Selected quad for the lemma: tradition_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
tradition_n	agree_v	lawful_a	wit_v	18	3	15.5372	5	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A51395	The Bishop of Winchester's vindication of himself from divers false, scandalous and injurious reflexions made upon him by Mr. Richard Baxter in several of his writings ...	Morley, George, 1597-1684.; Morley, George, 1597-1684. Bishop of Worcester's letter to a friend for vindication of himself from Mr. Baxter's calumny.	1683 (1683)	Wing M2797; ESTC R7303	364,760	614

and positive command from God for the doing of it and as he had God's command to doe it so he had God's approbation of it and reward for it after it was done for the Lord said unto Jehu saith the Text 2 Kings 11. 30. Because thou hast done well in executing that which is right in mine eyes and hast done to the house of Ahab according to all that was in mine heart thy children of the fourth generation shall sit upon the throne of Israel But Jeroboam had neither God's command to doe what he did before he did it nor God's approbation for doing what he did after he had done it neither were Solomon or Rehoboam usurpers as Athaliah and Ahab and Jehoram were To conclude as the Examples even of the best mens actions recorded in Scripture do not make what they did to be lawfull any farther than as they were agreeable to the general rule of all mens actions the Moral Law of God or as they had a special a certain and a positive Dispensation from God the Lawgiver himself to doe something upon some occasions otherwise than by the general Rule they were obliged to doe and Exceptio in non except is firmat regulam An exception to a Rule strengthens the Rule in things not excepted So the doing of that which was justifiably done then by virtue or warrant of such a Dispensation is not justifiably to be imitated by any man or number of men now when no such Warrant no such Dispensation from the Lawgiver himself in so certain so immediate and so miraculous a manner as it was then is to be expected whatsoever our mad Enthusiasticks may pretend to the contrary CHAP. X. A Recapitulation of the two former Arguments from the word of God and Primitive practice against both Papists and Presbyterians BY what hath been said already partly from plain Precepts of Scripture commanding all Christians to obey and forbidding them to resist their lawfull Sovereigns though never so unlimited in the Constitution or never so Tyrannical in the exercise of their Government for who ever was or could be more so in both respects than NERO was in whose reign those Precepts were given and partly from the Practice and profession of all Christians agreeable to those Precepts in the Primitive and purest times together with the Answer to such Objections as have been or may be made from some few misinterpreted and misapplied examples out of Scripture to the contrary though by what hath been said upon these heads it hath I say been sufficiently proved that Kings or Soveraign Princes and Governours do not lose their Right to govern their Subjects though they be Vnlimited or Tyrants and govern otherwise than by God's or their own Laws they ought or are obliged to govern and consequently that their Subjects do not upon that account cease to be Subjects so as to be disobliged from obeying even such Sovereigns from obeying them I say either actively or passively that is by obeying them in all their lawfull Commands willingly and chearfully and by suffering for not obeying them in their unlawfull Commands meekly and patiently and never in any case or upon any provocation to resist rebell or take up either offensive or defensive Arms against them there being nothing to warrant the one more than the other in the word of God or in the practice and judgment of the first and best of Christians which one would think should be enough to convince all that are Christians now of the unlawfulness of it And yet of all Christians those that seem to be most opposite to one another in all things else I mean the Papists and the Presbyterians with other of our Sectaries agree in this one thing I mean in the lawfulness of Subjects taking up Arms against their Sovereigns though the former to wit the Papists like the old Pharisees hold nothing to be lawfull for which they have not a Tradition from their forefathers and the latter to wit the Presbyterians and their Complices like the old Scribes hold nothing to be lawfull for which they have not express Scripture And yet as both Scribes and Pharisees agreed in thinking it lawfull to oppose and fight against the Lord Christ so both Papists and Presbyterians and other Sectaries agree in holding it to be lawfull to oppose and fight against the Christs of the Lord I mean Kings though as neither of those had then so neither of these have now any Warrant either from Scripture or Tradition that is either from the written Word of God or from the practice of their primitive Predecessours to plead for it CHAP. XI An Objection from the Law of Nature and that those Precepts were temporary and the Primitive Christians were too weak to resist answered The Church of England 's judgment upon the case BUt perhaps it may be said though it cannot be said rationally by any that hold either of the aforesaid Principles that though there be nothing to be alledged either from Scripture or Tradition that is either from the written word of God or from the practice of the Primitive Christians to justifie the taking up either of offensive or defensive Arms by Subjects against their Sovereigns yet it may be lawfull by the Law of Nature which is the unwritten word of God or rather word of God written in mens hearts And this Law of Nature say they is as truly the Law of God as that which is written in Scripture and therefore whatsoever is justifiable by the Law of Nature may be and is lawfull though there be no express Warrant for it either from Scripture or from the practice of the Best of men in former times because it being known by all men to be lawfull by the Law of Nature it needed not to be declared to be so by Scripture nor attested to be so by any Mens Practice or Example Neither will it follòw say they that what was lawfully done at one time must necessarily be done at all times or that it should not be lawfull for Christians to doe that now which it was not expedient for the Primitive Christians to doe then because being so comparatively few and fable as they were then their taking up of Arms against their persecuting and oppressing Princes would rather have increased than lessened their sufferings And what if it were upon that account and upon that account onely for so some of these 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Despisers of Government and Blasphemers of Sovereign Princes have dared to argue that Christ and his Apostles did give those Precepts in Scripture of not resisting even the worst of Princes and consequently that they were to oblige those to whom they were given no longer than untill they were strong enough to resist without fear or danger of being the worse for it To this I answer first that to have such a thought of Christ or his Apostles who wrote what they writ 〈◊〉 〈◊〉