Selected quad for the lemma: cause_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
cause_n	ecclesiastical_a	king_n	supreme_a	3,134	5	8.5794	4	true

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A77907	A caveat for subjects, moderating the Observator. Wherein his chiefest arguments are confuted, the Kings iust prerogative manitained [sic]: and the priviledge of the subiect no wayes preiudiced: by William Ball, Gent.	Ball, William.	1642 (1642)	Wing B587; Thomason E118_7; ESTC R19366	9,502	16

hence that the People are the sole efficient Cause of the Kings Power but onely the secundarie and partiall Now when it is said that id quod efficit tale est magis tale it is to be understood of entire and totall causes but in this case the People being at the most but the partiall cause of the Kings Power the Axiome of Rule faileth as for example the Moone being of her selfe a Body darke receives her Light at least wise her chiefest from the Sunne as from an entire cause the Sunne is therefore truly sayd to be more Light being the totall subordinate cause of Light in this case therefore it is truly sayd id quod efficit tale est magis tale but the Sunne mediante homine producit hominem mediante Leone Leonem mediante Planta Plantam for that the Sunne affordeth to all sensible and vegitable creatures an influx of vigour and naturall heat yet for as much as the Sunne is in the production of these creatures but a partiall and not an integrall cause it were absured to say that the Sunne were more a man then is a man or more a Lyon then is a Lyon or more a Plant then is a Plant and so is it to say that because a King may acknowledge his Power in part received from the Peoples generall consent that therefore the People have more Power then himselfe The Observator telleth us Page 3. That the Kings dignitie was erected to preserve the Communalty the Communalty was not created for his service This somewhat too harsh especially if wee consider our King to be in all Causes as well Ecclesiasticall as Civill next and immediately under Christ supreme Head and Governour such words would have beene better accommodated to a Duke of Venice then to a King of England The Iewes I beleeve when they asked a King at Gods hands were somewhat inclining to the Observators opinion for they desired a King for their owne ends chiefely to Iudge them and to fight their Battailes not well considering that if they had a King hee must and ought to have a Kingly Dominion over them Whereupon God caused the Prophet Samuel to instruct them concerning the Praeeminence of a King and that if they would have a King a King would be such and such a man as is evidently characterized in the first of Samuel chap. 8. where amongst other things verse 17. the Prophet sayth Hee will take the Tenth of your Sheepe and yee shall be his servants Where by the word will hee sheweth the Authoritie which Kings would have and by the word shall hee sheweth the Obedience that subiects should have nor did the Prophet speake of some or to some few onely but of all and to all the people at least-wise to all the chiefest of them saying Yee shall be his servants I desire therefore that the Observator and all his other adhaerents would take more speciall notice of this Text of the Prophet and that of Saint Pauls confirmation of this Text Let every soule be subiect to the higher Power For though Christian Monarchs ought not by the Rules of Christianitie to Tyrannize nor make our Sonnes their Slaves or our Daughters their Concubines and the like as did many of the Kings of the Gentiles and some of the Iewes yet ought they not to be thought so contemptible as that the Communaltie was no way created for their service The Observator sayth in the same Page That the right of Conquest cannot be pleaded to acquit Princes of that which is due to the people as the authors and ends of all Power for meere Force cannot alter the course of Nature and frustrate Law and if it could there were more reason why the people might iustifie Force to regaine due libertie then the Prince might to subvert the same By the Observators leave for his first Clause it is answered alreadie That in Monarchies the people are not the authors or ends of Power for the second Clause That meere Force cannot alter the course of Nature or frustrate the tonour of Law that is to say that meere Force cannot captivate and debase a people by nature free living under a law of common consent I suppose the words cannot alter should have been cannot de jure alter or ought not to alter c. For that force can alter and de facto hath altered the freedom and lawes of people and nations is known to most men Histories and Chronicles testifying to the world the several alterations forms of government which conquerors have induced but whether they ought so to have done is a question yet should the Observator and his adherents take advice that though in Nature there is a parity of mankind and therefore dominion may not seeme to be intended by nature yet God the authour of Nature foreseeing the fall of man and the depravation in nature which did ensue thereof intended power and dominion and that some should bee masters and or hers servants some command and others obey some should become slaves to tyrants others subiects to free Monarks others members of popular Estates and these things God hath ordained by his divine wisedome according to his will and disposes and alters them at his pleasure But as for the pot it aught not to say to the Potter Why hast thou made mee thus It is enough for it to know that there is no power but of God and so to be appliable to the use it was made for if for hononr to honour if for servility to servility being subiect for conscience sake Rom 13.5 Of a strange nature therefore are those words viz. There were more reason why the people might justifie force to regaine due liberty then the Prince might to subvert the same If this doctrine had been good our Saviour would surely have counselled the Iewes when they asked him whether it were lawfull to give tribute to Caesar to have kept their money in their purses or to have made up a stock of it and by force to have sought to regaine their due liberty from Caesar and not have bid them Give unto Cesar what is Cesars If it be alledged that in case Christ had counselled the Iewes so they would have plaid the Iewes inceed and have accused him of high treason What then would Christ have concealed or did he at any time conceale the truth for seare of the Iewes accusations When hee was coniured to expresse whether or no hee were the Sonne of God a thing more hatefull to the Iewes eares then the denying of tribute could have beene to the eares of the Romans Christ answered Thou hast said it which is as much as Yes But suppose the Iewes would have accused him of high treason in case hee had denied tribute to Cesar and that God would not have such a vile imputation as treason laid on the redeemer of the world Yet had regaining of due liberty by force been lawfull Christmight have said Ye may give tribute