Selected quad for the lemma: nature_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
nature_n	humane_a	law_n	positive_a	2,470	5	10.9031	5	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A47772	The blessing of Iudah explained, and applied to the present times, in a sermon preached at S. Maries, Oxford, March 27, 1644 : being the anniversary of His Majesties inauguration to his crowne ... : wherein by Henry Leslie ...	Leslie, Henry, 1580-1661.	1644 (1644)	Wing L1161; ESTC R21216	30,794	49

shall consider of the collation of regall power and certainly that is from none but from God even where the Person of the King is designed by man for all power of Rule is Gods and none but he can give it he onely can say unto kings Ego dixi dit estis but if the People gave them their power then they might say Nos diximus dii estis Psal 82.6 and if they should say so I am sure it were no better than blasphemy It is therefore a damnable doctrine of the Iesuits taken up by the Puritans who out-stripe the Iesuits in all treasonable doctrines and practises that God gives the power of rule first unto the community and that this power is in the body of the people immediately as in its proper subject and that by them it is transferred unto the King yet so as they habitually retain it in themselves and in some cases may actually resume it They are the words of Bellarmine out of Navar and Almayn This is a fond imagination which hath no ground either in Scripture or in Nature There is no revelation to propound it as a doctrine to be believed for the Scripture teacheth us that Kings are from God receive their power from him there is not one word in all the Scripture that doth so much as imply that the power is first given unto the people and by them unto the King but the contrary may be easily concluded from holy Writ for if this Iesuiticall doctrine were true I do not see how God could say Per me Reges regnant he should rather have said A me per Populum Reges regnant for the particle per denotates the instrument and immediate cause neither do I see how the Apostle could say There is no power but of God which implies as much as that all power namely supreme power whereof onely he speakes is from God onely and if it be from God onely it is not from the People nor from God mediante Populo Paraeus was no good friend of Kings for that justly censured by this famous University yet he resolves that proposition after this manner into a double universall affirmation Non est potestas nisi à Deo id est omnis potestas est à solo Deo he stiles the King the Minister of God but if his power were immediately given him by the People he should rather be stiled Minister Populi as being their Minister immediately and Gods onely mediately Nor could Kings be said to judge in Gods place if the power whereby they judge be given them by the People and that onely in trust As this treasonable doctrine has no warrant in Scripture so neither hath it any ground in Nature for naturall reason doth onely dictate that it is of necessity that the multitude be ruled naturall reason doth convince and compell men to consent to be governed by some but there is nothing in Nature that doth prove that the People have this power in themselves but reason teacheth us the contrary for the power of life and death belongs unto Soveraignty by the Law of Nature and by Gods own institution Gen. 9.6 Who so shedeth mans blood by man shall his blood be shed now we know no man hath this power over himselfe Ostensio erros●f swar c. 3. S. 12. therefore the learned Spalatto saith well Populus est naturaliter regibilis non rectivus Nature inclines the People to be ruled not to rule the People were never invested with soveraigne power and therefore howsoever the King be sometimes chosen by them and alwayes inaugured by them yet his power his commission is not from them but from God for it is a maxime in the Law Nemo plus iuris in alium transferre potest quàm ipse habet The people cannot transferre unto the King that power which they never had Man did receive from God immediatly power and dominion over the beasts of the field and can we then imagine that the more noble command which a King hath over his Subjects should be given him any otherwise then from God immediately The Iesuites acknowledge that in a Democracy they who have the supreame power receive it immediatly from God and shall we not think that it is so also in a Monarchy If this Doctrine of the Iesuites were true then would it follow that Democracy is by the Law of nature Monarchy and Aristocracy only by positive humane Law so shall God be the author and institutor of that Government which by all wise men is acknowledged to be the worst and most imperfect That which misled the first authors of this opinion the Parisian Doctors was that they did not distinguish between the disignation of the Person and the collation of the Power but thought that the one act is included in the other and yet in the Ecclesiasticall power they can distinguish these two for they will acknowledge that the designation of a person to be a Bishop is by man and yet he receives his Episcopall power immediatly from God as Mathias did receive his Apostleship from God being propounded by the Disciples and chosen by lots Now there is no reason in the world but that they should acknowledge the same of the regall power that albeit the person who is to be King be designed by man yet he receives his power and Commission from God immediately And then the people do not so much apply the power unto the person as the person unto the power even as if a man should goe into a darke Cell and there amongst many looking-glasses choose one bring it out and set it before the light of the sunne whereby it becommeth resplendent that man cannot be said to apply the light of the sunne unto the glasse but to apply the glasse unto the light of the sunne even so when the people designes a person to be their King they cannot be said to apply the Regall Power unto the person but the person unto the power For they having designed the person God immediatly gives him the power This was signified by the anoynting of Kings for they were not anoynted by a Praetor nor by a Captain of the Army nor by an Officer of State who yet had been the fittest person to convey a power from the people unto the King but the King was alwaies anoynted by Priest or Prophet to shew that the power given by that anoynting was from God only for Priests are appoynted to Minister in things pertaining to God Again the Oyle wherewith they were anoynted was not bought from Merchants or Apothecaries but brought out of the sanctuary compounded by Gods own direction and therefore holy Oyle to signifie that the power given by that anoynting is sacred too such as the King did receive not from Millo a place of secular assemblies but from Mount Sion In all Christian Kingdomes it hath been a custome at the Coronation of a King to set the Crown upon the Altar and from thence to take it