second and third c. as they had done before why do these men now begin to make it a matter of conscience to do otherwise and that without example in all the New Testament or in the Old Testament after the return from the Captivity or lastly of any reformed Church in Christendome which use the same name of moneths and the same order of their Calender as the State wherein they live does The third Querie is when the moneths mentioned in Scripture began their account of first second and third c for resolution whereof it will be requisite to answer to two Queries 1. What was the first moneth 2. When was the first day of that moneth To the first I answer That Buxtorse will tell you in his Jewish Synagogue out of the Talmud that the Jews had four seasons of the year which they called the first moneths in several respects But certain it is out of the Scripture it self that before their coming out of Egypt the moneth Tisri was their first moneth which began about the Autumnal Equinox for it is called the feast of Ingathering which is perfected in the end of the year Levit. 23. 39. and to the end of the old year immediately succeeds the beginning of the New the same continued for civil affairs After their coming out of Egypt their year began in the moneth NIS AN or ABIB which was about the Vernal Equinox Exod. 12. 2. Then it was that God first said This moneth shall be to thee the beginning of moneths viz. in order to sacred solemnities h. e. all the Ceremonies of the Law To the second I answer That of these moneths of the Hebrews no certain time of beginning can be shewen by reason of the anticipation of Equinoxes and the new Moons not recurring in the same moments of time The modern Jews and others that follow them refer the first moneth NIS AN to our March and it is manifest that this moneth was called the moneth of new fruits or ears of corn because then did the corn put

every word shall be established Deut. 19. 15. And is not the same rule given in the Gospel Mat. 18. 16 The want therefore of Urim and Thummim Oracle and extraordinary Prophets did not abolish the right use of the Magistrate for then after the Captivity the Jews had never had the right use of the Magistrate Now then if excellent Magistrates under the Law such as were Zorobabel and Nehemiab had no other advantages to Magistracy then we have under the Gospel their Arguments drawn from advantages which the Jews had above the Christians falls to the ground and nothing hinders but that we may have as good à Magistracy under the Gospel as they had under the Law and altogether as infallible too or rather I might have said as little fallible for that they were actually fallible is evident Neb. 7. 64 65. where we read that some of the Priests off-spring sought for the Register of their Genealogy but it could not be found What then The Tirshathà or Governour could not resolve it how it stood as formerly such things were done and therefore they were not to eat of the holy things till there stood up a Priest with Urim and Thummim which never came to pass And now I pray you where was their greater infallibility from this time to the coming of Christ which was the space of five hundred and thirty years then Magistrates have ever since had As for Ahab whom they urge to have erred I say that he erred not for want of advantages which others had but for want of an honest purpose of mind which hindered the right use of those advantages he being a man that had sold himself to do iniquity mean while he ceased not to be a Magistrate Another Argument they draw from the different dispensatious of the Gospel from those of the Law These dispensations are now adayes more talked of then explained or understood and least of all in this present affair The dispensations are differen●● ●ay they and why Because forsooth under the Gospel transgressors are not to be proceeded against as under Moses by external force and power God inpatience and long-suffering waiting on men Answ If transgressors are not to be proceeded against under the Gospel by external power how is it then said that the power beareth not the sword in vain and that it is the Minister of God to execute wrath on them that do evil Rom. 13. 4 By evil is understood all evil it being in materia necessarta according to that of Pro 208. A King that sitteth on the throne of judgement scattereth away all evil If all then it is evil committed as well in spiritual as secular things And then for patience and long-suffering towards sinners expecting their repentance as God is the same God so has his patience and long-suffering been heretofore as much as-now under the Gospel Was he not one hundred and twenty years before he brought the Floud upon the world of the ungodly And was he not grieved forty years with his people before he sware that they should not enter into his rest Psalm 95. and Heb. 3. Whereas now God expects a present embracing of grace offered 〈◊〉 Cor. 6. 2. Now is the accepted time future repentance 〈…〉 to be presumed upon But say they when any continues in disubedience to the Gospel his punishment is eternal in the world to come therefore as the Apostl● saith 1 Cor. 4. 5. Judge nothing before the time until the Lord come who will bring to light-hidden things of darkness and will make manifest the counsels of the hearts and then shall every man have praise of God Answ And so when any one continues in disobedience to the Law his punishment is eternal too But what is this place to a mans continuance in disobedience to the Gospel Is it not alledged by St. Paul himself a Preacher of the Gospel He would not be judged before the time for what for his not continuance in obedience to the Gospel Nothing less for he ever continued in obedience to it and ever preached it The Question was whether he were faithful in this his stewardship or no whereof they were not to be judges but God alone the searcher of the heart St. Paul himself knew nothing by himself yet was he not thereby justified The heart of man is deceitful above all things and if a man may be deceived in his own heart it were a rash thing to judge another mans and that before the time that the hidden things of darkness shall be brought to light and the secrets of all hearts shall be disclosed to the view of all men as now they are to God It is therefore rash and bottomless judgement that the Apostle here forbids not that which is passed upon good grounds and serious deliberation 2. It is ●aucy censure that is here forbidden to wit that they being private men should go about to censure their Apostle and Preacher when they were rather to be judged by him 3. It is impertinent judgement that is here forbidden in going about to judge the heart when man looketh on the outward appearance only and judgeth in matter of fact not in matter of thought and this is all the Magistrate himself pretends to wherein it is lawful for him to judge which is confirmed by the same Apostle 1 Cor. 2. 6. Are ye unworthy to judge the smallest matters and v. 4. he takes it for granted that they have judgement in things pertaining to this life But say they St. Paul 1 Tim. 1. 13. sayes that he was a blasphemen and a persecuter and if the mind of God had been that he should have suffered death in that condition how should he have had repentance 〈…〉 and been such a glorious instrument in the Church as 〈…〉 was Answ That it was neither the mind of God nor the duty of the Magistrate to cut off St. Paul for blasphemy before his conversion as this was and in the time of ignorance when nor he nor the Magistrates under whom he lived knew it to be blasphemy to speak against Christ or Christians Hence it was that he said that he obtained mercy The Jews knew not Christ to be the Lord of glory for had they known it they would not have crucified him Wherefore St. Peter shews them that a door of mercy was yet opened unto them The fame may be said of the Jews alledged by our Adversaries here The Jews were never yet converted to Christianity which may be the reason why they are not punished nor condemned for blasphemy against Christ But in that they say that the Jews are the greatest blasphemers of Christ that are on the earth this is true only implicitely for should they explicitly blaspheme they were worthy of punishment yea and were punished by the Imperial Laws as may be seen in Cod. Justiniani l. 1. c. 9. de Judaeis Celicolis where it is decreed That if any of those Judaei or Cael●●olae did attempt any

in our doings that will of God is to be followed which we have expresly declared unto us in the Word of God And as for the Emperours and Duke of Savoy 's tolerations together with that of Polonia and Rome it self alledged here for their defence I say it is one thing what they did upon State policy and another thing what they would have done had they not been under a necessity of doing it The King of Spain has made a peace with the Hollander notwithstanding his claim he makes to the Low Countries why because he has irons enough in the fire elsewhere The case was so with Ferdinand of Germany Emanuel of Savoy the State of Poland the Emperours of Rome a necessity lying upon them to do as they did but by the way I must tell you that there were Laws made against the Novatians before Justinian's time witness that before quoted out of the Code which was enacted by Theodosius and Valentinian against that rabble of Hereticks whereof the Novatians were a part and even that Law refers to others formerly made particularly against their Conventicles which they falsly called Churches Neither did the others want Laws against a liberty of Religion though they thought it necessary to tolerate it Which necessity ceasing the Popes as their following words would have it were the first preachers of force and violence in matters of Religion and yet it came not so far as death but the first that preached that Doctrine was Dominick the founder of the Order of begging Fryars Answ That as I conceive neither were the Popes the first preachers of force and violence neither was Dominick the first founder of begging Fryars for I have already proved that force in this case has been practised before taught by St. Austin and approved by God himself in giving men into the hands of Satan for the punishment of the flesh Nay did not the whole Christian world agree together upon the same principle in the holy war against Insidels which is more then we have undertaken to justify though the same power which was raised against them was turned against Christians upon the instigation of Dominick This Dominick was not the founder of begging Fryars for these owe their beginning to S. Francis of Assize but of a new order of working Fryars who being unable to maintain themselves by working were forced to piece out their maintenance by begging The new Order I call them for here even in this Island about six hundred years before Dominick the Monks of Bangor were about two thousand and one hundred that lived upon the work of their hands as Bede witnesseth Hist Eccles Gent. Ang. l. 2. c. 2. In the next place to the pretended iniustice of the executions that are urged to have been done in the reign of Henry the fou●th for m●tter of opinion I say that what was done was occasioned not so much for opinions as for the hostile manner that the assertors of those opinions assembled themselves in which was pernicious in it self and dangerous to the State These were called by several names one whereof was Lollards not as owing their beginning to Lollardus a German if I may have the liberty of conjecture but as being so called quasi Lowlords h. e. Levellers for in Acts and Monuments they are also written Lolleards the termination whereof comes near to the Scottish word Laird for Lord. In the last place it is objected Why are we so zealous against th●se we call Hereticks and yet great friends with drunkards and fornicatours and swearers and intemperate and idle persons c. Answ This Argument holds for those that are onely called Hereticks but are not certainly known to be so whereas that which is Heresy indeed is a spiritual drunkenness and a spiritual fornication and which usually carries along with it an interest destructive to the King and Church which Hereticks will fight for as eagerly as a corporal fornicatour will do for his Paramour and therefore more severely to be punished then corporal drunkenness in those that are guilty of it for it may be said of corporal drunkards as Caesar did of Dolabella whom he was advised to beware of I am not afraid said he of such fat perewig'd fellows as he they are the pale and the lean men that I stand in fear of meaning Cassius and Brutus so Plut. in vita Caesaris Yet this I adde namely that he who is a friend to an unbounded liberty of opinions such as these men contend for is a friend to drunkenness too inasmuch as he that hath liberty to think what he pleases in any thing for hither these men would extend liberty will judge it lawfull to take a cup too much a● sometimes And where have you greater drinking then amongst the Low-Countrey men where liberty of opinion is allowed In so much that a very famous man and he a publick Professour too failing his Auditours of a Lecture one day made an Apology for himself the next and said The reason was that he had been drunk over night This I had from one of the greatest friends they have in England and therefore not very likely to raise a false report of them And to let you know that this Nation observes no just measure in any thing appertaining to God or Caesar another hath expressed this their moral Scazon by a metrical one in these words Utrinque clauda Gens Batâva jampridem est Sed cur unde nosse vis id in promptu Deo rebellis rebellis est Regi Hi nonne summo ●ure 〈◊〉 cloud● Per omne 〈◊〉 omne per latus p●ssunt Quibus est sides luxata valga distorta Fide litasque facta loripes tata The Ba●avan on both feer goes awry Wouldst know the cau●e 〈…〉 thee by and by He 's Rebel both ' gainst God and ' gainst his Prince And he whose cheverel conscience can dispense With faith to th' one and fealty to th' other His legs and sides and all will halt together As for Disputations so much desired they are good in themselves but for the most part so partially reported that I have seldome known any good come of them for when men cannot confute what others say they will make them say what they can confute FINIS Errata Majora In the Contents Sect. 7. read Situation Sect 16. for 〈◊〉 read Romn read Lell●● pag. 8. lin 2. read 200. l. 23. read Ienerati● p. 11. l. 5. read stirred up p. 12. l. 1 read it this be not the very p. 15. l. 21. read Sacordotales p. 15. l. 27. read Dis 〈◊〉 ● 21. p. 17. l. 27. read de Imper. sum pot p. 22. l. ●● read Schedius and Dis. p. 25. l. ●● read Synode p. 26. l. 20. read Re●etin l. 29. read Ailes p. 27. l. 6. dele are l. 19. 〈◊〉 Azarias and Villalpandus l. 22. read Roman and d●le together p. 28. l. 6. read contin●ous l. 8. read plane l. 11. read an ablong l. 14. read given l. 15. dele colon l. 22. rea● seem l' 20. read letters p. 29. l. 3. read North. and l. 29. read exception p. 30. l. ●● read Nebuchadnezzar's p. 31. l. 33. read Gyges p. 35. l. 24. dele 1. p. 40. l. 31. 〈◊〉 Swallow p. 41. l. 22. read 〈◊〉 p. 40. l. 29. dele if p. 43. l. 24. read Laws p. 4● l. ult read 〈◊〉 p. 48. l. 5. read to the same effect l. 18. for by read of p. 52. l. 〈◊〉 dele of l. 13. dele so l. 32. read iniminate p. 53. l. 7. read 〈◊〉 p. 54. l. 10. read would destroy l. ult for want it read meant it p. 55. l. ● read take heed in p. 57. l. 〈◊〉 for unlawfull read lawfull p. 58. l. ult for examination read 〈◊〉 p. 59. l. ●● fore 50. read tit 50. l. 15. for if read to p. 61. l. 11. for lib. ● read lib. 1. l. 12. re●● Paganis l. 13. read 〈◊〉 14. for ask read after l. ult read by punishing so ●● sort l. 15. read without delay bring themselves and theirs to the holy assemblies and. 20. for Logo Qui read Logo 〈◊〉 ●● p. 66. l. 21. for e. 9. read ● 9. p. 67. l. 22. rea● 1438. l. 29. read 〈◊〉 l. 30. read 〈◊〉 l. 30. read expose and read chapitres ● 68. l. ●14 ead sujets l. 5. read ob●issancel 16. read 6. ion faith sujets l. 19. read 〈◊〉 read c. l. 27. read pense l. 28. read plusiors l. 31. dele p. 69. l. 9. read 〈◊〉 l. 14. read 〈◊〉 p. 72. l. 25. read in 〈◊〉 ●● is this * Viz. Dr. Owen in 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 l. 4. digres