Selected quad for the lemma: law_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
law_n	act_n	authority_n	king_n	5,660	5	4.0152	3	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A14241	A speech delivered in the castle-chamber at Dublin, the XXII. of November, anno 1622 At the censuring of certaine officers, who refused to take the Oath of Supremacie. By Iames Bishop of Meath.	Ussher, James, 1581-1656.	1631 (1631)	STC 24555; ESTC S118952	5,567	16

consequently it must bee yeelded without contradiction that the temporall Magistrate doth exercise therein a part of his civill government in punishing a crime that is of it owne nature spirituall or Ecclesiasticall But here it will be said The words of the Oath being generall that the King is the only supreme governour of this Realme and of all other his highnesse dominions and countries how may it appeare that the power of the civill sword only is meant by that government and that the power of the Keyes is not comprehended therein I answere first that where a civill Magistrate is affirmed to bee the governour of his owne dominions and countryes by common intendement this must needs be understood of a civill governement and may in no reason be extended to that which is meerely of another kinde Secondly I say that where an ambiguitie is conceived to bee in any part of an Oath it ought to bee taken according to the understanding of him for whose satisfaction the Oath was ministred Now in this case it hath been sufficiently declared by publick authority that no other thing is meant by the governement here mentioned but that of the civill sword onely For in the booke of Articles agreed upon by the Archbishops Bishops the whole Clergie in the Convocation holden at London anno 1562. thus we read Where we attribute to the Queenes Majesty the chiefe government by which titles wee understand the minds of some slanderous folkes to be offended we give not to our Princes the ministring either of Gods Word or of the Sacraments the which thing the Injunctions also lately set forth by Elizabeth our Queene doth most plainly testifie but that onely prerogative which we see to have beene given alwaies to all godly Princes in holy Scriptures by God himselfe that is that they should rule all estates and degrees committed to their Charge by God whether they be Ecclesiasticall or Temporall and restraine with the Civill sword the stubborne and evill doers If it be here objected that the authority of the Convocation is not a sufficient ground for the expositiō of that which was enacted in Parliament I answer that these Articles stand confirmed not onely by the Royall assent of the Prince for the establishing of whose Supremacy the Oath was framed but also by a speciall Act of Parliament which is to be found among the statutes in the thirteenth yeare of Queene Elizabeth chap. 12. Seeing therfore the makers of the Law have full authority to expound the Law and they have sufficiently manifested that by the supreme government given to the Prince they understand that kind of government only which is exercised with the Civill sword I conclude that nothing can be more plaine than this that without all scruple of conscience the Kings Majesty may be acknowledged in this sense to bee the only supreme governour of all his Highnesse dominions and countries as well in all spirituall or Ecclesiasticall things or causes as temporall And so have I cleered the first maine branch of the Oath I come now unto the second which is propounded negatively that no forrein Prince Person Prelate State or Potentate hath or ought to have any jurisdiction power superiority preheminence or authority Ecclesiasticall or spirituall within this Realme The forreiner that challengeth this Ecclesiasticall or spirituall jurisdiction over us is the Bishop of Rome and the title whereby he claimeth this power over us is the same whereby he claimeth it over the whole world because he is S. Peters successor forsooth And indeed if S. Peter himselfe had beene now alive I should freely confesse that hee ought to have spirituall authoritie and superioritie within this kingdome But so would I say also if S. Andrew S. Bartholmew S. Thomas or any of the other Apostles had beene alive For I know that their commission was verie large to goe into all the world and to preach the Gospel unto every creature so that in what part of the world soever they lived they could not bee said to be out of their charge their Apostleship being a kind of an Universall Bishoprick If therefore the Bishop of Rome can prove himselfe to bee one of this ranke the Oath must be amended and wee must acknowledge that hee hath Ecclesiasticall authoritie within this Realme True it is that our Lawyers in their Year-bookes by the name of the Apostle do usually designe the Pope But if they had examined his title to that Apostleship as they would try an ordinary mans title to a piece of land they might easily have found a number of flawes and maine defects therein For first it would be enquired whether the Apostleship was not ordained by our Saviour Christ as a speciall Commission which being personall onely was to determine with the death of the first Apostles For howsoever at their first entry into the execution of this commission we finde that Matthias was admitted to the Apostleship in the roome of Iudas yet afterwards when Iames the brother of Iohn was slaine by Herod wee doe not reade that any other was substituted in his place Nay we know that the Apostles generally left no successors in this kinde neither did any of the Bishops he of Rome only excepted that sate in those famous Churches wherein the Apostles exercised their ministery challenge an Apostleship or an Universall Bishoprick by vertue of that succession It would secondly therefore bee inquired what sound evidence they can produce to shew that one of the company was to hold the Apostleshipp as it were in fee for him and his successors for ever and that the other eleven should hold the same for terme of life only Thirdly if this state of perperuity was to be cast upon one how came it to fall upon S. Peter rather than upon S. Iohn who outlived all the rest of his fellowes and so as a surviving feoffee had the fairest right to retaine the same in himself his successors for ever Fourthly if that state were wholly settled upon S. Peter seeing the Romanists themselves acknowledge that he was Bishop of Antioch before he was Bishop of Rome we require them to shew why so great an inheritance as this should descend unto the yonger brother as it were by Burrough-english rather than to the elder according to the ordinary manner of descents Especially seeing Rome hath little else to alledge for this preferment but only that S. Peter was crucified in it which was a very slender reason to move the Apostle so to respect it Seeing therfore the grounds of this great claime of the Bishop of Rome appeare to be so vaine and frivolous I may safely conclude that he ought to have no Ecclesiasticall or spirituall authority within this Realme which is the principall point contained in the second part of the Oath FINIS IAMES REX RIght Reverend Father in God and Right trusty and welbeloved Counsellor wee greet you well You have not deceived our expectation nor the gracious opinion we ever conceived both of your abilities in learning and of your faithfullnesse to us and our service Whereof as we have received sundry testimonies both from our precedent Deputies as likewise from our Right trusty welbeloved Cousin Counsellor the Viscount Falkland our present Deputy of that Realm so have we now of late in one particular had a further evidence of your duty and affection well expressed by your late carriage in our Castle-Chamber there at the censure of those disobedient Magistrates who refused to take the oath of Supremacy Wherein your zeale to the maintenance of our just and lawfull power defended with so much learning and reason deserves our Princely and gracious thankes which we doe by this our letter unto you and so bid you farewell Given under our Signet at our Court at White-hall the eleventh of Ianuary 1622. In the 20. yeare of our Raigne of great Brittaigne France and Ireland To the right Reverend Father in God and our right trusty and welbeloved Counsellor the Bishop of Meath a 1 Per. 2. 13 14. b Iohn 20. 23. c ● Tim. 5. 17. d Tit. 2. 15. e Matth. 16. 19. 18. 18. f Rom. 13. 4. g Ezra 7. 26. h Matt. 26. 52. i 2. Chr. 26. 18. k 1 Tim. 2. 2. * As on the other side that a spirituall or ecc●esiasticall government is exercised in causes civill or temporall For is not Excommunication a maine part of Ecclesiasticall government and Forest lawes a speciall branch of causes Temporall yet we see in Sententiâ latâ super chartas anno 12. R. H. that the Bishops of England pronounce a solemne sentence of Excommunication against the infringers of the liberties contained in chartâ de Forestâ l Mark 16. 15. m Acts 1. 25 26.