Selected quad for the lemma: kingdom_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
kingdom_n	david_n	israel_n	judah_n	1,785	5	9.8153	5	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A88579	A cleare and necessary vindication of the principles and practices of me Christopher Love, since my tryall before, and condemnation by, the High Court of Iustice. Whereby it is manifested, that a close prison, a long sword, a High Court, and a bloody scaffold, have not in the least altered my judgment. Whereas also the cruelty of the sentence, the insufficiency of the proofs, and my own innocency, are demonstrated. As also my grounds and reasons of giving in a narrative, and the lawfulness of the matter and titles of my petitions (though to usurpers) manifested and maintained. Together with a declaration of my judgement concerning Cromwells unlawfull invasion of the kingdom of Scotland. Written by me Christopher Love, Master of Arts, minister of Lawrence Iury, London; penned by me the eighth of August, fourteen days before my death.	Love, Christopher, 1618-1651.	1651 (1651)	Wing L3148; Thomason E790_5; ESTC R202748	58,288	49

according to thine anger and according to thine envy which thou hast used out of thy hatred against them and I will make my self knowne amongst them when I have judged thee c. It is in Scripture record accounted a more deplorable judgment to have Nations of the same Religion and under the same Government to wage War one with another than to have a War with any other Nations whatsoever read 2 Chron. 15. 5 6. Nation shall rise against Nation that is the Kingdome of Israel against the Kingdom of Iudah who were of the same Religion and also under the same Government during the Reignes of Saul David Solomon and part of Rehoboams so in 2. Chron. 28. 9 10. per totum many instances out of Scripture might have been produced to suggest to you how unwarrantable a thing it is for Cromwell with his English Army to invade spoyle and lay wast their poor Brethren of Scotland We are commanded Zech. 7. 9. 10. ●o shew mercy and compassion every man to his neighhour oppr●sse not the Widdow nor the Fatherl●ss nor the stranger nor the poor and I t●none imagine ev●ll against his Brother in your heart and the reason may be drawn from Mal●chy 2. 10. Have we not all one Father hath not one God created us Why doe we deal treacherously every man against his brother by prophaxing the Covenant of our Fathers I have no more to say in this matter but will say of Cromwell though he may prosper for a while against the people of God yet I may say of him as God did of J●hojakim Tkine eyes and thi●e heart are not but for thy covetousnesse and for to shed innocent bloud and for oppression and for violence to do it therefore thus saith the Lord They shall not lament for him saying ah my brother or ah my sister they shall not lament for him saying ah Lord or ah his glory he shall be buried with the buriall of an ●sse c. Ier. 22. 17 18 19. I am in the next place to give some reasons to prove the unlawfullnesse of the invasion of our Brethren of SCOTLAND I shall lay down a few considerations whereby you may see the evill nature and dangerous consequence of this War First This Warre with Scotland is worse than the former war intended against Scotland in the year 1640. it is worse in many regards 1. The First war was called Bellum Episcopale this may be called Bellum Haereticale if I may so say the first War would have brought in Popish ceremonies this War brings in damnable Heresies and hellish blasphemies by the first they would have scrued up Monarchy into Tyranny by this they will pull down Monarchy and turne all to Anarchy 2. This War in the year 1650. is worse than that intended about the yeare 1640. because then we were not under so many Covenants and Engagements one towards another as now we are Cromwell invaded them after a Covenant and Articles of Agreement for assistance made with them after help and Brotherly assistance received from them yet he hath forgotten the Brotherly Covenant with them and all the kindnesses we have had from them in the day of out deep distresse Thirdly This war hath not such an Authority as the former had the first was raised by the King and his Councell this by Cromwell and a Faction Fourthly the Souldiers many of them doe behave themselves worser than the Souldiers the King and Bishops did raise against the Scots at first the Kings Soldiers were but ignorant and prophane these many of them Hereticks and Blasphemers those did pull down Crosses and Pictures these pull downe Ordinances those drunk with Wine or Strong Drink but these drunk with Error having a spirit of gyddinesse and contradiction against the Truth which is the worst sort of drunkennesse Fifthly far worse in the event also in the Kings and Bishops war not above 14 slain one both sides but in this war Cromwell with a more cruel and bloody minde hath most barbarously slaine at least 10000 of the Scotish Nation since he entered Scotland oh the bloody cruelty of this man 2. A second reason may be taken from the time when Cromwell invaded them it was not when Scotland was over-run with malignity during the time of Hambletons prevalency but it was when the power of that Kingdome was in the hands of the most Religious and Covenanting Party in Scotland after Hamblitons Army was destroyed and Montrosse defeated and the godly party who managed the cause of God for these 14 years faithfully had all the power of that Kingdome in their hands then Cromwell invaded them which to me is an evident Demonstration that the invasion of Scotland was by the instigation of Jesuites and the Papists Party to root out the Protestant Party in ●cotland and to bring their persons in vassalage and thraldome as to their civill Liberties 3. A third Reason may be drawn from the slight grounds Cromwell had to invade Scotland because they would not be a Common-wealth therefore they shall not be a People because they will not break their Covenants therefore Cromwell will break them because the● will not lay their Consciences waste he will lay their land waste and make it desolate because the Scots are for a Scripturall Presbytery and a well-regulated Monarchy for found doctrine and the power of godlynesse therefore it is that Cromwell is so much their Enemy Whatever els may be pretended ●et these were the true grounds why Cromwell and the rest of the Iesuited Spanish Faction did invade the neighbour Nation 4. A fourth reason may be taken from the wicked ends Cromwell aims at in his invading Scotland viz. merely to satisfie his ambitious and covetous desires to be absolute Lord of the Estates Liberties and Lives of all the people in these 3. Nation it doth not content him to have one Kingdome viz. Ireland for Ireton his Son nor another Kingdome viz. England for himself but he must have Scotland also His end is as was that of the Children of Ammon invading Israel in Amos 1. 13. That they might inlarge their borders his end and the end his Souldiers aim is like that of the Chaldaeans that bitter and hasly Nation to march thr●ugh the bredih ●f the Land to possess the dwelling places that are not theirs his end is like that of M●unt Seir who said ●hese two Nations and these two Countreys shall be mine and wee will passesse them So saith Cromwell these two Nations and these two Countrves viz. England and Scotland shall be mine and I will possesse them nor will all this content him he seeks to be an universall Monarch like that Ch●ldaean Monarch in Hab. 2. 56. He is a proud man neither keepeth at home who exlargeth his desire as hell and cannot be satisfied but gathereth unto him all Nations and heapeth unto him all people but shall not all these take up a taunting proverbe against him Woe to him

then the Lawfull King of Israel set over him by God and Absalom only an intruder and made King by the tumults of the People yea David himself did bid Hushai call Absalom that Usurper King 2 Sam. 15. 34. Say to Absalom I will be thy servant O King Yea further David himself did call Absalom King 2 Sam. 15. 19. David said to Hushai returne to thy place and abide with the King that is with Absalom yet he knew himselfe to be the lawfull King and did not acknowledge that his Sonne Absalom had any right to the Kingdom though he did give him the Title of a King So Athaliahs Usurping is called by the Spirit of God reigning yet the spirit of God ownes not her right to reigne but approved of the killing of her and the setting up Ieh●ash the true and lawfull heire in her room Yea Christ himself called the Devill the Prince of this World Iohn 12. 13. and 16. and 11. yet is it imaginable that Christ thought this Title of right belonged to the Divell certainely no Musculus on Iohn 12. 31. well observes non est i●le viz. Satan Princeps mundi legitimus sed per rapinam Paul called the Devills Principalities and power Eph. 6. 12. yet none will be so shamelesse as to say that Paul thought this their Rule Dominion and power of right belonged to them but is meerly usurped and intruded into See Annot. on the Bible on Ephes. 6. 12. 3. Titles are not alwaies approbative but distinctive my meaning is that giving of Titles to persons or things argues not ones approving of a just right to those Titles but seems meerly to distinguish those persons or things from others that are called by other names or Titles as I call them at Whitehall a Councell of State to distinguish them from a Councell of Warre I call those at Westminster the Parliament of the Common-wealth to distinguish them from the Lords and Commons assembled in Parliament 4. Titles are giving to things or persons sometimes meerly by allusion not approbation as in Scripture phrase sin is said to reigne and the Devils are said to rule not that either the one or the other hath an approved right to rule over man as a lawfull Prince hath to rule over his Subjects but they are said to reign or rule by way of allusion to the reign of Princes in their Dominions 5. Titles may be given without sin to persons or things though of right they belong not to them where they are generally received or mentioned by such titles by the people where I live About names and titles much indulgence is to be given to the common usages and customes of the people I may call things or persons by such names or titles as I know belongs not of right unto them because they are ordinarily knowne and generally received by such names and titles I could give manifold instances out of Scripture to prove this David called Abs●lom King not that he thought him so of right but because he was commonly known and generally received by that title among the people So Herod was called by the Evangelist King of the Jews so did the Jews generally call him by that title yet none but that sect or sort of people called the Herodians did owne it as Herods right to be the King of the Iews who were so called because they pleaded for Herod to be the lawfull King of the Iews which the Pharises and others withstood because he was not one of the Iewish Nation as he ought to be Deut 17. 15. Yet all the Iews called Herod King though they did not acknowledge him to be their lawfull King t is manifest giving of titles are but titular acknowledgments and no more 6. If names may without sin be given to places and things which belong not to them I see no reason why they may not be given to persons There are names and titles given to many places both upon superstitious and idolatrous grounds yet may without sin be used I speak not of the first imposers when those places are so called and commonly knowne by such names Luke that writ the Acts of the Apostles calls a place in Athens Mars-hill as it was commonly called and this he might do without sin though this name was originally imposed on that place in honour of Mars yet he calls the place as it was commonly called though called so upon an Idolatrous ground Acts 17. 22. So for T●ings also we may without sin call them by those names which others give them though they may deal superstitiously or sinfully in the first imposition of such names Thus Paul mentions a ship of Alexandria whose signe was Cast●r and Pollux names originally imposed by the Gentiles upon an idolatrous ground yet being generally received Paul calls the ship after this name 7. It was a matter of absolute necessity as to my life for me to Petition them I being condemned to dye t is true for a trivial or ordinary occasion I should never Petition them but in an extraordinary case I might lawfully do it David in a case of extreme necessity did eat the Shew-bread which in an ordinary case he might not do T is true indeed Cato would not Petition Caesar for his life he had rather dye than Petition but that I conceive was rather out of some animosity or height of Spirit or petty discontent than out of a rectified judgment for my part I am fully satisfied that I have not sinned in giving them their assumed Titles Names and Titles do not determine rights conveniunt rebus nemina saepe suis it is true sometimes but not alwayes 8. Titles men assume to themselves or are generally given by others may be given them by me without sin or without owning a right to those titles this I may make appear by sundry late instances Henry the eighth had this title given him Defender of the faith yet he had no right to this title for he defended only the Popish Religion he opposed the Faith rather than defended the Faith and the true reason why the Pope gave him this title Defender of the Faith was because he opposed the Doctrine of Luther and wrote against him yet none scrupled to call him and the succeeding Kings of England the Defenders of the Faith So the King of Spaine is called the Catholick King yet he hath no true right to this title for he is not a Catholick or universall Monarch yet our new State have lately sent to the King of Spaine under this title The Catholick King so the King of France is call'd the most Christian King so the Duke of Bavaria having by arms ejected the Palsgrave writes himselfe Prince Elector Palatine of the Rhine so the King of Poland takes this title to himselfe King of Sweden yet hath no right to that Kingdom yet none that ever I heard of scrupled to give these titles to them considering that titles do not determine rights and considering