Selected quad for the lemma: book_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
book_n	king_n	law_n	see_v	2,683	5	4.1564	3	true

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
B06596	Sherlock against Sherlock. The master of the temple's reasons for his late taking the oath to their Majesties, answered, / by the rector of St. George Botolph-Lane. With modest remarks on the doctors celebrated notions of allegiance to soveraign powers.	Wagstaffe, Thomas, 1645-1712.	1691 (1691)	Wing W216A; ESTC R186142	12,557	24

he had done the House of Jeroboam chap. 16. ver 7. Ela succeeded Baash who had no better Title than his Father and yet Zimri who Slew him is accused of Treason for it v. 20. ZimriVsurpt the Kingdom when he had Slain his Master but he was only a vain Pretender to it when he wanted Power for when the People who were Encamped against Gibbethon heard that Zimri had Killed the King they made Omri King and went immediately and Besieged Tizza where Zimri had naken Possession of the King's Palace who finding no way to Escape set Fire to it himself and died in the Flames of it And now Israel was divided between Omri and Tibri but those who followed Omri prevailed against those who followed Tibri and Tribri died and Omri Reigned ver 21.22 All which plainly shews that where there is no regular Succession to the Kingdom there Possession of Power makes a King who cannot afterwards be resisted and opposed without the guilt of Treason But it was otherwise in the Kingdom of Judah which GOD himself had entailed on David 's Family as appears from the Example of Joam who was concealed by his Aunt Jehosheba and hid in the House of the Lord for Six Years During this Time Athaliah Reigned and had the whole Power of Government in her hands but yet this did not make her a Soveraign and irresistable Prince the right Heir of the Crown was yet alive And therefore in the Seventh Year Jehojada the Priest set Joash upon the Throne and Slew Athaliah and guilty of no Treason or Rebellion in doing so 2 Kings 11. which shews That no Usurpations can extinguish the Right and Title of a natural Prince Such Usurpers though they have the Possession of the Supreme Power yet they have no right to it and though GOD for wise Reasons may sometimes permit such Usurpations yet while his Providence secures the Persons of such Deposed and Banished Princes from Violence he secures their Title too As it was in Nebuchadnezzar's Vision Dan. 4.26 The Tree is cut down but the Stump of the Roots is left in the Earth The Kingdom shall be sure to them after that they shall know that the Heavens do Rule Case of Resistance of Supreme Powers Pages 127 128 129 130 131 132. Self-Defence was never allowed by GOD or Nature against publick Authority but only against Private Violence There was a Time when Fathers had the Power of Life and Death over their own Children Now I would only ask these Men if a Son at that time saw his Father coming to Kill him and that as he thought very unjustly he might Kill his Father to defend himself This never was allowed by the most Barbarous Nations in the World and yet it may be justified by this Principle of Self-Defence as it is urged by those Men which is a plain Argument that it is false It is an express Law That he that Smiteth his Father or his Mother shall be surely put to Death Exod. 21.15 and yet then the Power of Parents was restrained by Publick Laws And the Authority of a Prince is not less Sacred than of a Parent He 's God's Minister and Vicegerent and Subjects are expresly forbid to resist and it is a vain thing to pretend a natural Right against the express Law of God 2. For the Sole Power of the Sword is in the Kings hands and therefore no Private Man can take the Sword in his own Defence but by the Kings Authority and certainly he cannot be presumed to give any Man Authority to use the Sword against himself And therefore as Christ tells Peter He that takes the Sword shall Perish by the Sword He who draws the Sword against the lawfull Powers deserves to dye by it 3. We may consider also That it is an external Law That private Defence must give place 〈◊〉 publick Good Now he that takes Arms to defend his own Life and some few others involves a whole Nation in Blood and Confusion and occasions the Miserable Slaughter of more Men than a long Succession of Tyrants could destroy Such Men Sacrifice many Thousand Lives both of Friends and Enemies to a private Self-Defence and if this be the Law of Nature we may well 〈◊〉 Nature a Step-Mother that has Armed us to 〈◊〉 own Ruine and Confusion Case of Resistance pag. 203 204 205. Considerations and Reflections upon some of Doctor Sherlock's Celebrated Positions concerning Passive Obedience and Non Resistance WE shall now consider the Doctor 's Reasons why the King is Irresistible in all Cases which are these 1. That the King has a Personal Authority antecedent to all the Laws of the Land independent on them and superior to them Case of Resistance pag 196. Now This is not true for the King is King by Law and has his Authority from the Law Indeed our Authors says in the same Page That the great Lawyer Bracton by those very words of his Lex facit Regem was far enough from understanding that the King receives his Soveraign Power from the Law I confess I never was so well acquainted with Bracton as to know what secret Meanings he had contrary to the Sense of his Words and therefore cannot tell how far he was from understanding That the King receives his Soveraign Power from the Law but I am sure he was not far from saying so for he says it in the very next words Attribuat igitur Rex quod Lex attribuites videlicet Dommationem Potestatem He proves that the King is under the Law and ought to Govern by the Law because he is made King by the Law and receives his Power and Authority from the Law and then adds what the Doctor is pleased to cite Non est enim Rex ubi dominatur Voluntas non Lex He is no King who Governs by Arbitrary Will and not by Law that is no lawful English King Bracton must mean for still he may be a Good Outlandish and Assyrian King and Tyrant though his Arbitrary Will does all For the Doctor Case of Resist pag 41. quotes out of Dan. 5.18.19 That God gave Nebuchadnezzar such an Absolute Kingdom that vvhom he vvould he slevv and vvhom he vvould he made Alive and vvhom he vvould he set up and vvhom he vvould he pulled dovvn And I hope no Man Tyrannizes over his People who uses the Prerogative which God has given him therefore the Doctor rendring Lex facit Regem To Govern by Lavv makes a Soveraign Prince a King and distinguishes him from a Tyrant will pass with none but such ordinary Readers as he write his Book or and who never saw Bracton Chancellor For tescue likewise says That a limited Monarch receives his power a Populo estaxam which unriddles the Doctors Riddle in the same place Hovv the Law can make the King vvhen the King makes the Law But it is such a wonderful thing that there should be a Lavv to create a King and to enable him so far