Selected quad for the lemma: lord_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
lord_n	great_a	people_n	see_v	13,446	5	3.2956	3	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A94080	The common-vvealth of Israel, or A brief account of Mr. Prynne's anatomy of the good old cause. By H.S.	Stubbe, Henry, 1632-1676.	1659 (1659)	Wing S6035; Thomason E983_11; ESTC R203692	4,778	8

captivity they had no Monarchs in Israel such were only they that were the Descendants of David as the Jewish Rabbins tell us and they were subordinate to the Sanhedrin and might be scourged by them in case of offence So that this Text proves nothing but yet as much as the former that Monarchy is best but for the Paramount dignity of Parliaments over the Kings But you may reply that it is promised as a blessing and therefore that is better then a Republick I answer That where the executive Power is in one person triable by a Sanhedrin upon breach of Law it is a Republick and the controversie is meerly Grammatical whether this or that is duly named So that Mr. Prynne here proves a Common-wealth to be the best form of Government But is not Mr. Prynn a man of admirable qualities to be followed by any that can think there is any Government absolutely best and abstracting from circumstances It is the posture of the Nation and the disposition of the People which makes this or that Government best here or there In France a Monarchy at present is best but an extraordinary revolution may so order things that it may be as little feasible there as amongst us and where the Land is so modelled it is a blessing to have a King All that Ezekiel saith is that God did bless Ierusalem and she fared deliciously and was very beautiful and did grow up to a Kingdome and her name was spread amongst the Nations for her beauty Ezek. 16. 13 14. What then he doth not say that Monarchy was the beauty he put upon her to make her perfect but that beauty was precedaneous thereunto and it was for that she was famous among the Heathen These are pretty allegations Monarchy is so far from being proved best here that it is not so much as said to be any way GOOD In Deuteronomy no more is said to the advantage of Monarchy then is to be expected from Mr. Prynne's quotations Deut. 17. 14 When thou shalt come unto the Land if thou say I will set a King over me like as all the Nations that are about me Then thou shalt make him King over thee and thou shalt write him this Law I had thought that Mr. Prynne would have thought If 's and Ands to prove nothing such suppositions infer nothing but the conveniencie of tying a King to Laws if one be chosen not that it is best to choose one God did institute a Common-wealth in Israel as Mr. Harrington hath excellently shown and the rejecting thereof he cals a rejecting of God 1 Sam 8. v 7. I desire all judicious persons to read that Chapter and consider the preheminence of the best of Governments viz. Mr. Prynne's Monarchy He pleadeth for Monarchy because God is a King and this he proves by sundry Texts I would too submit to a Monarchy if my King were omnipotent omnipresent omniscient without passion or shadow of change This is not for the advantage of every Monarchy no more then if I should say it is better to ride on horseback then go on foot Ergo le ts go buy hobby-horses If God and Christ were as men passionate and fallible they should not be my Monarchs In that he cals the Good old Cause Iesuitical it is not such accusations will make it censurable The Iesuits are generally against Bishops so is Mr. Prynne Ergo it is Iesuitical to be against Bishops Bellarmine too is for Monarchy and saith it is the BEST of Governments so sayes Mr. Prynne too you see then by his argument Mr. Prynne of Swanswick is a Romish Iesuite The Dominicans are against Free-will c. so is Mr. Prynne Ergo Mr. Prynne is a Dominican The Pope is principally against a Toleration so is Mr. Prynne Ergo he is an errant Papist But primitive Christianity under Christian Emperors allowed and avowed an universal Toleration with a capacity for each not differing in Opinions but Religions to be preferred to the highest dignities Ergo the Good old Cause is agreeable thereunto and justified by their judgement as well as practise But of this I shall more at large discourse against Mr. Prynne or any else that defie the Hoast of Israel My hast permits me to adde no more but that you may find an ample confutation of all that Mr. Prynn either hath or shall write in Pantagruels Library within New-Colledge in Oxon by the name of Tartaretus de modo cacandi I am Sir Yours c. FINIS POSTSCRIPT SIR I Suppose these reflections may suffice for to evince the goodness of the Cause against Mr. Prynne and to let you see that his writings have much of the Lawyer in them high charges and imputations are but words of course with them and all that cry he makes is but the way of the mans indicting As to the Antiquity of the cause though I might say with Tertullian upon another account illud prius quod verius Truth Reason Honesty and foundations upon nature will make a cause not only better but older then any plea from musty records and concessions extorted from Tyrants enough by other penns hath been said and what he saith was never the design of the Parliament was objected to them for such by their quick sighted adversaries I cannot examine his proofs but you may conjecture by his Scripture allegations how his others would appear upon a review It is clear from the covenant that the generous English never intended the defence of the King otherwise then as it was consistent with the subjects liberty and priveledges of Parliament As to the seclusion of members I understand not why if some betray their-trust others may not be faithful Mr. Prynne once taught that if the house of Lords dissented and refused to provide for the safety of the people the house of Comomons alone might do it why may not a part of the latter house take the like care upon the like exigency I profess I see not how one is a greater breach of priviledg then the other or less inconsistant with Mr. Prynnes Similitude used by him in his defence of the Warr against the King viz. As in a storm if the Marriners are drunk or neglect their duty or drive upon rocks the rule of selfe-preservation permits any body to interpose So is there not as great a danger now as ever of the Nation may we only use arms to provoke not secure and take them up that we may lay them down at the feet of Kings together with our necks to be trampled on It were more prudential in case of oppression to go with halters at first and so to encline to mercy then to enrage them and then give them opportunity to satisfie their fury