Selected quad for the lemma: prince_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
prince_n	duke_n	king_n	poland_n	2,753	5	11.6962	5	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A26871	Cain and Abel malignity that is, enmity to serious godliness, that is, to an holy and heavenly state of heart and life : lamented, described, detected, and unananswerably [sic] proved to be the devilish nature, and the militia of the devil against God and Christ and the church and kingdoms, and the surest sign of a state of damnation / by Richard Baxter, or, Gildas Salvianus ...	Baxter, Richard, 1615-1691.	1689 (1689)	Wing B1195; ESTC R2643	73,886	164

knows not that some things are lawful to avoid suffering which else would not be lawful It is lawful to cast your goods into the Sea to save the Ship and mens lives Which else were a sin It 's lawful to give a Thief your purse to save your life which else were unlawful It 's lawful to blow up neighbours houses to stop a fire Christ proved it lawful to break the Sabbath in cases of necessity he withdrew into the Wilderness and far from Ierusalem to avoid the pharisees persecution And Paul was let down by the Wall in a basket Which without danger of suffering had not been lawful Though no sin must be done to avoid suffering yet that may and must be done which self-preservation makes no sin but a duty To kill a man that assaults you in your own defence is not the same crime as unnecessarily to kill him But as to the other case of taking the Corporation Oath and Declaration if you know the case as you should do before you accuse men you know that it is the true sence of them that is all the controversy No body scruples swearing Loyalty and renouncing Rebellion and Sedition and all unlawful means of reformation That which makes it difficult is that on one side the proper universal sence of the words seems to them unlawful and Oaths must be taken in the usual sence unless our Rulers give another yet on the other side learned sober Conformists profess that they take such words in the limited sence or else they would not take them And they argue subtilly to prove that to be the true sence And our Law-makers to whom it belongs will not end the controversy by an exposition And can you wonder here if men fluctuate in uncertainty And a late writer having given subtiler arguments for the limited sence than were published before did perswade many And in that limited sence twenty Nonconformist Ministers took the oath long ago in London at one time But I justify none that mistake in so great a matter And doubtless if they sinned God will not bless it to their good It will prove their snare And I am glad that we are agreed that Perjury is a heinous sin I beseech you then to consider 1. Whether those men are fit to accuse them who drive them to it and say to Ministers Swear or lye in Iail 2. Or those who are of the mind of Grotius Bishop Taylor and such others that Lying is Lawful when it saves our selves and wrongs no other And of those Divines that say It 's as lawful to defend my self from pernicious Imposers with my tongue as with my hands 3. Let us all with fear who believe there is a God avoid the dreadful crime of perjuring the whole land This whole Kingdom is sworn against all Forreign Iurisdiction in the Oath of Supremacy and against all endeavours to alter the Government of Church or State by 1. the Corporation Act 2. The Vestry Act 3. The Militia Act 4. The Oxford of Confinement 5. And obliged by the Act of Uniformity Is it not perjury than to endeavour any alteration of it 1. What shall we then think of them that would bring in Popery would they not perjure the Kingdom 2. What shall we say of them that write for a Forreign Church Jurisdiction under the name of General Councils or a Colledge of Bishops or of Forreign Patriarchs of whom the Pope is chief and the Principium unitatis to the universal Church Is it no change of our Church Government to bring us under a forreign Jurisdiction Is it no change of State Government to make the King and Kingdom Subject to that forreign Jurisdiction who may excommunicate him and so bring on him all the evil which Excommunication inferreth And what man in his wits knoweth not that Prelates and Priests are much at the will and power of the Princes under whom they live Doth not our King expect that his Bishops obey him And those that must have this Universal Jurisdiction over our King and us are the Subjects of other Princes of which the far greatest part are Papists Mahometans Infidels Heathens or such as are called Hereticks And if our King and we be made Subject to the Subjects of the Turk the Pope the Kings of Spain France Poland the Emperor the Moscovite the Dukes of Bavaria Tuscany and such like is he not made a Subject to their Lords and Masters and much worse Will not this project perjure England 3. Whether it be any alteration of Government by them that would change the Power and use of Parliaments I leave to Lawyers 4. But I would fain be satisfied of another case These Kingdoms of England and Scotland took a Covenant and Vow some Voluntarily some at their Compositions who had been sequestred for the King This Vow contained divers matters of which some are notorious duties as to repent of their sins to oppose Popery Schism and Prophaneness to defend the King c. It 's not denied by most that I meet with that this Oath or Vow was unlawfully imposed and unlawfully taken and many think some of the matter was unlawful viz. to oppose Prelacy c. But seeing Casuists are agreed that an Oath unlawfully both imposed and taken bindeth to that part of the matter which is lawful and necessary notwithstanding the Conjunction of the rest And the Corporations of England are all formed by a Declaration taken by all in power and trust that There is no Obligation without the least exception on me or any other person from the Oath called the Solemn League and Covenant The doubt is whether every man may declare that of all the thousands of three Kingdoms whom he never knew no one is bound by that Oath or Vow to repent of his sins or in his place and calling to oppose Schism Popery or Prophaneness or to defend the King and whether all may declare that the Londoners and Ministers and the restored old Parliament and General Monks Army who restored the King as supposing they were bound to it by that Oath were all deceived and were under no such obligation thence And whether I am not bound in charity to think that the sequestred Royalists put a good sence on it when they took it And so whether all the Corporations of England are free from And for what it is that God hath singled them out for Judgment If you be agreed with us and with manking against so great a sin as Perjury especially national let us help one another with Love and Patience to resolve such doubts Accus But they have been guilty of Rebellion in a Civil War and therefore are justly suspected to Preach or hold Rebellious Doctrine Ans. 1 Are those men lovers of Love and Concord who purposely make use of pardoned acts to keep the Kingdoms wounds still open Did not the King tell you in his Declarations and Act of Oblivion that the putting up of all save to the excepted