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
A91250	Prynne the Member reconciled to Prynne the barrester. Or An ansvver to a scandalous pamphlet, intituled, Prynne against Prynne. Wherein is a cleare demonstration, that William Prynne, utter barrester of Lincolnes Inne, in his soveraigne power of parliaments and kingdomes, is of the same judgement with, and no wayes contradictory to William Prynne Esquire, a Member of the House of Commons in his memento. Wherein the unlawfullnesse of the proceedings against the King, and altering the present government is manifested out of his former writings and all cavils and calumnies of this scandalous pamphleteer fully answered. / By William Prynne Esquire, barrester at law, and a Member of the House of Commons.	Prynne, William, 1600-1669.	1649 (1649)	Wing P4043; Thomason E558_5; ESTC R203281	19,546	27

this Kingdome in his Soveraigne Power of Parliaments yet he and the Committee of the Commons House which authotized it doth in the very Title of that Booke in expresse termes condemne the Papists and popish Parliaments of Treachery and Disloyalty to their Soveraignes both in Doctrine and practise and of Trayterous Antimonarchiall ●ractises and attempts upon the Persons Crownes and Prerogatives of their Kings in deposing and murdering them And manifests the Iurisdiction Power and priviledges claimed b● the Lords and Commons not the Commons alone without the Lords or the tenth part of the Commons under the Armies force whiles the rest are imprisoned and secluded by them to be farre more loyall dutifull and moderate then those claimed and exercised by our popi●● Parliaments Prelates Lords and Commons Ergo he refu●es William Prynne a Member of the House of Commons in his breife Memento to the present unparliamentary Iunto wherein he diswades them from their present dislo●all proceedings to depose and execute Charles Stewad their lawfull King as being a Iesuiticall and popish practise contrary to the practise and principles of all protestant Parliaments and the manifold Petitions Remonstrances Declarations Protestations Solemne Leagues Covenants and Engagement of this present Parliament Whether Prynne be against Prynne in this and whether Prynne the Barrester Member be not both unanimous against their proceedings herein let the world this ignorant mistaken Pamphleter now judge Secondly Mr. Prynne the Barrester in the foure first Pages of the first Part of his Soveraigne Power of Parliaments in as positive and earnest manner as can be condemnes and censures the Ies●its and Papists doctrines and practises in deposing and murdering Kings and Princes as treasonable damnable wicked and hereticall and particularly chargeth them for attempting to destroy and murder Hi● Majesty and 〈◊〉 ●osterity as well as Queene Elizabeth and King Iames alleaging many protestant Writers of our owne Church as Doctour Iohn Whi●●● Bishop Iewel Bishop Bilson and others condemning them for this their doctrine and practise which can stand neither with peace nor piety Ergo Mr. Prynne the Member who doth the very same in his Memento are both accorded and not against one another but both against this Pamphleters and his Confederares Iesuiticall popish Assertions and practise Adde hereunto that Mr. Prynne the Barrestet not onely in his Truth triumphing over falshood antiquity over novelty printed by Order of the Commons House 1644. and in his sword of Christian Magistracy supported Anno 1646. hath asserted the Power and Prerogative of Christian Princes and Kings as much as any man in Ecclesiasticall matters but in his third part of the Soveraign power of Parliaments and Kingdomes p. 62 63 determines thus Thirdly Neither is this any parcell of the Controversy between the King and Parliament Whether Subjects may lay violent hands upon the persons of their Princes wittingly or willingly To deprive them of their Lives or Liberties especially In cold blood when they do not actually nor personally assault their lives or chastityes or for any publike misdemeanours without a precedent sentence of imprisonment or death against them given judicially by the whole State or Realme As in s●me elections and Heathen Kingdome in 〈◊〉 times * where they have such authority to araigne or condemne them for all unan●mously disclaime yea abominate such trayterous practises and Iesuiticall positions as execrable and unchristian Fourthly Neither is this the thing in difference as most mistake it Whether the Parliament may lawfully raise an Army to goe immediately and directly against the person of the King to apprehend or offer violence to Him much lesse intentionally to destroy Him or to resist his owne Personall attempts against them even to the hazard of his life For * S●● 〈…〉 Collection of all Remonstrances c the Parliament and their Army too have in sundry Remonstrances Declarations Protestations and petitions renounced any such intention or designe at all for which there is no colour to charge them when neither the Parliament nor their forces in this their resistance have the least thought at all to offer any violence to the Kings owne person or to oppose his legall just soveraigne authority The very words and languages of Mr. Prynne the Member in his Memento who is still consonant to himselfe in both And p. 92. to 98. he addes 〈◊〉 proves * Cook 7. Report 〈◊〉 case of f. 11 P●il●● A●ch de 〈◊〉 Vinda●i c. 17● That hereditary Kings are Kings before their 〈…〉 coronation which is but a ceremony That it is false and 〈◊〉 to affirme that Heredit●ry Kings before their Coronations ti●● they are anoynted are not sacred nor exempt from violence That Saules person was sacred exempt from his Subjects violence not because he was anointed as if that onely did priviledge him but because he was a King appoynted by the Lord himselfe That these texts and speeches of David 1 Sam. 24. 6. 10. c. 26 v. 21. 23. 2 Sam. 1. 12. 16. The Lord forbid that I should doe this thing unto my Master the Lords anointed to stretch forth my hand against him seeing he is the Lords anointed I will not put forth my hand against my Lord for he is the Lords anointed And David said to Abishai when he would have slaine Saul Destroy him not for who can stretch forth his hand against the Lords anointed and be guiltlesse The Lord forbid that I should stretch forth my hand against the Lords anointed For wast thou not afraid to stretch forth thy hand against the Lords anointed Thy blood shall be upon thy head for thy mouth hath testified that thou hast sl●ine the Lords anointed c. Prove That Subiects ought not wilfully or purposely to murder or offer violence to the Person of their Kings especially in cold blood when they doe not actually assault them That David and his men might not with safe conscience stretch forth their hands nor rise up against their Soveraigne King Saul to assault or kill him thus in cold blood without any assault or present provocaetion which had been treachery and unpiety in a Sonne in Law a servant a subiect a successor who slew the Amalekite that came and brought him tidings of Sauls death together with his Crown and bracelet instead of giving him a reward a● he likewise * 〈…〉 put Baanah and Richab to death as Traytors who having murdered King Ishbosheth though his enemy and corrivall instead of rewarding them and hanged up their hands and feet because he reported himselfe had slaine him to gain a reward from David which concludes that it was not lawfull for any of Sauls own men to slay him no not in an exigent by his owne command Aud he concludes That the evasion of Doctor Ferne That Davids dem●●nor c. was extraordinary derogating exceedingly from the personall safety of Princes yea and exposing them to such perils as they have cause to con the Doctor small thankes for such a