Selected quad for the lemma: reason_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
reason_n	day_n	law_n	sabbath_n	3,352	5	9.6183	5	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A85413	Right and might well met. Or, A briefe and unpartiall enquiry into the late and present proceedings of the Army under the command of His Excellency the Lord Fairfax. Wherein the equity and regularnesse of the said proceedings are demonstratively vindicated upon undeniable principles, as well of reason, as religion. Together with satisfactory answers to all materiall objections against them. / By John Goodwin.	Goodwin, John, 1594?-1665.	1648 (1648)	Wing G1200A; Thomason E536_28; ESTC R188135	40,195	49

no right or priviledge of Parliament to Vote or Act contrary to their trust yet it is a right and priviledge belonging to this house that in case any of the Members shall at any time so act or vote they should not bee questioned or suffer for so doing at least not by any other power but by that of the House it selfe onely To this also I answer 1. By concession that this is indeed a right and priviledge of Parliament taking the word Parliament in a due and proper signification viz. for a Parliament consisting of a competent number of men not dead to their trust who are in a capacity of faithfulnesse and integrity to discharge the office and duty of a Parliament in endeavouring at least to relieve the pressures and grievances of the people to protect their liberties c. It is the manner of the holy Ghost himselfe in the Scripture frequently to deny the common Name of things to such particulars in every kinde which are defective in those properties for use and service which should be found in them and which are found in other particulars of the same kind Thus Paul expressely Hee is not a Jew which is one outwardly neither is that circumcision which is outward in the flesh But hee is a Jew which is one inwardly and circumcision is that of the heart in the Spirit not in the letter c. a Rom. 2. 28 29 So elsewhere when yee come together into one place this is not to eate the Lords Supper b 1 Cor. 11. 20. This is not c. meaning that as they went to worke that which they did deserved not the Name of an eating of the Lords Supper Therefore 2. By way of exception Sect. 36. I answer further that if by Parliament be meant any number of men whatsoever chosen by the people into Parliamentary trusts and sitting in that House where Parliaments truly and properly so called use to assemble about the great affaires of the Kingdome whether these men or the major part of them love the interest of the Kingdome and be cordially affected to the liberties of the people or no I know no such right or priviledge of Parliament as that specified A Parliament that is unusefull and unserviceable for Parliamentary ends is no more a Parliament then a dead man is a man or a Virgin defloured a Virgin And as a dead man hath no right or priviledge of a man truly so called belonging to him unlesse it be to be so ordered dealt with that he may not be an annoyance or offence unto others so neither doe I know any right or priviledge of a Parliament indeed appertaining to a Parliament politically dead and which is not animated with a spirit of faithfulnesse to the publique unlesse it be to be so entreated and handled that it may not destroy the publique Interest or endammage their Trustees the people in their liberties A terminis dimiuuentibus non valet argumeutatio It is a rule in Logicke that an argument drawn from termes of diminution is of no validity or force As for example when a man is dead it doth not follow that because he is a dead man therefore he is a man or hath the properties of a man as that hee is rationall risible or the like By the reason which rules in this principle or maxime our Saviour denyes that inference of the Jewes who argued themselves to be the children or seed of Abraham because they were his carnall seede or came from him according to the flesh If yee were Abraham's children saith hee to them yee would doe the workes of Abraham a John 8. 39. implying that because they did not the workes of Abraham they were not his children viz. in that proper and emphaticall sence wherein the Scripture is ordinarily to be understood when it speaketh of Abrahams children and of the great promises and priviledges belonging to them In like manner the Apostle Paul when hee speaks of the priviledges and blessednesse setled by promise upon Abraham and his seed still understands the word seed not in that diminutive or equivocall sense wherein it comprehendeth as well his carnall or wicked seede as that of a more noble descent but in that emphaticall weighty Gal. 3. 7. 9. 16. 29. and appropriate sence wherein it onely signifieth the children of Abraham indeed i. spiritually such and who resemble him in his faith and holinesse Rom. 4. c. See the Texts in the margent After the same manner when either the lawes or people of the Land in their accustomed discourse and consequently the Solemn League and Covenant speake of rights and priviledges of Parliament they doubtlesse doe not take the word Parliament in an equivocall and comprehensive sence wherein it may be extended to any thing which in any sence or consideration may be called a Parliament but in an emphatical restrained sence viz. as it signifieth a politicall body consistory or court of men chosen by the people into Parliamentary Trust faithfully prosecuting and discharging the import of the Trust committed to them If this property be wanting in them they are but a Parliament so called not having the worth or consideration whereunto such Rights and Priviledges which are called Parliamentary either according to principles of reason and equity or according to the intention of the first Donors or founders of them doe belong or appertaine The premisses considered evident it is that the Army did not violate or breake any the rights and priviledges of Parliament properly or Covenantly so called when they reduced the Parliament to the true nature dignity and honour of a Parliament by secluding such Members from it who altered the property and turn'd the glory of it into a lie 2. Be it granted Sect. 3. that the Army stood bound by their Covenant and Oath to preserve the rights and priviledges even of such Parliaments as that was which they divided yet they stood bound also by the same Covenant and Oath to such a duty or engagement the faithfull application of themselves whereunto in the case in hand did fairely both in the sight of God and men discharge them from that other obligation even as the duties of circumcising Cùm duo praecepta cōcurrunt majus debet servari In ipso Decalogo cum videmus duo inter se praecepta cōfligere et alterum ab altero impediri illud quod legis latoris ipsius sententiâ videbitur esse majus praserri debet Pet. Mart. in 1 Sam. c. 21. 3. and of sacrificing when the seasons appointed for them by the law fell on the Sabboth priviledged those from guilt in breaking the law of the Sabboth who performed them on that day It is a common rule avouched by the best of our Divines and by the light of nature and reason it selfe that when two duties or commands meete in such a streight or exigent of time that they cannot both receive that

Objection we are not behinde hand having given a sufficient answer unto it already the substance of it being nothing but what the second Objection offered Notwithstanding because we desire to give heaped measure of satisfaction especially to such arguments which pretend to the Scriptures we thought it not amisse to lay the words themselves before you out of which the objection is fram'd and so to give in the surplussage of a further answer unto it Therefore 1. We answer by distinguishing with the Ministers of Scotland in their briefe Theses de Majestatis jure betweene the power of Magistrates and the abuse of this power The power say they is from God and so his ordinance but not the abuse of it Yea hee no whit more allowes the abuse of a lawfull power in one Tyrant then the use of an unlawfull power in another a Secundò igitur distinguendum inter potestatē ipsam potestatis abusum eam non autem hunc ordinavit Deus Imò non magis ab eo probatur abusus potestatis legitimae in uno tyranno quàm potestas illegitima in altera So that if it were the abuse only of a lawfull power which the Army resisted they resisted no Ordinance of God nor are they for such an act made liable to any condemnation by the Scripture mentioned Now that it was not any power but the abuse of pewer which the Army resisted hath been more then once clearly enough evicted in this Apologie and is further evidenced from hence no other power but that which is Parliamentary can be pretended to have been resisted by them in that act so often mentioned But that they did not resist this power but the abuse of it onely appeares 1. Because this power remaines at this day quiet and undisturb'd in the midst of them Yea 2. Their great care and desire is to settle this power upon better terms for the due government of the Nation then those on which it hath been continued hitherto If it be said Sect. 49. that that the Parliamentary power now in being in no lawfull power because it is under force I answer 1. that it is no more under force then it was whilst all the Members now secluded had free liberty to sit and vote in that House The same Army which is now pretended to over-awe or keep under force the present Parliament was as neer and did as much to the Parliament then in matter of force or awe as now it is or doth Therefore if it were a lawfull power then it is no lesse lawfull now 2. Nor is the Parliament at this day under any more force by reason of the Army then it was for the space of about two years together before by reason of the continuall tumultuous engagements and practices both in City and Countrey Nay 3. I verily believe that if the Members of Parliament now sitting would please to declare themselves upon the point they would acknowledg and confesse that they are as free from force or feare at least in respect of the Army now as they have beene at any time since their first meeting in their House But to the maine objection in hand I answer 2. Sect. 50. The ordinance of God in Magistraticall power being the adequate foundation upon which that subjection or obedience which he requireth of men unto it by his command is and ought to be built evident it is that this subjection is not commanded or required to this power beyond the ordinance of God in it i. unto any act or injunction of men invested with this power which swerveth from especially which opposeth this ordinance of God in the end and intent of it Now the end and intent of the ordinance of God in magistraticall power being as the Apostle cleerly asserteth vers 4. the good of those that are subject to it For he is the Minister of God to thee for good it is evident yet further that there is no subjection commanded by God unto any higher powers further or otherwise then they act and quit themselves in a due order and proportion to the good of men And where subjection is not commanded resistance is not prohibited and consequently is not unlawfull For where there is no law there is no transgression Therefore if those higher powers the resistance whereof the objection chargeth upon the Army were found acting and apparantly bent to act on in a way of manifest prejudice and opposition to the good of those from whom they expected subjection which I presume is little questionable to him that hath read and weighed the premisses and consequently quite besides the end and purport of the ordinance of God the Army in that resistance which they made against them transgressed no law or precept of God Nor doth it follow from any thing that had been said that a Magistrate for every errour in the administration of his power may be deposed from his place of Magistracy by any party of men but this is that which only followes that when the supreame Magistracy of a Kingdome shall be so farre whether blinded in judgement or corrupted in affection that such counsels and actings put forth themselves in them from time to time which are apparantly detrimentous and destructive to the generall and great interest of the due liberties of the people reasonable security may be taken of them by any party of this people having the opportunity and all others wanting it that they shall proceed and act no further in such a way 3. And lastly that resisting the ordinance of God in the Higher Powers which the Apostle in the Scripture in hand condemneth is not a deteyning of men in Authority though with a strong hand from doing mischiefe in their places but either as was formerly said a refusing obedience unto their lawful commands or awards or rather a complotting or attempt-making to shake off the yoke of all obedience unto civill Magistracy Calvin upon the place seemes to incline to the latter Paraeus unto the former whose words are these Yet every disobedience is not to be termed rebellion or resistance but only that which out of malice is practised or admitted contrary to the lawes by those who refuse to satisfie the law by suffering such punishment as they have deserved a Non quaevis tamen in obedientia dicenda est rebellio vel resistētia sed ea solum quae contra leges ex malitiâ admittitur ab ijs qui per poenā commeritam legibus satisfacere detrectant If either of these interpretations of the place be admitted certain it is that it reflects no bad colour at all upon the action of the Army who neither refused obedience in what they did to any command much lesse to any lawfull command of their Superiours nor yet declin'd the giving of satisfaction unto the lawer by refusing to suffer any punishment which they had deserved Pareus layes downe this position upon the place and maintaines