Selected quad for the lemma: lord_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
lord_n	day_n	keep_v	law_n	10,477	5	5.1659	4	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A43909	The History of self-defence, in requital to the history of passive obedience	Seller, Abednego, 1646?-1705.	1680 (1680)	Wing H2138B; Wing S2456_CANCELLED; ESTC R14596	33,640	35

the Massacre in Ireland did stir up the Spirits of many in England out of a fear lest they should suffer the same things here and the advice of some high flown men given to that King of introducing new Ceremonies into the Church of Scotland stirred up the Spirits of that Kingdom all which jumping together made way to his ruine Which was afterwards effected by some bloody self-designing men that made a party in the Army But our Author needs not wonder so much as he does to see her Sons disown that which he calls her Doctrine since he might have known that many of her Sons were in the Parliament Army a great part of King Charles I. Army being Roman Catholicks so that they were but the smallest Number of the Church of England that joyned him But as I said before this Gentleman reckons none true Sons of the Church but those of his own size As for the rest I doubt not but he includes them with those Enemies who make a fasting day of our Saviours Nativity as if they were sorry that he came into the World and perhaps with reason because their Actions were so contrary both to his Precepts and Example By which we may see that this Gentleman has been so intent in conning the 13 of the Romans that he had no time to spare for the 14th Otherwise he would have been more sparing in rash judging for he might have read in Verse 4 of that Chapter Let not him that eateth despise him that eateth not let not him that eateth not dispise him that eateth and in v. 6. He that keepeth a day to the Lord be keepeth it and he that keepeth not a day to the Lord he keepeth it not Or it may be our Author has past his courses of smaller Duties such as this is and minds only the Topping and most difficult such as Non resistance c. And so the old Proverb may be applied to him Aquila non captat muscas But I must take the Liberty to tell him that the Generality of our high Non-resistance mens practice is as contrary to the Precepts and Example of our Lord as the worst of those that he says make a fasting day for our Saviours Nativity He tells us next Did we seriously study the Laws of Providence Pag. 3. and consider the Indispensable Obligations laid on us of taking up the Cross c. Very true but because we are ordered to take up the Cross when called to it must we therefore make one for our selves as if we were as ambitious of it as the Primitive Christians were of Martyrdom I think our Author himself if he be of that Church he professes will not therefore justifie the Papists making a Rod to chastise themselves with on good Friday or think that God is pleased therewith since he never desired them to take up that Cross many crosses are laid upon us by God which yet we may use lawful means to get rid of particularly sickness and he would be thought a fool that would not apply himself to Physicians to get free of it but would expect to be cured by a Miracle And till our Author has given better Arguments for Non-resistance than we have yet seen we must take the Liberty to say that in order to the preserving of our Lives against a Tyrant that would take them away we may as warrantably make use of Self-Defence as of Physicians when sickness threatens us with Death His Instance of the Gnosticks is very far from the purpose for as the Author he quotes upon that Subject says Ibid. they reckoned all Governments to be nothing else but the contrivance of some evil Spirits whereas there are none of those that are for Self-defence if we except those of the Fifth Monarchy Principle but have as great a veneration for Government as any of his Party and would hazard as much for the supporting thereof as any of them but as for Tyranny when people are much in the same case if not worse than if there were no Government at all the case is quite altered That other Citation of Machiavel is much to the same purpose and therefore I pass it He next reflects upon Hobbs but I suppose designed to wound another through his sides Page 4. for in other points I believe they needed no Reconciliation and his Conscience is mightily startled if he has any at the dangerous Tenets which he revived viz. That Power is originally in the people that the Foundation of all Government is laid in Compact and that the Breach of Conditions by one Party justifies that of the other But I would gladly hear his Proofs that Power was not Originally in the people and how Kings came first by their Power For all that ever this Author or any of his party have said about it is a meer Chimaera viz. That Kings as they derived their Lives so they received their Power from Adam and Noah by virtue of their Primogeniture as the first had it immediately from God without any consent of the People But first then it would follow that Mankind should be born as great slaves as Beasts since a King in such a case should have as much Propriety over them as any Countrey-man has over his Horse Cows or Sheep than which nothing can be more repugnant to reason 2. It would follow that there should have been but one Universal King over the whole Earth viz. the Eldest Son of Noah who undoubtedly must have that Power over all his Younger Brethren and consequently his Posterity in the right line must have had the same Power over their Posterity and there could not have been any other Kings unless he or his Posterity in the right line had made them their Vicegerents but this is altogether Inhistorical And therefore their position must be false For it is certain that the great Monarchies that have been in the World were but small Kingdoms at the first and that for a considerable time and were afterward enlarged by Conquest 3. If this Conjecture had been true it would follow that God himself contradicted his own Order without any reason for it For upon the Israelites desiring a King should not he rather have made choice of the chief of the first Tribe than of one of the meanest families of the Youngest Tribe viz. Saul who was not master of such Vertues as to recommend him to the Crown before all the rest of the Children of Israel The like may be said of David who was not of the Eldest Family of Judah and tho' he was a Man after Gods own heart yet according to those Gentlemens opinion another should not have been deprived of his Right And since this Opinion has not the least ground for it it must necessarily follow that it was by Election and consequently that the Power of Election resided in the People and as the People did elect them so it is most rational to suppose that Articles were drawn up