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	samuel_n	saul_n	1,780	5	9.7755	5	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A12064	A looking-glasse for the Pope Wherein he may see his owne face, the expresse image of Antichrist. Together with the Popes new creede, containing 12. articles of superstition and treason, set out by Pius the 4. and Paul the 5. masked with the name of the Catholike faith: refuted in two dialogues. Set forth by Leonel Sharpe Doctor in Diuinitie, and translated by Edward Sharpe Bachelour in Diuinitie.; Speculum Papæ. English	Sharpe, Leonel, 1559-1631.; Sharpe, Edward, 1557 or 8-1631.	1616 (1616)	STC 22372; ESTC S114778	304,353	438

cast down to deiect kings lift vp kings and to bestow a Kingdome vpon whom hee please Hee sent Samuel onely to denounce it to Saul and to annoynt Dauid in his roome Samuel did annoint Dauid when God did expressely command it therefore the Pope may depose a Prince although God did not expressely command it I pray tell me hath the Pope any reuelation from God to depriue a King No you will say but hee hath a commandement as before him many other had true to denounce the iudgements of God either temporall or eternall not to execute them God is the actour in casting downe of Saul not Samuel God inflicted the punishment as a Iudge Samuel onely did publish it as a messenger neither as he was a Prophet by his generall vocation but as hee was a Prophet by speciall instinct appointed to that purpose not as Superiour to Saul but as Gods messenger who did precisely lay this cha●ge on him and named the successour with his own mouth What is this to the Pope vnlesse you thinke the prerogatiue proper to the mighty God communicable with a sinnefull man which if hee take it on him without Gods speciall and expresse commandement he doth not exercise it vnder God but equall as God And whatsoeuer is done without God is done against God But Saul as you say is deposed by Samuel by Gods commandement God set downe the censure Samuel declared it I adde also out of the text hee did not declare the § 32 person of Saul to bee cast out of the possession of the kingdome as you say but the off-spring of Saul from the succession of the kingdom for Israel and Iuda after Saul was reiected of God and Dauid annointed did for all that with Dauid obey him many yeers 1. Sam. 24.11 whom Dauid after his deposing called his Lord and the Lords annoynted God keepe mee saith hee from laying my hands vpon him for he is the annoynted of the Lord he doth not say he was but he is the annoynted of the Lord. And he restrained himselfe in ot for feare but for conscience not for curtesie but for duty when he found him sleeping in the caue and one of his captaines would haue killed him Take heede saith he what you doe 1. Sam. 24.5 for who shall strike the Lords annoynted and be guil●lesse hee did not thinke it compassion because hee spared him but hee would haue thought it a sinne if hee had layd his hand on him Hence arose that scruple in his conscience because he had cut off the lappet of the Kings garment hee trembled when hee cut off the skirt of the kings coat these good fellowes blush not to offer violence to the kings person Hee commanded the man to be thrust thorough who had killed Saul the Lords annointed these appoint earthly heauenly rewards for such as murther annointed Kings And if all Israel did of right obey Saul being reiected § 33 by Gods command if Dauid himselfe annointed the successour of the kingdome did performe all loyall obedience to him if he reuerenced him as the Lords annoynted and condemned it as a sinne in himselfe if he had layd his hand vpon him when hee might and reuenged it vpon another that had committed it how can the Pope absolue the subiects from the oath of obedience made to any king whatsouer or make his act meritorious who doth kill him from whom the Pope without any authoritie hath taken the gouernment you see therefore that there is neither truth in the Antecedent of your enthymem nor coherence in the consequence § 34 After the same manner wee may answere you about Ieroboam The example of Ieroboam answered that which your selfe confesse by the way that the Prophet was sent who should denounce the punishment in word only not violently inflict it himselfe and did not vtter one word of the schisme and deposing but onely foretold what should follow that Iosias should ouerturne that altar and burne the Priests bones vpon it as it fell out 300. yeares after Ieroboam was dead But whether it prefigured our falling from the Apostolicall sea Ieroboam and his Priests types of poperie as you call it or your backsliding from the Apostolicall truth and whether Ieroboam with his altar doe represent your Pope who hath corrupted the true and auncient worship of God with vnwritten traditions or our Princes who haue reformed it so corrupted by the holy Scriptures it is not to be argued at this time onely I see a great likenesse betweene his calues and your idoll vpon the altar I appeale to your religious wisedome what difference is there in the case of Idolatrie whether a caluish or a crustie Godhead bee adored I know your answere you doe not worshippe the bread but Christ in the bread And Ieroboams Priests might make the same answere that they worshipped not the calfe but God in the calfe whose Idolatrie for all that you hold to be condemned But whether Ieroboams Priests be the types of our Ministers or of your shaulings and whether they be more abiect and hungerstaru'd they who for conscience sake serue the liuing God or your Priests who to fill their paunches serue the golden calfe it belongs not to this question in hand And all this example proueth nothing else but that a wicked King may rightly bee reprehended of a Prophet as a wicked Pope may of any Priest yet you would not say that a Pope might iustly bee deposed of him as neither the king by the Prophet although hee were greiuously reprehended by him as hee well deserued § 35 Neither leprous Ozias though hee were shut from the company of men according to the Law Ozias the Leperous no type of excommunication whom you make the figure of a spirituall Leper and by that reason of one that is excommunicate was at any time thrust from his kingdome because the gouernment thereof was committed to his sonne 4. Reg. 15. For Ozias continued king to his dying day as the Scripture calleth him in the 25. yeare of his raigne which was the last of his life Iothan therefore was not as yet the King but the Kings Vicegerent while his father liued Neither did any Leper by Gods law loose his priuate inheritance Inheritance not lost for leprosie much lesse a king the publicke inheritance of the crowne Neither did heresie which you tearme a spirituall leprosie driue any out of his kingdome no more then couetousnesse or ambition or the contempt of the word cast the Pope out off his Popedome which the Fathers called the leprosie of the soule And if leprosie shall remoue a king out of his throne how shall the Popes hold their chaires that you leprous conclusion doth as well touch the Popes myter as the Kings crowne This figure then is as pernitious to the Pope as to the King For whereas you said it was the office of the Priest to separate those that were Lepers there you

of excommunication that the Catholikes shall not take the Oath of Allegeance or else retract it being taken And it is to be doubted that to whom the definition of heresie doth agree whether heresie the thing defined doth agree That Grosthead being dead seemeth with his definition as with his Crosier-staffe to strike the Pope vpon his brest Then Saturnine What Schismatikes saith he what § 21 Sigebert what Vincentius what Grosthead with his Crosiers staffe do you reckon vp As if they were not all condemned by the Church because they were at contention with the head of the Church But that wee may not seeme rather to contend with the authorities of men then of God Paul the Apostle forbad to salute an Heretike yea he warneth that after the first or second admonition we should auoide him If it be not lawfull to salute an Heretike is it lawfull to serue and obey an Heretike Paul teacheth that we sacrifice an heretike as hatefull to God as a great sacrifice to him and tha● we flie from him as from a gangrene And shall it not be lawfull to cut of the gangrene and cast it away lest it doe infect vs when as we are bidden to cut off our owne flesh if it be affected with a gangrene Now saith Patriotta you shew your selfe a right Iesuite § 22 when as Paul did forbid that we should salute an Heretike How heretikes are to be delt withall but auoide him after the first or second admonition in one word he did forbid voluntarie societie not necessarie dutie familiar salutations which curtesie affords not reuerent obseruance which pietie imposeth priuate acquaintance whereby soules are infected not publike obedience whereby gouernment is maintained It is not lawfull to salute an Heretike will you not therefore pay an Heretike the money that is owing him yes that I would say you I demand againe whether the debt of obedience be not more iust then the debt of money which is of greater force a debt contracted in your owne consent or that which is imposed vpon you by the commandement of God § 23 Here Saturnine We owe nothing saith he to Heretikes Nothing said Patriotta Doth not the seruant owe faithful seruice to his Master being an Heretike he oweth it you say to an Infidell not to an Heretike You trifle If you owe it to an Infidell which doth oppugne the faith doe you not owe it to an Heretike who only doth erre in the faith Doth not the wife owe faithfull obedience to her husband though he be an heretike yes when nothing may be the cause of diuorce but adulterie as Christ teacheth no not infidelitie it selfe as Paul saith Lastly children are bound to obey their Parents in the Lord although they be Heretikes Therefore shall not subiects much more obey the Prince Lord of the familie the husband of the common weale the publike father of the country although he be an heretike for heresie doth not dissolue the bond of dutie but breaketh of the knot of acquaintance But heresie is a gangrene as the Apostle faith But although we are commanded to cut of all heresie as a gangrene yet are we not commanded to roote out euery heretike It were wrong with the Papists if this your opinion were setled in our mens mindes But we leaue these parts of cruell Surgeons to your selues who presently betake your selues to lanching and fearing and alwaies vse the cutting knife and fire and look not for easier and gentler remedies But seeing in this quarrell you seeme to buckle with vs with weapons out of the Scripture which you doe seldom handle whereby you proue that Kings in right may be and in fact haue been depriued that subiects may by a word be absolued as by a word they were bound with an oath of obedience Goe to let vs see before you come to the second foundation the practise of Christians what you can say against vs in the former Then Saturnine I will freely speake saith he what I § 24 verily thinke God had not securely prouided for his Church if he had not sent some holy stout Prophets and Preists who might with their Church discipline correct and keep vnder such Kings as were wicked and tyrannous when they grew desperate Examples out of the old Testament 1. Saul and might remooue them being the hatred of God and men the shame to religion and the burthen to the people Therefore we read the first King ouer Gods people because he seemed to take vpon him the spirituall function was excommunicated by Samuel at Gods commandement and put from the possession of his Kingdome although after Dauids annointing and his owne deposing he held it by tyrannicall force many yeeres and did often attempt to murther both Dauid the competitour of the kingdome and Samuel the executioner of Gods decree as he had slaine foure-score and fiue of the holy Preists the Nobites Who knoweth not that a speciall Prophet was sent § 25 of God to Ieroboam King of Israel 2. Ieroboam who did denounce the iudgement of God against the King and the Kings race because he had separated the people by a wicked schisme from the ancient and true worship of God begunne at Ierusalem and had erected a new altar in Bethel whereby the schisme and diuision from the Apostolike See is properly prefigured and ordained a new Cleargy a hunger-starued and contemptible out of Aarons order such an one as yours is The sinne was afterward so seuerely punished according to the censure of the Prophet that there was none left of the Kings stocke to make water against the wall The King did very fondly lay hold vpon the man of God to kill him because hee thought the denouncing of Gods iudgement was treason against the Kings crowne and dignity § 26 3. Ozia We read likewise that Ozia the King of Iuda beeing puft vp with intolerable pride not content with the honour of a King did insolently presume to vsurpe the spirituall and Priestly office being stoutly withstood by Azaria and 80. other Priests and violently expelled out of the Temple and that because he threatned and resisted the Priests he was strucken with a filthy leprosie and therefore not onely cast out of the Temple but by their authority separated from the company of men which was a speciall figure of the Priestly authority vnder the new Law which may excommunicate Kings as well as others for heresie which is a spirituall leprosie and committed the gouernment of the Kingdome to Iotham his sonne An apparant example that it is lawfull for Priests to take armes and by force to bring vnder the wickednesse of Kings when as they deeme it is auailable for the preseruation of religion and the honour of God § 27 The zeale of the good Priests in the depriuing of that wicked Queen Athalia is worthily commended 4. Athalia whom Iehoida the cheefe Priest with a power of the Priests and Commons did command to be

put beside her throne and put to death and did annoynt and crowne the true heire § 28 Who is ignorant how couragiously Elias answered being designed to death by Achab and Iezabel 5. Ahab who had cast downe the holy altars and had slaine the true worshippers of God That it was not hee and other men of God but Achab and his house that had troubled Israel and with what zeale hee slew Iezabels false Prophets restored the holy altars called for fire from heauen wherewith he did destroy Ochozias captaines and messengers and annointed Iehu king ouer Israel and cast Achab with all his posterity out of the Kingdome of whom it is sayd That he put downe and ouerthrew Kings and cast the mighty out of their seats Eccles 48. as God appointed Ieremy ouer kingdoms that he should plant and roote them vp build them vp and plucke them downe Which power of Christs Preisthood vnder the new Testament doth appeare to bee farre larger and more ample and is giuen to the chiefe Preist the Bishop of Rome that he may in the name of Christ break in peeces and beat to powder with his iron rod as if they were earthen vessels such kings as lift vp themselues against Christ his Church which is his spouse his kingdome For by those examples it is euident that Kings annointed and iustly created may of right bee deposed Secondly for what causes they may in fact bee depriued Lastly that in the inauguration and consecration of kings as also in their depriuation God did vse the ministery of Priests and Prophets either ordinarie or extraordinarie to that purpose that they might be not onely Iudges but correctours of kings For whereas kings doe holde their dignity and supreame authority from God and haue bound themselues with all their might to promote the true religion and worship of God and the honour of their highest King and Lord and to gouerne the people in the faith and fear of God the Priests and Prophets to whom the cheefe and principall care of religion and soules is committed and who haue beene set aboue Princes in spirituall matters did of right oppose themselues against them in those passages which brought dishonour to God ruine to the religion and damnation to the soules of subiects and did exercise iustice and iudgement against their Princes in the name of God who abused their gouernment to ouerthrow the true worship of God brought in and established idolatry heresie and other abominations § 29 For there was betweene God and the King a certaine compact as it were which had force euer after either openly or at lest secretly that none should draw away their subiects either by force or by any other meanes from the faith of their Ancestours and from the religion holy ceremonies of God deliuered receiued by the hands of Preists whereby God did insinuate that if they did obserue these precepts and conditions they should long raigne with their posterity otherwise it should come to passe as we taught before that as the Prophets and Preists did annoint kings on that condition onely that they should defend and maintaine the worship and honour of God so likewise they should depose kings when they broke the couenant of God and fell to strange gods and draue their people to Apostasie And thus it appeareth it was vnder the olde Testament And if God did furnish the Priests and Prophets of the olde Testament with such power of excommunication whereby they might depriue wicked and tyrannous kings cast out of their thrones and driuen from the companie of men not onely of life if they could and this common light that they might bring no damage to the Synagogue with how much greater authority hath he strengthned the high priest of the new testamēt the vicar of Christ that he might cast out expell from the Communion of the Church beeing so cast out depose from their kingdomes such Kings as are Infidels Apostataes Heretickes and Tyrants and that not onely but release their peoples oathes giuen to such kings who haue broken their owne oath made to the Priest in the name of God at their coronation vnlesse we thinke that God had lesse care of his Church then of his Synagogue or doth more beare with Kings in these dayes who be heads of Apostasie from God then he did with Kings of former times Both which bee it farre from Gods Iustice and prouidence Truely he had left a miserable and a wretched Church as desolate and forsaken if he had exposed it being bereft of the helpe of holy Preists to the lust of cruell Tyrants that they might tosse and turne it at their pleasure and alter the state of religion euery yeere For whereas heeretofore Christian Bishops did not depose Nero Dioclesian Iulian the Apostata Valens and the like it was because Christians wanted temporall strength for otherwise they might haue done it by right I say by right the Bishops might haue depriued the Pagan-Emperours Apostataes and Hereticks if the Church had had that force to resist as before and after getting force it did resist Then Patriotta while in your malice Saturnine you § 30 suffer your selfe to bee thus carried against Kings you belch out notable blasphemy against God for what is blasphemy if this bee not to accuse Gods prouidence against the Church vnles he giue power to holy Preists to depose wicked Kings you haue very vnaduisedly founded the depth of Gods counsell with the plummet of your shallow iudgement who hath neuer the lesse I cannot tell whether much the more prouided for his Church as well by trying her patience with aduersity as seeking after thankfulnesse with prosperity aswell when he consumed the sinnes of the Saints by the persecution of Princes as when hee satisfied their desires with the mercy of pious Princes aswell by spoiling his sonnes of earthly pleasures recompencing them with the rewards of the blessed as continuing them hee delighted them with the comforts of such as were miserable Which I doe not speake to that end that I may excuse the cruelty of Tyrants but that I may set foorth the mercy of God because those things which they intend to the Saints for their euill God turneth to their good But you went about to daily with the expresse commandements of Christ and the Apostles with a few examples of the Priests and the Prophets ill vnderstood and farre worse applyed to the Pope How did that vnbeseeme a Diuine let vs therefore if you please waigh them seuerally § 31 Samuel you say did excommunicate Saul and being excommunicate cast him out of his kingdome Samuel did not excommunicate or depose Saul therefore the Pope hath power to cast a Prince out of his Kingdome I denie first the Antecedent It was not the Prophet but God himselfe that cast off Saul for his wickednesse for it is Gods onely prerogatiue to depose the mighty out of their thrones to raise vp those that are

Bishops vnlesse happily any other course seeme better to you Then Calander I promise you said he that nothing § 67 is more acceptable to vs that I may make answer for Argentine my friend I neuer doubted of ciuill obedience to be rightly performed to good Kings by Catholikes I thought to confesse the truth I was absolued from the oath of obedience to Heretikes and Tyrants after once they were denounced excommunicated by the Pope and now lawfully deposed from their kingdome Now seeing I perceiue that Christ Peter and Paul not only taught but shewed ciuill obedience to Tiberij and Neroes and to be so farre from taking from them with their diuine power as they might their scepter sword and Crowne that vnder them they laid downe their life to confirme their faith and obedience You haue said that which makes me begin to doubt of such force of excommunication and such power of the Pope For when I did diligently obserue euery passage of your disputation Patriotta out of that perspicuous and short exposition as it were consisting of those three texts I must needes confesse that the sparkes of this vnknowne and vnhard of truth did first cast them selues into mine eyes wherewith the authoritie of Aquinas Toletane and Laterane Councell for their power of excommunication and the authoritie of the Pope alleaged by Saturnine presently brought a mvst ouer them But light was brought out of the myst by Fristugensis Vrshergensis Sigebert and Vincentius and all the ancient and sincere Catholikes and graue witnesses of those times as I heare my Velbacellus affirme at what time Gregorie the 7. did first attempt to driue Henry the 4. Emperor by his excommunication out of his kingdome Here Saturnine being driuen from humane authorities betooke himselfe to diuine But whatsoeuer he tooke Patriotta straight-way caught it out of his hands where hee said that the Apostle forbad wee should not salute an heretike and commanded to auoide him after one or two admonitions Patriotta made answer that hee forbad voluntarie societie not necessarie subiection priuate familiaritie not publike obedience And when he prest that a gangrene was to be cut of he instantly replyed that it was not an heretike but heresie was compared to a gangrene and with a religious kinde of charitie as it seemde sparing the heretike thought good the heresie should be rooted out And from thence in my iudgement concluded not amisse when no heretike was to loose his inheritance or his life that a King much lesse was to be depriued either of his life or inheritance by reason of heresie Here Saturnine bent all the force of his wit and betaking himselfe into the fortifications of the old Testament from euery place gathering the forces of examples with arguments drawne from thence fought very valiantly so that when I heard him alone he made me consent almost vnto him But this heretike Patriott shrunke not a foote but presently buckled hand to hand He had said that Saul was deposed Patriot as the truth was distinguished that the person of Saul was not remoued from the possession of the kingdome but his of-spring from the succession But by whom euen from GOD not from Samuel whom hee proued to be not a Iudge but a messenger nor to haue inflicted the punishment of deposing but to haue published the decree and that not by the right of his generall vocation but by speciall instinct and reuelation from God not as Prophet but as a Prophet appointed to that end to annoint Dauid for the succession of the kingdome whom God had named with his owne mouth So that nothing can accrue to the Pope from hence vnlesse he can proue he haue receiued a reuelation to depose a Prince When hee contended that Ieroboam was cast aside § 68 by the Prophet he againe denied it confessing hee was greeuously reproued by the Prophet not violently remoued Saturnine assaults againe that Ozias a Leper was by force driuen out of the Temple by Azaria and 80. Priests and that he was separated from the societie of men and the gouernment committed to Iothan his Sonne Here Patriott a better Text-man as it seemeth denied that the King was put out of the Church forceably but being strooke with a leprosie was enforced by his owne accord to depart out of the Sanctuarie not out of the kingdome the right whereof hee reserued to himselfe to his dying day and put ouer the gouernment to his sonne as to his Vicegerent And that a Leper neuer lost his priuate inheritance much lesse his publike And when as heresie is a leprosie nor euer any was depriued of his kingdome for leprosie and therefore for heresie none was to be depriued Which reason must needs satisfie me in this businesse vnlesse it can be proued that the leprous Iewes lost their inheritance And when Saturnine affirmed that the lepers were separated from the company of men by the Priests Patriotta excepted against it that it was their duty to discerne the leprosie but the Magistrates were to put them apart So that the iudgement of the businesse belonged to the Preists the parting of the person to the Magistrate Whence he concluded and retorted it vpon Saturnine who sayd that heresie was a spirituall leprosie that it followed from this figure that the King ought rather to separate an hereticall Pope then the Pope an hereticall king So that this figure was more hurtfull to the Pope then to the King § 69 One thing there was which both Patriott did shrewdly re-enforce against you Saturnine and did likewise mightily offend vs all when you concluded out of Azarias example that it was lawfull for Preists to take armes to represse the wickednesse of Kings for the Preist resisted the King not with arms but with words vnlesse perhaps you will take a greeuous admonition reproofe and reprehension for armes Azarias did not cast the king out of the temple much lesse out of the kingdome And doe you thinke of corslets swords and lawnces wherewith a warlike Preist may remooue a King from his throne fie vpon this proud vanitie A Bishop ought not to bee a striker much lesse a warriour It was not lawfull for Dauid to build vp Gods materiall Temple because he was a man of bloud and will you build vp Gods spirituall Temple with bloudy hands But I referre you to the canons and goe forward For where you sayd that Athalia was lawfully deposed § 70 by Iehoida the Preist it was first answered that shee was neuer rightly created and crowned Againe that she was deposed by Iehoida not as hee was high Preist but cheife Prince of his tribe and next allie to the king nor by himselfe alone but ioyned with all the Nobles of the kingdome not with the authority of the Preist but by the authority of Ioash being first annoynted and crowned by him that whatsoeuer he did he seemed to doe by the power of the king with the common consent of the Peeres and Nobles against the wicked