Selected quad for the lemma: honour_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
honour_n	custom_n	render_v	tribute_n	3,126	5	11.2636	5	true

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A86678	The divine right of government: [brace] 1. naturall, and 2. politique. More particularly of monarchie; the onely legitimate and natural spece of politique government. VVherein the phansyed state-principles supereminencing salutem populi above the Kings honour: and legitimating the erection of polarchies, the popular elections of kings and magistrates, and the authoritative and compulsive establishment of a national conformity in evangelical and Christian dutyes, rites, and ceremonies, are manifested to be groundlesse absurdities both in policy and divinity. / By Mich: Hudson.	Hudson, Michael, 1605-1648.; Stent, Peter, fl. 1640-1667, engraver.	1647 (1647)	Wing H3261; Thomason E406_24; ESTC R201931	147,691	220

excellency worth and goodnesse which God doth communicate unto men for the Regulation of their owne private affections and the exercise of a pious and vertuous life of which Honour every man in the Common-wealth is equally capable 2. Politicall Honour is that excellency worth and goodnesse which God doth communicate unto men for the Regulation of the externall actions of men in order to the preservation of society and the exercise of a peaceable and quiet life which is that Honour which the King doth receive from God and which doth supereminence him above all others in the same society and Common-wealth And this is also two fold viz. Primarius Secundarius 1. Primarie Honour is that excellency of power and authority which doth enable the King for execution of the duties of his Calling in the Rule and Government of his people and Subjects And this is two-fold viz. Legislativus Judiciarius 1. Legislative Honour is the power and authority to constitute and enact Lawes and Statutes for the Publike good and benefit of the Common-wealth And this againe is twofold viz. Ecclesiasticus Civilis 1. Ecclsiasticall Honour is the power and authority to enact Lawes and Statutes for the Regulation of mens words and actions in order to the externall performance of the duties of the first Table of the Morall Law according to the patterne exhibited by God in the frame and composure of the Ceremoniall Law instituted by God for that purpose 2. Civill Honour is the power and authority to enact Lawes and Statutes for the Regulation of mens words and actions in order to the externall performance of the duties of the second Table of the Morall Law according to the patterne exhibited by God himselfe in the frame and composure of the Judiciall Law Instituted by God likewise for that purpose 2. Judiciarie Honour is the power and authority to put all these Lawes in execution And this is two-fold Compensativus Vindicativus 1. Compensative Honour is the power to encourage and remunerate the integrity of pious and just men with titles of Honour and offices of state and the like according to the merits of their service and obedience which is the pastorall duty and office of Kings signified principally by their Scepter which is is called in Christs Govenment A Scepter of righteousnesse because of Christs Government over the Saints and Church triumphant wherein there is no use at all of the Sword but onely of the Scepter and by the exercise of his pastorall office to reward the faith and patience of the Saints Which passage I doe here insert to shew that the Scepter doth principally import the Pastorall and not the Imperiall and Magisteriall office of a King which relateth properly to his Militarie power 2. Vindicative Honour is the power to correct and punish the delinquences of disobedient and evill men which is the Magisteriall office and duty of Kings signified by their sword 2. Secondarie Honour which is a spece also of Politicall Honour is that Honourable and Magnificent maintenance which God hath assigned unto the King for support of his Royall power and dignity for as our lives Gen. 5.9 so our estates and fortunes are not ours but Gods For heaven and earth are his and all riches and honours come from him and he is Lord over all 1 Chron. 29.10 11 12. Psal 50.10 11. Psal 95.4 For a manifest of which Prerogative God in all his distributions reserved some part which he ordained to be sacred and holy unto himselfe as in that charter and grant made unto Adam in Innocency when there was no King or Priest but onely Adam himselfe the Lord in that grant reserved the Tree of Knowledge So that the law for honouring God with our substance Prov. 3.8 was an eternall law of nature and not any positive emergent law for before the Institution either of the Ceremoniall or Judiciall lawes of Moses This Prescript and Rule was observed by the Patriarchs as Cain and Abel both which did render unto the Lord a tribute out of their several possessions Gen. 4.3 4. And Abraham by this law paid Tythes to Melchisedec Gen. 14.20 And by the same law Jacob vowed unto the Lord the retribution of a Tenth of that which the Lord should give him Gen. 28. last as an acknowledgement that hee received it from God the Lord of all for Jacob had nothing of his owne at that time but a staffe Gen. 32.10 Now as God did delegate unto Kings a power over our persons in his ordinance for their Primarie honour of power and authority so did he likewise give them a power over our estates for support of that honour which is their Secondarie honour of Maintenance and Revenue which was the ground of Christs command to render a tribute of our goods unto Caesar Mat. 22.21 intimating that this temporall honour of tribute was by virtue of Gods delegation as due unto Caesar as the spirituall honour of praise and worship was unto God And upon the same ground Saint Paul commands to render custome and tribute to Kings not as a gift and favour but as a due and just debt Rom. 13.7 and gives this reason for it because they are Gods Ministers appointed to supply his place in Ruling and Judging us And seeing God hath transferred the greater power to Kings viz a power over our lives by putting the sword i. e. the Militia or Military power of the Common-wealth into his hands Rom. 13.4 the Apostle thence concludes their Investiture with the lesse viz a power over our estates Ver. 6. And this power was all the title which Christ had to that Asses-Colt which he sent his Disciples to fetch for his use Luke 19.30 for it appeares in the Text that Christ was not the proprietour of that colt yet he did not give order to his Disciples either to buy or hire or begge or borrow the colt of the owners but onely to tell any that profered to interrupt them that the Lord had need of him for it was a sufficient title to dispossesse the private owner that the publike Lord of all did command him and upon that answer the private owner did not resist the Disciples in taking him away Ver. 34. And the like power we see exercised by Pharaoh in that ordinance for storing up a fift part of all the Corne of Egypt for seven yeares together which law was enacted by Pharaoh upon the single Counsell of Joseph with the approbation onely of Pharaoh's servants or Councell and not by the generall consent of the people Gen. 41.34 Neither can we pretend this law to be Tyrannicall amd contrary to the law of God and Nature for it proceeded from the wisdome of God which in this businesse directed the mind of Joseph Gen. 45.57 Psal 105. Nor can any man imagine but the state and magnificence of Saul David Jeroboam and others who of private persons were advanced by God himself to Regall honour and dignity was supported by this meanes

of respect and reverence unto any person whose merits wee conceive to make a just title thereunto and this is that Honour whereof Aristotle's Maxime is to be understood that honor est in honorante non in honorate And this Honour is two-fold Fictitius Verus 1. Fictitious Honour is that which is grounded upon a meere pretence of some excellency worth and goodnesse in honorato the true ground thereof being indeed onely interest and selfe-respects in honorante which is properly Adulation and not Honour the affectation whereof was reproved by our Saviour John 5.44 and was the crime of the ambitious Pharisees who loved the praise of men more then the praise that cometh of God John 12.43 regarding the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 more then the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the shadow more then the substance 2. True and reall Honour is that which is grounded upon a reall perswasion of some excellency worth and goodnesse in honorato and is a result of Fundamentall Honour relating thereunto as the shadow doth unto the substance And this is twofold viz. Ethicus Politicus 1. Ethicall Honour is that which is grounded upon a perswasion of personall vertue in honorato either Intellectuall as wisdome knowledge prudence and the like or Morall as liberality temperance fortitude justice and the like 2. Politicall Honour is that which is ground upon a perswasion of those Royall excellencies in honorato which do supereminence him above all others in the same society And this againe is twofold viz. Primarius Secundarius 1. Primarie Honour is that which is grounded upon a perswasion and knowledge of Supremacie of power and authority in honorato And this is twofold viz. Activus Passivus 1. Active Honour is a willing endeavour to performe all his commands expressed in Ecclesiasticall or Civill Lawes and Statutes when wee conceive them to be just and honest and agreeable to the Law of God 2. Passive Honour is a voluntary submission to his Judiciarie decrees and censures for our non-performance of those Commands which we conceive to be dissonant to the Law of God 2. Secondarie Honour is the payment of Tribute Custome and the like contributions out of our estates for the maintenance and support of the Royalty and Magnificence of the Person invested with Royall power and dominion And thus much briefly of the nature and species of the principall end of Monarchy which is God and the Kings Honour It followes now that we should declare the nature and species of the lesse principall end which is Salus populi 2 Salus populi which is the lesse principall end of Monarchy though it be really distinct from the Kings Honour as the Relatum is from the Correlatum yet is an individuall Concomitant thereof and indeed a meere result and product of the same for salus populi can never be effected by any other meanes but those which in the first place doe effectuate and energate the Kings Honour whether we look upon the Monarchicall actons of King or Subjects both which are vers't about the same object and matter onely in a diverse manner For the King by reason of the Supremacy of his power and authority is interested onely in the active part of Government and therefore he acts for his owne honour and the peoples welfare by composing Lawes and Statutes wherein he commands things tending to the preservation of peace and unity in that society a principall ground of both the former ends The people are interessed onely in the Passive part of Government and therefore they act for the Kings Honour and their owne welfare by their obedience and submission to the Kings commands expressed in those Lawes and Statutes the violation whereof is a direct meanes of dishonour to God and the King and of ruine and destruction to the people For which cause Jeremy exhorted the captive Jewes in Babylon to pray for the peace and prosperity of that King because their owne peace and welfare depended upon his Jer. 29.7 And Paul also pressed Timothy and the Ephesians unto the practise of the same duty in behalfe of their Kings and Magistrates for the same reason 1 Tim. 2.1 2. Now though this salus populi being a result of the Kings Honour be capable of the same parts and divisions with the Kings Honour the fountaine thereof yet to avoid prolixity I shall referre the actuall specification of its parts unto the Readers Meditations it being no difficult matter to judge of the species of the Relatum by the divisions of the correlatum reprepresented in the premises And this briefe Analysis of God and the Kings honour and salus populi or the peoples welfare I hope may be sufficient for a generall survey of the nature and parts of the ends of Monarchie for a more full and perfect explication whereof I shall in the ensuing Chapter insist upon the resolution of a Quaere prescribing the due limitation of the Kings power CHAP. X. Of the due limitation of the Kings Power THe Quaere conducing to a plenary narration and exegesis of this point are both numerous and weighty one whereof I purpose to insist upon in this Chapter which I doe acknowledge was not the meanest inducement that gave life unto this present discourse of Monarchy the Solution whereof I suppose will present the Reader with a glimpse of some of those nationall crimes which have drawne upon us these nationall calamities a subject fitter for an entire Tract then a particular Chapter But my designe at present is rather to start then state this Question hoping a more learned and judicious Pen may supply the defects of mine by a more punctuall and satisfactorie discussion and determination of this point so profoundly mysterious both in Divinity and Policy Quaere What matters are within the sphere of Politicall Cognizance and what are res extra-regales and metapoliticall matters wherein the King cannot exercise either his Legislative or Judiciarie power without guilt of sacrilegious intrusion Sol. This Quaere consists of two parts the latter consequentiall of the former and both of them immediate expedients to enunciate the quality and extent of the Kings Commission from God the sole ground both of the Kings Power and the Subjects Obedience For though Kings be stiled Gods in Scripture Psal 82.6 and are indeed really so 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 i. e. in their Politicke capacity referring to their power over their Subjects yet wee all know that they are not so 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 i. e. in their physicall capacity referring to their nature and essence for they shall dye like men Psal 82.7 And therefore the right understanding of the nature of the Kings Commission and Deputation from God I conceive to be a point of necessary concernment 1. For Subjects that they may more perfectly understand the just extent of this Commission and in what things God hath thereby delegated a Power unto Kings over Subjects for direction of their duty of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉

The Argument is this To whomsoever the power of vengeance and recompence pertaineth he is a God for God himselfe affirmeth those prerogatives to be peculiar to himselfe Deut. 22.35 36. But both these prerogatives pertaine unto the King as Saint Paul affirmeth in this Text ergo Kings are Gods and by consequence the fift Commandement which prescribeth our duty to them must be a Precept of the first Table The seventh Reason is grounded upon the nature of that obligation which the commands of Kings doe impose upon their Subjects which binde the conscience Ver. 5. which is Saint Pauls fift motive to obedience Wherefore ye must needs be subject not onely for wrath but also for conscience sake Which reason Saint Peter alledgeth also to perswade this kind of submission to Kings 1 Pet. 2.13 Submit your selves for the Lords sake because the submission is not to man but to God Ephes 6.7 whose Majesty and Authority the King doth represent and in the latter part of this second Chapter Saint Peter presseth this kind of submission for conscience sake and the Lords sake by Christs example who needed not to have submitted to Pilate or the Jewes for wrath for he was able to overthrow them all with a blast of the breath of his mouth as he did the officers John 18.6 and shall doe Antichrist at the last day 2 Thes 2. Or to have obtained twelve legions of Angels from his Father for that purpose Mat. 26.53 whereof one single Angell was able to destroy 185000. Assyrians in one night but yet to honour the Substitute and Deputy of his Father he submitted to their power knowing it was his Fathers will and that the judgement was not theirs but Gods Acts 4.28 which is the ground of Nazianzens advise 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 We must submit to good Kings as to the Lord himselfe to bad Kings for the Lords sake Upon which grounds it is easie to prove the King to have the relation of a God to his subjects For he that can command the conscience is a God but the commands of the King doe oblige the conscience i. e. in licitis politicis whereunto his Commission doth extend and therefore in reference to all those matters the King is a God to his Subjects And by consequence this fift Commandement prescribing the Subjects duty must be a Precept of the first Table The eight and last Reason is taken from the nature of those acts whereby Subjects ought to expresse their obedience to Kings Ver. 6 7. which is Saint Pauls fixt motive to obedience which acts doe referre either unto the Kings power or else to his maintenance 1. The acts of obedience relating to power are Feare and Honour which are due onely to God Deut. 6.13 Mat. 4.10 Mal. 1.6 But Saint Paul commandeth us to performe these duties unto the King in this Text to which Solomon addeth another precept Prov. 24.21 My sonne feare God and the King And David likewise commanded the people to worship God and King Solomon 1 Chron. 29.20 so that God and the King are made a joynt object of these duties which are peculiar to God ergo the King must supply the place of God in reference to his Subjects and by consequence the fift Commandement must be a Precept of the first Table Ob. Christ forbids us to feare them that can kill the body onely but cannot kill the soule Mat. 10.28 but Kings can onely kill the body and not the soule ergo wee may not feare Kings Sol. That command of Christs is not Positive but Comparative as appeares in the Text and onely prohibits us to feare the King more then God Repl. Then when the Kings commands are contrary to Gods we may resist Sol. We may resist his commands but not his power for in those cases we must obey God by an active the King onely by a passive obedience for which wee have the president of the Apostles themselves Acts 4. and 5. who did refuse to obey the commands of the Rulers prohibiting them to preach in the name of Jesus but yet submitted to their power in yeelding themselves to be imprisoned and beaten according to the commands of the Rulers so that they obeyed both God and the Magistrate the first by doing the latter by suffering 2. The acts of obedience relating to the Kings maintenance are Tribute and Custome whereof I spoke at large in the ninth Chapter of this Booke in the point of Secondary Honour due to the King where I demonstrated these to be due to God onely Primarily and to the King onely Secondarily as he supplies the place of God in Ruling and Judging his people And therefore seeing we are to performe those acts of submission and obedience to the King whereof God himselfe is the proper and immediate object it followeth necessarily that the fift Commandement which prescribeth those acts must be a Commandement of the first Table Now upon these grounds it is easie to frame an answer to the three Arguments alledged for the preheminency of the peoples safety above the Kings Honour whereby to legitimate the resistance of Kings in order to the peoples safety To the first Argument taken from the Law of nature Answ 1 I answer that it is grounded upon a false supposition for the fift Commandement which is the ground of the Kings Honour is not a Precept of the second Table but of the first the duties whereof are grounded upon a love exceeding the love of our selves for the Law of God and Nature teacheth us to love God above our selves Deut. 5.6 Mat. 22.37 and therefore though the King be a man in his naturall capacity and therefore in that sense hath the relation of a neighbour yet in his Politick capacity in which sense onely he is the object of the duties of the fift Commandement he hath the relation of a God to us and not of a neighbour and therefore we ought to regard his Honour above our owne safety and rather to suffer the losse both of our estates friends and life then dishonour him To the second Argument grounded upon the instance of a Generall I answer Answ 2 that the case is farre different For I presume the Argument presupposeth that Generall to be trusted by the King for the safety and protection of that city and not for the destruction of it and that upon this supposition they doe resist him as a Traitor to his trust and in this case the resistance is lawfull because his Commission doth not extend to that act and he is onely a Magistrate so farre as his Commission doth authorize him But suppose the King should have judged that city to be destroyed and authorize that Generall to execute that judgement in this case it were absolutely unlawfull to resist and all acts of opposition in the city or souldiery being the Kings Subjects were absolute treason and rebellion because the Kings Commission from God doth extend absolutely both to our estates and persons nor doth he

of Custome and Tribute for their owne private patrimonies could not be sufficient for maintaining such Kingly magnificence nor doe we finde any particular Law or Statute for the particular endowment of these Kings but onely that generall Right and Prerogative which they derive from God investing them with a power over both our estates and persons which was the cause that God prescribed not in the Law any settled or certaine maintenance for Kings as he did for Priests For though both were his anointed Servants and Deputies and Kings also in a higher degree for they had power over the Priests as well as the people for Moses was not onely a god to the people but to Aaron Exod. 4. And Moses David Solomon Jehoshaphat and other godly Kings exercised this power over both Priests and Levites yea even over the high Priests themselves and that in the highest manner deposing one and advancing another to that Pontificall honour 1 King 2.26 Yet in regard Kings had power to provide for themselves in that manner as themselves judged requisite for their own honour and the peoples safety whereas the Priests had no power at all in any secular matters but what the King did delegate unto them by Commission therefore it pleased God to consigne a set portion for the Priests maintenance and not for the Kings Ob. The Lord blamed the Kings of Judah for imposing taxes upon the people Ezek. 45.8 9. And when Moses prescribed the Kings duty Deut. 17. he prohibited the multiplication of horses and of gold and silver whereby to spoile and oppresse the people Sol. The Lord both in these and many other places prohibiteth the imposition of all Illegall taxes and exactions such as Tyrannicall and wicked Kings usually laid upon the people for the support of their owne insatiate lusts and vanities and such as Samuel told the Israelites would be imposed upon them by Saul in his Tyrannicall government 1 Sam. 8.10 But never prohibited such as were intended for the honour of himselfe and the King and the benefit and welfare of the people though they seemed never so heavy and grievous as that tax was which Pharaoh by Joseph's advise imposed upon the Egyptians for seven yeares together which use and end is not to be determined by the people's discretion but the Kings as appeares in that instance concerning Pharaoh's act And therefore though it be unlawfull for the King to demand such taxes for any other intent but the honour of himselfe and the good of his Subjects yet is it not lawfull for the people to deny them or resist the Kings authority when they suppose and judge them to be demanded for other wicked ends as appeares by those addresses which Samuel told the people they should make unto the Lord for redresse of Sauls Tyranny by prayers and teares 1 Sam. 8.18 For neither Samuel nor the people in those dayes dreamed of these means of resistance and dethronement of Kings which the Devill hath since suggested unto his disciples For surely had those ancient Statists understood these new redresses of Tyranny to be just and lawfull they would never have enslaved and subjected themselves unto such pressures as are recorded in that Text. Repl. Naboth did justly deny his vineyard unto Ahab 1 King 21.3 and therefore the peoples disobedience to the Kings unjust demands of any part of their estate is not unlawfull but commendable Sol. That deniall of Naboth's was grounded upon a particular law of Gods concerning Inheritances in Israel as Naboth there declareth God forbid saith Naboth that I should give the Inheritance of my fathers unto thee For God had prohibited by his Law that any man should alienate the hereditary possessions of his family which by his appoitntment were to be reserved entire to continue the distinction of the families in Israel Numb 36. And againe Ahab did not command that vineyard from Naboth as a King but as a private purchaser intreated Naboth to exchange or sell it to him for a private conveniency and not for any publike use in which case Naboth might justly deny it For though a King be alwayes a King yet he doth not alwayes act as a King in his Politicke capacity but sometimes as a private person in his naturall capacity as in the scholasticall discussion of any point in question or in any contentious recreations as in Wrastling or Tennis and the like in which cases it is not unlawfull to oppose the King both in words and actions And of this nature also are such private bargaines for private uses and conveniencies as Ahab desired to make with Naboth and as David did make with Araunah for his threshing-floore which he would not take by his power but bought with his monie 2 Sam. 24. because it was to pacifie God for his owne private offence and not for the peoples Ver. 17. For though the people were punished it was David alone that offended Delirant Reges plectuntur Achivi But in whatsoever the King acts in his Politicke capacity as a King he may not be resisted or opposed either in words or actions or denied any service either from our estates or persons because in that capacity he is a God over us and may claime the same obedience from us which is due to God himselfe in all Politicall matters whereunto his Commission doth extend as the eleventh Chapter of this Booke shall more fully manifest So that if Ahab had demanded this vineyard of Naboth for any publicke use concerning the Kings honour and the peoples safety Naboth's pretence of Inheritance could not have warranted and justified his deniall thereof to Ahab For inheritances might be sold in Israel till the year of Jubilee in case of private necessity as appeares Lev. 25.25 and therefore much more might be commanded by the King in case of publike necessity For a publicke necessity must needs be a stronger super sede as for any Law then a private can be As also the description of Sauls Government by Samuel doth further evidence 1 Sam. 8.10 for what that Tyrant did to satisfie his lusts a good King may do to preserve the publike And it is not improbable that the pretence of such a deniall was the blasphemy whereof Jezabell caused Naboth to be falsly accused for the Text doth not say that it was blasphemy immediately against God but against God and the King which argueth that those witnesses accused Naboth of some disloyall speeches not consistent with the duty of a Subject which for ought appeares in the Text might relate to Naboth's deniall of that vineyard which the false witnesses might pretend to have beene demanded for such uses and in such a manner as that the deniall thereof might render Naboth guilty of a capitall dishonour and disobedience to the King And thus much briefly of the nature and spece's of Fundadamentall Honour the other spece of Honour opposite to this is Symbolicall whereof in a word 2. Symbolicall Honour is the signall exhibition