Selected quad for the lemma: cause_n
Text snippets containing the quad
|
ID |
Title |
Author |
Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication) |
STC |
Words |
Pages |
|
A45087
|
The true cavalier examined by his principles and found not guilty of schism or sedition
|
Hall, John, of Richmond.
|
1656
(1656)
|
Wing H361; ESTC R8537
|
103,240
|
144
|
be my refuge till this tyranny be overpast Yet for all this Tyranny ne perdas saith David yet for all this he fell not into the sin of all sins which they stand so much on usâ—rping power in things spirituall Yes and that would they have found too Why did he call himself Head of the Church Indeed no Samuel did that for him He it was that said When thou wert little in thine own eyes the Lord made thee Head of the Tribes of Israel of which the Tribe of Levi was one for that Samuel must answer But Saul went further a great deal yea further then Oza For he took upon him to sacrifice in person himself to offer burnt offerings upon the very Altar the Highest part of all the Priests Office that is usurped further then ever did any And all this David knew yet it kept him not from saying ne perdas They never have done with persecuting and shedding Priests blood was Sauls singer in that too In that he passed He put the High Priest himself and fourscore and four more all in one day to the sword and all upon the single accusation of Doeg Innocent in the fact and all Loyall to him and all but for a douzen of bread given to David This could not but grieve David exceedingly it was for his sake yet he saith ne perdas though for all that And one case more I give in for advantage It is well known he was a Demoniack one actually possessed with an evill Spirit which is a case beyond all other cases yet destroy him not Abisai though So that if Abisai in stead of Inimicum tuum had said God hath shut up this Tyrant this Vsurper this Persecutor this possessed party this what you will David would have said no other then he did ne perdas still I would fain know which of all their destructive cases is here wanting They be all here all in Saul all in him at the time of this motion yet all alter not the case David saith still as he said If then all be in Saul all incident all eminent in him nay if his case be beyond all said it must be that David here saith Though he be any of these though he be all these destroy him not or destroy him and be destroyed destroy him and be the child of perdition I would be loth to deceive you There may seem yet to want one thing Here was no High Priest to excommunicate him or give warrant to do it yes that there was too for Abiathar scaped that great Massacre of Priests by Saul and now he was lawfull High Priest Now he fled to David thence and brought the Ephod with him so as by good hap the High Priest was with David now in the Camp and the Ephod too There wanted no just cause you see to proceed against Saul There wanted no lawfull Authority the High Priest we have There wanted no good will in Abiathar ye may be sure his father and brethren having been murthered by Saul so here was all or might have been for a word speaking all would not serve David is still where he was saith still ne perdas knew no such power in the High Priests censure was not willing to abuse it cannot see Quis any person to do it nor any cause for which it is to be done That Abisai may not do it nor Abiathar give warrant to it his charge is honest ne perdas His reason good Christus Domini His sentence just nor erit insons His challenge unanswerable quis mittet manum 46. By giving Subjects leave to rise and resist in such a case would also be the ready way to bring the Church and State into such a condition as to have no King in Israel and so bring in â—dolatry and Anarchy which in his Sermon upon that Text he impuâ—es to that want and therefore fol. 126. saith Our first thanks then shall be this first the ground of all the rest for a King This very thing that there is one and that this deâ—ect Non erat Rex hath not taken hold on us The shout of a King is a joyful shout was a true saying out of the mouth of a false Prophet Balaam but forced thereto by God That a joyfull shout and this a wofull cry Hos 10 3. Nonne ideo nobis nullâ—â— Rex quia non timemus Dominum Are we noâ— therefore without a King because we fear not God And our fear to God was not such but he might justly have brought us to the miseâ—able plight The more cause have we to thank him that we have one And when I say one I mean first any one for be he Nebuchadonosor yet must we pray for him Or be it Jeroboam him though God gave in his wrath yet he took away in his fury the worse wrath of the twain Oâ— be he who he will to have one is a matter of thanksgiving for bâ—â—â—er any then an Anarchy Better any one a King then every one a King and every one is more then a King if he do what he lists It calleth to mind the cry of the Beasts in the Fable when they were in consultation to submit themselves to the Lion as to their King For when it was alleadged it was like enough he would do they knew not well what what he listed which they had cause to fear they all cryed Praestat unum timere quà m multos Betâ—er one Lion do so then all the Bears and Wolves and wild Beasts of the Forrest as before they did First then for this that there is any King c. 47. And therefore in sum in what he speaks against Uâ—urpation he must be also understood as all others in that kind that is striving to cast what odium he can upon it that ambitious persons might be more discouraged from such undertakings and not as meaning that Subjects have right to rise or resist upon any pretence of civil or legal right him whom Divine Providence hath at any time brought in for to be Head of the Church And this especially if they find in this man all that can be expected in him that beginneth a Royal race that is both Election and Conquest like as in David He is not like Nimrod a stranger by birth and relation found to force himself in by his own greatneâ—s and power but being of the same Nation and Religion is at first freely chosen and followed and that by a more nâ—merous and eminent party then that which David first headed During which time he was also undeniably signal in those victories he obtained over such as were their enemies by which he might come to claim right and dominion over them even as by election he might claim it over he other of his own party and so have just dominion over all For it is a gross mistake to think that either Election or Conquest the two ways to transfer right in this kind can be otherwise or more truly
by the Bishop of Rome But upon serious excogitation of the whole I was brought to resolve that in the plea and condition of power the Pope now standeth the interposition of his authority would many times rather increase then be effectual to prevent injustice or silence differences whether acted between a Prince and his own Subjects or by one Prince upon another As for example some person or order of Princes subjects misliking their usage appeal to Rome as against injustice and oppression He must then to make his authority known to be useful determine for one party or another as his judgment shall be engaged If for the King then is he but heightned and farther warranted to do the like If for Thomas a Becket or the Barons against him as sometimes in England then are Subjects encouraged towards sedition and civil war another time Again before he can be supposed rightly to interpose between Prince and Prince in the justice of their quarrels they must all of them be brought to be of the same religion and perswasion with himself or else equally averse that he may be impartial Suppose that might be done yet since he may have kindred and relations may he not in that case favor a Nephew a Casar Borgia or the like against him that hath no relation or may he not respect interest and application so as again to favor such an one as King John not only above his Barons but other Princes too upon resignation of his Crown to be held of him and his successors But that was not all for partiality and the like is but that which the Subjects of any Monarch might object against his absolute rule But the great difference and difficulty is that since the absolute Monarch was in all causes and over all persons in his dominions supreme Governor there was hereby a sure way for prevention of civil war and disturbance which being the chief political evil would recompence those sufferings of inferior nature which could but occasionally happen and never be so general Whereas he claiming but Ecclesiastical power only and it being not at all determined or agreed upon what is certainly so or not so for prevention of question thereabouts I saw no possible hope to attain peace by his umpirage if any should say he did exceed his Commission unless he could make himself Judg of that too and so by degrees and in ordine ad spiritualia draw in cognisance of all matters whatsoever When that is done as Constantines Throne will better become him then S. Peters Chair so truly if such an Universal Christian Monarch there were which is not likely to fall to be he there might much good arise by it as to the general increase of Christian peace and profession As for that other way found out by some of that side mentioned by the late Archbishop sect 26. num 11. for advance of his Supremacie namely by setting up again one Emperor over all Christendom to rule in secular matters while himself would rule him and them too in what he would call spiritual with as supereminent splendor as the Sun doth the Moon I apprehend it still ineffectual to peace till those powers be joyned in one person unless the Emperor could indeed be content as I said to change places with him and become so subordinate as not to shine in any act of Moon like power but by the light and leave of this his Sun Could this in any likelihood have been eâ—pected I might happily then have given some credit to those slender probabilities of S. Peters primacie and the Popes succession in the chair In the mean time the usurped exercise of this his Ecclesiastick power where he had no jurisdiction as a power standing insubordinate to the Prince hath begotten that great mistake That there might be a Church in a Church that is one Christian Common-wealth in another 13. But let us hear judicious Mr. Hooker more at large in this business of the Church and in answer to such as would appropriate the notion of Church to those of their own perswasion only lib. 5. fol. 367. Church is a word which Art hath devised thereby to sever and distinguish that society of men which professeth the true Religion from the rest which professeth it not There have been in the world from the very first foundation thereof but three Râ—ligions Paganism which lived in the blindness of corrupted and depraved nature Judaism embracing the Law which reformed Heathenish impiety and taught salvation to be looked for through one whom God in the last days would send and exalt to be Lord of all finally Christian belief which yieldeth obedience to the Gospel of Jesus Christ and acknowledgeth him the Saviour whom God did promise Seeing then that the Church is a name which Art hath given to Professors of true Religion as they which will define a man are to pass by those qualities wherein one man doth excel another and to take only those essential properties whereby a man doth differ from creatures of other kinds So he that will teach what the Church is shall never rightly perform the work whereabout he goeth till in matter of Religion he touch that difference which severeth the Churches religion from theirs who are not of the Church Religion being therefore a matter partly of contemplation partly of action we must define the Church which is a religious society by such differences as do properly explain the essence of such things that is to say by the object or matter whereabout the contemplations and actions of the Church are properly conversant For so all Knowledges and all Vertues are defined Whereupon because the only object which separateth ours from other Religions is Jesus Christ in whom none but the Church doth believe and whom none but the Church doth worship we find that accordingly the Apostles do every where distinguish hereby the Church from Infidels and from Jews accounting them which call upon the name of our Lord Jesus Christ to be his Church If we go lower we shall but add unto this certain casual and variable accidents which are not properly of the being but make only for the happier and better being of the Church of God either indeed or in mens opinions and conceits This is the error of all Popish definitions that hitherto have been brought They define not the Church by that which the Church essentially is but by that wherein they imagine their own more perfect then the rest are Touching parts of eminencie and perfection parts likewise of imperfection and defect in the Church of God they are infinite their degrees and differences no way possible to be drawn unto any certain account There is not the least contention and variance but it blemisheth somwhat the unity that ought to be in the Church of Christ which notwithstanding may have not only without loss of essence or breach of concord her manifold varieties in Rites and Ceremonies of Religion but also her