Selected quad for the lemma: death_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
death_n	henry_n	king_n	prince_n	7,937	5	6.0693	4	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A94740	A supplement to the Serious consideration of the oath of the Kings supremacy; published October 1660. In, first, some consideration of the oath of allegiance. Secondly, vindicating of the consideration of the oaths of the Kings supremacy and allegiance, from the exceptions of Richard Hubberthorn, Samuel Fisher, Samuel Hodgkin, and some others against them, in the points of swearing in some case, and the matters of those oaths. By John Tombes B.D.	Tombes, John, 1603?-1676.	1661 (1661)	Wing T1821; Thomason E1084_1; ESTC R207991	39,490	48

said King his heirs or successors or any absolution of the said subjects from their obedience I will bear Faith and true Allegiance to his Majesty his heirs and successors and him and them will defend to the uttermost of my power against all conspiracies and attempts whatsoever which shall be made against his or their persons their Crown and Dignity by reason or colour of any such sentence or declaration or otherwise and will do my best endeavour to disclose and make known unto his Majesty his heirs and successors all treasons and traiterous conspiracies which I shall know or hear of to be against him or any of them And I do further swear that I do from my heart abhor detest and abjure as impious and heretical this damnable doctrine and position That Princes which be excommunicated or deprived by the Pope may be deposed or murthered by their subjects or any other whatsoever And I do believe and in conscience am resolved that neither the Pope nor any person whatsoever hath power to absolve me of this Oath or any part thereof which I acknowledge by good and full authority to be lawfully ministred unto me and do renounce all pardons and dispensations to the contrary And all these things I do plainly and sincerely acknowledge and swear according to these express words by me spoken and according to the plain and common sense and understanding of the same words without any equivocation or mental evasion or secret reservation whatsoever And I do make this recognition and acknowledgement heartily willingly and truly upon the true faith of a Christian So help me God The words of King JAMES in his Apology for the Oath of ALLEGIANCE p. 46 c. in his answer to Cardinal Bellarmine's Letter AS the Oath of Supremacy was devised for putting a difference between Papists and them of our profession so was this Oath of Allegiance which Bellarmine would seem to impugn ordained for making a difference between the civilly obedient Papists and the perverse disciples of the Powder-treason In King Henry the eighths time was the Oath of Supremacy first made by him were Thomas Moor and Roffensis put to death partly for refusing of it From his time till now have all the Princes of this Land professing this Religion successively in effect maintained the same and in that Oath only is contained the Kings absolute power to be judge over all persons as well Civil as Ecclesiastical excluding all forrein powers and Potentates to be Judges within his Dominions Whereas this last made Oath containeth no such matter only medling with the civil obedience of subjects to their Soveraign in meer temporal causes And that the injustice as well as the errour of Bellarmine's gross mistaking in this point may yet be more clearly discovered I have also thought good to insert here immediately after the Oath of Supremacy the contrary conclusions to all the Points and Articles whereof this other late Oath doth consist whereby it may appear what unreasonable and rebellious points he would drive my subjects unto by refusing the whole body of that Oath as it is conceived For he that shall refuse to take this Oath must of necessity hold all or some of these Propositions following 1. That I King James am not the lawful King of this Kingdom and of all other my Dominions 2. That the Pope by his own authority may depose me If not by his own authority yet by some other authority of the Church or of the See of Rome If not by some other authority of the Church and See of Rome yet by other means with others help he may depose me 3. That the Pope may dispose of my Kingdoms and Dominions 4. That the Pope may give authority to some forrein Prince to invade my Dominions 5. That the Pope may discharge my subjects of their obedience and allegiance to me 6. That the Pope may give licence to one or more of my subjects to bear arms against me 7. That the Pope may give leave to my subjects to offer violence to my person or to my Government or to some of my subjects 8. That if the Pope shall by sentence excommunicate or depose me my subjects are not to bear faith and allegiance to me 9. If the Pope shall by sentence excommunicate or depose me my subjects are not bound to defend with all their power my Person and Crown 10. If the Pope shall give out any sentence of excommunication or deprivation against me my subjects by reason of that sentence are not bound to reveal all conspiracies and treasons against me which shall come to their hearing and knowledge 11. That it is not heretical and detestable to hold that Princes being excommunicated by the Pope may be either deposed or killed by their subjects or any other 12. That the Pope hath power to absolve my subjects from this Oath or from some part thereof 13. That this Oath is not administred to my subjects by a full and lawful authority 14. That this Oath is to be taken with equivocation mental evasion or secret reservation and not with the heart and good will sincerely in the faith of a Christian man These are the true and natural branches of the body of this Oath In the book intitled God and the King imprinted at London 1615. by King James his special priviledge and command p. 27. is thus said The matter or main subject of this Oath which is the principal thing whereof I conceive you desire to have a more distinct and full understanding may to this purpose be resolved into these ensuing assertions 1. Our Soveraign Lord King James is the lawful King of this Kingdom and of all other his Majesties Dominions and Countries 2. The Pope neither by his own authority nor by any other authority of the Church or of the See of Rome nor by any other means with any others help can depose his Majesty 3. The Pope cannot dispose of any of his Majesties Kingdoms and Dominions 4. The Pope cannot give authority to any forraign Prince to invade his Dominions 5. The Pope cannot discharge his subjects of their allegiance unto his majesty 6. The Pope cannot give licence to one or more of his subjects to bear arms against him 7. The Pope cannot give leave to any of his subjects to offer violence unto his Royal person or to his Government or to any of his Majesties subjects 8. Although the Pope shall by sentence excommunicate or depose his Majesty or absolve his subjects from their obedience notwithstanding they are to bear faith and true allegiance unto his Majesty 9. If the Pope shall by sentence excommunicate or depose his Majesty nevertheless his subjects are bound to defend his Person and Crown against all attempts and conspiracies whatsoever 10. If the Pope shall give out any sentence of excommunication or deprivation against his Majesty notwithstanding his subjects are bound to reveal all conspiracies and treasons against his Majesty which shall come to

the actions of some of the members yet by outward force a thing cannot be imposed on the conscience For then only is a thing imposed on the conscience when the conscience is convinced that he ought to do or not to do it which must be done by doctrine or some other way insinuating into the conscience the necessity or lawfulness of doing or not doing a thing which outward force cannot perform 2. That it is a greater mistake That the King in the Oath of Supremacy is acknowledged to have power to be a Lord over faith or by outward force to impose any thing in the worship of God on mens consciences This mistake might have been rectified if they had heeded the Oath Proviso Admonition 37th Article prefixed before my book and the explication of the 5th and 6th Propositions which I gave conformably to the speeches of learned approved men by the Princes that have been and are which I find not yet any persons in authority have disallowed and yet I conceive by their words in the end of their petition they were not ignorant thereof sith they cite the proviso of the Statute 5. Eliz. and the admonition which I presume they found printed in my book By which they might have understood that Kings are acknowledged Governors in spiritual things as well and no otherwise as in temporal things Now in temporal things they have not power to impose any thing on mens consciences by outward force not is the King a Lord over our faith in temporal things so as that if he should tell us we may marry our brothers wife or command us to fight a duel for our honour we may think we are bound in conscience to do it or that we may lawfully do it much less that he is Lord over our faith in the things of God so as to impose on our consciences what we shall believe concerning God Christ the Covenant of grace the doctrine of salvation c. or to form the worship of God by addition or diminution otherwise then is appointed by Gods word but as Dr. Rainold's Confer with Hart chap. 10. cites the words of Augustine which I find in the seventh Tome of his works in the third book against Cresconius the Grammarian chap. 51. more fully then in the fiftieth Epistle For in this kings as it is commanded them by God served God as they are Kings if in their Kingdom they command good things and forbid evil things not only which pertain to humane society but also which pertain to the Religion of God And as they are not to govern in temporal things but according to just Laws of the Commonwealth so neither in the things of God but according to the holy Laws of God and although they have more authority in making and executing Laws in Civil things then in Religious yet in neither to make or execute Laws contrary to Gods Laws nor to usurp that prerogative which belongs to God to dispense with his Laws or to hinder the doing of a duty imposed in the first or second table of the Law or to mould or urge doctrines of faith or worship otherwise then God in Scripture declares or appoints nor do we acknowledge by taking that Oath that we owe them active obedience if they urge us by Laws and Edicts thereto in things reserved to Gods prerogative or such as are contrary to his Laws in force only we are to yield passive obedience by suffering and not resisting the power and authority thus abused Nor is there any thing in the words of Q. Elizabeths Admonition annexed to her injunctions contrary to this explication For the Queen doth not say that She challenged by that Oath such a power as was challenged by her Father King Henry the eighth which was to burn his subjects at the stake for their dissenting from him in religious matters But She saith That nothing was is or shall be meant or intended by the same Oath to have any other duty allegiance or bond required by the same Oath then was acknowledged to be due to the most Noble Kings of famous memory King Henry the eighth Her Majesties Father or King Edward the sixth Her Majesties Brother And again For certainly her Majesty neither doth ne ever will challenge any other authority then that was challenged and lately used by the said Noble Kings of famous memory King Henry the eighth and King Edward the sixth which is and was of ancient time due to the Imperial Crown of this Realm that is under God to have the soverainty and Rule over all manner of persons born within these Her Realms Dominions and Countries of what estate either Ecclesiastical or temporal soever they be so as no other forrein power shall or ought to have any superiority over them Now if She had challenged power to burn at a stake her subjects for their dissenting from King Henry the eighth in religious matters then she must challenge power to burn all his Protestant subjects at a stake and therefore she must be conceived to challenge only authority over all persons to govern them according to just Laws excluding forrein power Whereto agree both the words of the 37th Article set down in my former book and the word of King James in this That in that Oath only is contained the Kings absolute power to be Judge over all persons as well Civil as Ecclesiastical excluding all forrein powers and Potentates to be Judges within his Dominions Nor is it true That by King Henries practice appears that Q. Elizabeth challenged power to burn dissenters from King Henry in matters of Religion For she did not challenge all the power which King Henry practised for then she should have challenged a power to behead her mother which he practised and if the Queen her self exercised the same authority though it be not to be called authority or power truly but an usurpation or abuse of power in putting some to death for their conscience in Religion yet doubtless she challenged no other power then what before had been or might be lawfully exercised or used as the words are in the Statute 1. Eliz. c. 1. a little before the Oath of Supremacy nor doth the Oath acknowledge the King Governor or to have any other power or authority to be assisted defended or actively obeyed then as it is lawful and used or exercised lawfully and therefore in answer to the three Arguments of the Petitioners I say 1. That by the acknowledgement of the Kings Supremacy in spirituals as a Magistrate neither is a man bound to change his Religion as the King doth nor to forbear Gods worship which he forbids nor to deny Christ or worship other Gods because he commands it It followes in the Maidston prisoners Petition And now O King that no man as he is a Christian hath power to be a Lord over anothers faith or by outward force to impose any thing in the worship of God is as clear 1. Because the