Selected quad for the lemma: cause_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
cause_n	good_a	lord_n	see_v	4,192	5	3.2926	3	true

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A90205	An indictment against tythes: or, Tythes no wages for Gospel-ministers: wherein is declared, I. The time when tythes were first given in England. II. By whom, and by whose authority and power tythes were first by a law established in England. III. To whom, and to what end and purpose tythes were first given, and after continued in England. IV. Ministers pretending a threefold right to tythes, 1. By donation. 2. By the laws of the nation. And 3. By the Law of God; examined and confuted ... To which are added, certain reasons taken out of Doctor Burgess his Case, concerning the buying of bishops lands, which are as full and directly against tythes, as to what he applied them. Likewise a query to William Prynne. By John Canne. By John Osborne, a lover of the truth as it is in Jesus.	Osborne, John, lover of the truth as it is in Jesus.; Canne, John, d. 1667?	1659 (1659)	Wing O525; Thomason E989_28; ESTC R203025	30,438	45

is to be feared under the sprinkling of a Vial. He hath had something of the mark of the Beast so long upon him as no wonder if a noysome and Grievous Sore be upon him for it Neither do I expect under the pain and torment he is but he will more and more blaspheme the name of God his Tabernacle them that dwell in heaven 4. And to observe here the wise mans counsel Pro. 26. 4 5. thus far I take notice of the man seeing he will be doing and by the ten idle Queries which he put forth the other day it is apparent his wit lies not that way I will put this Question to him Suppose a man hath a fair pool of water in his ground the which in time becomes corrupted Weeds grow Mud increaseth and Frogs creep into it Now to help this the Owner cuts a new channel and draws the Water out to another place and leaves the filth and corruption behinde The Question is and the Case is put to Will. Prynne in the behalf of the Frogs Whether the water be the Frogs because the pit is theirs in which the waters formerly stood and whether the Frogs have cause to croak foam as if they had wrong done them or condemn those Fishes for Hereticks Sectaries and Schismaticks which refuse the stinking Mud for the other Christal Stream This pit we will take to be the old Form of Government by King Lords and House of Commons the Weeds and Mud Tyranny and Idolatry of all sorts and sizes the Frogs Archbishops Bishops and the whole Hierarchie down to the Parish-Clerk not excluding the Lawyers the Waters the just Rights and Liberties of the People in things Civil and Ecclesiastical the Owner the People in their Representatives Now something is already done in cutting a new channel and drawing the Waters to another place to wit a free Commonwealth and to leave the Weeds and Mud behinde And here is some work for William Prynne if he can leave his peevish passion and be sober a while to shew us what wrong the owner doth to these Frogs and why they must be Sectaries Anabaptists Jesuites c. that prefer the sweet and wholesome waters of Truth and Righteousness before the Weeds and Mud of Tyranny and Idolatry We will allow William Prynne the Pit and the Weeds and Mud But the water is the Owners of the ground And therefore if the Peoples Representatives shall go forward in bringing away all the good Water to this other place I mean a Commonwealth and leave the Weeds and Mud to the Frogs in the Pit there are not a few will justifie their doing against all that William Prynne can say for the Pit the Weeds Mud and Frogs For conclusion Great is the difference among us about the Good Old Cause one saith it is thus and another takes it otherwise Now the way to be patient quiet contented it is to take notice that the Lord is coming forth to decide the controversie And it will not be long I am strongly perswaded but he will make it clear and certain that he may run that readeth whether the Case which William Prynne hath stated be the Good Old Cause or what others otherwise have asserted It was the Lord who by a wonderful appearing decided the Controversie between Moses and the Magicians so afterwards between Elias and the Priests of Baal I am apt to think the present difference about the Good Old Cause will not be decided but by some visible and eminent hand of God There have been many Appeals especially of late put up to God about it and I am waiting and many more by faith and prayer for an answer from Heaven that is shortly to see shame and final confusion upon whatsoever is not the Good Old Cause but cried up by corrupt men for self-interest and what is the Good Cause indeed to be glorious and alone exalted Be silent O all flesh before the Lord for he is raised out of his holy habitation Zech. 2. 13. From my house without Bishopsgate at the three Stills the 13th of the 5th month 1659. John Canne AN INDICTMENT Against TYTHES THe consideration of the great oppression that is now exercised in this land by imposing upon men that intolerable burthen of Tythes wich lieth heavy upon and is grievous to the people of this Nation in general and more particularly to the Husbandmen and Farmers of Lands who after great labor and charges in plowing and ordering their Land and sowing their Seed and maintaining their Family and Cattel and payment of Rents and other Charges and Taxes imposed upon them wait patiently for a plentifull Harvest to countervail their pains and charges but then cometh a Tythe taker with his Cart and sweepeth away in the name of a Tenth a fourth if not a third part of the Husbandmans profit But most especially this unlawfull payment of Tythes is most burthensome to the conscientious and faithfull Servants of Jesus Christ who desire to obey him and his Commandments These I say and such like considerations have incited me to inquire seriously and to search out diligently First the time 1. The time when 2. By whom 3. To whom and to what end when Tythes were first given in England Secondly by whom and by whose Authority a Law for payment of Tythes was first established and after confirmed And thirdly to whom and for what end and purpose Tythes have been formerly and yet are paid in England And of these I shall speak briefly in order as I have laid them down And first to the time when Tythes were first given 1. The time in England I finde it affirmed by several Authors that in the first Three hundred years after Christ no Tythes were paid in England but the Priests in those times were maintained by the free benevolence and contribution of the people as Tertullian Origen and Cyprian do testifie And in the next Three hundred years in the time of the Danes and Saxons Heathenism and Paganism did totally overspread this Land until about the year of our Lord Six hundred when Gegory the great sent over Augustine the Monk into England assisted with forty Preachers to convert the Saxons from Paganism to Popery which was effected in the time of Ethelbert the first Christian King of Kent who being converted was afterward an instrument for the conversion of his Nation the Saxons This Ethelbert is reported to have been very bountifull to the said Austine the Monk and gave him the Lordship and Royalty of his chief City Canterbury but that he gave him any Tythes or ever commanded Tythes to be paid to him or to any other or made any Law for payment of Tythes it doth not appear to me by any History Nor can it be proved that any Law was made for payment of Tythes in England until the year of our Lord 786. And then in the time of Off a King of Mercia which was in 2. By whom the time

Law never intended that any penalty given by the first branch of that Statute should be recovered in any temporal Court but if any place then in the Ecclesiastical Court onely And I am induced so to judge for these five reasons following First because if they had intended to have given Reason 1. power to sue at the Common-Law for any forfeiture given by that first branch they would therein as fully have declared their meaning as they did in the latter branch of that Act. Secondly Because this Act is called an additional Act Reason 2. added to the two former Acts of the 27 and 32 of Hen. 8. and herein onely some penalties added whereof that of treble value is one but nothing taken away by this Act from the said two former Acts and therefore the Proviso contained in the said Act of the 32 of Hen. 8. whereby all men are restrained to sue for Tythes in any temporal Court standeth still firm in full force and unrepealed And it is and hath been the opinion of some men that this penalty of treble value expressed in the said Act of 2. Edw. 6. was rather in terrorem to cause men for fear of a greater danger to pay their Tythes willingly then that the said forfeiture should be exacted Thirdly because the Bishops were at that time powerful Reason 3. in this land and then sitting in Parliament and can it be conceived that had they understood that the Parliament intended to give liberty thereby to sue for that forfeiture 〈◊〉 the Common-Law in temporal Courts and thereby to deprive the Bishops Courts of their Priviledges and their Officers of their profits that ever they would have consented to the passing of that Act for it is well known that they did alwayes endeavour to uphold their Ecclesiastical Courts and to continue and enlarge their own profits pomp and lordly dignity and were more willing to hold Plea in Causes that belonged not to their Cognizance then to abate any of their Priviledges as appeareth by a Prohibition directed to the Prelates Archdeacons c. of the Diocess of Norwich which is to be seen in Rastals Abridgement Fourthly because all the Judges in their Answers to Reason 4. the Bishops Objections in the fourth year of the late King James acknowledge that if the question be upon payment or setting out of Tythes they send it to the Ecclesiastical Court there to be determined Fifthly because it is most fit that where the principal Reason 5. viz. Tythes are to be recovered there the accessary viz. the forfeiture should be demanded for Tythes are the principal the forfeiture of treble value is but accessary Therefore they that say that they sue not for Tythes but for the forfeiture of treble value do but delude men as if they would teach them to build an House without a Foundation Tythes are the Foundation for if a man pay his Tythes there can be no forfeiture nor cause of action So that it is a meer juggle and a forged cavil of those men who so object Sir Edward Cook in the first part of his Instit saith That it is the most natural and genuine exposition of a Statute to construe one part of the Statute by another part of the same Statute for that best expresseth the meaning of the makers And again every penal Law is to be taken according to the letter of the Law without wresting or adding and not according to mens various conceits and interpretations And so King James very well told his Judges in the Star-chamber in the year of our Lord 1616. charging them to do Justice uprightly and indifferently without delay or partiality and yet not to utter their own conceits but the true meaning of the Law not making laws but declaring the Laws and that according to the true sence thereof remembring that their Office is jus dicere and not jus dare to declare the Law not to give a Law And the same King James in a Speech to the Parliament in the year of our Lord 1607. telleth them That as every Law would be clear and full so the obscurity in some points of our written Law and want of fulness in others the variation of Cases and mens curiosity breeding every day new questions hath inforced the Judges to judge in many Cases here by Cases and Presidents wherein I hope Lawyers themselves will not deny but that there must be a great uncertainty And where there is variety and uncertainty although a just Judge may do rightly yet an ill Judge may take advantage to do wrong and then are all honest men that succeed him tyed in a manner to his unjust and partial conclusions Wherefore leave not the Law to the pleasure of the Judge but let your Laws be looked into for I desire not the abolishing of the Laws but onely the clearing and sweeping off the rust of them and that by Parliament our Laws be cleared and made known to all the Subjects So far King James And I desire with all mine heart that you our Worthies the Representatives now assembled in Parliament and all others that may succeed you would seriously consider and set upon the regulating of the Laws of this Commonwealth and repeal such as are unnecessary reform such as are faulty explain such as are dark and mystical and make such new ones as may be to the glory of God and comfort of all his faithfull and peaceable Servants But it may be some will here object and say that Objection Tythes are paid in England by an ancient custom and our Law is grounded much upon custom Then I demand who first brought in that custom was it Answer not the Pope and why is not that custom one and the same in all places of this Land and why are there several and divers customs and manner of tythings in several Parishes And why are not all reduced to one kinde and manner of tything in all the Parishes of England For in some Parishes the tenth of all the Corn Grain and Hay is paid in kinde and in some Parishes onely a small sum of money and in others a piece of Meadow is allowed for the Tythe of all the Hay arising yearly within that Parish Also in some Parishes tythe-milk is paid in kinde every tenth day during the greatest part of the year and in other places but two pence or it may be less for a Cows milk for the whole year If any one of these Customs be good and warrantable why are not all the rest made conformable thereunto But if all be evil as certainly they are why are they not all abolished For it is a Maxime in the Law Malus usus abolendus est An evil Custom is to be abolished Doctor Ridley in his view of the Civil-Law Pag. 147. saith That the Customs we pay our Tythes by at this day were setled upon this Kingdom by the Popes Legats in Provincial and Synodal constitutions And Mr