Selected quad for the lemma: england_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
england_n	according_a	church_n	doctrine_n	4,717	5	6.8021	4	true

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A48310	Memoranda : touching the oath ex officio, pretended self-accusation, and canonical purgation together with some notes about the making of some new, and alteration and explanation of some old laws, all most humbly submitted to the consideration of this Parliament / by Edw. Lake ...	Lake, Edward, Sir, 1596 or 7-1674.	1662 (1662)	Wing L188; ESTC R14261	107,287	162

be rejected Qui semel est malus semper praesumitur esse malus presertim in eodem genere delicti Oaths of Allegeance and Supremacy explained And also if thought fit that the Oaths of Allegeance and Supremacy should have had some explanation alteration or emendation especially in that point of not resisting the King In the second Homily of Obedience which book is confirmed by Act of Parliament it is there expressed in terminis as the Doctrine of the Church of Engl. that it is not lawful in any case to resist the King That this should expresly have been put into these Oaths and that all persons whatsoever which are to take the Oaths of Allegeance or Supremacy or that have taken them may take them with such emendations it being too notorious what strange interpretations have been made of these Oaths as that they were made onely against the Papal power and as though nothing else were to be resisted And in the beginning of the Rebellion in Scotland the orthodox Divines of Aberdeen maintaining according to that Doctrine of the Church of England That in no case the King is to be resisted and that so to do was contrary to Gods Word and to the opinion and practice of the primitive Christians The other Divines fomentors of that Rebellion expresly denied this and alledged that the reason why the primitive Christians resisted not was because deerant illis vires the very same reason that Bellarmine gives for the same so well do these two Factions concur Though by the History of those times it appears and Tertullian openly pleads it against the Emperor that it was not for want of strength for they had enough but that it was contrary to their conscience guided by Gods Word so to resist And therefore why not much need that all persons whatsoever should take this Oath to declare their opinion in this point And also Robbery the Law to be altered if thought fit that the Law concerning Robbery ought to be in many cases and especially for the first offence mitigated and not made capital but that restitution be made to the party robbed and if the Robber be not able to do it then to be forced to work it out Which course some think would probably more terrifie idle persons that turn thieves who had rather dye desperately then lead perhaps a long and wearisom life Hereby many may repent and amend and do good service to their King and Countrey The party robbed also hereby gets restitution which seldom or never happens as the Law now is Our Law contrary to the practice in other parts of the Christian world hereby becomes harder then the Levitical Laws Some have hereupon said that the Gospel the Spirit killeth and the Letter giveth life contrary to St. Paul which seemeth something Anti-Evangelical The yoke of the Gospel should be easie And also if thought fit Against condemnation upon a single testimony that none should be condemned to dye upon a single testimony when there is no other kind of proof by circumstances or violent or vehement presumptions equivalent to a witness that makes a kind of semiplena probatio at the least as in the Canon Law In the mouth of two or three witnesses every saying shall be confirmed sayes the Levitical Law which is repeated in the New Testament and in a manner at least is made Lex Evangelizata The Law-maker Truth Justice in the abstract could as well have said In ore unius vel duorum testium as duorum vel trium if he had thought it so fitting and yet as before the Gospel seems to pinch harder then the Law To that Objection That then many Malefactors would escape it may be answered That secret things belong to the Lord and to him they are to be left and that it is better ten Knaves should escape then one guiltless man should be hanged We have seen and heard how even in a manner miraculously God hath often revealed murther and great crimes that we may suppose that when such crimes cannot be in the ordinary way detected it pleases God they shall be done extraordinarily Many instances might be given of the sad consequences by putting to death upon the testimony of a single witnesse Judge Fortescue in his book De laudibus legum Anghae relates a passage about a Gentlewoman in Sarisbury that was put to death even burnt at a stake for murdering her husband and that sentence given upon the testimony of a single witness which witness not long after upon his death voluntarily and in a most penitent manner confessed he had given false witness against that Gentlewoman and that she was no wayes guilty of that murther for which she was put to death And Judge Fortescue there speaking of the Judge that gave sentence against her hath these words as I take it or to this effect the book is not now by me as they are there in the Latine version out of the Law French Soepius iste judex mihi fassus est quod nunquam in vita sua animum suum super hoc facto purgaret A notable instance this way to relate no more being numerous happened in London not many years since as 't is credibly reported A young man a Lawyers Clerk made love to a Gentlewomans Chamber-maid and a fellow-servant of the Chamber-maids keeping company much with her and the young man using also kind dalliance towards her she conceived that he loved her better then the Chamber-maid but afterwards perceiving she was mistaken she boyled with revenge against him and the Devil watching as a roaring Lion whom he may devour instigated her to accuse him of theft that he had stoln from her Masters house and taken away under his Cloak a Silver Boll Upon this bare single testimony of hers the Jury found him guilty he was condemned and dyed for it Not long after the Chamber-maid grieving for the loss of her espoused husband seeing her fellow-servants Trunk or Box unlocked lift up the Cover and there saw that very Boll which she very well knew for which the young man was condemned and suffered she calls up her master who found it to be the same Boll which she he shewing it to her could not deny upon this she was prosecuted condemned and suffered death and the Chamber-maid fell mad with grief and dyed And all this came from this judgment upon the testimony of a single witnesse Should any object That this might happen upon the testimony of two or more witnesses It is possible but not so probable and the safe way is to follow the Rule afore-mentioned In the case of Treason two witnesses are required and very requisite and in other crimes capital especially when also in many cases that are not capital two witnesses are required why might it not be reasonably expected though the atrocity of Treason is high yet as to the person offending and suffering the punishment by losse of life is little different Touching Juries And also if