Selected quad for the lemma: religion_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
religion_n	kingdom_n	majesty_n	subject_n	3,349	5	6.8187	4	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A89520	An argument or, debate in law: of the great question concerning the militia; as it is now settled by ordinance of both the Houses of Parliament. By which, it is endeavoured, to prove the legalitie of it, and to make it warrantable by the fundamentall laws of the land. In which, answer is also given to all objections that do arise, either directly, or collaterally concerning the same. All which is referred to the judicious reader. by J.M. C.L.	Marsh, John, 1612-1657.; Milton, John, 1608-1674, attributed name.	1642 (1642)	Wing M575; Thomason E119_13; ESTC R18112	46,929	48

AN ARGUMENT OR DEBATE IN LAW OF THE GREAT QVESTION CONCERNING THE MILITIA As it is now settled by ORDINANCE of both the HOUSES of PARLIAMENT By which it is endeavoured to prove the Legalitie of it and to make it warrantable by the fundamentall Laws of the Land In which Answer is also given to all Objections that do arise either directly or collaterally concerning the same All which is referred to the judicious Reader By J. Marsh C. L. LONDON Printed by Tho. Paine and M. Simmons for Tho. Vnderhill at the Bible in Wood-street 1642. TO THE READER Courteous READER THat which I framed for my own private satisfaction onely in these distracted times in which every man that resolves not to stand Neuter ought to have his conscience poysed by good grounds and principles l●st that it suffer shipwrack in the conclusion I do here though unwillingly present to the publique view in which weak and poore indeavour I have borrowed some of the Parliaments grounds to exspatiate my self upon that I might the better convince thy iudgement and mine own but the greater part are mine which I hope will not blast the rest nor make it unfruitfull to thee but rather more fully inform satisfie and convince thee of the truth of the Parliaments assertions and to this end I have not used any affected style but have to the utmost of my endeavour invested the Law with its own plainnesse and integrity for I have alwayes raised this conclusion to my self that where I look for words there I expect least Law which is confirmed unto thee as a truth in these dayes Now Reader shortly to conclude this for the Work doth not deserve a Preface or Epistle if happily there may be any thing in it that may merit thy more serious consideration and make thee a true Subiect to the King by being faithfull to the Parliament I shall expect no greater areward of my labour then that confidently beleeving that the issue of it will be thine and my happinesse Farewell Thine to love and serve thee J. Marsh. AN ARGVMENT IN MAINTENANCE OF THE MILITIA Setled by ORDINANCE of PARLIAMENT THe generall Question is but shortly this Whether the Militia as it is now setled by both the Houses of Parliament be warrantable by Law or not The Case with the Circumstances upon which this generall Question is stated depends upon these two Quaeres 1. Whether the King by his Prerogative hath the sole and onely power of ordering and disposing of the Militia of his Kingdome or not Admitting that he hath then the next and maine scruple is 2. Whether both the Houses of Parliament in time of imminent danger the King refusing to settle the Militia for the defence and securitie of his people may by an Ordinance of Parliament without his Majesties consent settle the Militia and put the Kingdome into a posture of defence or not 1. For the first point I conceive very clearly that the King by his Prerogative warrantable by the Lawes of the Land performing the trust reposed in him hath the onely power of disposing of the Militia of this Kingdome and therefore I shall not debate this so much out of scruple or doubt as to give satisfaction to the unlearned and I shall prove it in reason thus The King is Caput Reipublicae pater patriae that is the head of the Common-wealth and Father of his Countrey and hath this great trust committed to him by God and his people of governing of them in peace and happinesse by maintaining and defending of their Religion Lawes and Liberties which that he may be the more obliged to doe he taketh a solemne Oath at his Coronation that he will doe and performe this according to the trust reposed in him the due execution whereof being of so high consequence to this Kingdome and of so great difficultie to himselfe and therefore not to be executed without great care circumspection and trouble the Lawes and Constitutions of this Realme hath in favour and ayde of his Majestie who is intended alwayes to be imployed and negotiated Cirea ardua regni about the high things of the Kingdome allowed unto him many prerogatives priviledges and exemptions above all his Subjects Among which I take this in our Case to be one for as our Religion Lawes and Liberties are committed in trust to the King so are our lives also which he is bound to defend aswell by the materall sword if occasion be as by the sword of Justice and therefore as it is well knowne all prosecutions by way of Indictment against any man for the taking away of the life of another are at the suite of the King and the King onely can pardon the offence and no other For he alone hath the charge of the lives of his Subjects committed to him and this is such an inseperable trust that the King cannot grant this over to another as it is resolved in 20. H. 7. where it is said ●● H. 7. fo 8. a. That a grant of power to pardon Felons by the King to another is not good for that it is a prerogative annexed to the Crowne and cannot be severed But here it is not to be understood that no prerogative of the King can be severed from the Crowne for some may as I shall afterwards shew and that by grant of the King too but that this among others is such a prerogative as cannot be severed and the reason of this is as I conceive for that the life of a man is of so high and puissant nature that none lesse then God or the King ought to have interest and power in and though the Common-wealth loose a member it is the King onely who looseth a Subject and therefore the killing of a man is said in the Indictment to be against his Crowne and dignitie and not against the Common-wealth for though mediately it be an offence against the Common-wealth too yet it is a more neare and immediate offence against the King for that he is intrusted with the lives of his Subjects Now as the King is bound to defend his Subjects by the Law so in like manner he is bound to defend and protect them by the Sword if occasion be as I have said before from all danger both of forraigne and domesticke enemies And therefore as there is a Leigeance that is a faithfull and true obedience of the Subject due to his Soveraigne as it is interpreted in the 7. Rep. Calvines case ● Rep. Calvins ●●se So there is a protection due from the Soveraigne to the Subject for he ought not onely regere to rule but also Protegere subditos suos to protect his Subjects So as betweene the Soveraigne and Subject there is Duplex reciprocum ligamen that is a double and reciprocall bond Quia sicut subditus regi tenetur ad obedientiam ita Rex subdito tenetur ad protectionem for as the Subject is bound to obey the King so the King