Selected quad for the lemma: death_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
death_n	child_n	father_n	life_n	5,155	5	4.4801	4	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A96620	A discovery of charity mistaken; or, some reasons against committees forcing the Parliaments godly, faithfull and plundered ministers (who labor in the Word and doctrine) to pay fifth parts to sequestred wives and children. With some answers to some arguments alledged for it. As also some complaints of poore plundered ministers, against the hard dealings of some committees about fifth parts, and juries, with a motion for their settlements for their lives.	Williamson, R., fl. 1653.	1653 (1653)	Wing W2799; Thomason E723_10; ESTC R207250	14,125	19

are placed and let the other alone or make some under-hand bargain with them and so it comes to passe that many times godly Ministers who have been deprived of the lives of their friends of their estates in the wars and have Wives and many small Children of their own and friends who have lost their limbs in the Parliaments Service to maintaine are compelled to pay full fifth parts unto the Wife or child of the sequestred that hath it may be good considerable temporall estate to live upon and this without defalcation of taxes and charges which were or are in many places above a fourth part of the whole but this is occasioned by Committees giving them leave to chuse where they list and alwaies and all of one and so Newters yea Malignants till of late and young men who have either none or but little charge and never lost any thing by the wars escape fifth-part-free and the burthen as hath been shewed is laid upon the aged wel-affected poor plundered Ministers who have great charge of children and friends depending upon them Third Argument To force poor plundered Ministers put into Sequestrations to pay fifth parts unto the wives and children of sequestred Ministers is a practise not well grounded upon the Holy word of God which ought to be the rule and foundation of Christian mens actions Therefore it is not warrantable I know it is pretended to be an act of great mercy and the Ministers that are against fifth parts though they be truely godly and poor and merciful to those that are poor indeed are hardly censuRed and looked upon as covetous selfe-lovers and without natural affection but it is for the most part by such that are so indeed and also false accusers and despisers of those that are truely good 2 Tim. 3. But Sir some wise and worthy men say it was but an act of humane pollicy devised at first by some in favor of Malignants and connived at by others as in time of the wars favouring honest godly Ministers but continued to their undoing Now to evidence it to be a practise not well grounded upon the Word of God I suppose it will not be amisse to lay down those portions of holy Scripture producible for the lawfulnesse of Committees forcing fifth parts from godly poor plundered Ministers to the wives and children of those Ministers that are sequestred by the Parliaments Authority and then clear them Ob. First is or may be alleadged 1 King 2.26 And unto Abiather the Priest said the King get thee to Anathoth unto thine owne fields for thou art worthy of death Hereupon it is said that it is evident that though Solomon sequestred Abiather the Priest from being Priest unto the Lord yet he did not take away all his maintenance from him but commanded him to goe to Anathoth to his owne fields there therefore say they fifth parts are grounded upon the Word of God for here is example for a maintenance out of a sequestred Ministers own fields Sol. For Answer unto this be pleased to consider these things 1 That Solomon was an absolute King as most men hold extraordinarily made by the Lord as Adonijah said 1 King 2.15 and therefore Solomons practise is no good president for our Committees who are but conditional else we are in a worse condition then wee were in formerly but let it goe for good then know 2 That Solomon the Supream Magistrate sequestred Abiather the High Priest as a grand Delinquent for adhering to Adonijah who would needs be King before King David was dead or willing to resigne his Kingdome into his hand for which Solomon judged him worthy of death and yet pardoned him as to life and temporall estate and confined him to his fields at Anathoth which belonged not to him as he was High Priest if Solomons practise be a good president for fifth parts why not for our Committees to sequester 3 That Solomon pardoned Abiather as to life and temporal estate for that time for his former good Service done to his father David and sufferings for and with him but thrust him out of the Priests Office and confined him to his own fields at Anathoth So many Ministers though they have more deserved death then Abiather did yet have been pardoned by the Parliament as to life and liberty though they have done both them and their Fathers and friends all the mischeife they could But now that Committees practise in allowing fifth parts to sequestred Ministers Wives and Children and forcing godly poor plundered Ministers to pay them is not well grounded upon Solomons nor consonant thereunto is manifest For 1 Solomon sequestred Abiather from being Priest before the Lord and put Zadock in his room but he did not allot Abiather or his wife or children a fifth part of the High Priests maintenance and much lesse compell Zadock who performed the Office to pay it him or any other But now Committees doe commonly cut out fifth parts as large as third parts of the profits of sequestred Livings to sequestred Ministers wives and children and constrain godly faithful plundered Zadockes to pay them besides performing the Office to which by the Law of God and man they have ever been annexed and paying of all taxes and charges imposed which Zadock knew not of under the penalties of sequestration or imprisonment to sequestred Abiathers shall I say that name is not convient for they never bear the Arke before nor suffer any thing with or for the Parliament but rather acted with Saul and Absolom and either like Doeg murdered or at lest like Shimei cursed and railed and cast stones against them and their friends now whether most Committee-men have truly written after Solomons copy let all seeing and uncorrupted men judge 2 Solomon did confine Abiather to his own fields or possessions at Anathoth for near thereunto was the City of Nob before Saul destroyed it where Abiathers land lay as the learned * S. W. R. Knight observes He did not give him leave to make away his temporall estate and then chuse his maintenance where and when he would out of Zadocks as some Committees have done no but he confined him to his owne fields belonging to his Person not to his Office and that was a speciall act of grace to Abiather because he had carryed the Ark of the Lord before his father David and had been afflicted in all wherein his father David had been afflicted And truely if we look back to the 1 Sam. 21.22 chapters we shal find that Abiather deserved some favor more then other For he had done and suffered much he had born the Ark before David and he had lost his Father and friends and moveable goods for Davids sake and shared with him in all his troubles and his fault was such as a wiser man might have slipt into For Adonijah was the Kings eldest Son a proper man and Davids Darling and the King had not declared any thing against Adonijahs succeeding

A Discovery of Charity Mistaken OR Some Reasons against Committees forcing the Parliaments godly faithfull and plundered Ministers who labor in the Word and Doctrine to pay fifth parts to Sequestred Ministers Wives and Children With some Answers to some Arguments Alledged for it AS ALSO Some Complaints of poore plundered Ministers against the hard dealings of some Committees about fifth parts and Juries with a motion for their settlements for their Lives 1 Tim. 5.17 18. Let the Elders that rule well bee counted worthy of double honour especially they who labour in the word and Doctrine for the Scripture saith thou shalt not muzzle the Oxe that treadeth out the corn and the Labourer is worthy of his reward Omne beneficium postulat Officium LONDON Printed at the desire of a Friend and are to bee sold at the Three Bibles in Pauls Church-yard and in Westminster-hall 1654. A Discovery of Charity mistaken SIR I Received your Letter wherein you desire to know my reasons why fifth parts should not be allowed to the Wives and Children of sequestred Ministers by those Ministers that are put into Sequestrations which with some intermixed grievances I hereby humbly offer to your serious consideration and candid interpretation But to prevent mistakes I premise 1 That I plead not against the States allowing fifth parts to the Wives and Children of sequestred Delinquents temporall Estates except they be Offices into which others are put Neither 2 Do I intend any evill but good to those that have sate and do now sit at the stern of our Commonwealth I am one of those that have acted with and suffered much in name body and estate for them but that you may see lament and reforme the hard measure that some of their best friends have received at the hands of some of their Committees and worse may if some good course be not speedily taken to reforme and restraine them and therefore I hope that neither you nor any others wel-affected will take in ill part what I shall say in vindication of this Position That it is not warrantable for Committees to force poor plundered Ministers put into Sequestrations to pay fifth parts of the profits of them to the respective Wives and Children of Ministers that are sequestred from them And my Arguments to prove it are these 1 Because they have no right unto them for if they have any right to them it is either in right of the sequestred Ministers or of themselves but neither of these waies therefore no way 1 Not in right of sequestred Ministers because they have no right unto them they had it may be a civill right unto them but that they have lost by their convicted scandalousnesse and delinquency and are dead in Law now you know when a Minister is dead neither he nor his Wife nor Children have any right to any profits due after his death and therefore not to a fifth part Obj. But you will say they are not dead in law because not legally put out by a Judge at Common Law or deprived by their Ordinary Sol. I Answer 1 They are deservedly put out by the Authority of the highest Judicature in England for most have been sequestred by the late Committee for releife of plundered Ministers who were all Parliament-men and though some have been sequestred by Country Committees who commonly Favoured Delinqent and scandalous Ministers much more then the Committee for Plundered Ministers did you know these Committees were authorized to do what they did who proceeded as favourably as they could according to those Rules given them from above and secundum allegata probata the scandalousnesse and delinquency alleadged and proved against them if not as I have heard they had their appeale even to the house it selfe if made within halfe a year after sequestration 2 You know that Juries are for the most part malignant and corrupt favourers of malignant and scandalous Ministers and foreswore taking upon them to bring in their Verdict not according to the evidence but to judge of the Law it selfe So that if some good course be not speedily taken Acts of Parliament and mens proprieties will be little or nothing worth I am confident there are no greater oppressions in England then malignant and corrupted Juries are to honest men and yet though the Lives and Estates of Godly and Wel-affected men are to be tryed by them there is no provision made against them 3 And besides the fifth part is commonly allowed to the wives and children of those Ministers who would undoubtedly have been sequestred not onely by an honest wel-affected and uncorrupted Jury at Common-Law but by a Vote of the major part of the whole House it self 4 And truely many if not most of those that now stand sequestred were never legally if we take legally according to Gods holy Word put in for God never sent them For he never sends any but such as he quallifies with gifts of Illumination and Sanctification convenient and necessary for them both which many if not most of them wanted when they were first sent by men 5 And truely many of those Patrons that presented them as well as those Bishops that instituted them were as sequestrable for delinquency and scandall as themselves and therefore sure they were not fit and competent Judges of them and their behaviour But to leave this to the Parliament who know upon what good grounds they have sequestred them 2 I say they have no right in themselves to fifth parts For 1. Though it be said by some that the Parliament hath given them to them and therefore that they have as much right to fifth parts as the Ministers put into sequestrations have to the four parts The Parliament seeing how forward some were to cut such large thongs out of honest mens their good friends sides if I may so speak as to allow third parts to the sequestred Ministers under the colour of their Wives and Children did as in the case of Usury make a Law to restrain them to fifth parts and thereby did indeed tollerate but not command their Inferiors nor necessitate themselves to allow fifth parts from poor plundered Ministers which Law of theirs is God knows much abused by their Committees to their great dishonor and the grief and undoing of many godly Ministers and their Families and the maintaining and rejoycing of their irreconcilable Enemies Secondly I deny the Argument For it doth not follow that because the State doth tollerate and restraine Usury to 6 l. per cent that therefore it is lawful and just So neither doth it follow because the State doth tollerate a maintenance to the wives and children of sequestred Ministers out of those Sequestrations where godly and plundered Ministers are placed and restrain their Agents to fifth parts that therefore it is lawful to force them to pay them to them Ob. You will say it is lawful by mans Law though it may be it is not lawful by Gods Law Sol. Sir