Selected quad for the lemma: act_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
act_n	king_n	parliament_n	ratify_v	3,090	5	11.4702	5	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A19328	The ungirding of the Scottish armour: or, An ansvver to the informations for defensive armes against the Kings Majestie which were drawn up at Edenburgh, by the common help and industrie of the three tables of the rigid covenanters of the nobility, barons, ministry, and burgesses, and ordained to be read out of pulpit by each minister, and pressed upon the people, to draw them to take up armes, to resist the Lords anointed, throughout the vvhole kingdome of Scotland. By Iohn Corbet, minister of Bonyl, one of the collegiate churches of the provostrie of Dunbartan.	Nicanor, Lysimachus, 1603-1641.	1639 (1639)	STC 5753; ESTC S119005	43,296	68

a Reall and Royall answer from the most gratious and most learned King Iames of Blessed memory in his Booke intituled Ius Liber a Monarchiae pa. 193. Nego ego tempore Coronationis inter regem subditos pactum ini●i c. I deny sayes he that in the time of the Coronation there is any such covenant betweene the King and his Subjects But this is manifest that at that time or at the beginning of his raigne sponte suá of his owne accord the King promiseth to discharge honestly and faithfully that charge which God hath committed and entrusted him with 2 Though it were granted that there were such a mutuall contract yet his Majesty demonstrates most clearely that it cannot helpe this cause If the King sayes hee shall not keepe his part of the Covenant who shall be judge between these parties there is none who hath but attained to a smal taste of the civill Law who knoweth not that the contract cannot be esteemed violated by the one partie nor the other absolved of his part of the contract before that it be made manifest by the cognition and Tryall of the ordinarie judge which of the parties hath departed from the Contract For this is the caution of every civill and municipiall Law otherwise what could hinder but that every man in his owne cause may be both Judge and partie then the which there can bee nothing thought more absurd Now in that contract between the King and his Subjects without all controuersie onely God is Iudge to whom alone the King is bound to give acount of his administration because in that oath at the Kings inauguration both the judgement and vengeance of his perfidious dealing is given onely to God Therefore since God alone is the judge between the parties and since the try all and vengeance onely doth belong to him it must necessarily follow that God must first pronouce the sentence against the King before the people can be thought free of their part of the Covenant of obedience and subjection And so there is no man so blind but he may see how unjustly you make your selfe judge in your owne cause and usurpe the place of God 3. From this your mutuall contract you must shew that his Majesty not only obligeth himselfe to performe his Kingly office but also giveth power to the people when they judge that he failes in his part to resist him by force of armes or else you are idle to alleadge such contract And if you will produce this I have no more to say but that the King hath denuded himselfe of Royall authority and devolved it into the peoples hands he onely in name and the people in effect being King and supreme judge in their owne cause and so the King must stand Vt magna nominis umbra But you would doe well to produce such a contract out of the Vtopia of your owne braine Covenanter From Acts of Parliament ratifying the three Estates Authority 10. Argument and from our owne ecclesiasticall and civill Historie Anticovenanter 1 There can be no Acts of Parliament but those the King sets downe with advice of his Estates 2 And can you shew any Act of Parliament for the lawfulnes of resisting Princes or can you shew that there is any Act of Parliament giving authority to the Estates to resist His Majesty to execute Iustice 4 Doe you attribute any authoritie to these which ye cal the three Estates without the King You must know that the King is the onely Law-giver the Parliament is but his extraordinarie Councell and the Estates thereof are his extraordinarie Counsellours by whose advice hee enacts Lawes Consider also there was no Law in the Kingdome of Scotland before the Kings of it for before Fergusius his dayes we were but like Salusticus Aborigenes Genus hominum agreste liberum atque solutum sine legibus sine imperio But when the first King did conquer this Land he and his Successours gave Lawes divided the whole Land which was their owne and distinguished the orders of men and did establish a politicall government This is clear by our Chronicles and Ex archivis regijs in quibus antiquum primaevum jus asservatur satis constat Regem esse Dominum omnium bonorum directum omnes subditos esse ejus vassallos qui latifundia sua ipsi dōino referant accepta sui nempé obsequij servitij praemia 4 If you attribute such incompatible power to these Estates Why did not you by vertue thereof conclude this warre You ought first to hold a Parliament and then conclude warre But pardon me you have done so Your three Tables is for Your three Estates which hath ordained this warre 5. Which are these three Estates now Episcopacie is thrust from you and over-ruling Elders are in their place who are busie Bishops in another mans Diocesse and have been too busie in my parish And shall they supply their place in Parilament As for your Ecclesiasticall and civill Historie if that be Knox Buchanans regni jus expresly condemned by Act of Parliament you may be ashamed to name them and ought to have covered their nakednesse if you had respected them You have published in print to the great disgrace of Knooe that he called kneeling at the Communion An Invention of the Divell and will you here make him a Doctor of Treason Covenanter From our Covenant lately sworne and subscribed 1. Argument binding us to defend the Kings Majesties person in defence of the true Religion and to defend the true Religion against all persons whatsoever Anticovenanter This is indeed Ilias malorum your Covenant binds you to it and to much more even to whatsoever shall seem good to the most part of you by cōmon consent were it never so hainous For that clause of your Covenant wherein you are obliged to whatsoever shall seeme meete by common consent is a great Ocean a blanke to be filled up with what you please it seemeth good to you already for the keeping of the first Table to break the second in working the works of unrighteousnesse As to with-hold from Ministers their Stipend as conducible for your ends to threaten them with big words to lay violent hands on them in the discharge of their calling in pulpit 〈◊〉 which I have suffered and which is more to contemne and disobey Supreme Authoritie yea to take up armes against it and if you by common consent shall thinke meete to remove that blocke of authoritie out of your way you are obliged to it by your Covenant for certainely this is very conducible to your ends For if your Calder wood be true Kings are enemies to Religion in his Altare Damascenum he affirmeth that Natura insitum est omnibus regibus odium in Christum And so King James of Blessed memorie is called by him Infestissimus ecclesiae hostis And your Master-man Cartwright layeth down a ground for this overthrow of Kings as you may reade in the

them to such rebellion but only to serve God and their King And now many of them are exclaiming that they are deceived and must be perjured if they take armes against their King And how many are groaning under this and would gladly bee freed and yet dare not for your terrours and affrightments 2. They are many who have subscribed the Kings Covenant who will be loath to be in that Categorie with you For I hope they know that beside the sinne of Rebellion they will also incurre Perjurie if they runne with you in your evill way For they are obliged by their bond to take up defensive armes in defence of the King Religion and Lawes and that only when by Authoritie they are commanded so to do But your covenant obliges you to take up armes against his Majestie even though he forbid you if by common consent you think it should be done Your fifth difference is of the same nature too Betweene a people holding fast their alleagiance c. If you be such as you call your selves his Majestie hath no quarrell against you but herein yet you must be judges in your owne cause and the King must stand to your sentence Saul was righteous in his owne conceit and did obey the Commandement of God but the bleeting of the sheepe and the lowing of the oxen belied him Your daily practises beare witnesse whether you be such men as you call your selves 3 You say that ye have suspended your judgement and practise about things controverted till they be determined by a lawfull assembly Answer 1. You did not suspend your judgment and practise but by your covenant have abjured these things controverted as heads of poperie as the learned Doctors of Aberdeen most clearely have showen which yee were never hitherto able to answer and if this bee to suspend your judgement you are worse than the wife of Bodwell who first spake and then advised you have first sworne to the one part of the controversie and then take it to consultation 2. If we will grant you that ye have only suspended your judgements and practise c. consider how absurd you are herein first ye with an implicite faith sweare to believe and practice what shall bee determined in a lawfull assembly though ye know not whether it shall approve or condemne those things 2 You fall head-long in another point of Poperie in making the generall assemblie an infallible Iudge at whose determination ye sweare to stand in judgemen and practice for if yee did acknowledge that the assembly might erre it had beene great folly in you to sweare to stand to the determination of one who is not of infallible judgement 3. I demand of you who are the strict Non-conformists What if the assembly had determined contrary to your expectation and declare that those things controverted were not heads of Popery would ye have condescended to them and if the assemblie had not been made up of conjured persous but of free Ministers it had beene so concluded Your last two differences may be joyned in one you professe your selves to be zealous in religion and that the Kings Majestie is urging the swearing to the true religion of his Subjects c. Who then is to hurt our religion who is comming by armes to destroy it if his Majestie be for you who is against you You have the King a Patterne and Patron of Piety and why did you protest against the covenant because hee commanded it But all this tends to no other sense then to brand so worthy a King with perjurie and dissimulation You have therefore most wickedly stared the question especially since his Majestie by many published Proclamations hath often assured you that he is so far from thinking of any innovation of religion that he is resolved constantly to maintaine the same as it is established by law in this Kingdome of Scotland and hath beene so ready to give all full satisfaction that he hath in a manner granted all that was petitioned for of his Majestie reade his Majesties Proclamation and Declaration dated the 27. of Febr. where ye shall finde the state of the question rightly set downe and clearely see that he is so farre from intending the ruine and subversion of this his Kingdome that he takes God and the world to witnesse that he is at last forced to take armes and that for his owne right and our good to reclaime us from our daring and encreasing insolencies and for the re-establishing of his royall authority amongst us againe And therefore the question is now Whether he be our King or not Yea the question must be now not Whether you may take defensive armes against the King But Whether or no the Kings Majestie may take defensive armes against a disloyall and rebellious people for doe not you invade his loyall subjects besieging his cities by armies of men because they remaine obedient and loyall to their King have not you by force and fraud taken his Castles led captive his captaines and other subjects and laid hold upon all whom ye know loyall subjects to ward them and compell them to runne your crooked course you spare not the Lords owne Day in time of Gods service in the house dedicated to his worship to take his Majesties servants and keepe them in ward and dispone upon the Kings forts and castles as you thinke good putting in and putting out whom you please drinking and carouzing in his Castles quasi jam partâ victoriâ I you have triumphed leading the Kings Crowne captive with Tuck of Drumme in great solemnitie through the street of your Citie of Confusion and afterward have not onely appointed your office-men of warre for resisting of authoritie but also as I am credibly informed have erected a new government of 26. Governours of Nobles Barons and Burgesses yearely changeable for the government of the Kingdome As for his Supremacie then no wonder that it be gon for in your last pretended generall assembly you are not far from that which Optatus sayes of the Donatists Ille solito furore accensus dicit Quid imperatoricum ecclesia he being kindled with his wonted furie Contra Parm. lib. 3. sayes What hath the Emperour to doe with the Church In your protestations you give him no more a-doe but to be present among you that as an inferior officer he may attend you and see that no tumult or outward disorders be among you who are the supreme Iudges in causes Ecclesiasticall You will admit of no appellation from you to the King but have deprived them that thus appealed whilst even the Iewes in an Ecclesiasticall matter admitted Pauls lawfull appeale to a Pagan Emperour Acts 25.11 and whereas generall assemblies should ever carrie libertatem judicandi non necessitatem credendi as Augustine saies and the acts thereof are only Canons August contra Faust Directions and Rules without any power to be lawes till they be confirmed 〈◊〉 and allowed by the Supreme

with Your next example is of Iehojada who commanded Athaliah to be slaine 2 King 11. The very bare reading of the History answers you sufficiently Athaliah was an usurper of the Crowne which by right belonged to Ioash which was hid six yeeres from her cruelty After Iehojada the High-Priest Ioash's Uncle and Tutor with the Captaines and Hundreds with the Levites and chiefe Fathers of Israel had brought forth Ioash and put on him the Crowne and declared him King then by authority of Ioash the King thus seated in his throne Iehojada caused slay that bloudy usurper of the Kingdome Athaliah So this was done by the authority of the King Now nothing can be gathered from this but if any Subjects for certaine yeeres have taken upon them Royall authority if the righteous King doe recover his own authority he may command the usurpers to be slaine This point shall not be denied you Your last example from Scripture is also against you cōcerning the men of Keilah If you wil without prejudice judiciously consider the place you shall see that if you will prove the lawfulnesse of your defence it must be from Davids flying from Saul I have often seene both in the Fathers and modern Writers Davids example produced for to shew the unlawfulnesse of resisting Princes but never till now for the lawfulnesse of resistance Consider first then in generall that as Saul was ever invading David so he was ever flying from him 2. That where David did hide himselfe he found oft-times treacherous men to discover him promising to deliver him unto Saul So the Ziphits ran to Saul saying Doeth not David hide himselfe with us in strong holds in the wood in the hill of Hachilah Now therefore come downe and our part shall bee to deliver him into the Kings hand And thus being oft betrayed he was forced to forsake the Kingdome altogether to goe to the King of Gath. Now for the men of Keilah they were much obliged to David for delivering them from the Philistims and therefore the place being indebted to him and also farre from Saul he desired to remaine there so long as he might as having no certaine dwelling place else-where Saul hearing that he was there said God hath delivered him into mine hand for hee is shut in by entring into a towne that hath gates and barres By all appearance it was some of Keilah that brought Saul this newes shewing him what advantage he now might have of David being in such a close towne As for David being wise as the Angel of God when he heard of his discoverie to Saul he foresaw that if the men of Keilah would bee unthankfull they might keepe him within the towne to the King and not suffer him to flie away Therefore he enquires of God first if Saul would come there to seeke him for hee had no purpose to goe from Keilah if Saul were not to come for poore man he had no place to goe to Secondly hearing that Saul would not faile to come downe hee began to suspect the men of Keilah of deceit that they would shut the gates and keep him in till the King should take him having such advantage of the gates and barres that hee could not flie as his usuall custome was Therefore hee demands of God the second time Will the men of Keilah deliver me 1 Sam. 23 12. and my men into the hand of Saul that which is here translated deliver in the originall is shut up Will the men of Keilah shut mee up as is also exponed in the Margent of the Bible in that place So the meaning is not as you most seditously expound it Will the men of Keilah not defend mee but deliver me to Saul who am resolved to keepe this walled Citie against him But this is the meaning Will the men of Keilab not let mee goe away but shut me up close the gates that I cannot eseape by flying This lets us see that David had a purpose to flie from Saul which makes him so carefull to try whether the men of Keilah would hinder him by shutting their gates that finding them deceitfull he mightflee in time And therefore it 's without warrant you say that David with his six hundred men purposed to defend themselves in the citie agaist the King If hee had purposed to keepe the towne he would have beene well pleased how close soever the gates had been shut and would rather have enquired Lord will the men of Keilah open the gates and let in the King then will they shut the gates upon me 2 Though your exposition were true that David purposed to keepe the towne against the King the question yet remaineth Whether he ought to have done so or not a facto ad jus non valet consequentia 3 It proveth not your conclusion David was but one man who tooke an army of six hundred men to defend himselfe against the King as you dreame Therefore when the King persecuteth a private man he may gather an army and resist the King which I hope you will not at least cannot sustaine and yet you must sustaine this or else passe from your Argument Finally if any of you were in the case that David was in to be the Anointed of God and appointed by God to succeed Saul it feares mee you would take more upon you then David did for ye have done more already and some of you are not ashamed to call the Nobility Ephori and that they put on the Crowne with the King in his Coronation turning all to a finistrous and seditious sense As for your examples from reformed Churches since we live not by Examples but by Lawes I will not stand upon them as not knowing the Lawes and Government of forraigne Kingdomes If they have Lawes for their resistance you produce these examples most impertinently 2. From facts to prove the Lawfulnesse of resisting is ridiculous 3. None of these by resisting gained so much as by suffering as experience too late doth shew Covenanter From Testimonies not onely of Popish Writers 8. Argument but of the Divines of the reformed Churches even such as will bee strong pleaders for Monarchie Neither is Calvin against us but for us From the testimonies of most judicious Lawyers and learned men who have written contra-Monarchomachos Anticovenanter I grant Iesuites yet not all are for your tenet for herein you agree contrary to the Doctrine of al sound Divines ancient and moderne You name not any Protestant Divine but Calvin who is flat against you for this purpose I referre you to learne it out of the Duplie of the most learned Doctors of Aberdeen You nominate no judicious Lawyers I know your Advocate Master Iohnstone is for you but the question is too Deepe for his shallow brain Covenanter From the mutuall contract betweene the King and the people as may be seene in the Acts of Parliament 9. Argument and Order of Coronation Anticovenanter Answ 1. To this I give