Selected quad for the lemma: power_n
Text snippets containing the quad
|
ID |
Title |
Author |
Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication) |
STC |
Words |
Pages |
|
A29287
|
The break-neck of presumptuousnesse in sinning applyable unto the occasions of these times.
|
|
1644
(1644)
|
Wing B4338; ESTC R20115
|
14,349
|
33
|
{non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} the ordinance of God Rom. 13. 1. and therefore chargeth every soule to be subject unto it Next they object that the governments spoken of by S. Paul are written to be {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} powers and authorities that is in abstracto say they as Aristocracie or Democracie and Monarchie not Monarchs or Aristocraticks signifying the persons concealing that which is also written in the same place the word {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} The Rulers ver. 3. which signifieth the persons and againe He carryeth the sword ver. 4. accordingly Peter most expresly naming The King all which have been concealed But thirdly they insist that the power spoken of as to be obeyed is to be a terrour to the evill and a praise to the good And therefore if a King prove tyrannous they owe no more subjection concealing that Paul notwithstanding tyrannie it selfe enjoyned subjection saying Be subject to the powers that ARE and you your selves knowing right well that the principall of the powers that then were was Nero a most monstrous tyrant to his owne heathenish subjects and the fiercest persecutor of Christians for their Religion yea not sparing these Apostles themselves Peter and Paul but hunted them even unto martyrdome notwithstanding Peters direct doctrine was to the people Submit your selves and Pauls be subject both commanding to pursue civill obedience 4. Say they although Peter giveth the King the supremacie yet there is a power from the people coordinate unto them but this they speak from themselves without any Scriptum est cunningly concealing that which indeed hath Scriptum est which may discover their false figment Peter requiring subjection both to the King as Supreame and also to them that are sent from him as namely his Officers the Law of Relation evincing that Supremacie with coordination is as true a solaecisme as is an head equall with its shoulders 5. They being left forlorne of defence in the New Testament post back to the Old urging Scriptures according to their stale trick of concealment First alledging for their purpose examples which can neither affirme or deny contrary to that knowne Maxime A facto ad jus non valet argumentum but they stick to that omitting Gods direct precepts in behalfe of Kings commanding obedience and forbidding all contempts although precepts as all know be directories to over-rule all examples 2. For their examples they instance in the deposing of Athaliah the Queene the defection of Jeroboam and Ehud his killing of King Eglon concealing the circumstances there extant to wit that the Queene deposed was an Usurptrix against the Heire of the Crowne then living That Jeroboam was a manifest rebell against Rehoboam although for the sin of the same King expresly permitted by God and that Eglon was an Alien tyrannizing over them whom it was lawfull for an Israelite to kill as an enemie in open warre against them Thus of Papisticall allegations But can this make any thing against our Zelots and Incediaries of these times Onely thus much that they in defence of the same conclusion of taking up Armes against Authority in case of Religion depend wholly upon the same Jesuitical and Papistical principles and practices excepting two or three additionals with which the latter delight themselves it being the same art of violation of Texts of Scripture against the rules of due loyaltie prescribed by God The two which I shall mention shall not be inferiour to the former It was resolved in an Ecclesiastical Assembly and published in print for the justification of an hostile manner of entrance into this Kingdome without consent of the King and affirmed that if the English should deny them free passage and victuals for their money God would be offended with them as he had been with the King of Edom and his Countrey in not permitting the Israelites to passe through their coasts in their journey to the land of Canaan The matter is storied Numb. 20. It is worth your reading Wherein we finde that Moses and all the Host of Israel came to Kadesh which was the borders of Edom intending to journey through that Kingdom but concealing first that they did not offer to set a foot within the borders of Edom before they had sent Messengers to aske leave of the King thereof secondly concealing that the condition of passing which they tendered was to goe onely the high way that through without delay or negotiating with the people of the Land save onely to have water for their money and againe concealing how when the King of Edom raised warre against the Campe of Israel and came to face them Moses and his Host offered not the least resistance but as it is in the Text Israel turned away from him All three circumstances directly contradictory to the practices that followed In another late English Treatise we may find another allegation of Scripture much boasted of which indeed if it were sincere might so farre as a Topick place of example could enforce conclude for justification of Rebellion in part For it is written 2 King 18. 7. in expresse termes Hezekiah King of Judah rebelled against the King of Assyria This is the Allegation Now hearken we to the omission of words in the same story of the same Chapter and but the eleventh verse following And Hezekiah sent to the King of Assyria saying I have offended returne from me that which thou puttest on me I will beare meaning for satisfaction and reparation O that these glossers would follow his example in repenting for their rebellion and that they would recant their wilfull falsifications which their art of perverting the Scriptures is no better then a kind of that {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} condemned by the Apostle which we may terme Cogging a Die It will not be sufficient to detect these Incendiaries and Trumpeters for Rebellion except we further pull off the vizards wherewith they use to maske themselves by colourable pretences that so the uglinesse of their naturall visages may more plainly appeare Their Visards are of these kinds 1. Aspersions of Jealousie 2. Name of Religion 3. Ostentation of Zeale 4. Assurance of happinesse upon every one slaine in the Cause besides 5. their plausible Applications of their allegations and other pretences to the person of his Majesty and the present occasions 1. Aspersions of Jealousie It is your common practice to infuse into the hearts of people an argument of Jealously but why because forsooth his Majesty useth the help and Armes of Papists to make him a defender of Popery But with what face or forehead seeing that you your selves by the same argument may be much more concluded Papisticall for urging in this cause against the Kings cause altogether the arguments of Papists The difference will be that Papists yeeld the assistance onely in the name of subjects according as God hath prescribed you contrary to the obligation of subjection
necessary part thereof The second in dealing thus with sacred Scripture which maketh the lye utterly Sacrilegious Two others are discerned in the Devils consequence one in his pretentions thus If thou be the Sonne of God c. to wit that thereby thou mayest manifest thy dignity and speciall interest thou hast in the favour of God The second in his intention If thou be the Sonne c. that by trying conclusions he might work his own destruction Let us begin with his lye It is no newes to heare that the Devil can lye whom Christ thus branded saying that he is a lyar and the Father of lyes as if lying were a property essential unto him who no sooner heard this questiō Who shal deceive Ahab but instantly answered as if this were an office peculiar unto himself and said I will be a false speaker in the mouth of all Ahabs Prophets But the manner of this lying is worth inquiring into The tenour of the Text which he cited runneth thus He namely God Will give his Angels charge over thee to keep thee in all thy wayes they shall hold thee up in their hands that thou dash not thy foot against a stone But the Devil omitteth that clause to keep thee in all thy wayes whereby is meant the wayes of his own revealed ordinances as all the Psalmes speake which were directory words and made against the Devills temptation of seeking extraordinary and hazardous wayes of mans own will He did thereby intend therefore a lying delusion as many expositours Ancient and others have observed and the Devil being as Christ hath said the father of lyes every one that liveth in the world will acknowledge that he hath had an innumerable off-spring therein Now the manner of lying is twofold one close by that equivocation which is called mentall reservation which we may call Jesuiticall because of their more special profession and practise thereof instructing every Priest when he is examined by a Magistrate and in danger to be discovered that being asked Art thou a Priest he may answer slily I am no Priest reserving this notion in his minde to tell it unto you Which Jesuiticall art and subtilty in the Priests answer we discerne here to have been Satanicall in this Devilish temptation by his concealment of the former words of the Psalmes As for example thus He hath given his Angels charge over thee not uttering the next words In all thy wayes could not but reserve in his minde a purpose of not telling it unto Christ For it is impossible but that he who omitteth words lest they should be told hath the same cōception in his mind But they tell it and print it in their books that this kind of answer by reservation is no lye Let us therefore try this out of Gods book Ananias having sold his possession for a piece of money and laid it down at the Apostles feet to be distributed in common craftily kept back a part thereof to whom Saint Peter said Why hath Sathan possessed thy heart to lye to the Holy Ghost Now lying is not without some expression of words which must have been to this question Thou Ananias hast thou sold them that possession but for so much and he answering but for so much and concealing a part could not but conceive in his mind a selling it but for so much for ought that Peter should know which as we have heard from Peter himselfe came from the Devil and therefore was as I said a Satanicall lye And I leave it that I may come to that which is open direct and flat lying which is commonly practised amongst men and may be called as Bernard termeth every brazen faced sinne Daemon meridianus We reade of distinct and peculiar Nationall sinnes as being more predominant in some countryes then others some branded with the infamy of Drunkennesse some of Gluttonie some of Venery and the like some have become Proverbialls for lying whence we have the Graeca fides the faith meaning faithlesnesse of the Grecians Punica fides the faith of the Punicks and fides Cretensium the Cretians faith to which we may adde if we consider our proficiency in forging lyes in the compasse of three yeares I speake to our shame our fides Anglicana whether Privata or Publica exceeding the three former put them all together when as still our to morrow doth give yesterday the lye So epidemical is this leprosie amongst us I returne to the Text It is written So then this we speak of is used by the devil in his false allegation of the said Scripture aggravating the lye to make it sacrilegious The devil saith the Apostle can translate himselfe into an Angel of light this he doth most whensoever under the colour of singularity and of newly devised strictnesse of manners and opinions he seduceth men into new heresies and schismes as is taught us Col. 2. 23. But yet can there be any transformation more delusive and sacrilegious then this the perverting of the right sense of Scripture whether by false glosses or and that especially by abusing the sense of Scriptures by omission of words and circumstances which contradict the intention of the Objectours upon which point come wee now more especially to insist Many houres would not suffice to rehearse the many Romish sophistries in this kind of abusing of Scriptures in every controversie but I have singled out one onely most pertinent for the present time which is their doctrine of Subjects taking up Armes against Soveraignty for restoring of Religion and calling it a just cause for justifying of their former Irish and now English Popish Rebellions which may give you a cleare scantling how to judge of the rest Thus beginning with this their Maxime That the power of all Government is alwayes resident in the people and therefore for Religions sake they may make their Insurrections at pleasure Their first Scripture is out of the 1 Pet. 2. 13. where speaking of a King he saith he is {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} a creature of man or humane creature which we say is most true in constituendo in constituting a King or any forme of Government But rege constituto the King being constituted and established the power of Government by the ordinance of God is in the Governour and not in the people and therefore they wittingly conceale that Peter having said of the creation of a King that it is Humane addeth presently he being once authorized an injunction upon the people saying Submit your selves unto him How during their owne wills nay for he subjoyneth for the Lords sake So that now he is not mans creature but Gods who immediately putteth an obligation upon them of obedience unto him This is the first point and for proof of this our Exposition we have the testimony of S. Paul where that which S. Peter called {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} humane creation he entituleth it expresly {non-Roman} {non-Roman}