Selected quad for the lemma: death_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
death_n	die_v	king_n	year_n	13,736	5	5.1327	4	true

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A92823	A second part of the religious demurrer; by another hand. Or, an answer to a tract called The lawfullnesse of obeying the present government. / By a lover of truth and peace.	Lover of truth and peace.; Ward, Nathaniel, 1578-1652.	1649 (1649)	Wing S2314; Thomason E530_31; ESTC R203433	11,345	8

power with wrong to the right Heir we sin and so much the more if bound by Oathes and Covenants not to assist or comply with any others neither for fear nor favour deserting our engagements which are the words of the solemne Covenant Not suffering our selves directly or indirectly by whatsoever combination perswasion or terrour to be withdrawn from this blessed union c. but shall all the daies of our lives zealously constantly continue therein against all opposition and promote the same according to our power against all lets and impediments whatsoever c. All which whether it can so easily be dispensed with as this Gent. seems to hold forth I leave to every conscience to consider And whereas saies he some speak of a time for settlement they indeed do rather speak for a time of unsettlement c. They mean if a Government be once setled by the generality of the people and no power appears to bring it back to the former state they may better comply with it In repub constituta not constituenda And this is no unsettlement unlesse it be an unsetling of an usurped Government which men in Covenant ought to endeavour to their utmost power and however to be rather passive in than active to the settlement of it which if it were generally done might by the blessing of God upon faithfullnesse to a right Heir and to our Oaths and Covenants perhaps prevail to make the usurpers think of some better way of reducing the Government to the ancient channell Whereas this way of compliance fastens and settles them in their sin and Government together And whereas he saith that may be called a settlement when there is such a way setled that men may have justice if they will and may enjoy the main end of Magistracy to live a peaceable life in godlinesse and honesty I answer Such a settlement as is pleaded for is not the way to enjoy the main end of Magistracy c. For how can a people consenting readily together to a violation of so sacred a Covenant and Oath ever be like to live a peaceable life in godlinesse or honesty And indeed saies he when one is in possession by power and another pretends a Title what can the body of a Nation do in this case they cannot judge of Titles c. True in some doubtfull cases they cannot but in our case who is so simple that he cannot judge of the Title where it is and where it is not who hath not or may not hear of the Oathes of Allegiance and Supremacy who hath not heard of Parliamentary Declarations for the right and Title Whatever it was in former times the Title is now clear to every eye and if it were doubtfull our engagements are gone out into all the world To that he answers Surely Oathes are sacred bonds and reverend obligements c. yet there are faults on both hands on the one side the slighting of an Oath But we finde some part of the Vow and Covenant to speak of all the daies of our lives c. True it is the obligation of some things may end as that of the Kings Person c. To which and the rest we say the Kings Person in England never dies saies the Law such a King we are bound to preserve Suppose the King had died in wars or a naturall death and his Son had been in Arms at his death would not our Covenant have reached to binde us to the preservation of the Sons person as well as of the Fathers whatever men think now I am confident two or three years ago most men would have been of this minde 2. It is indeed impossible to preserve that Kings person yet saies the Gent. We finde some part of the Vow and Covenant to speak of all the daies of our lives as to extirpate profanenesse heresie blasphemy and for Reformation All which it were well if the Covenanters would remember to observe But I shall remember him of more To preserve the rights and priviledges of Parliament and the Liberties of the Kingdom c. Are these things impossible now to be preserved and if not do they not still binde us to endeavour them 2. His words are worthy to be printed and printed again Will any man that understands and favours Religion and piety say that the clauses which concern Religion and piety are expired Did we promise to God in our severall places and callings to extirpate profanenesse heresie blasphemy and to endeavour a Reformed life in our selves and ours onely till our enemies were overcome and then to make an end Say the same of our promises to preserve the rights and priviledges of Parliament and liberties and Laws of the Kingdom What were this but to say unto God if thou wilt deliver us we will be bound to thee till we are delivered and no longer c. Surely this is too like that course of carnall Israel Ps 78.14 c. But he goes on Here it were good to consider whether there be any clause in any Oath or Covenant which in a fair and commonsence forbids obedience to the commands of the present Government much lesse when no other can be had and so the Commonwealth must go to ruine We answer yes there is by necessary consequence that clause in the Oath or Covenant that commands obedience and faith to the King his Heirs and Successors and to the Laws established forbids obedience to any other power or Authority raised up against them Nor will that salve it which he adds when no other can be had for another may be had and might perhaps have been had ere this if some men in place had not complied with that force put upon the Houses and Kingdom If they did it upon antecedent consent they are deeply and hainously guilty if upon perswasion or terrour contrary to their engagements in the Covenant yet are they too guilty to be excused as accessaries post factum to say no more But saies he If the Kings Heirs be not his Successors how doth that Oath binde either the word Successors must be superfluous or else it must binde to Successors as well as to Heirs And it hindes not to a Successor that is not an Heir how can it binde to and Heir that is not a Successor In answer we say 1. Who keeps the Heir from being a Successor They that made the Act against succession to which this Gent. perhaps gave his Vote or at least complies and acts with those that did so Vote in acting for a Republike in opposition to it 2. The word Successor is not superfluous for it is put by way of exposition of the word Heir who ought to be the Successor And it matters not how Successor is sometime taken In the Oath of Supremacie or Allegiance it is not meant of any Successor but a lawfull Successor as the words expressy are If then any force debar the succession of the right and lawfull Heir let him