Linguistic DNA - Concept Modelling Demonstrator

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
soul_n	ordinance_n	power_n	resist_v	4,907	5	10.4011	5	false

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A77374	The vvounded conscience cured, the weak one strengthned, [sic] and the doubting satisfied By way of answer to Doctor Fearne. Where the main point is rightly stated, and objections throughly answered for the good of those who are willing not to be deceived. By William Bridge, preacher of Gods Word. It is ordered this 30. day of January, 1642. by the committee of the House of Commons in Parliament, concerning printing, that this answer to Dr. Fearnes book be printed. John White. The second edition, correced and amended. Whereunto are added three sermons of the same author; 1. Of courage, preached to the voluntiers. 2. Of stoppage in Gods mercies to England, with their [sic] remedies. 3. A preparation for suffering in these plundering times.	Bridge, William, 1600?-1670.	1643 (1643)	Wing B4476A; ESTC R223954	47,440	52

That in the established Lawes of the Lanâ— we have the Princes will and consent given upon good advice and to obey hiâ— against the Lawes were to obey him against himselfe his suddaine will against his deliberate will so that if there be any established Lawes whereby the King hath given his former deliberate consent for the blowing of the Trumpet that now sounds then this objection is but a false allarum Now though I be no Lawyer and must refer you much to what the Parliament hath said who are the Judges of the Law yet thus much I can tell you as consonant to right reason That unlesse the Parliament have a power to send for delinquents and accused persons to be tried in that highest Court of Justice I say unlesse they have such a power they are no Parliament The King hath often protested to maintaine the liberties and priviledges of Parliament Now suppose a man be complained of to the Parliament for some notorious crime it is granted by all that the Parliament hath a power to send a Serjeant at Armes for him and if he refuse to come that Serjeant at Armes hath a power to call in more helpe and if the Delinquent shall raise twenty or thirty or a hundred men to rescue himselfe then the Parliament hath power to send downe more messengers by force to bring up the Delinquent and if they may raise a hundred why may they not upon the like occasion raise a thousand and so tenne thousand And if the King shall protect these Delinquents that is but his sudden will the Doctor saith his deliberate will in the Law is to be preferred before his sudden will now this is the knowne Law of the Kingdome and the constant practise of all Parliaments that they have a power to send for their Delinquents and indeed else how can they be a Court of Justice if they cannot force the accused to appeare before them And therefore according to the Doctors owne principles the Kings deliberate will being in his Law he himselfe hath sounded this Trumpet though by his sudden will as he calls it hee is pleased to sound a retreat For though the Doctor saith that the Parliament takes up Armes against the King yet herein he doth but abuse them mistake the question deceive many The truth is they doe but in this Army now on foot under the command of the Earle of Essex send for those Delinquents that have beene obnoxious to the State and to deny them such a power as this is to deny them the very being of a Parliament For by the same reason that they may send one Serjeant at Armes for one they may send one thousand for one thousand Then the Doctor tells us That it is a marvellous thing that among so many Prophets reprehending the Kings of Israel for Idolatry cruelty and oppression none should call upon the Elders of the people for this duty of resistance Ans I cannot but wonder at the Dr. his marvelling For what caâ— be more plaine then that Text 2 Kings 6. 32. But Elisha sate in his house anâ— the Elders sate with him and the King sent a man from before him c. buâ— when the messenger came to him hee said to the Elders see how this son of a murderer hath sent to take away my head looke when the messenger commeth shut thâ— doore and hold him fast at the doore The Dr. wonders if resistance werâ— lawfull why no Prophet should call upon the Elders of the people foâ— this duty of resistance here is the Prophet Elisha calling on the Elders to imprison the Kings messenger Then lastly the Dr. saith that Scripture Rom. 13. Let every soule be subject to the higher powers and ver 2. Whosoever resists the power resists the Ordinance of God and they that resist shall receive to themselves damnation doth above all give us a cleare manifestation upon the point Ans Now therefore let us here joyne issue and if this place which thâ— Dr. makes the very hinge which all his discourse moves upon be noâ— clearly and fully against him then let the consciences of men be satisfieâ— in all that he saies but if it be against him then let them reject all that hâ— affirmes He would prove from hence that it is not lawfull for any man to resiâ— with a forcible resistance the command of a King though he commanâ— what is unlawfull because sayes he that this commandement was given unâ— the Christians to be obedient unto Roman Emperours whose commands were meerly destructive to the Christian Religion and those powers nothing but subverters of that which was good and just Ans That there is no such thing commanded in this Scripture I proâ— by these reasons 1. Because the power that every soule is here commanded to be subject to and not to resist is that power which is not a terrour to goâ— works but to evil The 3. verse being made a reason of the 2. the 2. verâ— saith Whosoever resists the power resists the ordinance of God and they that resâ— shall receive to themselves judgement then the reason is given for Ruleâ— are not a terrour to good workes but to evill ver 3. and therefore the subjection commanded and resistance forbidden is not in things that are uâ— lawfull and contrary to the Law of God 2. The power that we aâ— commanded to be subject to and not to resist is the ordinance of God aâ— the Minister thereof is the ordinance of God to us for good ver 4. â— saies the Apostle speaking of the Ruler that we are to obey he is the Minister of God to us for good but when he commands a thing unlawfull aâ— contrary to the law of God he is not the Minister of God to us for goâ— therefore in this Scripture there is no such thing commanded us to subject to and not to resist the ungodly command of Princes Ob. And if it be said that though his commands are unlawfull yet he may be a penall ordinance of God for our good I answer that in this Scripture we are not commanded to submit unto a penall ordinance because the submission injoyned here by the Apostle reaches to all times and places and all times and places have not their authority and government by way of a penall ordinance 3. Therein the Apostle commands us in this Scripture to be subject and not to resist wherein the Magistrates are Gods Ministers but in unlawfull commands they are not properly and actively Gods Ministers though God may make use of them though in regard of their place they may be Gods Minister yet in regard of the thing commanded they are not when they command things that are evill and contrary to Law Now so we are commanded to be obedient as they are in that action Gods Ministers Verse 6. For this cause pay you tribute also for they are Gods Ministers attending continually upon this very thing 4. It appeares by all the first verses of this

thinke of any such matter Object Why but if the people give the power then if abused they may take it away also Res No that needs not seeing they never gave away that power of selfe preservation so that this position of ours is the onely way to keepe people from such assaults whereby the power of the Prince is more fully established whereas if people were kept from power of selfe-preservation which is naturall to them it were the onely way to breake all in peeces for Nullum violentum contranaturale est perpetuum no violent thing against nature is perpetuall Thus have I clearly opened our opinion and proved our sentence give me leave now to speake with the Doctor Section I. THe Doctor saith That in the proposition or principle by the word resistance is meant not a denying of obedience to the Princes command but a rising in armes a forcible resistance this though cleare in the question yet I thought good to insinuate to take off that false imputation laid upon the Divines of this Kingdom and upon all those that appear for the King in this cause Gubernatâ—res ergo in â—is rebus quae cum decalogâ— justis legibus pugnant nihil juris aut immunitatis habent pâ—ae caeteris hominibus privatis perpretrantes id quod malum est Coguntur tam metuere ordinationem Dei gladium prestante ad vindictam nocentium quam alii homines privati nam Paulus Ro. 13. docet Deum ordiâ—asse instituisse potestatem illam gladio defendendi bonum puniendi malum praecipit ut omnis anima sic ipsi guber nâ—ores tali Dei ordinationi fit subjecta hoc est obligat ad sacienâ—â—m bonum si velit defendi ist a. Dei ordinatione non ob sua facinoâ—a impia puniri Magdeburgensis cent 1 l. 20. cap. 4. page 457. Quod aâ—tem ad nos proprie pertiner possum enumerare duodecim aut etiam amplius reges qui ob scelera flagitia aut in perpetuum carcetem suÌ„t damnati aut exilio vel morte voluntaria justas sceleruÌ„ poenas fugerant nos autemid contendimus populum a quo reges nostri habent quicquid juris sibi vindicant regibus essâ— potentioreÌ„ Iusque idem in cos habere multitudinem quod illi in singulos a multitudine habent Bâ—â— de Gub Regni apud Scoâ—os Here the Dr. would insinuate in the very entrance of his book that so he might the better captare benevolentiam curry favour for the matter of his discourse following That the Divines of England are of his judgement But if they be so surely their judgement is lately changed But indeed what Divines are of his judgement not the Divines of Germany not the Divines of the French Protestant Churches not the Divines of Geneva not of Scotland not of Holland not of England Not the Divines of Germany who say thus Governours therefore in such things that are repugnant to the Law of God have no power or immunity above other private men they themselves commanding that which is evill have no power or immunity above other private men and they themselves commanding that which is evill are as much bound to feare the ordinance of God bearing the sword for the punishment of vice as other private men For Saint Paul in Rom. 3. saith that God did institute and ordaine a power both of defending that which is good and punishing that which is evill and he commands that every soule and so the Governours themselves would bee subject to this ordinance of God that is bound to doe good if they would be defended by this ordinance of God and not by their wicked deeds make themselves liable to punishment Not the Divines of the French Protestant Churches witnesse their taking up of armes for the defence of themselves at Rochell Not the Divines of Geneva For as Calvin in the 4. book of his institutions chap. 10. saith thus For though the correcting of unbridled government be revengement of the Lord let us not by and by think that it is committed to us to whom then is given no other commandment but to obey and suffer I speak alway of private men for if there be at this time any Magistrates in the behalfe of the people such as in old time were the Ephori that were set against the Kings of Lacedemonia or the tribuner of the people against the Roman Consuls or the Demarchy against the Senate at Athens and the same power which peradventure as things are now the 3 States have in every Realm when they hold their principal assemblies I do so not forbid them according to their office to withstand the outraging licentiousnesse of Kings that I affirm if they wink at Kings wilfully ranging over and treading down the poor Commonalty their dissembling is not without wicked breach of faith because they deceitfully betray the liberty of the people whereof they know themselves appointed to be protectors by the ordinance of God Not the Divines of Holland for we know what their practise is towards the King of Spaine Not the Divines of Scotland for Bucaâ—an saith for I can number twelve â—r more Kings among our selves who for their sinne and wickednesse were either cast into prison during their life or else eschewed the punishment by banishment But this is that which we contend for that the people from whom the Kings have all that they have are greater then the Kings and the whole multitude have the same power over them as they have over particular men out of the multitude witnesse also their late taking up armes when they came into England which by the King and Parliament is not judged rebellion Not our English Divines whose judgement Dr. Willet was acquainted with as well as our present Dr. who saith thus Touching the point of resistance certaine differences are to be observed for when there is an extraordinary calling as in the time of the Judges or when the Kingdome is usurped without any right as by Athalia or when the land is invaded by forraigne enemies as in the time of Maccabees or when the government is altogether elective as the Empire of Germany in all these cases then is least question of resistance to be made by the generall Councell of the States yet where none of these concur God forbid that the Church and Common-wealth should be left without remedy the former conditions viz. those alledged by Pareus observed when havock is made of the Common-wealth or the Church and Religion Thus also Doctor Bilson whose booke was allowed by publicke authority and printed at Oxford speakes If a Prince should goe about to subject his Kingdome to a forraigne Realme or change the forme of the Common-weale from Empery to Tyranny or neglect the lawes established by common consent of Pr. and people to execute his owne pleasure in these and other cases which might be named if the Nobles and Commons joyne together to defend

13. Chapter that the subjection and obedience here commanded by the Apostle is not passive obedience or subjection but active for the Apostle having said ver 1. and 2. Let every soule be subject to the higher power and not resist he saith at the third verse Why wilt thou not then be affraid of the power doe that which is good and at the sixth verse For this cause pay you tribute also But if the King command any thing that is unlawfull and sinfull the Doctor saith we are to be subject only passively therefore the subjection commanded and resistance forbidden in the Scripture not such as relates the unlawfull command of Princes as he affirmes when the Roman Emperour commanded things destructive to the Christian Religion accordingly Hierom upon the place Oftendit Apostolus in his quae recta sunt judicibus obediendum non in illi quae religioni contraria sunt And besides the Doctor himselfe confesseth page 11. that this prohibition was not temporary but perpetuall therefore to reach unto those times when the Prince should command that which was good therefore the subjection here commanded was active subjection and not meerly passive But the Doctor saith he will free this place from all exceptions and therefore he saith first I may suppose the King supreme as St. Peter calls him or the higher power as St. Paul here though it be by some now put to the question Answ And is it but now put to the question What shall we say then of that speech of Doctor Bilson By superiour powers ordained of God we understand not onely Princes but all publicke States and Regiments some where the people somewhere the Nobles having the same intrust to the sword that Princes have in this Kingdome and from this place Rom. 13. we are commanded to be obedient to those that are in authority Suppose we be in some country where there is no King but States doth not this Scripture command us subjection there also How therefore by the higher Powers here is meant onely the King The Doctor acknowledgeth that the Parliament is the highest Court of Justice in the Kingdome and the highest Court of Justice must needs fall within the compasse of these words the higher Powers unto which by vertue of this commandement of the Apostle we are to be obedient How then is this true which the Doctor saith that by the higher Power is meant the King onely or supreme in opposition to the Parliament But I prove it saith he For S. Peters distinction comprehends all that are in authority the King as supreme and all that are sent by him 1 Pet. 2. 13. in which latter ranke are the two Houses of Parliament being sent by him or sent for by him and by his Writ sitting there Ans Calvin and other Interpreters herein is contrary unto the Doctor Nam qui pronomen eâ—m ad Regem refeâ—unt multum falluntur Estigitur huc communi ratioâ—â— commendandam omnium magistratuâ— authoritateÌ„ quod mancato Dei praesunt ab eo mitâ—untâ—r unde sequitur quemadmodum Paulus doâ—â—â— Deo resistere qâ—i ab eo ordi nata non se obedienter submittunt Calv. in 2 Pet. 1. 13. who saith thus Those that referre the pronoune him to the King are much deceived for this is that common reason whereby the authority of all Magistrates is commanded because they doe rule by the commandement of God and are sent by him By him being referred to God by other Interpreters and to the King with the Doctor Then the Doctor saith secondly In this Text of the Apostle it is said All persons under the higher powers are expresly forbidden to resist for whosoever in the second verse must be as large as the every soule in the first Ans That which the Doctor aimes at in these words is to make the whole Parliament subject unto the King And who denyes them to bee the Kings subjects and that as men and Englishmen they should not be subject unto the King But if he meanes that as a Parliament they should be subject to enact and doe what ever he commandeth then how is that true which he saith in the 25. 26. pag. That there is such an excellent temper of the three States in Parliament there being a power of denying in each of them for what might follow if the King and Lords without the Commons or these and the Lords without the King might determine c. Or if he meane that as a Parliament jointly considered they are to submit passively unto the unlawfull commands of the King and that passive obedience is commanded only here in this 13. Ro. then this is so to straiten the Text as never any yet hath straitned it neither indeed can any conscience thinke that when the Apostle commands us to be subject unto the higher powers his meaning is only by way of suffering in his unlawfull commands and not by way of obedience in his lawfull commands Thirdly the Doctor saith That the Roman State might chalenge more by the fundamentals of that State then our great Councell he thinks wil or can Ans But what then Is it not therefore lawfull for the subjects now to resist the higher power commanding things unlawfull because the Apostle commanded there that we should not resist the higher powers in things that are lawfull Herein lyes the Doctors continued mistake He thinkes this command of the Apostle was given to the Christians to be obedient to Nero in his unlawfull commands whereas the Apostles command in this place reaches to all times and is made to all that are Christians Although they did live under Nero yet it does not follow that the Apostle commanded them to be subject to him in unlawfulls If indeed Nero's commandements were onely unlawfull and this direction of the Apostle was made onely to the Christians in those times and that the subjection commanded were onely suffering subjection then this Scripture might make much for his purpose But though Nero was an enemy to the Christians yet some of his commandements were lawfull and this direction of the Apostle was not made onely to the Christians in those times but as a generall rule for all good men and the obedience and subjection here commanded was not onely to be passive but active which I have proved already wherein I also appeale to the Doctors own conscience whether that this Scripture doth not command active obedience and subjection to the Prince and therefore his interpretation thereof is exceeding wide and his argument null Then the Doctor saith If it be replyed that that prohibition was temporary and fit for those times as it is said by some whom he answers Ans I answer that the Doctor here makes his owne adversary and fights with him Many other answers he refutes also it being not in my purpose to make good every pamphlet but to satisfie mens consciences onely I cannot but here take notice that the Doctor professes against arbitrary

Selected quad for the lemma: soul_n

Text snippets containing the quad