Selected quad for the lemma: cause_n

Word A Word B Word C Word D Occurrence Frequency Band MI MI Band Prominent
cause_n act_n king_n parliament_n 3,554 5 6.8839 4 true
View all documents for the selected quad

Text snippets containing the quad

ID Title Author Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication) STC Words Pages
A36241 A defence of the vindication of the deprived bishops wherein the case of Abiathar is particularly considered, and the invalidity of lay-deprivations is further proved, from the doctrine received under the Old Testament, continued in the first ages of christianity, and from our own fundamental laws, in a reply to Dr. Hody and another author : to which is annexed, the doctrine of the church of England, concerning the independency of the clergy on the lay-power, as to those rights of theirs which are purely spiritual, reconciled with our oath of supremancy, and the lay-deprivations of the popish bishops in the beginning of the reformation / by the author of the Vindication of the deprived bishops. Dodwell, Henry, 1641-1711. 1695 (1695) Wing D1805; ESTC R18161 114,840 118

There are 2 snippets containing the selected quad. | View lemmatised text

already what has been pretended to the contrary from the Case of Abiathar and those other later Deprivations by the Heathen Magistrates And this is at present our Principal Dispute § LXIX No Reasoning from the Rights of the Jewish Princes to the Rights of Christian Princes now Indeed in this whole matter concerning Reasoning from the Jewish to the Evangelical Priesthood I have taken care to Argue barely from what was common to them both the Nature of Priesthood in general and in those very instances wherein even the Apostolical Christians admit the Argument Our Adversaries on the contrary when they Reason from the Princes Power then to the Power of Christian Princes now they do not Argue as I have done from the Priesthood simply considered but from the Power annexed to the Priesthood yet seperable from it according to the design of GOD in the particular Constitution The Power of Governing the Society whose holy Rights are administred by it is I confess very seperable from the Right of Priesthood in general and whether it was actually annexed to it or not is therefore to be judged by the particular constitution But particularly for the Jewish State I rather believe that it was not annexed to it For the Right of Government as annexed to the Priesthood is founded on the Right the Priest has to oblige subjects by excluding refractory Persons as such from partaking in his Sacrifices But so much Erastus has I think well observed that the only things that then hindred from the Sacrifices were only Legal incapacities such as not being of the Holy Seed or being under some Legal Pollution not any whatsoever immoralities of Life And therefore the Punishment for not standing to the award of the Priests was capital as being a disobedience to so much of the secular Government as it was Theocratical not exclusion from the Sacrifices of those who had been contemned by the delinguent Nor indeed was there that necessity that the Government even as to Spirituals should be annexed to the Priesthood then as there is under the Gospel now The Prince was then always obliged to be a Jew and therefore of the Religion establish'd for that Nation by GOD himself Now his being of an other than the true Religion is no hindrance by our modern Constitutions from having a Lawful Right to the secular Government Then the Prince had a better pretence as the Head of the Theocracy to command in affairs concerning GOD than any Prince living can now when no State pretends to be Theocratical Then all the concerns of the Peculium were confined to that single Nation which was wholly commanded by one Prince Now the concerns of every National Church are mixed with those of all the other National Churches in the World with whom their Prince has no concern at all This very consideration makes the National Church's Interests seperable from the Interests of their Prince of which he can therefore be by no means presumed a Competent Judge That Priesthood was not intended to be Practicable in a time of Persecution and Independence on the Civil Government On the contrary the want of all the Exercises of their Religion was the most dejecting consideration of their Captivities and one of the greatest inducements for good Men to be earnest with GOD in Prayer for a Restoration They were then to be without a Priesthood without an Ephod without a Teraphim And the Temple of the Lord was the Principal thing bemoaned by them who pretended any Zeal for their Nation or Religion No doubt on account of their losing all the comfort of Sacerdotal Ministrations which could be performed in no other place besides that particular Temple Then the loss of their daily Sacrifices was the highest Calamity that the Antichrist then expected could bring upon them And the perfect uselesness of the Priests afther the destruction of the Temple made Titus put the Priests to the Sword when the obstinacy of the Jews had obliged him to destroy the Temple So clear it was that that was not a Religion capable of subsisting in a Persecution as to the Exercises of it as a Communion But it is withal as clear that our Church was instituted in a Persecution with a Power of depriving disobedient Subjects of the benefits of Communion and with a Power of exercising Sacredotal Offices in that very State of Independecy on the Civil Magistrate And indeed that State was principally provided for here at the first Institution of the Church which was not so much as designed in the Jewish Church Besides the clear and express Revelation of Spiritual and Eternal benefits conveyed by our Evangelical Priest-hood is a thing peculier to the Gospel Yet this alone is sufficient to put it beyond all pretensions even of a Theocratical Magistracy designed only for Temporals Thus therefore it every way appears that more Power is by GOD himself annexed to the Evangelical than to the Legal Priest-hood This therefore is sufficient to overthrow our Adversaries Reasoning here that our Princes now may challenge all that Power that the Jewish Princes could formerly For they cannot challenge that which though it was not then has yet been since annexed to our Evangelical Priest-hood § LXX Our Present deprivations not justifiable by even our present Secular Laws Yet after all we can even from the Laws of of our Countrys and the Supremacy settled by those very Laws except against the Sentence of Deprevation passed against our Fathers as to their Spirituals The Supremacy in Causes Ecclesiastical is by all the Acts made concerning it vested not in the PARLIAMENT but in the KING And even as it is in the KING it was never intended for him so as that it might be in his Power to confound the several Courts and Jurisdictions to which Causes are appropriated by the Laws themselves The Acts for the Supremacy even in Temporals do not allow him to transfar any Cause from the Court appointed for it to his own hearing out of it nor even to any other Court than that to which the cognizance of it does properly belong This holds as in other Cases so in this also of the Deprivations of spiritual Persons And it is own'd to hold by Mr. Hooker himself in that very Book to which we are referred by our Adversaries He owns it with express application to the Case of the KING himself the Seat of the Supremacy in Spirituals He tells us that All Men are not for all things sufficient and therefore publick affairs being divided such Persons must be Authorized Judges in each kind as common Reason may presume to be most fit Which cannot of KINGS and PRINCES ordinarily be presumed in Causes meerly Ecclesiastical so that even common sense doth rather adjudg this Burthen to other Men. He owns that Bishops alone were before accustomed to have the ordering of such Ecclesiastical affairs He confesses that Virtuous Emperours such as Constantine the Great was made Conscience to
but England and France were then two distinst and perfectly independent Societies The same way as the BISHOP himself was the Head of the CHURCH and yet a Subject of the STATE therefore a Member of BOTH Societies antecedently to any such Conversions or any Pretence that could be therefore made for a coalition of both into one Society Conversion therefore thought it bring all Persons into one Society of the Church yet does not hinder but that the Two Societies of the Church and State continue as distinct from each other as formerly whilst the same things remain that made them two Societies formerly And Conversions do not hinder but that they may still remain so Still the Spirituals and Temporals are as distinct as ever Still the same Right continue for the Bishops to be the competent Judges of Spirituals as the Magistrate are of Temporals Still the same distinction of Laws continues by which the Two Societies are governed as formerly That the Church is to be governed by the Church which are made by a Consent of the Ecclesiasticks and that the State is governed by the Laws which receive their Sanction from the Lay-Authority Still the Independence continues that the Bishops are as supream unappealable Judges for Spirituals as the Magistrates are for Temporals Conversions I am sure do not hinder but that this also might have remained as it did formerly For such a coalition of the Two Societies as our Adversary reasons for it would be necessary that the Government of one of the Societies should surrender or acknowledge a dependence on the Government of the other But neither of them can be pretended at the first Conversions of Magistrates Neither of them now in the Case of the Church of England The name of Head on which our Adversary insists is long ago laid aside by Q. Elizabeth And one of our Articles disowns all Pretensions of our Princes to the power of preaching the Word and administring the Sacraments This Article is ratified and made Law by an Act of Parliament Upon these Considerations we can fairly take the Oath of Supremacy as thus intrepreted by the Legislators themselves without owning any subjection of the Bishops as to Causes purely Spiritual to the Supream Magistrate even in England So far the Church and State are yet even here from being made one Society as our Adversary pretends The Examples of Bishops taking out Patents for the Right of giving Orders were I believe never known before the Reign of HENRY the VIII And that I hope our Adversary himself will not plead as a Reign of Presidents If he do the Liberties of the People will be no more secure than those of the Clergy Nothing was security against him who made such manifest invasions on the Two Fundamental Securities MAGNA CHARTA and his own OATH taken at his CORONATION Thus clear it is that Conversions alone could not make any change in the Rights of Power in Spirituals of which the Church was possessed before notwithstanding that the Converts are thereby made one Body with the Church with which they were not one formerly § LIX The Church's Obligations are more necessary for the subsisting of the State than those she receives from the State are for hers If therefore the Majestrate will lay claim to a Right in Spirituals it must be on some other account than bare Conversion That he must rather lose than gain by as I have already shewn because in his Conversion he comes to the Bishop's terms not the Bishop to his Our Adversaries therefore have another Pretence for his Superiority in purely Spirituals That is the benefit that the Church enjoys by the Magistrate's favour and protection the honours and profits annex'd to the sacred Offices and the security she has thereby against Adversaries and the assistance of the secular Arm for reducing Rebellious Subjects by secular coercions For these things they think her obliged in Gratitude to remit some of her former Rights by way of compensation for them And this Obligation in gratitude they conceive sufficient to engage her to an implicite and intrepretative Contract to continue this remitting of Rights on her part if she will in reason expect that the Magistrate shall continue his Favours But I confess I cannot see proceeding on Principles that must be granted by all who believe Religion but that the disadvantage will still lye on the side of the Magistrate For by this way of Reasoning the implicite Contract for remitting Rights will lye on that side which is most obliged and that side will appear most obliged which receives more benefit by the commerce than it gives For this consideration of remitting Right on account of Gratitude comes only in by way of compensation for what is wanting on its own side to make the benefit it confers equal to that which it receives But I cannot imagine how the Magistrate can pretend his Favours equal to those which he receives by Religion especially the true Religion So far he is from exceeding them so as to expect any compensation for arrears due to him on ballancing his accounts It is by Religion and by those Obligations which nothing but Religion can make sacred and inviolable that he holds his very Throne it self If he hold his Throne by Compact nothing but Religion can hold the Subjects to the Contract made by them If by any other Right nothing but that can oblige them to pay him that which by any sort of Right soever is his due Where he has no force to exact duty from them nothing can restrain them but ties of Conscience and nothing alse can lay a restraint on their Conscience but Religion Where he has a power of Force yet even that is not near so formidable at the irresistible power of Heaven and the fear of future and eternal Punishments No Considerations but those can curb them from secret Practices which oftentimes subvert the greatest Humane Force by degrees insensible and therefore unaviodable Nor is any Religion so conget on these accounts as that which is truest and most acceptable to GOD. GOD may be obliged by the general Laws of Providence for the general Good of Mankind to inflict Imprecations made for securing Faith even in false Religions But he is most present at the Offices of his owe establishment and therefore they have the greatest reason to fear them who imprecate in that form which is most suitable to the ture Religion No Religion so formidable at that which threatens future and eternal Pains in case of Violation No Religion can so well assure Us of the future and eternal State as Revealed Religion No Revelation so well evidenced by Credentials attesting it in Ages of Writings and accurate Information as our Christian Religion No one Communion even of Christians so just and equal against Invasions on either side either of the Church or the Magistrate as that of the Primitive Christians and of these Churches which lately came the nearest to those