Selected quad for the lemma: truth_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
truth_n	faith_n	justify_v	object_n	1,744	5	9.2095	5	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A94259	Some new observations and considerations upon the present state of things in England. The differences betweene King and Parliament impartially disputed, the persons on both sides truly anatomized and the publique faith vindicated. / By J.S. Gent.	J. S., gent.	1643 (1643)	Wing S91; Thomason E93_14; ESTC R12058	6,846	13

Some New Observations and Considerations upon the present State of things in ENGLAND The Differences betweene King and Parliament impartially disputed the Persons on both sides truly Anatomized and the Publique Faith Vindicated BY J. S. Gent. IT is a principle in reason aswel as policy to support great designes with firme resolutions endeavours equall to both wisedome which is the object of the intellect speakes no lesse common and prudence which acts in the will directs what it is to decline the accomplishment of an expedient once attemdted Many justifie publique folly and deny publique faith they approve of safety but dislike the meanes they affect the appearance and reject the essence of truth they seeme to obey the King and yet repugne the Lawes they honour the Parliament and sleight its power they are ambidexters and yet neuters for they looke one way and swim another If you demand a reason passion shall step in and plead tradition and if you make a further progression they will be ready to swallow you up with your duty of Submission to higher powers they urge a personall and connive at a nationall good if they be learned they speake and write obscurely if ignorant it is sufficient they have the learned though malefactours for their presidents private relations so charme them that they seem to be asleepe and happy were this Kingdome if they might not be awaked till reformation may receive a deepe rooting the discipline or circumstantiall part of religion they dote upon but which of them have appeared in defen●e of any doctrinals wihch have beene wounded by Arminians and others or have supprest superstition or the graduals of Idolatry It is a facile matter to make lubricke professions and reserved oathes but how doe they checke such semblances by the expresse opposition of the generall good But they say they have a Protestant King who will defend the Religion of Queene Elizabeths time they have known Lawes still in force and with whom or for what should they contest In answer to which my subject will admit of variety of matter as necessary introduction to my conclusion therfore let it not offend the Reader that a method is propounded to so short a worke First 1. Quest I demand Whether at the Queens time there were not reliques of superstition fit to be abolished Secondly 2. Quest Whether since that time the same have not multiplied Thirdly 3. Quest Whether if the same be urged they may not be denyed Fourthly 4. Quest if innovations of law or religion be inforced by poover they may not be forceably resisted For the first It is notorious 1. Answ whose immediate successor Queen Elizabeth was and how active in reformation but as in nature a habit is not without great perill deserted so in policy a suddaine change causeth a Catastrophe undoubtedly had the good Queene had the command of time or that the threed of her life had been prolonged she would have prevented the plea of the present opposers Sed non reluctandum est eum Deo For the second 2. Answ who can be ignorant what Commissions for composition with recusants have beene since authorised and what growth such toleration hath occasioned what indempnities appeales and connivences have been fostered what incouragements they have implicitely and expressely received and how in many places they have trampled upon our most resined Protestants they began to overlooke the power provided for their suppression and under the Armes of their papal protectors to undermine authority but I hope I may speake to them as Seneca in another case Non in re sed opinione laborasti your endeavours have not been pertinent but opinionate For the third if I justifie not the dissenting from 3. Answ I doe ipso facto tolerate the assenting to an impious imposition power is no further extensive then it hath subordination from and reference to the divine prescripts duo Contradictoria non possunt simul esse vera contrary powers cannot be at once effectuall and I am confident this subiect would not be insisted upon but that Casus plerumque ridiculus multos elevavit a ridiculous matter will blow up some disputations For the fourth question 4. Answ it is as undeniable as any of the former for if it be examined whence this high strain of resistance is derived it is answered from Majesty and there it is patronized and though I appove not what Keckerm cites in his question qualiter iudicandum est de resistentiâ Principis posse principem eodem ordine jure Regno dejici quo admissus est sieas leges pacta violet sub quibus admissus est yet I say with Augustine Regna sine justitia magna potius l. trocinia sunt quam imperia A goverment without justice is rather a robbery then a Royall authority When the Apostle saith Submit to every Ordinance of man for the Lords sake it must be intended they are such Ordinances which the Lord will favour and these words for the Lords sake are a limit and not a motive to obedince And for the words of submission to the higher powers Rom. 13.1 it is denied that they referre to the Kings personall command His Maiesty in His owne Declaration acknowledgeth His government to be a mixt monarchy and that mixture presupposeth some what at least of an equall power to maiesty Obj. and what can that be but the lawes Divine and Humane But say some of all difficulties none equalizeth this that profound iudgements proficients in Law and policy act this Tragedy on either part and who shall presume to be a moderator humane reason steps back divine precepts seeme ambiguous and who shall further explaine Ans It is a maxime in experiment that an united strength is most prevalent in nature all things move towards their first element singularity is an enemy to good for that the entity of good is mutuall and diffuseth it selfe into reciprocals All the sences of man may have their deceptions though not all at once and as the obiect of fight is better discerned one eye being shut when they are both open because that sence is more contracted to the object so when a whole Kingdom acts by its representative there is the most cleare conveyance of discerning Then hence will arise this proposition That they that best know the Kingdomes danger can best provide for its safety but the Parliament doe best know the Kingdomes danger ergo c. And here comes in the quaere Q. The danger being thus knowne may they be by power impugned Reason rules us to decline things destructive and prevention is the best of policies Seneca saith Faoilius est pernitiosa resistere quam regere non admittere quam adnissa moderari It is more easie to resist than rule and not to admit then being admitted to moderate a mischiefe where the supreame priviledges politicall or divine are in hazard the greatest ayd may be made use