Selected quad for the lemma: death_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
death_n	covenant_n	law_n	life_n	4,307	5	5.4437	4	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A79833	The golden rule, or, Justice advanced. Wherein is shewed, that the representative kingdom, or Commons assembled in Parliament, have a lawfull power to arraign, and adjudge to death the King, for tyranny, treason, murder, and other high misdemeanors: and whatsoever is objected to the contrary from Scripture, law, reason, or inconveniences, is satisfactorily answered and refuted. Being, a cleer and full satisfaction to the whole nation, in justification of the legal proceeding of the High Court of Justice, against Charls Steward, late King of England. The first part. / By John Canne.	Canne, John, d. 1667?	1649 (1649)	Wing C440; Thomason E543_6; ESTC R204183	32,291	40

the Kings of England have not been absolute Monarchs but the Supreame Soveraignty resided in the people is a thing certainly known and so abundantly proved by other hands as there cannot be any shew of reason brought against it 3. Seeing the King is under law and the representative of the people above the King to proceed in iustice against him hence it will necessarily follow that the King by law may lawfully be put to death for the law saith the highest or supreamest Judge upon earth cannot pardon and free the guilty of the punishment due to him A. de le l. non ideo minns Rom. 3,4 Deu. 1.17 And the reason is he is but the minister of God a revenger to execute wrath upon him that doth evil And if the judgment be the Lords not mans not the Parliaments as indeed it is not he cannot then draw the sword against the innocent nor absolve the guilty except the would take upon him to be wiser then God respect persons in judgment and dispose of that which is proper to his master Now sure it is God only univocally and essentially as God is judge and God only and essentially and all men in relation to him are ministers legates deputies servants I say in relation to him equivocally and improperly Judges and meer created and breathing shadows of the power of the King of Kings And look as the Scribe following his own devise and writing what sentence he pleaseth is not an officer of the court in that point nor the pen and servant of the Judge so the Supream Councel of State and Representative of the Kingdom arraigning the King for murder Treason and other high misdemeanors would be but forged intruders and bastard Judges and go contrary to Law so far as they gieve not the very sentence of God and are not the very mouth of the Iudge of Heaven and Earth to pronounce such a sentence as the Almighty himself would do if he were sitting on the throne or bench 4. Howsoever there be some solemnities of the Law from which the King may be free which indeed are not Laws as Prickman proveth D. c. n. 78 but some circumstances belonging to the Laws Nevertheles if a king commit murder adultery theft and be a traitor a waster and destroyer of his people their goods lives Laws Liberties contrary to his oath and coronation-Coronation-Covenant in this case I confidently affirm there is no law that hath reason equity or justice for its bottom and ground against the putting of such a King to death by the great Councel of State as we have formerly shewed above him And the reason is cleer for the people have no power to make a law that the King shall not dy by the hand of Justice what wickednesse soever he should commit 5. I would gladly be informed by any Iurist or Statist If a Tyrant without a title may be killed yea by a private man why a Tyrant that hath lost his right and title to the Crown by the highest Judicature in the Kingdom may not lawfully be put to death Ut L. vim F de Justit jure ubi plene per omnes For the first the law gives it and it is so generally held by Vasquez Barclay and others Vasq l. 1 c. 8. n. 33. Bar. cont Monar l. 4 cap. 10 pag. 286. And for the latter observe what Royalists themselues acknowledge Winzetus against Buchan saith of Nero Wintzet adv Buc. p. 275. that he seeking to destroy the Senate and People of Rome and seeking to make new lawes for himself excidit jure Regni lost all right to the kingdom And Barclay saith a Tyrant such as Caligula spoliare se jure Regni spoileth himself of the right to the Crown So Grotius Groti de jure bell pac l. 1 cap. 4. Si Rex hostili animo in totius populi exitium feratur emittit regnum If he turn enemy to the kingdom for their destruction he loseth his kingdom because saith he Voluntas imperandi voluntas perdendi simul consistere non possunt A wil or mind to govern and to destroy cannot consist together in one 6 The cutting off of a contagious member that by a Gangreen would corrupt the whole body is wel warranted by nature and reason for the safety of the whole is to be preferred before a part But here perhaps it will be objected cut off a mans head and the life of the body is taken away so the King being the head destroy him and the whole body of the Common-wealth is dissolved I answer God cutteth off the spirits of Tyrannous Kings and yet the Common-wealth is not dissolved For 1. This or that tyrannous King being a transient mortal thing cannot be referred to the immortal Common-wealth as it is adequate correlate 2. If all the Kings of the earth were removed yet the Common-wealth would not leave off to be a body it would be only a casting off of one form of Government for another the worser for the better but the natural body without the head cannot live Lastly Mr. Pryn citing some Law-Books where the King is said to be the only Supream Governor of this Realm hath no Peer in his Kingdom ought not to be under man Soveraign power of Parl l. 1. p 104 105. Thus answereth 1. That the meaning of al these books is the king is above every one of his Subjects particularly distributively as single men but if we take them collectively in Parliament as they are one body and represent the whole kingdom then they are above the King and may yea ought to restrain and question his actions his male-Administrations if there be just cause 2. Bracton explains himself how he is highest and without a Peer to wit in distributing justice that is he is the highest Iusticiar in the Kingdom but as the Law as any in receiving justice And for the Oath of Supremacy it relates to the Popes forraign Princes authority formerly usurped in this Realm and not at all to be referred to Parliaments or their jurisdiction power superiority preheminence or authority not so much as once thought of by the subscribers of this Oath which had its creation and authority from the Parliament 15. Obje Some say For people to adjudge their King to death is without example either in Scripture or humane history Answ 1. We argue this negatively this is neither commanded nor practised nor warranted by promise Ergo. It is not lawfull But this is not practised in Scripture Ergo. It is not lawfull It followeth not I read not in all the word of God of a man put to death for lying with a beast for witchcraft for tempting the people to go a whoring and serving a false God yet these things are written and are all divine precepts 2. Physitians say that that Physick which only stirs the humors and doth not carry them away leaves the body worse then it found it so

unlawfull for Zedekiah and the rest of the Jews in the time of their captivity to resist the tyranny of the Caldeans but likewise before the captivity they could not with a good conscience have resisted or maintain'd the city against them when they had besieged it forasmuch as the Lord commanded them by Jeremy that they should deliver up the city into the hands of the Caldeans and without resistance yeeld themselves to be their servants Chap. 21.2,3,4 27,1,12,13,14 ch 36 ch 37 3. Touching Pharaoh 1. He had not his crown from Israel 2. Pharaoh had not sworn to defend Israel nor became their King upon condition and oath to maintain their Laws Liberties and Rights 3. Israel had their land in Egypt by the meer gift of the King 4. The Israelites were not his native subjects but strangers and sojourners who by the Laws of the King and Princes by the means of Joseph had gotten the land of Goshen for their dwelling and liberty to serve the God of Abraham to whom they prayed in their bondage Exod. 2,23,24 The Kings of England as Kings have stood to England in a four-fold contrary relation they have had their crown by the voluntary and free choise of the People and no otherwise but conditionally that is covenanting and taking their oath to do so and so for the publick good The English are natives not beholding to their Kings for their possessions nor ever held the same as gratis from them The Supream and Soveraign Power of the Kingdom is in their hand the which Israel in Egypt never had nor could lawfully challenge 10. obje Dr. Gouden speaking of putting the King to death saith Never did Christ or his Apostles by practice or precept give the lest intimation of the will of his Father as agreeing to what you declare to be your purpose Christ saith Maxwel Sac. San. Mai. c 5. n. 6. in the cradle taught by practice to flee from Herod and all Christs actions are full of mysteries and our instructions He might have had Legions of Angels to defend him but would rather work a miracle in curing of Malchu's ear as use the sword against Caesar He suffered under Pontius Pilate to commend patient suffering of ill condemn al resistance of superiors would have servants suffer buffets not only for ill doing of good masters but also undeservedly of these masters that are evill and that from his own example 1 Pet. 2.18.21.23 much more are we patiently to suffer of Kings without resistance The monuments of Babels ruin shew farre off to be high and great things but being neer they are very low and little too whatsoever is here if we come up close to it 't is impertinences non-consequences and nothing else And first in general we answer 1. Christ saying His Kingdom is not of the world and refusing to take the Magistracy upon him signifyed thereby that for civil politie he left it to the people to practice according to the humane Law and reason and as it might best serve for every nations safety peace and welfare 2. When the Dr. writes next I would have him set down where Christ and his Apostles by precept or practice taught that any man for murder treason rebellion c. might lawfully be put to death by the higher powers if he find this thing no where directly or by consequence in the New Testament then under favor of his Doctorship it is simply spoken But if he can find such a precept or practice thus far I do ingage and challenge any man to oppose that I will as clearly prove from the same place that the Commons of England may lawfully put their King to death for the like crimes 3. If Christ came not to destroy the Law as the Law of nature Nations then it is not contrary to any precept or practice of his for the Parliament of England to judge to death the King for treason and high misdemeanors against the law of nature and Nations But the first is true therefore the latter 2. For a more particular answer 1. Christ flying into Egypt what mystery soever it had sure I am it contained no prohibition against the lawfull execution of justice and judgment upon any man 2. That Christ might have defended himself with more then twelve legions of Angels but would not it was not because to cut off tyrants is unlawfull 〈…〉 no shadow for that in the Text but because it was Gods will that he should drink the cup his Father gave him 3. That Christ blamed Peter for speaking of drawing his sword Rivetus sheweth the reasons Rivet in dec in mand 6. pag 234. 1. Because it had a kind of revenge in it for so few could not repel such an Army as came to take Christ 2. He waited not on Christs answer 3. He could have defended himself another way 4. It was contrary to Gods will revealed to Peter Mat. 16,21,22,24 4. To the place in Peter I answer 1. Patient bearing of wrong and punishing wrong doers are compatible in one and the same person One act of grace is not contrary to another Not to respect persons in judgment is as commendable a vertue as patient suffering for a good cause 2. The scope of the place is not to forbid all violent resisting but only forbiddeth revenging resisting as not to repair one wrong with another from the example of Christ who when he was reviled reviled not again and therfore the Argument is a fallacie Ab eo quod dicitur 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ad illud quod dicitur 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 If a master attempt to kill an innocent servant and invade him with a weapon of death in that case the servant is free from guiltiness if there being no other way to save his life he slay the master than be kild himself because I am neerer by the law of nature and dearer to my self and mine own life then to my brother 3. No Prince hath a mastery or dominion over his subjects but only a free paternal and tutorly over-sight for the good of the people The masters in the Apostles time had a dominion over servants as over their proper goods Ro. 13.4 11. obje But the special Objection of Royallists is Rom. 13.1,2 Let every soul be subject to the higher powers for there is no power but of God and whosoever therefore resisteth the power resisteth the ordinance of God Hence therefore they conclude Grot. de Jur. bel pac l. 1 cap. 4 Barc con mon. l. 3. c 9 Maxwel S●c San. Mai. c. 2 p. 29. 1. That the King is the supreamest or highest power here intended There is no Judge above a King on earth 2. Howsoever in those dayes there was a standing and continual Senate which not long before had the Supream power in the Roman State yet now the Emperour was Supream and therefore no power of resistance left to the people 3. The prohibition

change upon their persons neither set them at any distance touching subjection to the Law either active or passive more then they were before their personal estate was the same still as before neither are they exempted from corporall punishment if they break the Law more then any other men 2. objec It is further objected Exod. 22.28 Thou shalt not revile the gods nor curse the Ruler of thy people Again Ecc. 10.20 Curse not the King no not in thy thoughts and curse not the rich in thy bed-chamber If Kings may not be curs'd much less put to death by their Subjects Answ 1. The first text is not properly meant of Kings but pertains rather to Judges and other sort of Rulers and so the Jew Doctors understand the place 2. Solomon well explains the place Prov. 17.26 It is not good to strike Princes for equity that is evil speaking of Magistrates for well doing is a wicked and vile thing Hier. in hunc ver ● 3. The other text by some is applyed unto Christ the King of his Church But take it literally because Kings may not be curs'd which is prohibited under pain of condemnation will it therefore follow that Kings may be theeves murderers traytors tyrants and commit any wickednesse and not be cal'd to an account by such who are above them and have a lawfull Power in their hands to punish them 4. The place comprehends Rich-men as well as Kings and therefore it may be as well concluded from it that no man if rich may be punished for any crime or fault whatsoever 5. Both these if rightly applyed are altogether for us for whosoever whether King or Prince shall curse and revile the Supream and Soveraign State of the Land and that for well doing as call them Rebels and Traytors and violently seek to destroy them he absolutely violateth this Law Thou shalt not revile the gods It is true there is here no punishment set down for him that should thus rail But seeing as one writes on the place Willet Qu. 57. he that railed on his father and mother was to die for it Exod. 21.17 much more worthy of death was he which should curse the fathers of the Countrey 3. objec I counsell thee to keep the Kings commandment and that in regard of the oath of God Be not hasty to go out of his sight stand not in an evill thing for he doth whatsoever pleaseth him Where the word of a King is there is power and who may say to him What dost thou Ecc. 8.2,3,4 Hence the Royallists argue If the word of a King must stand and his power not to be resisted how can his Subjects lawfully touch his Person Answ 1. To keep the Kings commandment must be understood of things just and lawfull otherwise as the Apostle saith We must obey God rather than man It is well laid down by Philo Philo de vita Mosis Regis officium est jubere quae oportet fieri vetare a quibus abstinere debet caeterum jussie faciendorum interdictio cavendoru m proprie ad Legem pertinet Atque ita consequitur ut Rex animata sit Lex vero sit Rex justissimus The office of a King is to command those things which ought to be don and to forbid those things which ought to be avoyded But the command of things to be don and the forbidding of things not to be don properly belongeth to the Law And so it followeth that a King is a living Law and the Law is a most just King 2. The oath of God here is the oath which is taken in the name of God and whereof God is made a witnesse The meaning is the King is so to be obeyed as that God is not to be disobeyed and that the oath made to the King is so to be kept as that the oath made to God be not broken Hence Tremellius reads it sed pro ratione juramenti Dei but with regard to the oath of God shewing that Subjects are by their Allegeance and Covenant no further obliged to observe the Laws of earthly Princes then are agreeable to Gods commandments 3. Whereas it is said He doth whatsoever pleaseth him this must be understood only of a good King and just cōmands as if it were supplyed with whatsoever pleaseth God not licet si libet as if all were lawfull whatsoever a King should do but the genuine sence of the place is stand not in an evill matter for the King hath power to do whatsoever he pleaseth in way of justice to punish thee if thou continue obstinate in evil courses to forgive thee if thou confesse submit and crave pardon of him for the same 4. Who may say to him what dost thou that is reprove or censure him for doing justly as Job expounds it Chap. 34 18. and so must the place be understood to wit that no man may presume to question the Kings just actions warranted by the Law of God and men but otherwise Kings may and are to be reprehended as we have sundry examples for it in Elias reproving Ahab Elisha Jehoram Nathan David John Baptist Herod 1 Sam. 13.13 2 King 3.14 Jer. 1● 28. chap. 22.3 Ho. 5.1.2 Yea not only so but to be resisted withstood and opposed in their unrighteous courses Hence Augustine and Ambrose do affirm Augu. in Psal 82. Amb. in Offic. when Herod and Pilate condemned Christ and caused him to be put to death howsoever the people lamented it were sorry for him and sorely bewail'd his death yet were they all punished and why so because when they were able and might have taken him out of the hands of unjust and wicked Magistrates and so preserv'd his life they did it not in this regard they wrapt themselvs in the same guilt of blood and became murderers of him But lastly This text intends only private men not a Parliament the supreamest Judicatory and Soveraign power in the Kingdom for in this High Court the Kings Person is no other than another subject I say it again to this Court He personally stands as a single man to be questioned censured punished as the Crime and Cause shall be And in truth here lies the stone at which many have stumbled much like to that long controversie between us and the Church of Rome about Petros and Petra Peter and the Rock We distinguish them taking the person of Peter to be one thing his faith or Christ another Whereas the Papists will allow of no such distinction So the Title and Office of a King is one thing the Person another and howsoever the former comes not into question yet the latter may But many by mixing and confounding things together which should be severed and distinguished apprehend not how the Person of the King and not the Title and Office of a King can be questioned censured and punished Hugo Grotius putting down seven cases in which the people may have most real action against the

it hath been seen by often and wofull experience when the States of a kingdom have only stirr'd their Princes by opposing and resisting their tyranny and misgovernment and not cut them off they have brought upon themselves and the whol Realm the more mischief and misery afterward 3. Former examples are no binding rules to us otherwise then we see men have acted according to reason religion Law for wherein soever they differed from these things therein ought we to differ from them 4. If kings formerly have not judicially been put to death for murder treason and other capital crimes it is the more needfull and usefull that such a thing should now be don that all other Nations far and neer may hence know and learn what their duty is and what they may lawfully do in point of Law and conscience and not stand stil as if they were beasts in a base and sencelesse slavery any longer But Fiftly To speak more directly to the objection There is no new thing under the sun We have many examples of Emperours Kings which have judicially been condemned put to death by the Soveraign power of the people Matth. Par. pag. 273 274 275. Not to speak of Nero mentioned before nor of our King John who was condemned to death by a Parliament in France for slaying his Nephew Arthur treacherously with his own hands and likewise to lose the Crown of England It is said of Amaziah king of Iudah 2 King 14.19 That they made a conspiracie against him in Jerusalem and he fled to Lachish but they sent after him to Lachish and slew him there Not privately but openly as acted by publick authority for his great impiety and having broken his Oath and Covenant whereupon we reade not of any complaint inquisition proceeding or punishment inflicted on those that slew him after his death either by the people or his children as there was upon those that slew king Amon but being slain They to wit the persons who had put him to death brought him on horses and he was buried in Jerusalem and all the people of Judah made Ahaziah King Which plainly shews that what was formerly done by the greater part of the State at Jerusalem was afterward confirmed by Common-consent and executed by command of those which might lawfully do it In like manner Andronieus was apprehended deposed put to death by the people for his tyranny and oppression Nic. Chr An nales fol. 52. Grimst Emp. hlst pag. 160. Reg. Sco Buchan lib. 4. pa. 111. So Iulianus not only deprived of the Empire but authoritatively commanded to be slain in his pallace Heliogabulus that monster of mankind was by the Praetorian Soldiers put to death with the Senate and peoples approbation Dardan King of Scotland by the unanimous consent of the Nobles and people had his head cut off which they carried about for a laughing-stock and threw his corps into a jakes after he had reigned 4. years Lucktock the 22 King of Scotland for his vitious and base life was convented before an assembly of the chief men and slain with the instruments of his wickedness ib. p. 113. Eugenius the 8. another of their Kings was for his filthy lusts covetousness and cruelty slain in the assembly of his Lords by their general consent and his companions in villany and wickednesse hanged Et ipsi gratum populo speculatum praebuere pag. 165. which was a greateful spectacle to the people So Agis and Pausanias two Lacedemonian Princes put to death by the people Mun. cos l. 5. c. 37. p. 1248. So the Thracian Kings for their offences by publick consent were punished with death The usual practice of the Saboeans was to stone their Kings if they highly transgressed and went beyond their bounds If need were it might be shewed out of Histories and approved Authors that the Athenians Ionians Melesians Marchomanni Quadi Persians Sicilians Corinthians Parthians Meroes Gardii Medes Paphii Cathians Ethiopians Sidonians Germanes Swedes Danes and antiently even all other Nations not only prescribed laws and lim●… to their Kings but cald them usually to an account for their misgovernment and oft times put them to death when they saw cause Alex. ab ●… 4. ●… fol. ●… ●uel Gibel pli l. 4. Alex. l. 6. c. 4. Plut. in Arat. Val. 6 The putting to death of Tyrants in former times hath been held so lawful and honorable as large rewards have been propounded to the undertakers and authors thereof and to the living they have given the goods of the Tyrant as to the deliverer of their Country and honored the dead with Epitaphs and Statutes of brasse as in Athens Harmodius and Aristogiton together with Brutus and Cassius Max. l. 2. c. ult L. 3. L. om● ne delictū Sect. ut F. de re mil. in Greece Aratus the Sycienian and thus by publick Decree of their States because they had freed their several countries from the tyranny of Pasistratus Coesar Nicoebis yea those monuments of Tyrant-killers by antiquity were so honored and highly esteemed of as they placed them in their Temples on sacred banqueting beds And when Xerxes having vanquished the Athenians had carried away with him the Statutes of Harmodius and Aristogiton into his own country Seleucus one of the successors of Alexander the great King of Syria caused them with all diligence to be carried back again and to be set up in their own places In Norway antiently they had this custom That whosoever slew a Tyrant King was thereby made a King Gul. Neu brig l. 3. cap. 6. And what the Poet wrote was the opinion then and common saying of the people Victima haud ulla amplior Potest magisve opima mactari Iovi Quam Rex iniquus To God no better offering can men bring Nor fatter than a wicked Tyrant King For conclusion This only I shall add to say There is not an example any where of the like practice If it be meant not so judicially and according to the strict rule and form of law I confesse there may be much truth in it For commonly heretofore amongst all Nations Iewes Turks Papists Heathens c. People observed not the manner as matter they thought Tyrants so worthy of death as they did not much mind how and in what way to cut them off so they were destroyed hence it came to passe that few tyrannous princes in old time ever died a natural death but either by their subjects or their means were slain in warre or by some private hand made out of the way which gave Iuvenal occasion to say Ad generum Cereris sine caede sanguine pauci Descendunt Reges sicca morte Tyranni Few Tyrants unto Plutoes Court do go But that are thither sent by bloody blow And therefore this late proceeding against the King seeing it was so legal it shall live and remain upon record to the perpetual honor of our English State who took no dark or doubtful way no indirect ●…by-course but went in the open and plain path of Justice Reason ●…w and Religion and in this regard they need not fear the reproaches and falshood of malitious tongues and pens for as God doth approve their work and owns it so he will defend them his and their Cause in spight of all treacherous and wicked Designs either of Men or Devils The end of the First Part.