Selected quad for the lemma: friend_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
friend_n	army_n	king_n	send_v	1,066	5	5.3865	4	true

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A47873	Interest mistaken, or, the Holy cheat proving from the undeniable practises and positions of the Presbyterians, that the design of that party is to enslave both king and people under the masque of religion : by way of observation upon a treatise, intitutled, The interest of England in the matter of religion, &c. / by Roger L'Estrange.	L'Estrange, Roger, Sir, 1616-1704.	1661 (1661)	Wing L1262; ESTC R41427	86,066	191

not so far And this I think will stand good although I have already placed the right of making War in the King for that must be understood of a forreign War Since whosoever hath a part of the Supreme Power hath consequently a right of maintaining such part as he hath There is one line yet remaining which our Author hath very prudently kept for a Reserve till the Presbyterians shall have gotten the better of the King Quod ubi fit potest Rex etiam suam Imperii partem belli jure amittere That is Where thus it happens the King's encroachment upon the Peoples Right may fairly amount to a forfeiture of his own Is it not pity that people of these milde and complying Principles should be charg'd with Disobedience If this be the case of England the Question is no longer the Presbyterians Liberty but the King's Title to his Crown That Chapter of Grotius whence he takes his Quotation treats De Bello subitorum in Superiores Where and where not Subjects may take up Arms against their Superiors This learned man among other Cases tells us in this they may and the Reason is evident For where the Soveraignty is thus dispos'd half to the King half to the People that Prince is but a Subject to some purposes a King to others So that in any point of Soveraignty formally vested in the People He is not their Superior but they his How finely he hath match'd the Case of England where Kings have no Restraint but what they put upon themselves for the Laws are their proper Acts But mark the process of his Reasonings and how in his own phrase he feels his way step by step The Presbyterians were ever in the right he says Why if he would be quiet who says the contrary But then the King was in the wrong To bring the Case up to Grotius his determination we must admit First that by the constitution of England the Soveraignty is shared betwixt the King and the two Houses and Next that the late King did actually invade the Popular Prerogative from whence arises the lawfulness of resistance and after that Potest Rex etiam suam Imperii partem Belli jure amittere They have at last the same right to the Crown they had at first to the Quarrel He that peruses the first eight Sections of the fore-mentioned Chapter will find Grotius no favourer of his Opinions that quotes him Be the Prince what he will he tells us Summum Imperium tenentibus resisti jure non posse Bodin yet more expresly that England and Scotland are absolute Monarchies That the Supreme Power is onely in the King Iura Majestatis ac Imper●i summam in unius Prinoipis Arbitria versari Further In Senatu nullum est Imperium Nor onely so but whoever urges the contrary meditates a Commotion Isti qui Imperium Senatui tribuunt Reipublicae interitum ac status eversionem moliuntur As to the point of Loyalty now in question the subversion of the Fundamental Government of this Kingdom could not be effected till those Members of Parliament that were Presbyterian were many of them imprisoned others forcibly secluded by the violence of the Army and the rest thereupon withdrew from the House of Commons Observation Then it seems till that violence by the Army upon the Presbyterians there was none acted by the Presbyterians upon the King To seize his Towns and Magazines Hunt and Assault his Royal Person Part his Revenues Hang up his Friends All this is Justifi'd in Case his Majesty refuses to be rul'd by his Two Houses Alas the Fundamental Government was safe I warrant ye so long as the Rights of Soveraignty were exercis'd first by the Assembly in Scotland and then by a pack'd Party in a close Committee And the Presbyterians never the less honest men for selling the King first Then voting him a Prisoner and after that for Pinching him even upon the very Point of Presbytery Surely they are much to blame that charge these Innocents with disloyalty If the Presbyterian Members had not been Forced they say all had been well Truly it may be so yet if I mistake not there was a time when the Episcopal Members were Forced too and had that Violence been spared it had never come to This. But I suppose the City-Tumults against BISHOPS the Outcries of the Rabble at White-hall the Multitudes that Baul'd for Reformation Posting up such and such for Straffordians as honestly opposed the Torrent of the People This in the VVell-affected passes for Christian Liberty But our Author follows his Opinion with a Proof For they says he meaning the Presbyterians had voted the King's Concessions a Ground sufficient for the Houses to proceed to settle the Nation and were willing to cast whatever they Contended for upon a Legal Security Observation Waving their Former Vote of Non-Addresses and that foul Declaration of their Reasons for it We will in Charity believe they were over-aw'd and that it was extorted by the Army But what excuse for the Matter of the Propositions That they were actuated by a Presbyterian Spirit appears in This that they demanded a Settlement of a Presbyterian Government It remains now onely from Hence to gather the Fair Equivalence of this Gentleman's Doctrine and to discover what 't is the Presbyterian Faction calls a Legal Security They hold That if the King of England will not comply with the Two Houses the People may Chase Sequester and Imprison Him And when they have him in Distress they may without Disloyalty press Him to these or the like Conditions for His Liberty 1. By a Publick Act to justifie that Violence and condemn himself 2 ly To Renounce and Abolish Episcopacy although bound by Oath and Judgment to defend it 3 ly To Transfer the Right of Levying Men and Monies to the Two Houses by them to be raised and disposed of at pleasure without rendring any Accompt to his Majesty 4 ly To deliver up the Lives Liberties and Fortunes of all that served him to the Mercy of that Party 5 ly To grant that all Offices of Trust may be disposed of by the Appointment of Both Houses This is a short and modest Accompt of Presbyterian Loyalty the Due Liberty they contend for which being setled upon a Legal Security with such further Concessions as their Modesty shall vouchsafe to require puts an end to the Dispute His late Majesty observes upon Uxbridge Treaty That it was a grand Maxim with them always to ask something which in Reason and Honor must be denyed that they might have some colour to refuse all that was in other things granted And so we find it But what 's the Reason of this peevishness Is there any thing in the Nature of Prelacy that frames the mind to Obedience and Loyalty Or is there any thing in Presbytery that inclines to Rebellion and Disobedience Observation Truly I think there is Prelacy holds a better proportion in

give good Evidence As touching Ceremonies the Contest began early even in King Edward's Reign between Hooper and other Bishops The Consecration of Hooper Elect Bishop of Glocester being stayed because he refused to wear certain Garments used by Popish Bishops he obtained Letters from the King and from the Earl of Warwick to the Arch-bishop of Canterbury and others that he might not be burthened with certain Rites and Ceremonies and an Oath common●y used in the Consecration of Bishops which were offensive to his Conscience Nevertheless he found but harsh dealing from his fellow-Bishops whereof some were afterwards his fellow-Martyrs and Ridley among others who afterwards thus wrote unto him when they were both Prisoners for the Gospel However in time past in certain Circumstances and By-matters of Religion your wisdom and my simplicity I grant hath a little jarred each of us following the abundance of his own sense and judgment Now be assured that even with my whole heart in the Bowels of Christ I love you in the truth and for the truth's sake which abideth in us Some godly Martyrs in Queen Mary's days disliked the Ceremonies and none of them died in the defence of Ceremonies Liturgy and Prelacy in opposition to all other Ecclesiastical Government and Order It was the Protestant verity which they witnessed and sealed in blood in opposition to Popery especially the prodigious Opinion of Transubstantiation and the Abomination of the Romish Mass or Sacrifice In the same bloody days certain English Protestants being fled for refuge into Germany and setled at Frankford were divided amongst themselves about the Service-book even with scandalous breach of Charity and in the issue the Congregation was sadly broken and dissipated What is intended by Due Liberty might be a Doubt did not the Coherence explain it to be a Freedom of Acting to all intents and purposes at pleasure whether without Law or against it no matter according to such presidents of Former times as our Resolver refers unto and justifies He tells us The contest about Ceremonies began early and so in truth it did For in the time of King Edward there was a wambling toward the Geneva Discipline but neither very earnest nor very popular and That so far as I can learn procured even by the Author of that Platform Calvin himself Concerning Godly Martyrs in Queen Mary's days Some suffered that disliked the Ceremonies Others that liked them That none died in defence of them is a Remarque might have been spared For the Question was matter of Faith not Discipline The Frankford Breach indeed was a sad Story but yet considering the Dividers of no great Honor or Authority to our Friends purpose Knox and Whittingham were the prime Ring-leaders in this Disorder who upon some Disputes started about the Service-book joyning with others of the Consistorian stamp drew such an extract of it as they thought fit and sent it to Calvin requesting his Opinion of it Such was the Answer they received as blew the whole Congregation into a flame from whence arose that scandalous breach ensuing viz. The English Service being established Whitingham Gilby Goodman with some others Divided and went to Geneva whence both by Letters and Discourses they tampered the Ministers and People of England and Scotland into a revolt encouraging them to set up their new Discipline in despite of all Opposers whatsoever The Gospel returning under Queen Elizabeth these differences were revived and held up by Disputes Writings and Addresses to several Parliaments and there were great thoughts of heart for these Divisions Observation Why this is English yet it is but turning now to Queen Elizabeth's Reign to understand these people and unriddle the Due Liberty they plead for But of This in its proper place Having drawn down the Quarrel from Edward the Sixth to the blessed Restauration of Charls the Second whom God protect he proceeds to descant upon the Present The greatest part of the Ministers named Puritans yielded conformity to those controverted Rites and Forms that were by Law or Canons established as to things burdensome not desirable in their nature supposed indifferent but in their use many ways offensive and groaning more and more under the yoke of bondage as they conceived they waited for deliverance and were in the main of one soul and spirit with the Nonconformists And even then the way called Puritanism did not give but get ground But now the Tenents of this way are rooted more than ever and those things formerly imposed are no● by many if not by the most of this way accounted not onely burdensome but unlawful Observation But is it so that Matters by Law established in themselves Indifferent and onely Burthensome to day rebu●sic stantibus may become Vnlawful to morrow By the same Rule Kings may be taken away as well as Bishops all Dignities and Powers being alike submitted to a Popular Level For if the People shall think fit to say the Magistrate is unlawful as well as the Ceremony by the same reason he may destroy One with the Other and Virtually he does it We know the Rites and Forms of Worshipping are not of the Essence of Religion and the huge bustle about Discipline is onely an Appeal to Ignorance and Tumult The Church must be Reformed By whom Not by the Rabble What means this application then of so many factious Sermons and Libels to the People They are not Judges of the Controversie But in a Cause more capable of Force than Argument they do well to Negotiate where Clamour and Pretence weigh more than Modesty and Reason If a man asks by what Commission Act these Zelots They answer readily 'T is God's Cause and better obey God than Man He that said Give not Credit to every Spirit I suppose knew as much of Gods mind as our Illuminates Is not mistaken or perverted Scripture the ground of all Schism and Heresie Counsels may erre they say and cannot Presbyterians How comes this Party to be more infallible than their Neighbours If they are not let but all other people of Different Judgments take the same Freedom they do of out-cries against any thing under pretext of Conscience let any man imagine the confusion For where every man is his own Judge All men shall dispute till each Particular condemns himself so that the Strife is Endless and the Event Restlesness and Confusion This comes of not submitting to some Final and over-ruling Decision Upon this pinch at a dead lift they fly to their Judgment of Discretion which leaves them still at Liberty to shape their Duty to their Profit They tell us They 'l be tryed by the Word of God not heeding how That is again to be tri'd by Them so that in Issue their private Interpretation of the Scriptures must pass for the Law Paramount to which both King and People are equally and indispensably subjected Undoubtedly what God commands we ought to do and not to do what he forbids This in few