Selected quad for the lemma: parliament_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
parliament_n	humble_a	majesty_n	petition_n	2,957	5	9.0583	4	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A43548	The rebells catechism composed in an easy and familiar way to let them see the heinousness of their offence, the weakness of their strongest subterfuges, and to recal them to their duties both to God and man.	Heylyn, Peter, 1600-1662.	1643 (1643)	Wing H1731A; ESTC R23968	23,896	33

another Plaister which will salve that Sore viz. The difference that is made between the King's Person and his Power by which is it made visible to discerning eyes that though the Parliament have levyed War against the Person of the King yet they do not fight against his Power but defend it rather And 't is not a resistance of the Person but the Power of Princes which is forbidden by Saint Paul How do you like of that distinction Answ. As ill or worse than of the other as being of the two the more serious folly and coming from an Author no less factious but far more learned I confess than your other was For if I do remember right Buchanan was the first that broached this Doctrine in his Book De jure regni apud Scotos in which he tells us that Saint Paul in the place aforesaid doth not speak of Magistrates Sed de functione officio eorum qui aliis praesunt but of the Magistracy it self the Function or Office of the Magistrate which must not be resisted though his Person may Which foolish Fancy serving fitly for a Cloak or Vizard wherewith to palliate and disguise Rebellions hath since been ofen used by those who pursue his Principles though never worn so thred-bare as of late in your treacherous Pamphlets but draweth after it as many and as gross Absurdities as the other did For by this strange division of the King from himself or of his Person from his Power a Traitor may kill Charles and not hurt the King destroy the Man and save the Magistrate the Power of the King in one of the Armies may fight against his Person in the other Army his own Authority may be used to his own destruction and one may lawfully set upon him beat assault and wound him in order to his preservation So that you make the King like Sosia in the ancient Comedy who being well beaten and demanded who it was that did it made answer Egomet memet qui nunc sunt domi z that Sosia who was at home in his Masters House did beat that Sosia which was abroad in his Masters business But questionless Saint Paul did better understand himself than either Buchanan or any of his followers since his time have done Who doth interpret the word power which he useth in the first and second Verses by that of Principes Ministri Rulers and Ministers which be useth in the third and fourth Which as it plainly shews that he meaneth the Magistrate and not the Function or the Office as your Masters tell you so doth it leave you liable to the wrath of God if you endeavour to defend these wicked and rebellious courses by such wretched shifts 26. Quest What say you then if it appear that the two Houses of Parliament for I use your terms are not subordinate to the King but coordinate with him y I hope then you will yield so far that the two Houses have a power if they cannot otherwise provide for the common safety to arm the People of the Realm against Him as against an Equal Answ. We grant indeed that People which have no Superiour but stand on equal terms with one another if injured by their Neighbours and not receiving satisfaction when they do desire it may remedy themselves by force and for so doing by the Law of Nations are esteemed just Enemies but so it is not in the point which is now in question the Realm of England as it is declared by Act of a Parliament being on Empire governed by one supreme Head and King having the Dignity and Royal Estate of the Imperial Crown of the same unto whom● Body Politick compact of all sorts and degrees of People divided in ●erms and by Names of Spirituality and Temporality been bounden and ought to bear next to God a natural and humble Obedience Assuredly had the Lords and Commons then assembled conceived themselves coordinate with the King in the publick Government they would not have so wronged themselves and their Posterity as to have made this declaration and acknowledgment so prejudicial thereunto not only in a Parliament time but by Act of Parliament Besides if this Coordination which you dream of could be once admitted it must needs follow thereupon that though the King hath no Superiour he hath many Equals and where there is equality there is no subjection But Bracton tells you in plain terms not only that the King hath no superiour in his Realm except God alone but that he hath no Equal neither Parem autem non habet in regno suo as his words there are b And then he gives this reason of it Quia sic amitteret praeceptum cum par in parem non habet imperium because he could not have an Equal but with the loss of his Authority and Regal Dignity considering that an Equal hath no power to command another Now lest you should object that is spoken of the King out of times of Parliament but that when once the Lords and Commons are convened in Parliament the case is otherwise First you must think that had this Doctrine been on foot in the times preceding it would have been a great impediment unto frequent Parliaments and that our King as others being very jealous even of the smallest points of Sovereignty would not admit of Partners in the Crown Imperial by the assembling of a Parliament having been used to reign alone without any Rivals And Secondly you may call to mind that even sedente Parliamento during the sitting of the Court the Lords and Commons call themselves His Majesties most humble and obedient Subjects which is not only used as a stile of course in such Petitions as they use to present unto him and by the way 't is not the use for men of equal power to send Petitions unto one another but it is the very Phrase in some Acts of Parliament c for which I do refer you to the Book at large And if they be his Subjects as they say they be they cannot be his Equals as you say they are and therefore not coordinate with him but subordinate to him by consequence the levying War against the King no more excusable in them than the meanest Subject 27. Quest You take great pains to make the Parliament or the two Houses as you call them to be guilty of Rebellion against his Majesty without ground or reason For tell me seriously think you the Parliament hath not power to arm the people and put them into a posture of defence against the Enemies of the Kingdom if they see occasion Answ. Yes if the King do give consent and that there be such Enemies against whom to arm them For properly according to the ordinary rules of Polities there is no power of raising Forces and putting the People into Arms but only in the Prince or Supreme Magistrate The Civil Laws have so resolved it Nulli prorsus nobis insciis