Selected quad for the lemma: cause_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
cause_n	king_n	law_n	prerogative_n	1,605	5	10.3114	5	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A78622	A raging wave foming out his own shame. Or, An answer to a book lately published by Richard Hains (a person withdrawn from) entituled, A protestation against usurpation. Wherein appears such a measure of envies bitterness heaped up, pressed down, and running over, as the like in some ages hath not appeared, by his many false accusations, and malicious insinuations, thereby to provoke (if possible) both the chief magistrate, and all men of what degree soever, to have suspicious thoughts of the innocent, easily proved to have no other fouudation [sic] but his own evil imaginations. : Wherein also the church of Southwater by him contemptuously rendered papistical in their act of withdrawment from him, is vindicated and cleared, first, by apostolical authority, secondly, by Rich. Haynes his own pen. / Written by Matthew Caffyn ...	Caffyn, Matthew, 1628-1714.	1675 (1675)	Wing C207A; ESTC R173317	24,862	30

to a paper did appear against him as also others with the assistance of Council learned in the law as Sir Ed. Thurlow of Rigate Sir Hen. Peckham of Chichester before the Lord Keeper of the Broad seal where after some debate of the case he having also able Council on his side his expectation was then frustrated and his design rejected as unreasonable and illegall for said the Council what if a man shall devise a new way to thresh his corn shall he therefore have a Patent surely no and what then may these be deemed innocent as doubtless he conceives them so to be in their opposition for the sake of mens outward advantages and this too after his Majesties grant of the same and may we be published to the world as contemners of his Majesties prerogative in our opposition for the sake of mens foul-advantages without evident demonstration of his malice against us In the Apostles times matters of wrong were punishable as now they are by the civill laws of the Kings and rulers then in being yet saith the Apostle 1 Cor. 6.1 dare any of you having a matter against another go to law c. what would R. H. if he had lived in those times have published the Apostles as one that contemned the Kings prerogative if not then what besides a bitter root of envy for some other cause is the ground of this reason-less and also law-less publication Besides if what is reported to us be true that the statute upon which Patents are grantable is to gratifie the ingenuity of such as by considerable charge or long study shall invent something for publike good as we incline to believe because the Lord Bridgman with Councill learned in the law put a stop to his designe and also because R. H. would as yet never produce the statute in such cases provided if this we say be true then it remains yet a Question to some whether this Patent was not fraudulently procured that is to say by suggesting something of ingenuity study or charge beyond what in uprightness he could do for since the common custome of men long before was to dry the seed of Clover and then to thresh it for which no man meerly mortall coveted a Patent we know not how reasonably to think that to dry the seed of Nonsuch and then to thresh it which R. H. counts a worthy invention especially considering such a president before should be numbred among the deserving arts and inventions of ingenious men As to the inhuman and unchristian suggestions of R. H. against me in relation to contempt of authority so often repeated by him wherein he hath out-done the deeds of the worst of men to me for what end other then persecutor-like to provoke if possible the chief Magistrate against me I know not I only shall adde this more that such has been my doctrine whereever I came with respect to Christian obligations to be subject to the higher Power and to obey every ordinance of man for the Lords sake such also has been my publick reasonings and private conferences in divers places in opposition to that spirit that despiseth dominion such has been my forwardness not only that Festus his civill laws should be observed but that his person also should be honoured as Most noble Festus though as to matters of religion he be found telling Paul that he is besides himself yea and such has been in that case my principles many years ago published in print which is yet visible subscribed by me and many others as that I do not suppose the unworthy insinuations of a man thus over-mastered with the spirit of envy will gain credit among many if any But I may not omit here to let the Reader understand how R. H. having endeavoured as aforesaid to render me an object of hate to the chief Majestrate descends pa. 28. to provoke as may be thought the Judges of Assize and Sessions against me saying that I have complained against them as acting rigidly and illegally but in what when or where he assigns not nor surely will he say that for several years we have had any communion about such persons nor that he did give me the least Item of such a thing before this publication being my first information which surely may be a sufficient demonstration of the unworthinesse of his spirit but while I know nothing of this nature which he abusively suggesteth against me this I well know that my principles have been as my practise have declared when I have been called before persons of such qualities not only to submit to the King as supream but also unto governours as Judges sent by him and if it any time there should be required that which should be thought by any to savour of rigidness or otherwise seem to them unlawfull or illegall and so in conscience to God they cannot actually obey that there remains no other lawfull way for such to take save only patiently to suffer or humbly to intreat favour nor is this all for in pa. 18. he descends to persons of an inferior quality saying that I rebuked him for being conversant with great persons to raise in them also as may be thought a prejudiciall opinion against me and from thence he descends in the same page saying that I also forbid him to be a peace-maker amongst his neighbours he being extreamly unwilling as may hereby be thought that any from the highest to the lowest should have a good opinion of me to all which I answer that there is no more true then that from some fears and godly jealosie that he might among some persons of quality take that liberty which would neither be honourable to the truth nor conduceable to their good as also from some fears that while his understanding was deeply exercised about civil controversies he might as some have forget his Christian obligations and so misbehave himself no more I say true then that upon this account I did cautionally speak something to him about it the truth of which our approbation then as well as now of persons that occasionally are conversant with persons of note and also that are concerned in matters of controversies sufficiently demonstrate nor yet is this all for in pag. 18. he also declareth that for what he can understand familie-duties is spoken against rather then encouraged thereby to beget as one at least wise may think an ill opinion among the several sorts of professors of our times concerning me whenas there is to my knowledge no other foundation for these unworthy reflections as my doctrine and practice to many may declare save only that sometimes I have dropped some words importing some dislike to such proceedings of men therein as seem to be meerly customary and more especially when they thereby pretending religious dispositions shall in the mean time live in religious actions paradventure in their families too as R.H. may well know some have done for that end has been my so

men who nevertheless strictly charged the Christians of those times as they tendred charity on the one hand and their avoiding evill on the other hand not to eat the same when any thereby was greived or offended and surely much more reason have Christians in all humility to yeild their necks to this Apostolical yoke when not only the offences of their brethren within but also manifest danger of stumbling those that are without shall be inviting and obliging them thereunto nor may this be restrained to such meats only because the Apostles words doth not only imply but plainly express any thing else besides that might as well as meats occasion stumbling or offence ver 21. to which agrees the Apostles advice elsewhere saying whether ye eat or drink or whatsoever mark ye do do all to the glory of God which that they might effectually do in the next words he adviseth them to give none offence to any c. 1 Cor. 10.31.32 But oh that R. Haines would consider from his own pen if not from the Apostles the justnesse and legalitie of our proceedings against him lest otherwise he give further cause and ground to men thereby to believe that 't is a spirit of envie for some other cause and not conscience of his duty towards God as he would insinuate that provokes him to this kinde of undertaking however thus he declareth pag. 22. that if the sence of the Apostles words had been That Christians should give no offence to the cursing and reviling sons of Belial or to the Church of Antichrist as for laws and prerogatives what have we to do with them that then Mark our practise had been somewhat authentick that is to say undeniable and approved of all men Now that the unbelieving Jews and gentiles whom Christians on the one hand were obliged to give no offence unto as on the other hand not to offend the Church of God were very many of them such that is men greatly polluted with sin is against all contradiction true for that not only the publicans and sinners of the Jews but also the professing scribes and phraisees were found defaming and reviling both Christ and Christianity nor surely can R.H. as clouded as he is think otherwise of the prophane and Idolatrous Gentiles and so were they truly the Church of Antichrist that is as surely he intends such as were against Christ and so doubtless no more deserving nor yet so much Christians carefulness not to offend them then the many persons that profess Christ in our times nor may he think himself innocent nor free from transgression if he should or any others with him conceive the Apostles charge to intend only that Christians should give no offence to those Jews and Gentiles that were more sober serious and honest then those publicans and sinners amongst them were since even such men in this case as well as others if we may not say more then others they being so much concerned therein were in like manner offended with him and condemned his practise or will he think it becomes him to publish those that have shewed their dislike to his proceedings to be such only as are the cursing reviling sons of Belial if so and that such his publication were upon just grounds yet should he not if he had learned of Christ who so much tendred the good of publicans and sinners be regard-less of or by any means despise their low estate but alas it seems he has rather of late learned of that pervese and froward generation of the Pharisees and so is found walking in their steps upbraiding Christians now as they did Christ then for being such friends to publicans and sinners the reviling and defaming sons of men while they only now as their master Christ did then tender the good of their souls and therefore at all times unwilling that any occasion of stumbling should be given them But if R. H. shall still object and say that although the Apostles charge in relation to the not giving offence to sinful men should be as aforesaid and so your practise thus far justified yet it may not be thought that the principles of the Apostles could admit them to say also as for laws and prerogatives what have we to do with them upon which also I concluded the authentickness of your practice My answer is that so far their principles did admit as their practise declares as to endeavour that Christians should forbare their right to and privilidge of eating those meats which by the civil laws and prerogative of the chief magistrate they might partake of and so practically they declared that they had nothing to do with the laws and prerogatives of their rulers as from thence to plead the lawfulnes of eating those meats when the eating thereof apparently tended to the greiving and stumbling others though they deemed it their weaknes to be greived at it and so that great and mortal duty of charity thereby neglected towards them and although the Apostles had many bitter and cruel adversaries yet was there none at least wise as we read of so vile and base as thereupon to publish them as such that contemned the laws and prerogative of the civil Magistrates and yet alas R. H. ceaseth not thus unworthily to deal with me for no other cause save only that I with others endeavoured to stop him in his Patent-designe and not to have pleaded the priviledge of the law and his Majesties prerogative when his design so apparently tended to the grieving the brethren and stumbling others though he had deemed it their weaknes to be grieved at it and so that great and moral duty of charity thereby neglected towards them But oh how great is the obscurity of the much to be lamented fruit of this mans enmity that he doth not consider while he so much speaks of contempt of authority that there is no law commanding or requiring men that they must have or else rebels by law but rather that persons whose ingenuity justly requires it may have Patents marked as a priviledge grantable by his Majesties prerogative whose prerogative therein what Christian ever questioned therefore as himself pleads there being no law requiring it there can be no such transgression as the contempt of authority in the perswading from it those pious ends aforesaid being the ground of such their endevours so that still the reader may observe that our proceedings against R. H. is not only justified by Gods word but by his own pen also If yet this be not sufficient the reader may here also read his own words which elsewhere we have under his hand as thus if saith he my brother being a Jew newly converted to the faith and whilst he is young and weak dares not eat swines flesh and therefore will have no communion with those that he knows to eat thereof because the law forbids it shall I therefore eat swines flesh whereby to offend this weak brother God forbid saith R. Haines