Selected quad for the lemma: world_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
world_n	king_n	kingdom_n	pilate_n	2,382	5	12.0207	5	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A09111	A treatise tending to mitigation tovvardes Catholike-subiectes in England VVherin is declared, that it is not impossible for subiects of different religion, (especially Catholikes and Protestantes) to liue togeather in dutifull obedience and subiection, vnder the gouernment of his Maiesty of Great Britany. Against the seditions wrytings of Thomas Morton minister, & some others to the contrary. Whose two false and slaunderous groundes, pretended to be dravvne from Catholike doctrine & practice, concerning rebellion and equiuocation, are ouerthrowne, and cast vpon himselfe. Dedicated to the learned schoole-deuines, cyuill and canon lavvyers of the tvvo vniuersities of England. By P.R.	Parsons, Robert, 1546-1610.	1607 (1607)	STC 19417; ESTC S114220	385,613	600

more hath S. Paul in that Epistle of the eminency of Christes Priesthood therby to set forth the most admirable excellency of his power and glory therby giuen him from his Father for our saluation but of the glory of his temporal Kingdome in this life he saith little or nothing And had not then the foresaid Fathers and holy Bishops S. Chrysostome S. Gregory Nazienzen S. Ambrose and others great cause by contemplation of this supereminent worthines of Christes Priesthood to inferre the great preheminēce in generall of the Christian Priesthood before Kingly dignity of earthly principality But let vs yet consider one reason more 17. The office of high Priesthood as partly hath appeared by that we haue said and is euident by the discourse of S. Paul appointing him for a meanes or mediator betweene God and man consisteth principally in two thinges or partes first in respect of that which he is to performe towardes God as to his Superiour secondly in the functions that he is to vse towardes the people as inferiours and subiectes The first consisteth in offering sacrifice oblations prayers and intercession for the sinnes of the people as already touching Christ our Sauiour out of the Apostle we haue declared The second consisteth in the spirituall power dignity authority and functions therof which our said high Priest Christ Iesus as head high Priest of his Church purchased with the sacrifice of his owne bloud hath and may exercise vpon the said Church for euer for vnto him as our high Priest it appertaineth not only to make intercession for his said Church but to gouerne the same also and to direct it by conuenient meanes vnto the end of their saluation which he hath designed and for this to make lawes prescribe orders appoint Sacramentes ordaine spirituall tribunals of iudgment giue sentence of separation of the good from the bad forgiue and retaine sinnes which spirituall gouernment of soules belonging to the office of high Priesthood is a different thing from the ciuill gouernment of temporall principality and yet is a Kingdome also in it self but a spirituall Kingdome ouer soules and not ouer bodies And this had Christ our Sauiour togeather with his high Priesthood according to the prediction and vision of Daniel Aspiciebam ecce quasi filius hominis c. I did looke and behold there appeared as it were the Sonne of man and God gaue vnto him power and honour and a Kingdome his power is an eternall power and his Kingdome shall neuer be corrupted And so in the second Psalme after he had said I am made King by him vpon his holy Hill of Sion he addeth presently to shew that it was a spirituall Kingdome Praedicans praeceptum eius my office is to preach his commandement and many other authorities may be alledged to proue that Christ in that he was high Priest had supreame spirituall Kingly authority in like manner for gouerning of soules 18. But now for the temporall Kingdome of Christ in this life to wit whether besides this spirituall and Royall gouernment of our soules he had Kingly Dominion also vpon our bodies and goodes and vpon all the Kingdomes of the earth so as he might iustly haue excercised all actions of that temporall iurisdiction as casting into prison appointing new officers Kings and Monarches yea whether their power and authority and interest to their States did cease when he came as the right of Priestly authority did in this I say and other pointes depending herof there are two disputable opinions betweene Catholicke Deuines the one holding the affirmatiue that Christ was Lord King temporall as heere is set downe which diuers learned men both of old and our time doe de fend the other affirming that albeit Christ togeather with his high Kingly dignity of spirituall power was Lord also cōsequently ouer our bodies shall raigne ouer the same most gloriously for all eternity in the life to come yet that he renounced the vse of all that Dominion in this life and that in this sense he fled when they would haue made him King and refused to deuide the inheritance betweene the two Brethrē when he was demaunded and finally said to Pilate My Kingdome is not of this world confessing himself to be a true temporal King also according to Pilates meaning but yet that the vse and exercise therof was not for this world but only for the next wherof also the good thiefe vnderstood when he said on the Crosse Be mindfull of me when thou shalt come into thy Kingdome And finally they alledge for proofe of this the wordes of Zachary the Prophet Ecce Rex 〈◊〉 venit tibi iustus Saluator ipse pauper Behold Sion thy King commeth vnto thee as a iust and sauing King but he is poore as though he had said he is thy true King but hath renounced the vse and priuiledge of the same and chosen pouerty in this world And with this second opinion which is the more generall doe concurre also the Protestantes of our age that Christ tooke vpon him no temporall Kingly power in this life least if they held the contrary it should be inferred therof that he left the same authority both of temporall and spirituall vnto S. Peter his Successour which yet the Catholickes that hold this opinion explicate otherwise saying that albeit Christ had no direct Dominion in this life vpon temporall thinges yet indirectly for preseruation of his spirituall Dominion he had and might haue vsed the same and in that sense he left it to his said Successor 19. Of all which is inferred first the preheminence of high Priesthood in Christ before his temporall Kingly principality for that as we haue said the actions and functions of Christes Priesthood haue not only more high eminent dignity both in that they treat with men for gouerning their soules then Christes temporall Kingdome for gouerning of bodies but moreouer that the dignity of Priesthood in Christ conteineth in it self a much more high spirituall Kingly power then is the temporall 20. Secondly is inferred that the reasons heere alledged by T. M. for his paradox in preferring Christs being a King before his Priesthood are vaine foolish The first wherof is this Christes Kingdome saith he had the preheminence of Priesthood because he is Priest only for vs but he is King ouer vs. But I would aske him Is not Christ Priest ouer vs aswel as for vs hath he not a spirituall and Priestly iurisdiction ouer our soules doth not he binde and loose our sinnes doth not he prescribe vs Sacramentes appoint vs lawes of liuing and the like or doe not these actions appertaine vnto him as high Priest ouer his Church And againe I would aske him about the second member as Christ in flesh was King was he not made King aswell for vs that is for our good as ouer vs

with God and the Prince follow their word and direction 33. And albeit God did some-times vse for externall guiding and direction of Priestes and Priestly affaires the authority of good Kinges in those daies especially when they were Prophetes also as Dauid Salomon in the correcting and remouing of some Priestes yet this was extraordinary and proueth not that simply and absolutly Kingly dignity and authority was aboue Priesthood in that law albeit also it be most true which the Authors by this man heere alledged Salmeron Cunerus Carerius and the rest doe note that the Priesthood of the old Testament was nothing comparable to that of the new this descending directly from the person and office of Christ himself and indued with farre higher and more powerfull spirituall authority for guiding of soules then had the Priestes of the old law which was but a figure of the new therfore to argue from that to this is a plaine fallacy and abusing of the Reader 34. Wherfore leauing this of the comparison betweene Kinges and Priestes of the old and new Testament I will end this first point with the very same conclusion concerning the safty of Princes from violence of their subiectes which our Aduersary himself alledgeth out of our Catholicke Author Cunerus in these wordes VVe are taught saith he from the example of the people of God as your Cunerus teacheth with great patience to endure the tyranny of mortall Kinges yea when wee haue power to resist and because they be next vnder God in earth in all their iniuries to commend their reuenge vnto God nay he teacheth Kinges another excellent rule of pollicy fitting for the preseruation of all States which is that he who succeedeth a King violently murdered of any though of Godly zeale yet ought he to reueng his Predecessours death by the death of the malefactours So T.M. And now followeth that of the Ghospell Ex ore tuo te indico serue 〈◊〉 for first I would aske him is not this Catholicke doctrine Is it not ours doth he not heere call the Author therof Cunerus ours how then doth he affirme euery where that our doctrine teacheth killing of Princes Let him shew vs any of his Authors that euer of this argument hath written so moderatly 35. And yet further I must aske him whether he will stand to the iudgment of this our Cunerus when he commeth to the point indeed How incorrigible Princes in some cases may lawfully be restrained as also depriued by the Common-wealth and consent of the supreame Pastour will he stand to this I say or rather fleet back againe to the doctrine of the Scottish Geneuian French Flemish Ministers when the King should mislike him and especially for his Religion wherof I make little doubt what euer he saith heere finding himself and his at good ease And finally I would aske him seriously whether he would haue his Maiesty of England to practice that excellent rule of pollicy which he so highly comendeth out of our 〈◊〉 who notwithstanding saith not a word therof by way of rule or obseruation but only affirmeth that Amasias did iustly put to death those seruantes of King Ioas that vpon zeale had slaine him in his bed I would aske him I say whether indeed he would wish his Maiesty of England to put the same rule and so highly commended pollicy in vse against such as violently murdered abetted or procured the same against not only his Predecessours but parentes and immediate Progenitours Father Mother and Grand-mother And then we know how many Ministers and their friendes would enter into that daunce but these men frame their tongues according to times fit occasiōs And with this he endeth his proofes out of the old Testament Out of the new Testament §. 2. 36. ANd then comming to the second part he beginneth his discourse with this title The former question disputed according to the state of the new Testament and presently in our manner he giueth the onset with this proposition The Pope hath all absolute and direct power and dominion temporall ouer all Kinges and Kingdomes of the world c. And for proofe therof citeth Carerius and Bozius in the margent and beginneth to lay forth their proofes and then against these two that hold the opinion of Canonistes wherof before we haue treated to wit that Christ was the immediate Lord of all temporalties and consequently also is his substitute he opposeth Franciscus de Victoria Bellarmine Sanders and others that hold the other opinion to wit that the Pope hath not directly but indirectly only such authority to deale with Princes in temporall affaires and so not informing his Reader that these are different opinions of the manner how the Pope hath this authority but yet that both do agree in the thing it self that he hath it he playeth pleasantly vpon the matter and would make men thinke that he taketh vs at great aduantage as contrary or rather contradictory among our selues which indeed is no more cōtradiction then if two Lawiers agreeing that such a noble man had such an office or authority ouer such a Lordship by succession from the Crowne should differ only in this whether the said office were giuen by the Prince seuerally and expressely by particuler gift and writinges or were giuen by a certaine consequence included in the gift of the said Lordship The differēce were nothing in the thing or certainty of authority but in the manner of hauing it and so is it heere and yet out of this difference of these two opiniōs doth our Minister furnish himself with good probability of argmentes on the one side as though they were his owne who otherwise would appeare very poore pittiful therin And this tricke he plaied before with the moderate Answerer when he serued himself of the two differēt opinions of some Deuines and Canonistes about the question VVhether Hereticks before personall denuntiation and sentence giuen be subiect to externall penalties appointed by the Canons And generally he runneth to this shift more then any other commonly of his fellow-writers which I haue seene in these our dayes to wit that whersoeuer he findeth any difference of opinions in disputable matters betweene our Catholicke writers which S. Augustine saith may stand with integrity of faith there he setteth downe any one of these opinions for ours and argueth against it with the argumentes of the other or bringeth in the others authority wordes against the same which maketh some shew or muster of matter on his side wheras in deed and substance he hath nothing at all 37. It were ouer long to examine in this place all the obiections which he putteth downe on our behalfe vnder the second head of our proofes concerning the time of the new Testament calling them Romish pretences and the fond resolutions he giueth vnto them as first that we doe found the Popes temporall sword vpon the keyes giuen by

both by bookes preachings and publike speeches of Magistrates as if it had byn a most heinous attempt in deed and not only these but by this occasion all Catholicks generally were most odiously traduced especially in this one point that touched them neerest to wit that they would seeme to conceaue any least hope of his Maiesties clemency and mercy towardes them by way of toleration or conniuency for their Religion or mitigation of their continuall pressures for the same 8. To which end were brought into this booke and published in print not only the Bishop of London his sermon at Paules Crosse vpon the fifth of August then past wherein he auowed his Maiesties protestation against Catholickes to the contrary but the speach also and charge of the L. Chancellour in the Star-chamber vnto the Lordes Iudges and communalty there present ready to departe into their countryes was deliuered as from the Kings owne mouth all tending to the same end of afflicting and disgracing the said people and depriuing them of all hope of any tolerance yea scoffing most bitterly and contemptuously at their folly for conceauing any such vaine hopes and inioyning the most seuere order for descrying searching apprehending imprisoning and punishing them which euer lightly was heard of as though they had 〈◊〉 the only or most grieuous male factors within the Realme and this only for their Religion 9. Soone after vpon the backe of this came forth S. Edvvard Cooke his Maiestyes Attorneyes Booke intituled by him his Fifth Part of Reportes which though in the entrance and fore-front it promised more calme and mild proceeding and so it performeth in phrase and style of writing yet was the drift and ending therof no lesse stinging then the Scorpions tayle it self against all sortes of Catholicks and their Religion And to say somewhat of it in this place his argument or subiect was new and strange taking vpon him to proue out of the old and ancient common lawes of England that the spirituall iurisdiction giuen by Act of Parlament to the late Queene Elizabeth in the first yeare of her raigne and exercised afterwardes by her in Ecclesiasticall matters was dew vnto her not only by vertue of that Statute but by vigour also of the said ancient common lawes and so acknowledged and practised by the olde ranke of our foregoing Kinges and Princes a conclusion no lesse strange and paradoxicall in wise and learned mens eares then that was of him who diuers ages after the warres of Troy ended and the true successe therof published by all writers throughout the world tooke vpon him to teach the contrary to wit that not the Grecians but the Troianes had the victory in that warre and so to reuerse and contradicte whatsoeuer had byn written taught or receaued before 10. Let the histories of our Christian English Kings euen from the first conuerted Ethelbert vnto King Henry the eight be examined whether this be so or not and whether a thousand monuments of theirs in almost a thousand yeares doe not testify them all to haue byn of contrary iudgment practice sense and beliefe in the controuersy proposed to that which M. Attorney by a few pieces of lawes distractedly alleadged woulde haue men to thinke Or if he delight as I take him to be learned to haue this argument more discussed for it is both ample and important let him but procure licence for his Antagonist to write and print his booke and I doubt not but that he will quickly be answered by some of his owne profession among whome I doe imagine that many fingers must needes itch and tickle to be doing in so aduantagious a cause or if not yet doe I dare assure him that some Deuine of our side shall ioine issue with him in that point for the confutation of his whole drifte and narration in those his Reportes but principally in the ouerthrowing of his iniurious conclusion wherby he would inferre that whosoeuer did not belieue and acknowledge the said late Queenes Ecclesiasticall feminine authority power and iurisdiction in spirituall matters was and is a traitor by the iudgment of the ancient common lawes of England receaued helde and practised euen vnder Catholicke Kinges and Princes of former times 11. Vnto which vntrue and improbable paradox he addeth another no lesse stinging nor better founded then the former which is that for the foremost eleuen yeares of Queene Elizabeths raigne vntill she was excommunicated by Pius Quintus No sorte of people of vvhat persvvasion soeuer in Religion refused to goe to the Protestantes Church which is euidently false both in many Puritanes and more Catholicks that refused openly in that time and then That vpon that occasion Catholicks first began to refuse which in like manner is false both for that they refused before and this occasion was altogeather impertinent to their refusall and thirdly most iniuriously of all he would further seeme to inferre that such as refuse now may in like manner be presumed to doe it vpon the same vndutifull minde towardes his Maiesty All which points doe tend to the exasperation and exulceration which euery one seeth and comming from a man of his place roome and neerenes in office about his Maiesty could not but make deepe impression and giue perhaps a great push to the lamentable precipitation of those vnfortunate Gentlemen that soone after ensued 12. VVhich being hapned came forth presently this other odious pamphlet of T. M. his deuised discouery wherunto now I am forced in particuler to answere it being in it self no lesse slaunderous and iniurious then the fact of the conspirators was wicked and grieuous to all Catholickes The booke beareth this title An exact discouery of Romish doctrine in case of Conspiracy and Rebellion But he that shall weigh it well shall finde it a more exacte discouery of English Ministeriall malice in case of sycophancy and calumniation the Authour endeauoring to ascribe that to publicke and generall doctrine which proceeded from priuate and particuler passion as also to drawe the temerity of a few to the hatred and condemnation of the whole Of which iniquity we shall haue occasion to speake more afterward in due place 13. Soone after this pamphlet appeared many more tending all for the most part to the same end of exulceration or driuing rather to plaine desperation euery one adding affliction to affliction and heaping hatred and enuy vpon them that detested bewailed the transgression happened no lesse but much more then these insolent insultors themselues Of this kinde I might name sundry that my self haue seene though being out of England I may presume to haue seene the least part of such as haue byn published and set forth 〈◊〉 this fact fell out as namely one intituled A Discourse of the late intended Treason wherin the discourser beginneth with this foundation That all English both at home and abroad vvere so fully in possession of contented peace at the

Protestant party to flatter and deceiue her with false oathes and 〈◊〉 she promised that she would not but he arriuing the next day after the Bishop vnto her at 〈◊〉 in France made so great promises oathes and protestations vnto her as by little and little gate credit with her and so returned into Scotland by England where he had his full instructions yow must thinke to dispose the mindes of all sortes to receiue and obey the said Queene after his and their fashion and agreement for which good office she gaue him soone 〈◊〉 her returne the Earledome of Murrey and committed the cheife Gouernement of the Realme vnto him But what effectes ensued we shall now in few wordes declare 21. When vpon the yeare 1563. which was two yeares after her returne to Scotland she resolued by consent of her Parlament to marry her knisman the Lord Darley newly made 〈◊〉 of Rosse and Duke of Albany this Earle of Murrey made a leagne of his confederates against the same pretending that it would be in 〈◊〉 of their Religion and brake into open warres against them both saith Holinshed and when they were pressed by the Kinges and Queenes forces they had alwaies their refuge into England and their counsaile and direction both thence and from their Ministers that neuer parted from them how to prosecute their matters against their Princes wherof the first point was to abuse the yong Kinges credulity and to set him against the Queene and hence ensued that strange and horrible act of entring her priuy chamber when she was at supper vpon the fourth of march 1566. in the company of the 〈◊〉 of Murton the Lordes Ruthen and Lindsey all Protestantes and armed who saluted her first with this greeting she being great with child That they would no longer suffer her to haue the gouerning of the Realme nor to abuse them as hitherto she had done And then pulled violently from her her Secretary Dauid which stood there present seruing her at table and for his refuge tooke hold of her gowne which they cut of and slew him with many stabbes to such fright of the afflicted Queene as it was no lesse then a miracle that she had not perished therwith or miscaried of her child which was his Maiesty that now gouerneth England hauing six monethes gone with the same This was done at a Parlament when all the Protestant confederates met togeather and tooke as yow must thinke the ghostly counsaile of their good Ministers for so holy an enterprise And vpon the 20. of Iune next was the Prince borne which thing not pleasing some that there should remaine any yssue of that family which they desired to extinguish the said King his Maiesties Father was most cruelly murthered in Edenbrough on the tenth of February next ensuing 22. Nor did the matter cease heere but rather now ascended to the greatest height of malicious Treason 〈◊〉 euer perhaps hath byn vsed against any crowned Prince in the world for that these Lordes of the Congregatiō as they called themselues that is to say Religious Rebels congregated against their sworne Prince gathering forces togeather laid violent handes on her Maiesties person first at Carbar-hill by Edenbrough when confidently she presumed as to her subiectes to goe vnto them and treate of peace and then casting her into prison depriued her of her Crowne set vp against her the name of her dearest iewell the yonge Prince not yet a yeare old made Regent her greatest enemy the Earle of Murrey her bastard traiterous brother held Parlamentes made lawes debarred her the sight of her sonne for euer and finally waging open warre against her and ouerthrowing her forces in the feild she being present forced her into England and there following her also procured vnto her the greatest disgraces dishonoured her with the foulest reportes defamed her with the most spitefull sermons bookes and printed libelles and finally oppressed her with the most notorious open iniuries that euer were cast vpon a person of her Maiesties quality dignity And all this without any scruple or remorse of conscience at all nay all was auerred to be done according to the very rule of the Ghospell for the Ghospell and this by all the Ministers both of Scotland and England 23. And thus much of the second Queene Mary of Scotland brought to her ruine by the Euangelicall obedience of these new Ghospellers but as for the yong Prince her Noble sonne whome she loued most dearely aboue all earthly creatures and neuer was permitted so much as to embrace or see him more afterward what passed in this time by the same sorte of mē both during his minority and afterward what cōtentions 〈◊〉 warres 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 what murthers what conspir cies Rebellions and violences were vsed were ouerlong to recount in this place the Histories are full and the 〈◊〉 made and set forth in print by the foresaid 〈◊〉 Authour of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in his sixt Chapter and 〈◊〉 booke against the 〈◊〉 doth touch many 〈◊〉 pointes of diuers notorious 〈◊〉 and violences offered by them and their 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Kinges person state and dignity as their taking his authority vpon them his surpriz and restraint at Rutheuen vpon the yeare 1582. the brethrens allowing and authorizing the same afterward expresly against the Kinges declaration to the contrary 24. The 〈◊〉 also against his person at Striueling vpon the yeare 1584. and many railing speaches sermons and bookes against him and his gouernment made in England to disgrace him and namely the seditious preaching of Dauison and other Scottish Ministers against 〈◊〉 in London in the Church of the Old-Iury and this being in the moneth of May it followed in Nouember after that these Ministers with their complices returning into Scotland with aide from England though this circumstance the Author con ealeth as not making for his purpose they gat ten thousand Rebelles togeather and 〈◊〉 their tentes before the towne of Striueling whither the King was retired to fortify himselfe in the Castle making proclamations in their owne names and there draue at length his Maiesty to yeald his person into their handes with the liues of his dearest friendes and was depriued also by them of his old guard and a 〈◊〉 put vpon him All which actes were not only defended afterward by the chiefe Ministers of that Realme but the King himselfe was called in like manner Ieroboam by them and threatned to be rooted out as Ieroboams race was if he continued in the course he held and many other like 〈◊〉 by them committed which for breuityes sake I forbeare to recount in this place 25. Now then to returne againe to our former ponderation set downe in the beginning of this Chapter let euery sage and prudent Prince consider and weigh with himselfe which of these two waies which of these two people which of these two groundes of doctrine which of these two methodes of practice which of these