Selected quad for the lemma: death_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
death_n	david_n	king_n	saul_n	5,115	5	10.1244	5	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A76397	King Charle's [sic] triall justified: or, Eight objections against the same fully answered and cleared, by Scripture, law, history and reason. Being the sum of a charge given at the last sessions held at Trewroe in the county of Cornwall, Aprill 4. 1649. / By Colonell Robert Bennet. Published by authority.	Bennet, Robert, 1605-1683.	1649 (1649)	Wing B1886; Thomason E554_21; ESTC R949	10,917	16

in verses 31.33.34 expressely declaring that bloudshed defiles the Land that the Land cannot be cleansed but by the blood of him that seed it And that therefore they should execute the Murtherer that they might not be defiled with blood There shalt take no satisfaction for the life of a murderer The murderer shall surely be put to death So we see it is plain every man that will be guiltlesse of bloudshed must endeavour to bring the murtherer to justice And therefore if the King be descended of the sons of Adam and if he have unjustly spilt the bloud of his people the Scriptures are plain that he hath no priviledge and that unlesse the people indeavour that the hand of Authority touch him for it the blood he hath spilt hath defiled them all and they cannot be innocent His Throne can give him no priviledge in this case of blood God would not endure that his Throne should exempt from Justice the Sanctuary was his Throne amongst men yet God commands the murderer to be taken thence executed Exod. 21.14 And wise Solomon understood it so when he commanded Benhaiah to execute bloud guilty Joab having the horns of the Altar in his hand if God would have the bloud guilty person pluckt from his own most sacred Throne yea executed in it which in other causes was an insufferable prophanation it cannot displease him to pluck a Murtherer to Justice from the Thrones of men and as the Scriptures clear the Thesis so their instances make good the practise that Kings are responsible to God and to men too for their bloodshed and misgovernment that they have no such priviledge of Impunity for their Prsons as their Parasites have flattered them to believe which King Agag found to be true notwithstanding his Plea that he acted Loco tempore belli and had Quarter given him 1 Sam. 15.33 the Kings of Israel and Judah give us many presidents of the same the cause of Jehu upon Jehoram being very opposite God giving testimony by a blessing upon his posterity 2 Kin. 8.30 and although the persons that acted in chiefe in such causes for their indirect intentions and other prevarications often drew upon themselves the wrath of God altered the nature of the work in their own persons yet did not that at all cleave to it in the Abstractum of executing Justice upon the capitall Offender which all along we find approved as well as commanded of God And if I may be permitted to travell amongst the Nations of the world what people hath not avowed their right herein Let the Queen-Regent of the Western world Imperiall Rome as she gave law to all the rest speak for all How often did it change the forme of the Supreme Authority for the corruptions of those that were intrusted with it Remarkable is the Sentence of the Senate upon the Emperor Nero who for his misgovernment and basenesse was adjudged to be whipt to death saith my Author In consensu Senatus praecipuorum Ducum exercituum jùste Decretum est ut Tyrannus telleretur Although he escaped execution by being his owne Executioner a day too soon Object 4. But was not David guilty of the death of Uriah and yet he did not suffer for it Nay did not David execute the Amalekite that slew wicked King Saul because he stretched forth his hand against the Lords Annoynted notwithstanding the Amalekite pleaded that Sauls escape was past hope and that what he did was to put the King out of the anguish and pain he was in Resp First for the case of David in the death of Vriah although this Answer were sufficient to that Argument to say that it is absurd and illogicall because it concludes from a particular to a universall and from a matter of fact to a matter of right Negativè and another sufficient Answer to this Argument may be that the death of Vriah being secretly contrived to be done upon an assault by the hand of the Enemy where there were others in the party and Vriah might have a possibility to come off that therefore no humane Judicature which is to proceed secundùm allegata probata could find the matter of fact yet I rest not in these replies but for satisfaction to this doubt I answer That it was not Davids Regall Authority that did exempt him from Justice in this case but it was the indulgence of the Almighty upon his true repentance and the Text is plaine for it 2 Sam. 12. at the fifth Ver. David unawres giveth a sentence of death upon himself to Nathan and at verse 13. there is Davids repentance I have sinned against the Lord then follows the Lords indulgence the Lord hath put away thy sin and that is not all thou shalt not die there is Davids full discharge from the hand of Justice for the case of the Amalckite what a sencelesse argument more is this to conclude from Davids execution of Justice upon a wretch for a bloody murther upon a King when he was in the most undoubted discharge of his duty unto the exempting of a tyrant from Justice for his misdeeds who did ever justifie such a wilfull murther upon any man though never so wicked Object 5. Quis est tam magnus pro tanto munere hoc Is not the King Supreme who can try him seeing Supremo non datur Superius Resp There is great odds between Supreme in power to give and Supreme in power given he that is only Supreme in power given is not so high but that there are greater then he and such is the King of whom it was true that he was Major singulis but Minor universis and long since this Nation knew the Kings Superiour Scilicet Curiam suam saith old Fleta the people in Parliament who often heretofore did and now again may try their Kings as well as other Officers Object 6. But what say we to that clause in the third Article of the Covenant which respects the preservation of the Kings person and Authority The Article runs thus We shall with the same reality and constancy in our severall vocations indeavour with our lives and estates mutually to preserve and defend the rights and priviledges of Parliaments and the Liberties of the Kingdoms and to preserve defend the Kings Majesties person and Authority IN THE PRESERVATION AND DEFENCE of the true Religion and Liberties of the Kingdoms that the world may bear witnesse with our consciences of our Loyalty and that we have no thoughts or intentions to diminish his Majesties just power and greatnesse Resp The plain purpose and scope of this clause in the Article concerning the King was to testifie the tender affections we had to him and must to our comfort remaine a Monument thereof to all Generations as also that we endeavoured if it had been possible to winne the King to us before he had run himself and the Kingdom into more mischief and the better to prevall herein we gave