Selected quad for the lemma: religion_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
religion_n	scripture_n	sense_n	true_a	4,624	5	5.7921	4	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A85396	Hybristodikai. The obstructours of justice. Or a defence of the honourable sentence passed upon the late King, by the High Court of Justice. Opposed chiefly to the serious and faithfull representation and vindication of some of the ministers of London. As also to, The humble addresse of Dr. Hamond, to His Excellencie and Councel of warre. Wherein the justice, and equitie of the said sentence is demonstratively asserted, as well upon clear texts of Scripture, as principles of reason, grounds of law, authorities, presidents, as well forreign, as domestique. Together with, a brief reply to Mr. John Geree's book, intituled, Might overcoming right: wherein the act of the Armie in garbling the Parliament, is further cleared. As also, some further reckonings between thesaid [sic] Dr. Hamond and the authour, made straight. / By John Goodwin.	Goodwin, John, 1594?-1665.; Glover, George, b. ca. 1618, engraver.	1649 (1649)	Wing G1170; Thomason E557_2; ESTC R12380	138,495	164

for the punishing of shoe-makers or taylours with death in case any of these vocations shall be found guilty of murther though there be no particular expression of either of their professions in the Law which sentenceth murtherers with death why should not the same Law be conceived to lie as clear for the p●nishing of Kings with death in case they murther though there be no expresse insertion of their Office or calling in the Law to signifie their inclusion in it considering that there is no more intimation neither for their exemption than for the other To say that the Law we speak of was never extended unto or Sect. 6. understood of Kings and therefore neither ought now to be extended unto or understood of them would be to say some what but what is next to nothing For 1. who is able to give any sufficient account that it was never in no age by no person understood of Kings That in point of execution it was never extended unto Kings is but a slippery proof that it was never understood of them Very possibly it was never in such a sence extended unto musitians or moris-dancers yet this if it could be proved would be no proof that therefore it was never understood or meant of them Besides if the Law we speak of never extended unto Kings in the execution of it it is no great wonder considering 1. That there being but one King at a time in the whole nation it can be no matter of wonder that he should not be a murtherer which supposed I mean that never any King of England heretofore was or was known to be a murderer there was no possibilitie that the said Law should formerly have bin extended unto Kings in point of execution 2. In case it could be proved that some former King one or more were guiltie of murther yet probably those who were intrusted with the execution of the Law we speak of might connive either through fear favour flatterie or the like In such cases as these there was no opportunitie of extending this law in the execution of it unto Kings Upon the same account it may well be that however the Law ought in reason equity and according to the import of the letter and words of it be understood as well of Kings as of meaner men yet it might never be publickly and Authoritatively declared that it ought to be so understood But 2 What if it can no more be proved that the said Law was ●●●t 7. never yet understood of Kings than it can be proved to have but executed upon Kings Doth it therefore follow that neither now it ought so to be understood especially considering 1 That the expresse letter and tenour of the Law will fairly bear such a sence 2 That such an understanding and interpretation of it will well stand with all principles of reason and equitie 3. That the pulick interest peace and safety of the Nation requires such an Interpretation 4 and lastly that the contrarie can never be proved I meane that it was never understood inclusively of Kings Suppose there were such a sence or interpretation of some text or sentence of Scripture lately given which every waies comports with the letter and gramaticall sence of the words fully agrees with the Analogie of Faith or the received principles of Christian Religion falls in very genuinely with the context or scope of the place perfectly accords with the clear sence of the like phrase and expression in Scripture elswhere c. were such an interpretation to be rejected meerly upon such a pretence as this That it cannot be proved that ever it was given or received by Christians heretofore Nor is that colour lesse washie or fading wherein to the exemption of Kings from humane Judicatories is commonly put to give it some semblance or shadow of a Truth that the King is Supreme and above all persons in his Kindom and in this respect there can be no competent or lawfull Authoritie on Earth to question ar●aign or judge him it being a received Maxime in politiques that ●ar in parem non habet potestatem multò minùs inferior in superiorem .i. that no man hath any right of Authoritie over his equall much lesse an inferiour over his superiour For to this we Answer 1. That the Scripture cannot be dissolved by the authoritie of Sect. 8. any Politick Rule or Maxime whatsoever of humane sanction If God in the Scripture saith that who so sheddeth mans bloud by man shall his bloud be shed men must not reply to him say we are content to put this Law in execution when Kings are not the transgressours but herein we must be pardoned we have no Authority nor Know we how to create any by which to punish Kings according to the exigencie of this Law when they offend against it We have a Canon sacred and inviolable amongst us which prohibits any man or numbers of men to execute this Law of thine upon Kings Will that God whose name is jealous suffer the Divine Authoritie of his Law to be trodden under foot by men for the salving of the credit of a Law or Principle of their own But 2 It was never yet proved nor I beleeve ever will be Sect. 9. either by any Scripture or sufficient Reason that the King especially under a Delinquencie or crime deserving death is either Par equall viz in power much lesse superiour to the body of his people or their Representative Master Rutherford whom these Ministers may well look upon as Praesidium dulce decus suum the chariot of Presbyterie and the hors-men thereof teacheth them another lesson over and over in his book intituled Lex Rex For the subject of Royall power saith he we affirm the first and native subject of all power to be in the communitie * 〈…〉 p. 5● Again There is not like reason to grant so much to the King as to Parliaments because certainly PARLIAMENTS who make Kings under God ARE ABOVE ANY ONE MAN and THEY MUST HAVE MORE AUTHORITIE and wisedom TH●N ANY ONE KING except Solomon as base flatterers say should return to the thrones of the Earth * I●●● p ●● Yet again wherever there is a covenant and oath betwixt equalls yea or superiours and inferiours the one hath some coactive power over the other which position he clearly proveth ● I●●● p. ●9 by a case immediatly subjoyned presently after Though therefore the King should stand simply superiour to his Kingdoms and Estates which I SHALL NEVER GRANT yet if the King come under covenant with his Kingdom as I have proved at length c. 13. he must by that same come under some coactive power to fullfill his covenant * Ibl●●m Again unanswerably I have proved that the Kingdom is superiour to the King * I●●● p 46. Yet over again If we consider the fountain power the King is subordinate to the Parliament and not coordinate for the

that mercie to all the three Kingdoms which would be expressed and shewed unto them as well in the preservation of those liberties as in the Execution of Justice upon their enemies and disturbers of their peace 2. Suppose the preservation of the Kings person had been Sect. 47 simply and without any limitation or condition injoyned in the Covenant yet the injunction being grounded upon this presumption that the King himself should and would enter into the same Covenant with us he refusing to come into the bond of the Covenant excludeth himself from all the benefit overtu●ed unto him in the Covenant upon those terms and dischargeth the Covenanters from all Covenant-obligations relating unto him The Author of the Discourse intituled Lex Rex was I suppose at the framing of the Covenant in Scotland yea and probably fashioned it both behind and before or however hath ploughed with a better heifer than all our Subscriptioners have done to understand a right the riddle of it yet he teacheth us this Doctrine for truth that if the Condition without the which one of the parties would never have entered in Covenant be not performed that person is loosed from the Covenant * L●●●●g p●g ●● Now I appeal to the Consciences of the Subscribers or to as many of them as have taken the Covenant whether they would have Covenanted the preservation of the person and Authority of the King if they had known the King would not have Covenanted the other things with them especially if they had known that he would so desperatly have opposed all the main ends of the Covenant as he did But this nail I remember is driven home to the head by that work-man who drew up the Armies large Declaration Therefore 3. Where a promise is either made or sworn conditionally Sect. 48 especially when the performance of the condition by him to whom or on whose behalf the promise is made or sworn is of greater moment than the performance of the promise it self in such cases it is as clear as the light that the non-performance of the condition by the one party induceth a disobligation of the other party from performance of the promise How much more when there is not onely a simple non-performance of the condition but also a practising with an high hand in opposition to it First evident it is that those words in the Covenant in the preservation and defence of the true Religion and Liberties of the Kingdom import a condition to be performed on the Kings part without the performance whereof the Covenant obligeth no man to the preservation or defence of his Person or Authority If this be not the clear meaning and importance of them the Covenant is a Barbarian unto me I understand not the English of it But if men will impose aenigm●s in the name of Covenants or Covenants made of riddles they can reasonably expect no observation of them but onely from some Oedipus or Fortunatus unlesse they will please to send their heifer along with them Secondly whether the Preservation and Defence of the true Religion and Liberties of the Kingdom be not a matter of far greater consequence than the Preservation and Defence of the Person and Authority of the King I am content to leave it to the Ministers themselves to judge and determin Thirdly whether the King hath not all along since the taking of the Covenant by the Generality of the Parliament and Kingdom acted in a way of full opposition to the preservation and defence of true Religion and the Liberties ●● the Kingdom I do not much fear to refer to the same arbitration Certain I am that if their tongues and pens were not at va●iance with their judgements this was their unanimous judgement and award wh●●est the Parliament smiled and the King f●owned upon the Presbyterian Interest Therefore as God by his promise of ●aving those who shall believe stands no wayes bound to save those who shall not believe so neither doth any Covenant or promise though made with Oath to preserve a●d defen●● t●e ●ings Person and Authority in case ●e shall preserve the t●ue Religion and Lib●●ties of the Kingdom oblige any man to the preservati●n or defence of either when the King acts destructively either to the true R●ligi●n or to the Liberties of the Kingdom least of all when he acts destr●ctively unto both M● Prynne himself approbante calam● citeth these words amongst many others of like import out of J●●tus Brutus Therefore the people are obliged to the Prince under a condition the Prince purely to the people Therefore if the condition be not fulfilled the people are unbound and the Contract void the Obligation null in Law it self * 〈…〉 Nay 4 The truth is all things duly considered that the Covenant Sect. 49 doth not more if so much promi●e or overture unto the King the preservation or defence of ●is Person or Authority by those that should take it as threaten him with the neglect yea and ruin of both from them Thus far the case is evident he that promiseth upon condition intimates and to a degree threatens non-performance of promise in case the condition be not performed especially when the performance of the condition is of much concernment to him that maketh the promise Suppose that God should onely have made such a promise as this unto the world Whosoever believeth in my Son Christ shall be saved without the explicit addition of this threatening but he that believeth not shall be damned it had been a pregnant Item and caveat given unto the world not to have expected salvation from him unlesse they believed Yea the promise ●● self contains a tacit threatening of condemnation unto those who believe not Nor is it a thing reasonable or worthy of God to conceive that he in a most serious and solemn manner and when he would speak most like unto himself should promise salvation unto the world upon condition that men believe and yet at the same time intend to save them whether they believed or no. Nor would it be in men any thing lesse than taking the Name of God in vain to swear in a solemn manner and with ●ands lifted up to heaven the preservation and defence of the Kings Person and Authority upon condition that he prese●v● and defend the true Religi●n and Liberties of the Kingdom and yet to tell or intimate unto him at the same time that they will preserve and defend his Person and A●thority whether he preserves Religion and Liberties or no. 5 If there be any thing in the Vow Protestation or Covenant Sect. 50 against bringing the King to a judiciary Trial and sentencing him according to his demerits the Ministers themselves are far deeper in the condemnation of tran●gr●ssours than those that have acted in or towards this bringing of him to trial or that have given Sentence against him at least in respect of any guilt contracted by them by either of