Selected quad for the lemma: soul_n

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

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A85184	The league illegal. Wherein the late Solemn League and Covenant is seriously examined, scholastically and solidly confuted: for the right informing of weak and tender consciences, and the undeceiving of the erroneous. Written long since in prison, by Daniel Featley D.D. and never until now made known to the world. Published by John Faireclough, vulgò Featley, chaplain to the Kings most Excellent Majesty.	Featley, Daniel, 1582-1645.; Featley, John, 1605?-1666.; England and Wales. Sovereign (1625-1649 : Charles I)	1660 (1660)	Wing F591; Thomason E1040_8; ESTC R199	47,903	77

State nor anxiously to enquire into the reason which moved the first contrivers and projectors of this League to set it on foot at this present and presse it with all earnestness I am perswaded that none will denie that their main scope and aime therein was to engage our brethren of Scotland in the present quarrell for pulling down Episcopacie and setting up the Presbyterie and by this National and solemne league to strengthen their partie and foment this unnaturall war which hath already drained the wealth of the Kingdome and is like to draw out the life-blood also Nemo tenetur divinare say the Canonists neither will I take upon me the office of a Prophet to foretell the Catastrophe of these Tragedies Yet sure I am this Queen of all Islands never received such prejudiced and wrong nor ever was so near the brink of destructions when she drew in forain Forces to defend her self against homebred Enemies and I pray God we experimentally interpret not the mysterie of Pharaohs dream concerning the lean kine which eat up the fat and yet were never a whit the fatter If there be a decree of Heaven that these two Nations shall be drowned one in anothers blood for the crimsons sins of both not yet repented of yet let not us draw this most fearfull judgement upon both Kingdomes by the cord of an oath But to argue syllogistically No Subjects living under a Christian Prince who is a professor of the true Religion and a Defender of the orthodox faith may enter into a publick and solemne covenant for the reformation of religion without the consent much lesse against the expresse command of their Soveraign For such disobedience and sleighting of their King cannot stand with the duty we ow him of fear and loyalty injoyned Prov. 24. 21. My son fear the Lord and the King Eccles. 8. 2. I advise thee to take heed to the mouth of the King and to the word of the oath of God Rom. 13. 1. Let every soul be subject to the higher powers whosoever resisteth the power resisteth the ordinance of God and they that resist shall receive to themselves damnation V. 4. If thou do evil fear for he beareth not the sword in vain Prov. 16. 14. The wrath of the King is the messenger of death Prov. 19. 12. The Kings wrath is like the roaring of a Lion 1 Pet. 2. 13. Submit your selves to every ordinance of man for the Lords sake whether it be to the King as supreme v. 17. Fear God honour the King Nor with the prayers of the Church made for him that we may serve honour and humbly obey him in God and for God Nor with the principles of right Reason for the King is the supreme head of the Church and Common-wealth under Christ and all his Subjects conjunctim in Parliament or divisim are but Members of the same Body politick and how should the members enter into a covenant or frame and devise it without the head But the King is so far from yielding his royall assent to this Covenant that he strictly forbids it and that under the pain of Treasonin his Proclamation printed at Oxford Ergo we may not enter into this Covenant nor entangle our consciences with this new Oath This Covenant we make with God and in all things especially the things appertaining to God we must obey God rather then man We have the Kings vertua consent l thereunto for though he be not present in person at the Parliament nor hath given his royall assent under his hand yet this Parliament is called and continued by his authority and his consent is vertually contained in the Votes of both Houses It is a ruled case in Divinity That we must obey God rather then man when God commandeth one thing and man another but when the commands of God and of his Vicegerent upon earth clash not one against another St. Bernards doctrine is most true We must obey him as God who is in the place of God in those things which are not against God When St. Peter and St. John returned this answer to the Councell the Councell forbad that which God commanded God commanded the Apostles to preach Christs resurrection and the Assembly of Priests and Elders forbad them This is not the Covenanters case for where doth God command the English to sweare to preserve the Scotch Discipline and Liturgie which they themselves have often varied Or to abjure Episcopacie which was the only government of the Church for more then 1500 years and under whose shade Christian Religion most flourished and the Church stretched forth her branches to the Rivers and her boughs to the ends of the earth Where doth the Scripture warrant much less command the association of two Kingdomes and joyntly taking up armes in the quarrell of the Gospell and defending and propagating religion by the sword The calling of the Parliament by the Kings authority doth not conclude his assent to all the Ordinances of both the Houses for if it were so why did this Parliament after they had voted the Militia and the extirpation of Prelacie and Pluralities send to his Majesty and humbly intreat his royall assent nay why in all Parliaments since the first even till this day after both Houses had past bills did still the Lords and Commons lay them at his Majesties feet beseeching him in humblest manner to take them up and signe them with his royall hand and if he liked them his answer hath been Le Roy vieut if he distasted them Le Roy s'avisera Did the calling of a Parliament in the Kings name and by his authority vertually include or conclude his Royall assent to all the Acts King Richard the 2d had given his consent to his own deposing for that Parliament wherein he was deposed was called in his name and by his Authority 4. No Covenant especially publike and solemn between two Nations for reformation of Religion may be taken without warrant from Gods word for in every such Covenant God is a partie and his consent must be both had and known which cannot be but from his word Beside this Covenant is bound with an Oath which is an Act of Religion and cultus latriae that is a part of divine worship and if it be not commanded by God it is forbidden in Scripture under the name of will-worship Moreover that golden rule of the Apostle applyed by by him to the use of things indifferent stretcheth also to this case of conscience Whatsoever Oath we take or Covenant we enter into not perswaded in Conscience that we have good ground for what we doe in scripture is sinne to us But this Covenant hath no warrant for it in holy Scripture for from the Alpha of Genesis to the Omega of the Apocalypse there is no vola nor vestigium of such a Covenant as this Ergo this Covenant must not be taken by any who desire to walk exactly before God according to the