A30577:463
The glorious name of God, The Lord of Hosts opened in two sermons, at…
The glorious name of God, The Lord of Hosts opened in two sermons, at Michaels Cornhill, London, vindicating the Commission from this Lord of Hosts, to subjects, in some case, to take up arms : with a post-script, briefly answering a late treatise by Henry Ferne, D.D. / by Jer. Burroughs.The glorious name of God, The Lord of Hosts opened in two sermons, at Michaels Cornhill, London, vindicating the Commission from this Lord of Hosts, to subjects, in some case, to take up arms : with a post-script, briefly answering a late treatise by Henry Ferne, D.D. / by Jer. Burroughes.
London: printed for R. Dawlman, 1643
Modern spelling is a reading aid: the words are the author’s, only the spelling is modernized. Original shows the page as printed, with the transcription marks.
To this he first answers, That is the same argument that is used for the Popes curbing of, or deposing Princes in case of Heresy, otherwise the Church hath no means to preserve it self.
To this he first answers, That is the same argument that is used for the Popes curbing of, or deposing Princes in case of Heresie, otherwise the Church hath no meanes to preserve it selfe.
The good of a Church is spiritual, and God hath given it spiritual means enough to preserve its spiritual good, although there be no such power of the Pope over 1Princes, and we know the Church was preserved and flourished in spiritual beauty when there was neither Pope nor Prince to preserve it.
The good of a Church is spirituall, and God hath given it spirituall means enough to preserve its spirituall good, although there be no such power of the Pope over 1Princes, and we know the Church was preserved and flourished in spirituall beautie when there was neither Pope nor Prince to preserve it.
- 1Ans.
But the good of a Kingdom is civill and natural, therefore it must have civill and natural means to preserve it self by in case of danger. Hence then although it be no argument that Popes may by power of Arms curb Kings, and because else the good of the Church cannot be preserved, yet it may be a good argument the people may in some case take up Arms to defend themselves against violence, although the King gives not his consent, because otherwise the civill and natural good of men in a Kingdom cannot be preserved.