Selected quad for the lemma: head_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
head_n	body_n	king_n	politic_a	2,735	5	10.6730	5	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A49524	The reformed Presbyterian, humbly offering to the consideration of all pious and peaceable spirits several arguments for obedience to the act for unifromity, as the way to vnity and endeavouring to demonstrate by clear inferences from the sacred scriptures, the writings of some of the ancients, or several old pastors of the reformed churches abroad, and of the most eminent old non-conformists amongst ourselves : as Mr. Josias Nichols, Mr. Paul Baines, and other learned divines : as for Mr. Perkins, Mr. Iohn Randal, and Mr. Rob. Bolton, that there is nothing required by the act for vniformity that is forbidden by the law of God / by Rich. Lytler ...	Lytler, Richard.	1662 (1662)	Wing L3573; ESTC R1525	139,662	290

find that judicious and learned King of Divines as Mr. Ford of Northampton styleth King Charles the First Prognosticating this Covenant would be very dangerous because the ma ter doubtful Sect. 13. There being therefore no remedy now but to be more wise and careful for the time to come taking heed of being too dogmatical in what we hold as to matters of modes of Worship and Discipline because that other holy and good men are of that mind For likewise one of our opinion as to the binding power of the Covenant let us not Juraere in verba magistri any more neither lean too much to our understanding but consult with the Laws of God and of the Land especially in this case Sect. 14. The Act you know that requireth that we should declare that in this particular the Solemne League and Covenant layeth no tye or obligation upon me or any other to endeavour to change the Government of Church or State On the other side many are of this opinion that though it be the judgment of the major part of the Judges that are learned in the Laws of many great and learned Divines some that have written De Juramento and therefore well know the binding power of an Oath and of the major part of the representative body of the Kingdom yet notwithstanding are perswaded the Covenant that they have taken bindeth them to endeavour the alteration of the Government of Church or State Sect. 15. In this case therefore as I said before the Laws of the Land are to be consulted with for there being no other judge in this case but the known Laws of the Land we must stand to their determination as to the satisfying the conscience about the binding power of the Covenant For if by the Law of the Land it appeareth that the matter of the said Covenant as to this particular be by the Law unlawful and the Imposers thereof without a power by Law invested in them we may safely and with a good conscience declare That we hold that there lyeth no obligaaion upon me or any other person from the same I do verily believe that as to the Government of the State the altering it from a Monarchical to a Democratical Government could never be subscribed to by the Engagement even by such persons who do yet believe that the Covenant bindeth them to endeavour to alter the Government of the Church Now be pleased to consider whether the reason be not the same They would have altered the Government of the State without Law and others the Government of the Church without Law And that you may be the better perswaded of this give me leave to impart that little smattering that I have of the Law as I have learned from the Learned in that Science Sect. 16. Concerning therefore the Laws of the Land you may please to observe this in the general That the Law hath three fulcimenta or grounds and they are these First Custom or Usage Secondly Judicial Records Thirdly Acts of Parliament Now Judicial Records and Acts of Parliament they are but Declarations of the common Law and customs of the Kingdom Law is is not known but by usage and custom and usage proves the Law 10 Eliz. Plowden 316. Now if this be so and it being evident that the Government in this Kingdom as to Church and State as now it is established having been of so long continuance as the Histories of this Kingdom do tell us This custom and usage of Government so long exercised maketh it to be a Fundamental Law Plowdens Commentary 195. Sect. 17. To alter therefore a Fundamental Law as to the Government of Church and State can never be done lawfully but by those persons whom Use and custom Judicial Records and Acts of Parliament have invested with Authority so to do Now who these are the Law must tell us not the two Houses alone not the King alone but both together make up the Body politick that make Laws for the Government of Church and State Dier 38. fol. 59 60. The King is the head of the Parliament the Lords the principal members of the body the Commons the inferiour Members of the same 1 Ed. 6. cap. 2. All Authority and Jurisdiction spiritual and temporal is derived from the King And every Member that sits in Parliament taketh a corporal Oath that the King is supreme over all persons the King therefore must needs be above the two Houses of Barliament which is evidenced further thus That as the power of their Assembling is by virtue of his Writ so the time of their staying is determined by his Royal will and pleasure according to the usage and custom of the Land The two Houses therefore are not above the King and there being no Law to be made without the King and both Houses neither alone according to the Fundamental Laws and Constitutions of the Land can alter or endeavour to alter the Government either of Church or State So that the altering of the Government except by such persons who have Authority by Law is an unlawful act in it self and the imposing of it upon others by an Oath makes it still more unlawful if the Imposers have not Authority by the Law of the Land so to do Sect. 18. Now I beseech you consider but as to matter of fact who did impose this Covenant and by the Law of the Land you will soon be resolved whether either the matter were lawful or the power lawful That the matter was unlawful thus appeareth not onely by what is already alledged but by what followeth That matter of an Oath is unlawful that is contrary to the Law of the Land The Government of the Church as it now stands being in the general secured by Magna Charta which great Charter is confirmed by 32. Acts of Parliament as I have read the first Article whereof runneth thus Salvae sint Episcopis omnes libertates suae Sect. 19. Now these general Laws of the great Charter of our Liberties and the Petition of Right there being no particular Laws against what is there contained such I say as are not repealed by a lawful power it is not the first Article of the Covenant as to the extirpation of that Church-government maketh the great charter void as to that particular I am apt to think in this case that an Oath imposed by persons that by their Oaths acknowledge the King supreme and above them that can make no Law therefore without the King and consequently can impose no lawful Oath by their Authority an Oath also as to the matter of it being unlawful as you have heard cannot make void a known Law or bind the conscience of the taker to endeavour the same But these Laws being in force do relatively bind the conscience to observe them and to endeavour by any power but those that made them to change and alter them I humbly conceive is above the sin of Disobedience and to swear to it maketh