Selected quad for the lemma: religion_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
religion_n	king_n	law_n	parliament_n	7,328	5	6.6868	4	true

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A77921	State-maxims, or, Certain dangerous positions, destructive to the very natural right and liberty of mankind. Laid down in a book entituled, The grounds of government and obedience; by Tho. White Gent. / Discussed, and both by Scripture and reason confuted, by Will Ball Esq;	Ball, William.	1656 (1656)	Wing B595; Thomason E886_6; ESTC R207341	17,284	32

be expected by hazarding the other freedom may be hoped for and if lost yet Rationally and nobly lost howbeit I think it very Rational to go prudently and not rashly to work in so weighty a case Mr. White ingeniously confesseth page 119. It is clear there can be no question of the necessity of the resistance for they are such speaking of the oppressions of a Tyrant as do put the question beyond all ambiguity in the very conscience of the Magistrate he should have done well to have added if he have any the objects bearing on the subject in every ones particular beyond denial and dispute Such a one who putteth his Subjects to such extremities Mr. White also page 118. jugdeth fit to deserve all the mischeif that may light upon him for it and withal concludeth that discourse page 120. And therefore his either ignorance or carlesness or Tyranny ought to be so evident that it be beyond all question or else the subiect must have patience for his own good which is his aim in putting himself under Government Now if ignorance which may peradventure be but mistake or carelesness which may sometimes be but confidence seeming so evident to the apprehensions of the People as that they be beyond all question are Grounds I will not say sufficient for the Subiect to resist the Magistrate certainly the Tyranny of exacting all the Subiect had at one time leaving onely a ground to work upon of new being a case more transcendent in voluntary mischief than ignorance or carelesness which may sometimes be involuntary must needs be a sufficient Ground for the subiect not onely to resist the Magistrate if he reform not and make restitution for The Roman Caesars even Nero had the Explicite consent of the Senate and the implicite consent of the People of Rome at least wise a parte post such oppression but also severely to punish him which thing Mr. White needed not to have been troubled in his Judgment to have confessed And now I think it not amiss to declare who are Tyrants whosoever acquireth power or soveraignty by meer force without the explicite or implicite which some call tacite consent of a Nation or People is a Tyrant formeer acquisition of Power or merum Imperium doth not barely of it self create any Right no more than doth a forcible Entry or Possession unduly gotten Also all and every Power Monarchical Aristocratical or Democratical who I have formerly instanced touching Limited Tyrants if unlimited Potentates may be Tyrants consequently Limited Potentates must be Tyrants if they transgress their Limitations albeit they have the Peoples consent explicite or tacite without Limitation do transgress the end of Government which is the Peoples safety and welfare are Tyrants the Reason is because all Government is by the Rule of Reason intended for Protection and Preservation not any for destruction or desolation and therefore this is an usual Maxim viz. ubi nulla Protectio nulla subiectio the Reason is because the final cause or end of subiection which is Protection is wanting to which end St. Paul pointeth at Rom. 13. 6 Therefore or to this end pay ye Tribute c. I think it convenient to define Protection and Subiection and from thence to deduce some Reasons Protectio est Relatio Defensiva superiorum erga inferiores That of 1 Pet. 2. 18. is to be understood of froward Masters Protecting and paying wages or allowing maintenance Protection is a Defensive Relation of Superiors towards Inferiors Subiectio est Relatio submissiva Inferiorum erga Superiores Subiection is a submissive Relation of Inferiors towards Superiors Hence it will follow that the Governour and Governed are but as Relatum Correlatum that the submissive Relation of Rational Obedience supposeth the Defensive Relation of Rational Justice we ought Rationally not blindly to obey Rom. 12. 1. we ought Rationally not rashly to Judge Luk. 12. 57. Hence it follows also that no submissive Relation of Rational obedience is due to such Tyrants if any such Monsters be amongst mankind who at will deprive their vassals of life or take away from whom they please what they please when they please ad Arbitrium for such do not defend but destroy nor can I be of opinion that any People did at any time submit to or rather enthral themselves under such Tyrants voluntarily but of constraint which if so then are they Free if able to free themselves as I have formerly shewed But whether or no any People have voluntarily enslaved themselves I shall not insist upon Howbeit I will instance the late Government of England not so unlimited as some have supposed it and would peradventure have had it so but exactly Regulated to the Rational end of Government until Exorbitances like briars over-spread the Land In England the King had the sole power Juritenent or of Law-administring but not solely for in the time of Parliaments they could ioyntly administer Law and Judge of matter of Fact even as could the King In England the King had onely a Joynt-power of Juredicent or of Law-making for without the Parliament the King could neither make nor repeal Laws nor Legally impose Taxes upon the People Yet the leaving matters of great consequence to the Resolution of the governed Party did not make them Governours as Mr. White supposeth Ground 15. pa. 127. for the Members of Parliament were co-ordinate with the King in Law-making and Law-administring at the times of their Sessions and in other things and at other times subordinate to the King Moreover in England neither the King nor Parliament though united in consent could do three things to wit 1. To deliver over the People of England to a Forrain Government 2. To deliver over the National Benefit of the People of England to a People distinct in Law and Government 3. To deprive the People of England of their own National Law That is to say to judge and determine Meum and Tuum contrary to the Essence of any Law as long as such Law was in Being For the Kingly and Parliamentary Sacred Scripture is the written Rule of Religion Law Positive of Government Nulled or repealed c. power united was but efficiently in Posse not formally in Esse above the Law because the Law obliged all even King and Parliament until such Law were by Parliament being the Representative Body of the Nation and Trustees of the People nulled or altered The Reason is because all Government ought to be Regular for the peoples safety not any absolutely or meerly Arbitrary to their Destruction Wherefore if the Kingly and Parliamentary power should have granted the Propriety of John to Thomas meerly at their pleasure contrary to Law in Being albeit they should therein have violated but the Right of one man Explicitely and Actually yet they had therein violated the Right of all men in England Implicitely and Potentially in regard all men had been subject to the like Danger