Selected quad for the lemma: child_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
child_n	prince_n	son_n	tribe_n	4,199	5	12.4429	5	true

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A44305	A survey of the insolent and infamous libel, entituled, Naphtali &c. Part I wherein several things falling in debate in these times are considered, and some doctrines in lex rex and the apolog. narration, called by this author martyrs, are brought to the touch-stone representing the dreadful aspect of Naphtali's principles upon the powers ordained by God, and detecting the horrid consequences in practice necessarily resulting from such principles, if owned and received by people.	Honyman, Andrew, 1619-1676.	1668 (1668)	Wing H2604; ESTC R7940	125,044	140

accusing him to the Magistrate by information or sufficient proof So also in the case of apostasie of a City a judicial process is required 14. ver Thou shalt enquire and make search and ask diligently and behold if it be truth and the thing certain c. Pelargus notes on the place Ne indicta causa quispiam temere à nimium fervidis condemnetur actio à Magistratu est instituenda post famam publicam defensio reo est concedenda But this man will have meer private persons without any judicial proceeding by the Magistrate to execute vengeance against all apostate Magistrates and Ministers and People This he furiously instigates people to do and by him and his party all are held Apostates who differ in a point of external Church-government from them albeit they hold fast the true Protestant Religion according to Gods Word and our good Laws in the integrity of their souls The other place abused by him is Josh 22.17 18 19. Naph p. 19 which he thinks gives warrand for private persons to use the revenging Sword upon Apostates for turning away Gods wrath But how absurdly abuseth he the holy Scripture It is most clear they were no private persons that transacted that business with the children of Reuben Gad and Manasseh nor the minor part of that people of God The Congregation of the Judges and Princes of the people conveened under the conduct of Joshua their Judge then living Phineas the high Priests son with the rest of the Princes of the Tribes are sent to treat with the Reubenites anent the altar they had set up and they return a satisfying answer Now let any judge what makes all this for the encroachment of meer private persons upon the use of the Magistrates avenging Sword on Apostates Besides the body of the peoples concurring we have the Magistrates supreme and subordinate acting their parts in their station who had they not used their Authority had that supposed defection been indeed real had been truly guilty of sinful connivance As to the third place cited Judg. 22. in the case of Israel and Benjamin that time was indeed the time thrice spoken of Judges 17.6.18.1.21.25 When there was no King in Israel every man did what is right in his own eyes if this be aimed at by this man his heart and wayes can tell It is hard to show what the Government about that time was Martyr on 18. of the Judges tells us the People of God in these times were under the power of the Philistines Collapsa erant omnia saith he quod Rege ac Magistratu Respublica destitueretur Yet shall we not think it likely but they retained somewhat of their Sanhedrim appointed Deut. 17. which in such a horrid case might draw together in an extraordinary meeting but let it be so that the Government was democratick then which cannot be proven yet seing it is the body or major part of the People that uses the Sword against the lesser it makes nothing for this Libeller who will have the minor part to use the Sword to punish Magistrates of all degrees and the major part of the people also if they have strength enough As to Achans case Jos 7. There is nothing in it to justifie private persons rising against the Magistrates and plurality of the people to avert the judgements of God nor for using violence upon them in case of their sinning against God which is the Libellers position what was done to Achan was done by the Supreme Magistrate Joshuah and not by meer private persons usurping his power Achans sin being so secret and unknown could not involve the whole multitude into sin and render them obnoxious to divine wrath they not knowing it far less being accessory to it And albeit it be said Israel hath sinned 11. v. yet as Diodate and others say well the meaning is one of Israel hath sinned not the whole collective body and although by occasion of that sin of one member of the body other members are smitten yet in the justice of God these smitten members had their own guiltiness drawing on strokes upon them the out-letting whereof was in divine wisdom ordered upon occasion of Achans sin These two things we are peremptory in 1. That God in his holy justice doth not punish any part of a people for the sins of another part to which they are no wayes accessory only they tollerate what they cannot amend keeping within compasse of their calling albeit in his holy Providence and Wisdom he may and doth often take occasion of punishing one part of a People for their own sins from the sinning of another part of that same Body and Corporation Every man that is punished hath in himself the meritorious cause of the punishment albeit the rise of the execution of the punishment hic nunc be occasion'd by the sins of neighbours or members of that same body 2. In this we are peremptory that whatever opportunities the Lord in his holy Wisdom doth take of punishing one part of a people upon the breaking out of the sins of another part of a people yet private persons have no warrand thereupon to usurp the Magistrates Sword nor to use it against himself if he be the offender or against other offenders and the pretence of turning away Gods judgements from our selves will not justifie such disorder and intrusion beyond the lines of our Calling This is the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the true question betwixt us and this man with his complices in every case where he apprehends defection he will have private men usurping the Magistrates punishing and revenging Sword against all for averting Gods wrath albeit to violent him or his in matter of Religion he affirmes is the greatest oppression He thinks he and his complices may force all by the Sword to their way but must not be forced by any Who can endure such Turkish Tyrranny such Doctrines and Practices so subversive of humane Societies If he or his consorts can produce either Scripture Command or allowed Example warranding any party of meer private persons to take and use not only the defensive Sword but the avenging and punishing Sword against Magistrates of all degrees and against the Body of a people upon pretence of Religion or any other we shall kiss his hands and humbly yeeld to Gods truth accounting this our greatest victory otherwise we must say he is a very word●e Thraso to tell us that any thing he sayes perverting the sense of Scripture may stop the mouth of all contradiction and we must look upon him as Sathans instrument to introduce confusion in the world And though he pleads for private persons falling upon Magistrates and others of the Common-wealth for their sins that Gods wrath may be turned away in their punishment it hath no weight with us for albeit the Lord may in his holy wise Providence take the rise of the out-letting of his judgements on some from the sins of others related

submission Pi●u● or out of any Principle of Conscience but prudential and politick because they are not in probable capacity to give him Battel if they had the tempting opportunity and capacity the case would be altered Then not only violent resistance should come to be duty but pulling of the Magistrate out of his chair of Government as we will hear punishing him and placing themselves though but private Men in his room How contrary such principles and practices of private Mens non-submission to and counter-acting of Church-judicatories supposed to do wrong are unto the Word of God how subversive of Church-government how introductory of Schisme Heresies and all Mischiefs into the Church is well discovered by the learned Reviewer of the Pamphlet intituled Presbytery no Papacy Protesters no Subverters And with equal reason may the same grounds be made use of against this Mans inciting all private persons to counter-act the Magistrate violently when they think he doth them wrong or when they account their Sentences unjust As certain confusion comes on the Church if the Principles of that Party be entertained so let People once drink in this Mans Doctrine in reference to the State there shall be no end of sedition no security for the powers ordained by God for any private persons are made judges of the justice of the Magistrates Sentences and Punishments and what Man will readily condemn himself if he may be admitted to be judge in his own cause And upon their own private judgement of the injustice of the Magistrates dealing with them are allowed without any further prerequisite to use violence against him pull the sword out of his hand and pull himself out of his seat onely there must be probable capacity for this and nothing excuses from not doing so but want of that capacity If that be wanting there must be submission to unjust Sentences not out of any consciencious respect to the Power but ad redimendam majorem vexationem This is the Libellers mind Such Doctrine surely is neither consonant to Gods Word to the practices of his dear and approven People to the mind of his soundest Servants nor to sound Reason Who ever will consult the holy Oracles of God will find that not only is obedience commanded to be given to Magistrates in their lawful injunctions and submission not only for wraths-sake but also for conscience-sake to their just punishments of sin and wickedness who ever re-offends or violently resists the Magistrate in either of these no doubt resists the Ordinance of God and receive to themselves damnation Rom. 13.2 but also that there is a submission required to be yielded them even when they put us to suffer wrongfully and unjustly may be evidently gathered from Scripture grounds in the case of unjust suffering God hath not left his people without direction what to do in reference to Magistrates abusing their power It is true as hath been said the Lord hath not given a moral power or warrand to any invested with Authority to do evil or unjustly concerning that the question is not But the question is what duty is owed by the Subject unto the Magistrate especially the Supreme for there may be remedies had against the injuries of the inferior by appellation in case of his male-administration and unjust Laws or Sentences according to these Laws or Executions according to Sentence whether they may violate or violent the person invested with Authority and not submit to him but counter-act him by force in self-defence against his violence or if they be bound in conscience or by any Law of God to submit humbly to what he inflicts although unjustly if they can neither move him by their humble petitions to forbear them nor can flee from his wrath or go out of his Dominions This man and his Complices maintain that if the Magistrate abuse his power in making unjust Laws or punishing according to these any private man or company of men that think themselves strong enough for the Magistrate ought never to suffer but use forcible resistance against the Magistrate abusing his power and that all the patience that is required of Christians toward oppressing Magistrates is only to bear suffering patiently when they are out of capacity of acting and may not better do and to suffer patiently when they see they cannot repress the violence of the unjustly-dealing Magistrate with a sufficient contrary violence This Doctrine favouring so strongly of carnal selfie-nature and being too suitable to the way of beasts who know no other thing but to be carried with a natural impetus to repay violence with violence till they be over-powered we utterly dislike and do assert according to the Holy Scriptures That even when Magistrates deal unjustly or put any to suffering wrongfully albeit they are for this to give a dreadful account and albeit Subjects are to judge of their actions as they deserve and not approve their malversation but modestly witness against it as there is opportunity yet suffering persons are bound to a passive submission or obedience enduring wrongs done to them not only with respect to Gods providential Ordinance by which their suffering comes to pass but with respect to his institutive Ordinance of Magistracy wherewith the persons afflicting them are invested albeit in the particular acts concerning them abusing their power For albeit the abuse of the power be not of God yet the abused power is of God and the person invested therewith must have respect from the sufferer other respect then is to be given to a private invader intuitu officii not intuitu abusus officii and this respect is patient submission under the affliction though unjustly inflicted and not daring to re-violent the person invested with Magistratical power although in a particular toward us he abuse his power to commit our persons and our cause to him that judgeth righteously not offering to move sedition albeit we were able for it If we shall only look to these three things in the Scripture we shall see ground for what is said 1. Consider what is required of Children toward their Parents unjustly afflicting them and likewise from Servants toward their Masters and by analogy we may learn somewhat of the mind of God of the duty of Subjects to their Princes who are their political Fathers and have a despotical and lordly power over them For Children Heb. 12.9 10. We had Fathers of our flesh who corrected and chastned us after their own pleasure and we gave them reverence which in the apodosis of the similitude is expon'd subjection v. 9. This is not only spoken of narrativè but approbativè if it were not so the argument taken from our carriage to Parents to enforce reverent subjection to God were not good The Apostle approves the reverend subjection of Children to their Parents though unreasonably and with mixtures of unjust passion correcting them he allows not the deed of the Parent for his own pleasure afflicting the Child but

judgement But as to the Scriptures he abuses to prove that people are involved in guiltiness or made obnoxious to the judgements of God by the sins of their Rulers albeit they have no accession thereunto but only not violent resisting them and that one part of people may be so involved in sin and wrath by the sins of another part and that therefore they ought to use violent resistance against the sinning Rulers or People The first place is Jer. 26.15 where the Prophet Jeremiah 8. ver is apprehended by the Priests the Prophets and all the people for his faithful preaching 9. ver All the people were gathered together in the house of the Lord against him and said thou shalt surely die whereupon the Princes come and sit in the entry of the new gate of the Lords house and the Priests accuse him before them ver 10 11. The Prophet Jeremiah delivered his message to them all avows his commission to the Princes and to all the people closing his speech submissively 14 15. Behold I am in your hand do unto me as seemeth good and meet unto you But know ye for certain if ye put me to death ye shall surely bring innocent blood upon your selves and upon this City and upon the inhabitants thereof Where two things are to be marked 1. That Jeremiah is speaking to the Princes and all the people or the great confluence of the body of the people at that time warning them not to meddle with his blood the Princes that they should not unjustly condemn him the people that they should not consent to nor co-operate with an unjust sentence as to the execution thereof as the manner of execution was amongst that people stoning c. And 2. he certifies both that if they consented and co-operated to his death they should bring innocent blood upon themselves and upon the city and inhabitants thereof he doth not at all incite the people to rise up and rescue him by violence out of the hands of Rulers if they should give sentence of death against him neither did ever any of the holy Prophets instigate people to use violent resistance against their perverse Magistrates nor did they ever reprove directly or indirectly that sin of non-violent resistance to Magistrates as some excessively bold do averr But only warns Princes and people both that they be not by consent or concurrence accessory to his death lest it should bring vengeance upon them all because of their consent and concurrence a deep accession to the same It will perhaps be said that the Prophet not only intimates that they who heard him Princes and people should be guilty of his innocent blood and obnoxious to judgement but even the rest of the people who although the confluence then was great could not be all present yea Children and Infants and all the dwellers in the City and the City it self should be involved in the sin and wrath following it I answer that none could be defiled with the sin but such as one way or another made themselves guilty by accession to it either in action or in omission of that which they were in their calling and station capacitated to do for hindering it such as violent resistance of Magistrates by private persons was not neither doth the Prophet mean that all the absents all the infants of that great City who knew nothing of the matter should be guilty of the shedding his innocent blood if it were shed or should properly upon that account deserve the wrath of God onely he means that the consentors actors and such as were omitting their duty publick or private in reference to the preventing of that sin should be involved in the guiltiness of it and incur the wrath of God for it But as for other Inhabitants of the City absents Children c. though for that sin they not knowing of it they could not be judged properly guilty of it or deserving wrath for it yet he intimates that the Lord by occasion of it should it be committed would bring wrath even upon these although for other sins as the meritorious cause upon their part And the judgement and wrath that for the sin of shedding innocent blood should come upon all the people and inhabitants of that City might be indeed properly a punishment to the Rulers for that particular sin and to the people accessory thereto in any way but could not be a punishment for that sin particularly upon them who were no way accessory to it but onely a punishment for their own demerits albeit the execution hic nunc occasioned by the sin of others This is a sure truth that God may justly punish the Princes or Fathers in the punishment of subjects or children Castigantur parentes in siliis tanquam in sua carne charissima Zanch. 4. pr. they being as it were parts of themselves may I say punish them with temporal judgements at least this is agreeable to his justice who visits the sins of the fathers upon the children 2d Command But yet when he is punishing Princes or Parents in their children or subjects there is also in these who are punished an internal demeriting cause of the strokes laid on that they shall have no reason to quarrel with God or to say The Fathers have eaten sowre Grapes and the Childrens teeth are set on edge Ezek. 18.2 Sometimes persons may be punished in the affliction or punishment that falls on other persons neer to them but yet the affliction of these other persons is alwayes deserved by their own sins albeit God in his wise providence makes these very same afflictions to be punishments also of the sins of others to whom they they are neerly related But as to this place it is not the Prophets mind to intimate as this man saith that for violation of this duty of not offering violence to the Magistrate proceeding unjustly wrath should come on them all of that City there is not the least evidence of any such intention he had to stir up the people to do such a thing only he gives faithful warning to all ranks not to consent or cooperate to such a wickedness which might bring wrath upon them as Diodat hath it ye will make your selves guilty before God of this fact and burthen your selves with it Then for that place Deut. 13.12 13 14 15. If thou shalt hear c. he asserts that it makes much for his position of the lawfulness of peoples rising against all Magistrates supreme and subordinate or of any part of the people their rising against the greater part wickedly back-slidden And he is bold to say that astricting this place or the like to the Hypothesis contained in the letter of the word c. is to elude Scripture and to mock the Holy Ghost by whom it is given To which 1. certainly this Libeller speaks like a Divine calling a conscientious cleaving to the literal meaning of the Holy Ghost in Scripture an eluding all

to them yet hath he not made his Providence the Rule of our actions to warrand us being private Persons to punish them but we must go to the Law and Testimony to seek the Rules of our actions And whatever action is not according to this there is no light in it it is but a work of darkness for all the fair colours men can set upon it albeit God visit the sins of Parents upon Children yet that gives no warrand to Children to offer violence to their Parents for their sins But yet the Libeller cannot so leave the matter but after many ranting and rambling words which it were a pain to ripe up nor is it our purpose minding onely to notice his abuses of Scripture and impertinent reasonings he comes at length to his great reserve pag. 30. and sayes If all these things do not satisfy as indeed they are soon pleased who will be satisfied by him he hath yet four or five particulars that will make all sure for his position which he hath been labouring to underprop viz. That any private persons may against all Magistrates and the great body of the Common-wealth take and use not only the self defending but vindicative punishing and reforming Sword And 1. he saith That the reason of delivering the Kingdom to the People and not to the King with the Law it self Deut. 17.14 no way contradicted or repealed by the manner of the Kingdom and in effect of Tyranny fore told by way of disswasive 1 Sam. 8.10 doth make much for his position But 1. the man utters here a gross untruth For God doth not in the Text deliver the Kingdom to the People and not to the King as he saith he doth only before hand instruct the People anent the right way of setting of a King over them when it should come to pass that they should do so and leaves in his Word instructions for the King that shou●d be set over them how to behave himself That the Kingdom is here delivered to the People to be managed by them as well as to the King or with reserve of Power to them to use violence upon and against the King if he should deviate from the rules there set down as this man contends is most false the People had not so much Power as to choose the person that was to be King God reserved this for himself 15. ver Thou shalt in any wise set him King over thee whom the Lord thy God shall choose neither ever did they choose a King but onely accepted of the Kings chosen and given them by God and designed to them by his extraordinary Embassadours as is clear first in Saul and after in David and his Family the chosen Royal Family Neither were the People to look on their Kings as their servants or vassals or creatures as such men use to write but as set over them Thou shalt set him over thee not under thee whom the Lord thy God shall choose neither had they power over the King but the King by Gods Ordinance had Power over them 2. Were it so that the Kingdom or the Power of managing it were delivered to the People which is most false yet this makes nothing to this Libellers position giving Power to any party of private Persons amongst People to punish all Magistrates and the major part of the people too if they be strong enough whatever was granted to the People here was granted to the body not to this or that party of private persons 3. It is very true the place 1 Sam. 8.10 and not 1 Sam. 10.10 as he mis-cites both this and the former Scripture neither contradicts nor repeales that Law Deut. 17.14 but agrees notably with it But it is false that onely the Tyranny of a King is there spoken of by way of meerly disswasive Moses and Samuel do very well agree together the one shews what a King should do ex officio and de jure the other what a King may do by the power he hath and yet not be obnoxious to punishment from Subjects The one shews what a good King should do the other what a People should suffer of an evil King without attempt of violence upon him The one sets forth Gods approbative Law and instructs Kings in their kingly duties the other sets down the permissive Law of the King shewing the reach of his Power if he should abuse it without punishment from man The doing of such things 1 Sam. 8.10 was in effect tyrannical not approven by God but if the King came to abuse his Power so far he had a permissive Law for him that it was not free to his Subjects to punish him As albeit the Lord approveth not Divorce or a mans putting away of his wife yet by a permissive Law husbands amongst Gods People had liberty Deut. 24.1 to put away their wives without being obnoxious to humane punishment for that cause albeit God reserved the punishment of the hard-hearted husbands to himself So the Lord gives no approbation to over-imperious or tyrannical facts of Princes yet if they abuse their Power he will reserve them unto dreadful punishments by his own hand but will not have the hands of their Subjects to be upon or against them As parents do evil in correcting their children for their pleasure Heb. 12.9 10. and have no moral approven power from God so to do yet it is a sort of right of parents that if they so do their children may not use violence upon them or rise to destroy them but be in a reverent subjection to them But this great Theologue tells us That it is only the manner of Tyranny that is here set down by Samuel And that meerly by way of disswasive to disswade them from seeking a King Ans 1. It is true the fact is the manner of Tyranny but the permissive power without punishment from Subjects is the just right of all Lawful Kings of whom as it may be said Nil paenas metuunt nulla quia lege tenentur So to them if they deboard and abuse their power it may be said Si genus humanum mortalia temnitis a●ma At sperate deos memores fandi atque nefandi 2. Let it be so that Samuel in setting forth the manner or Law of the King intended to disswade the people from insisting in their petition for a King yet that was not his only nor his main intention his main intention is to shew the People their duty under a Kings oppression though it was not his duty to oppresse them to shew them I say what they behoved to suffer under a King beyond measure imperious without resistance for he is not now teaching the King his duty This is clear for otherwise to what purpose should he have written the manner of the King in a Book and laid it up before the Lord after the King is set over them 1 Sam. 10.25 when there was no place for repentance no remedy no use of