Selected quad for the lemma: conscience_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
conscience_n	bear_v	spirit_n	wound_a	1,374	5	11.0872	5	true

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A43627	The lay-clergy, or, The lay-elder in a short essay in answer to this query : whether it be lawful for persons in holy orders to exercise temporal offices, honours, jurisdictions and authorities : with arguments and objections on both sides, poyz'd and indifferently weigh'd / by Edm. Hickeringil ...	Hickeringill, Edmund, 1631-1708.	1695 (1695)	Wing H1818; ESTC R10850	22,034	36

for the way was trac't before him for long before Laud's Ministration King Charles I. twice in Parliament uttered that distastful Sentence that gave such Umbrage and disgust to the Parliament and to the whole Kingdom and prov'd of most fatal and bloody Consequence in the ensuing Civil Wars for no people in the World have been more jealous of their Liberties and more apprehensive or allarm'd at any threatning presages of Arbitrary Government than the English such was that unfeasonable and distastful Sentence In that King's Speech I owe the Account of my Actions to God only And the Common-Text for the Manwarings and the Court-Sycophants of those times was Psal 51.4 Against thee thee only have I sinned and done this Evil in thy sight Whence they concluded and inferred that no King could sin against any but God alone Strange Logick more strange Divinity to draw an universal conclusion from particular Premises that because King David said that in the matter of Vriah the Hittite he sinned against God only therefore neither he in any other matter or particular nor any other King in any particular could sin against any but God only Surely David in that particular sinned against more than God only for he sinned against his own Conscience and his Coronation-Oath and the Duty of a King which is to be a Shepheard not a Wolf and was set up for Edification not destruction of the People of God also he sinned against Vriab's Life and his Wives Chastity in tempting and debauching her also he sinned against the Generation of God's Children made Religion evil spoken of and made the Enemies of the Lord to blaspheme as 2 Sam. 12.12 But Arch-bishop Laud had more ingenuity than to make that Construction of the word only for only there is interpreted by the following words in thy sight which are exegetical of the word only that is to say As Nathan said unto him 2 Sam. 12.14 thou didst it the Murther and the Adultery secretly David was cunning in his bloody ways and lustful ways he called not witnesses of his Adultery none knew but his Confidents and Pimps sworn to secrecy and the Murther was more secret for he kill'd by the sword of his Enemies the sword of the Children of Ammon so that against thee thee only have I sinned and done this evil in thy sight It is plain that David only meant that he had done that evil only before God only in his sight none else were privy to it or knew of it at least he thought so and so did Nathan thou didst it secretly saith he so cunningly didst contrive it that none but God only should know of that sin Besides only may as in Psal 62.4 and in many other places of Holy Scripture be taken for especially or Chiefly against thee especially against thee chiefly have I sinned Sure I am none but Parasites can imagin that a wretchedly-sinful King is not a sinner cannot offend against any but God If a King as King David did make his subject a Cuckold does he therein sin against or offend against none but God Must not the Cuckold be at all concern'd because his Horns were of a King 's making What Divinity is this Flatterers and Sicophants are the worst of Poysoners but King Charles I. was thus cajoll'd long before Laud came into vogue But indeed are King's accountable to God only I had thought that no King can for his Heart exempt himself from the Judg within him his Conscience which if wounded and awake it will keep him from sleep as it did poor King David this Judg put him upon the Rack and made him roar again breaking his Bones Psal 51.8 So true it is A wounded Spirit who can bear This Judg was such a Terror to Cain that it made him a Vagabond and to run away with himself he knew not whither nor could over-run his Judg and Executioner for he carried them along with him as Murderers do most terribly in the very Breast so that Judas rather than endure it Hang'd himself Oh wretched Sycophants To encourage a King to sin because he is Accountable to God only at the day of Death and the day of Judgment As if he the Rock of Israel that told King David 2 Sam. 23.3 That he that ruleth over men must be just ruling in the fear of God Should be Answered must Must be Just Is there a necessity for it must is not for Kings they are not accountable to any but God they can sin against God and against God only and he reckons not till the day of Death or the day of Judgment But I believe King David and some other Kings that I could think of found a more early day of reckoning than the day of Judgment and tho they and their Flatterers might put far from them the evil day yet they could not put it away yet in foro humano a King is not accountable But waving the Impiety where 's the Policy By such expressions to make the People Jealous and afraid of approaching Tyranny and Arbitrary Government The Kings of England usually have had their Speeches well examined in Council before they have spoken them in open Parliament I make no Apology for such language so offensive to the People only I say Laud is not to be blamed for the same for the Venome was destill'd into the King's Ear before he had the King's Ear and if it was otherwise what fence reason or Justice is there for one Clergy-man's failings to lay the blame upon all persons in Holy Orders This would be as ridiculous and unjust as if all the Layety should suffer for the sins of the Duke of Buckingham and Earl of Strafford of whose miscarriages in Government as an Evil Counsellor King Charles I. was so sensible tho always too late that he did publickly avow before Strafford's Death that he did not think him a Man fit for so much as the place of an High-Constable Was it Arch-bishop Laud too that was guilty of being an Evil-Privy-Councellor When K. Carles I. uttered the like alarming Expressions Such as these about imprisoning the Earl of Arundel saying in the House of Lords My Lords I do not by this mean to shew the Power of a King by Diminishing your Priviledges c. At which both Houses were strangely affrighted for the words Implied that he thought he had such a Power as King to diminish their Priviledges if he listed whereas they thought that they held their Priviledges per Legem Terrae not ad Libitum Regis by the Law of the Land and not the Arbitrary list or will of any man living Such Doctrines may go down in Turky and France they will not yet pass currant in England such was that other like ill-advised expression of that King namely But as for Tunnage and Poundage it is a thing I cannot want necessarily implying that if they would not give it him by Law he would take it by force as he did afterwards and