Selected quad for the lemma: kingdom_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
kingdom_n	king_n	samuel_n	saul_n	2,635	5	10.0337	5	true

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A70542	Two great questions determined by the principles of reason & divinity I. whether the right to succession in hæreditary kingdoms, be eternal and unalterable? Neg. : II. whether some certain politick reasons may not be sufficient grounds of divorce? Affirm.	Lawrence, William, 1613 or 14-1681 or 2.	1681 (1681)	Wing L692A; ESTC R19202	24,141	40

disaffected to Him for this since the Cause of his refusal to comply must be either that he is not so apprehensive of the danger they Dread and sees no Reason so to be or if he be as apprehensive as they yet perhaps he thinks it not within his Power to deprive the next Legal Heir of Succeeding without injury forasmuch as He judges his personal Affection or Disposition to any Opinion or Religion cannot alter and take away his Right and either or both these being the Motives which with-hold Him from proceeding as he is desired and both pertaining to Conscience which he must satisfy as well as other Men besides the Consideration of the Kings Heart being in the Hand of God and particularly directed and turned by His Providence His Subjects ought to submit to and Acquiesce in his Pleasure and so no remedy but Succeed he must and the Forfeiture not being taken Advantage of whilst he remained a Subject after He is once Possest of the Supreme Authority cannot then be taken For although that Disposition which Forfeited his Right to Succession when He was Heir may seem to Forfeit his Right to Actual Possession because no one has a Right to be Possest of that which he had no Right to take into His Possession yet the Condition of this Forfeiture is such that not being taken the Supreme Magistrate is supposed not to have judged it a Forfeiture and it belonging properly to his Cognizance to determine whether it were or no what he judged was no Forfeiture that he did not take for one and what He did not take when he is Dead no one can take for Him if to no one he Delegated Authority so to do and if a Forfeiture is made to a Superiour and the Supreme Magistrate neither by himself nor Delegate did take it no one being Superiour to the Succeeding Heir no one may take it either by forcible hindring him to Succeed or Warring against or Deposing Him when He is possest for the Crown once worn taking away all Defects as say the Lawyers and that passing over to the Heir immediately upon the expiration of the Predecessor all Previous Forfeitures or present Indispositions are of no force against Him because there is none on Earth Sufficiently Authorised to take advantage of them God indeed if he pleases by Interposing his Immediate Command may depose Him I mean not on the account of His Supreme Intendency over all the World for so He may depose a Prince though he be not so evilly affected but according to the rules of Justice and Reason as an Offender against Him whose Substitute he is by overthrowing the Ends of Government but this God rarely doth for although Saul for his grievous Offences were rejected by God yet suffered he Him to live and dye a King without proceeding to actual Deposition although Samuel had told Him from God that the Kingdom of Israel was rent from him that is from his Tribe and Family If it be Objected That though the Predecessor by a particular application of his Will did not take the forfeiture because he did not see it or believed it not Yet generally he must be supposed to Will and Design the taking it forasmuch as he Wills and Designs the Publick wellfare and so though not by a Special Act Yet by his General Intention of the Peoples good He must be supposed to have taken the advantage of it I answer That this will not stand good in Policy as it may do in many other things because such a belief would put it in the Peoples Power at their pleasure to Disinherit and Dethrone whomsoever they would forasmuch as they might frequently upon Distaste pretend him to have made a Forfeiture who made none and so depose him under the Colour of the Predecessor's Implicite and General Will to Disinherit him and this is so great an Inconvenience and Danger to the Publick that it 's far more eligible to run the hazard of Sometimes having a bad Prince than of having good ones turned off as bad or of suffering such ill Consequences as War and Bloodshed and an Unsettled Kingdom which must attend an attempt to depose even bad Ones since there is no one but has some Adherents The Scriptures command Servants Obedience not only to Gentle but froward Masters Applaud Suffering Wrongfully and the Primitive Christians did so even when they were strong enough to resist and the Souldiers were content to be decimated and to lay down their Armes to be wrongfully put to Death that is for a cause not deserving Death for professing the Christian Religion which plainly proves that both the Apostles and Primitive Christians who were as well Catechised in the Principles of Religion as we can pretend to be thought it an Article of their Faith that it was not lawful for Subjects to Depose or Resist the cruelest Tyrants though endeavouring their Spiritual destruction by obliging them to Idolatry and their Temporal by Proscribing them by Imprisoning and Murthering them if they refused and this we call Passive Obedience that is submitting to the Supreme Authority's pleasure even when we are Injured rather then Rebel against Him And thus much to shew that if the Heir be not Disinherited whilst He remains so it will afterwards be too late and in reason and justice Impossible CHAP. IV. That Mens Throwing themselves wholly upon Providence for Averting these Mischiefs without making use of Rational and Moral Means to prevent them is Unreasonable and Absurd THe Country-man in the Fable who called upon Hercules to draw His Cart out of the Mire in which it was set was bid to apply His own Shoulders to it and thrust if he would have it out Many there are who Idely rely upon Providence to save them from the Dangers they foresee but will not step a foot themselves or use the least Industry and Care for preventing those Evils and because nothing comes to pass without Gods Permission imagine therefore that nothing is done without His Appointment and on this account leave it wholly to him to Provide for their Safety But this careless Opinion I much dislike because it often brings Men into Misery by making them to neglect those Means for their Safety which God frequently puts into their own hands and so they are undone for want of Care for presuming God will Save them without the least of their Caution and Circumspection Nay sometimes there may be some whose Honours Lives and Fortunes must stand or fall with a present Condition of a Nation who know in their Hearts and are sure if the Times turn unless they will turn with them which 't is Reasonable many times to believe they may not they must lose both Lives and Fortunes and the Spiritual Welfare of all the Subjects be Endangered yet they are not content not to endeavour the Disinheriting a Successor with whom all this Mischief comes in upon a Scruple that such a Disinheriting is Un-lawful are not content fairly