Selected quad for the lemma: authority_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
authority_n	according_a	king_n	power_n	2,981	5	4.9052	4	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A45694	Political aphorisms: or, The true maxims of government displayed Wherein is likewise proved, that paternal authority is no absolute authority, and that Adam had no such authority. That there neither is or can be any absolute government de jure, and that all such pretended government is void. That the children of Israel did often resist their evil princes without any appointment or foretelling thereof by God in scripture. That the primitive Christians did often resist their tyrannical emperors, and that Bishop Athanasius did approve of resistance. That the Protestants in all ages did resist their evil and destructive princes. Together with a historical account of the depriving of kings for their evil government, in Israel, France, Spain, Portugal, Scotland, and in England before and since the conquest.	Locke, John, 1632-1704. Two treatises of government.; Languet, Hubert, 1518-1581. Vindiciæ contra tyrannos.; Defoe, Daniel, 1661?-1731, attributed name.; Ferguson, Robert, d. 1714, attributed name.; Harrison, T. (Thomas), fl. 1683-1711.	1691 (1691)	Wing H917E; ESTC R216382	24,457	34

God's Providence and Permission who suffered his own peculiar People the Jews to be under divers manner of Governments at divers times at first under Patriarchs Abraham Isaac and Jacob then under Captains as Moses Joshua and the like then under Judges as Othoniel Ebud and Gideon then under High Priests as Eli and Samuel then under Kings as Saul David and the rest then under Captains and High Priests again as Zorobbabel Judas Maccabeus and his Brethren until the Government was lastly taken from them and they brought under the Power of the Romans And last of all that God does concur with what Magistrate or Magistrates the Community thinks fit to appoint is plain by the Testimony of holy Scripture as when God said to Solomon By me Kings rule and Nobles even all the Judges of the Earth Prov. 8.16 that is by his Permission they govern tho chosen by the People and St. Paul to the Romans avoucheth that Authority is not but of God and therefore he that resisteth Authority resisteth God Rom. 13. which is to be understood of Authority Power and Jurisdiction in it self according to the Laws of every Country All Politick Societies began from a voluntary Union and mutual Agreement of Men freely acting in the choice of their Governours and Forms of Government All Kings receive their Royal Dignity from the Community by whom they are made the Superiour Minister and Ruler of the People Aristotle Cicero Augustin Fortescue and all other Politicians agree that Kingdoms and Common-wealths were existent before Kings for there must be a Kingdom and Society of Men to govern before there can be a King elected by them to govern them and those Kingdoms and Societies of Men had for the most part some Common Laws of their own free Choice by which they were governed before they had Kings which Laws they swore their Kings to observe before they would crown or admit them to the Government as is evident by the Coronation-Oaths of all Christian and Pagan Kings continued to this Day The Safety of the People is the Supreamest Law and what they by common Consent have Enacted only for the Publick Safety they may without any Obstacle alter when things require it by the like common Consent The lawful Power of making Laws to command whose Politick Societies of Men belongeth so properly unto the same intire Societies that for any Prince or Potentate of what kind soever upon Earth to exercise the same of himself and not by express Commission immediately and personally received from God or else by Authority derived at first from their Consent upon whose Persons they impose Laws it is no better than meer Tyranny Laws they are not therefore which Publick Approbation hath not made so Hooker's Eccl. Pol. l. 1. § 10. Whosoever says Aristotle is governed by a Man without a Law is governed by a Man and by a Beast As every Man in the delivery of the Gift of his own Goods may impose what Covenant or Condition he pleases and every Man is Moderator and Disposer of his own Estate So in the voluntary Institution of a King and Royal Power it is lawful for the People submitting themselves to prescribe the King and his Successors what Law they please so as it be not Unreasonable and Unjust and directly against the Rights of a Supream Governour No Man can be born an Absolute King no Man can be a King by himself no King can Reign without the People Whereas on the contrary the People may both be and are by themselves and are in Time before a King By which it appears that all Kings were and are constituted by the People because by the Law of Nature there is no Superiority one above another and God has no where commanded the World or any part thereof to be governed by this or that Form or by this or that Person therefore all Superiority and Authority must and does proceed from the People since by the Law of God and Nature there is no Superiority one above another Aristotle saith That the whole Kingdom City or Family is more excellent and to be preferred before any Part or Member thereof Succession was tolerated and appointed in the World to avoid Competition and Inter-regnum and other Inconveniences of Election 'T is plain from what hath been said that all Government proceeds from the People Now I will prove that they have Authority to put back the next Inheritors to Government when unfit or uncapable to Govern And also to dispossess them that are in lawful Possession if they fulfil not the Laws and Conditions by which and for which their Dignities were given them and when it is done upon just and urgent Causes and by Publick Authority of the whole Body the Justice thereof is plain as when the Prince shall endeavour to establish Idolatry contrary to the Laws of the Land or any Religion which is repugnant to the Scripture as Popery c. or to destroy the People or make them Slaves to his Tyrannical Will and Pleasure For as the whole Body is of more Authority than the Head and may cure it when out of order so may the Weal-Publick cure or purge their Heads when they are pernitious or destructive to the Body Politick seeing that a Body Civil may have divers Heads by Succession or Election and cannot be bound to one as a Body Natural is which Body Natural if it had Ability to cut off its aking or sickly Head and take another I doubt not but it would do it and that all Men would confess it had Authority sufficient and Reason so to do rather than the other Parts should perish or live in Pain and continual Torment So may the Body Politick chuse another Head and Governour in the room of its destructive One which hath been done for many Ages and God hath wonderfully concurred therein for the most part with such Judicial Acts of the Common-Wealth against their Evil Princes not only prospering the same but by giving them commonly some notable Successor in Place of the Deprived thereby both to justify the Fact and remedy the Fault of him that went before First King Saul was slain by the Philistines by God's Appointment for not fulfilling the Law and Limits prescribed unto him Ammon was lawful King also yet was he slain for that he walked not in the way prescribed him by God 2 King 21. and David and Josiah were made Kings in their rooms who were two most excellent Princes Shalum Pekahiah and Pekah three wicked and idolatrous Kings of Israel were by God's just Judgment slain one after another And all the Kings of Israel who violated the Covenant and Conditions annexed to their Crowns did for the most part lose their Lives and underwent the utter Extirpation of their Posterities from the Crown Rehoboham for only threatning to oppress the People was deserted by them who chose Jeroboham his Servant in his stead which was approved on by God If I should instance all

Death all those Tribes came to David and made a Compact with him for the performance of such Conditions which they thought necessary for the securing of their Liberty before they made him King 2 Sam. Chap. 2 3 4 5. The making of Solomon King by David his Father was not thought sufficient without the Peoples Consent else why did the People anoint Solomon and make him King the second time We read Judg. 8.21 22 23. that after Gideon had slain Zebah and Zalmunna with the Midianites the Children of Israel said unto Gideon Rule thou over us both thou and thy Sons and thy Sons Son also for thou hast delivered us from the Hand of Midian But he refusing their Offer they afterwards made his Bastard-Son Abimelech King though he had threescore and ten lawfully-begotten Sons Zimri having slain Baasha King of Israel reigned in his stead but the Children of Israel hearing thereof rejected him and made Omri the Captain of the Host King of Israel 1 Kings 16.15 16. The Kingdom of Edom appointed a Deputy to rule over them instead of a King and gave him Royal Authority there being then no King in Edom 1 Kings 22.47 See Macchab. 9.28 29 30. 13.8 9. 14.41 to 49. By which it is further apparent that their Kings and Governours were chosen by the People As propinquity of Blood is a great Preheminence towards the attaining of any Crown yet it doth not bind the Common-wealth to yield thereto and to admit at hap-hazard every one that is next by Succession of Blood as was falsly affirmed by R. L'estrange and many others when the Parliament would have disinherited the Duke of York as unfit to govern this Nation he being a Papist if weighty Reasons require the contrary because she is bound to consider well and maturely the Person that is to enter whether he be like to perform his Duty and Charge to be committed to him For to admit him that is an Enemy or unfit to govern is to consent to the destroying of the Common-wealth See how God dealt in this point with the Children of Israel 1 Sam. 8. after he had granted to them the same Government as the other Nations round about them had whose Kings did ordinarily reign by Succession as ours do at this day and as most of the Kings of the Jews did afterwards yet that this Law of succeeding by Proximity of Birth though for the most part it should prevail yet He shewed plainly that upon just Causes it might be altered as in the case of Saul who left behind him many Children yet not any of them succeeded him except Ishbosheth who was not his eldest Son who was anointed King by Abner the general Captain of that Nation to whom eleven Tribes followed until he was slain and then they chose David And Jonathan Saul's other Son so much praised in holy Scripture being slain in War his Son Mephibosheth did not succeed in the Crown though by Succession he had much greater Right to it than David God promised David that his Seed should reign for ever after him Yet we do not find this performed to any of his elder Sons nor to any of their Offspring but only to Solomon his younger and tenth Son Rehoboam the lawful Son and Heir of King Solomon coming to Shichem where all the People of Israel were assembled together for his Coronation and admission to the Crown for until that time he was not accounted true King who refusing to ease them of some heavy Impositions which they had received from his Father ten Tribes of the twelve refuse to admit him their King and chose Jeroboam his Servant and made him their lawful King and God allowed thereof for when Rehoboam had prepared an hundred and fourscore thousand chosen Men who were Warriours to reduce those ten Tribes to the Obedience of their Natural Prince God commanded them to desist by his Prophet Shemaiah and so they did These and the like Determinations of the People about admitting or refusing of Princes to reign or not to reign over them when their Designments are to good Ends and for just Causes are allowed by God and oftentimes are his own special Drifts and Dispositions though they seem to come from Man He who is set up or made King by the Consent of the People hath a just Title against the next Heir of the Blood and his Issue who are put by the Crown else most of the Princes now reigning in Europe would be Usurpers and want good Titles to their Crowns they or their Ancestors being set up by the People which were not the right Heirs of the Royal Stock The Laws of the Commonwealth is the very Soul of a Politick Body Kings and Emperors always have been are and ought to be subject to the Laws of their Kingdoms not above them to violate break or alter them at their pleasures they being obliged by their Coronation-Oaths in all Ages and Kingdoms inviolably to observe them for St. Paul saith A Prince is the Minister of God for the Peoples Good and Tribute and Custom are paid to him that he may continually attend thereto The Defence and Procuration of the Common-wealth is to be managed to the benefit of those who are committed not of those to whom it is committed A just Governour for the benefit of the People is more careful of the Publick Good and Welfare than of his own private Advantage Allegiance is nothing but Obedience according to Law which when the Prince violates he has no Right to Obedience There is a mutual Obligation between the King and People which whether it be only Civil or Natural tacit or in express Words can be taken away by no Agreements violated by no Law rescinded by no Force A Kingdom is nothing else but the mutual Stipulation between the People and their Kings The supream Authority of a Nation belongs to those who have the Legislative Authority reserved to them but not to those who have only the Executive which is plainly a Trust when it is separated from the Legislative Power and all Trusts by their Nature import That those to whom they are given are accountable though no such Condition is specified If the Subject may in no case resist then there can be no Law but the Will and Pleasure of the Prince for whoever must be opposed in nothing may do every thing then all our Laws signify no more than so many Cyphers And what are the Law-makers but so many Fools or Mad-men who give themselves trouble to no purpose For if the King is not obliged to govern by those Laws that they make to what purpose are the People to obey such Laws Whether another has Right to my Goods or if he demand them I have no Right to keep them is all one If the King sue me by pretence of Law and endeavour to take away my Money my House or my Land I may defend them by the Law but if he comes armed to take away

my Liberty Life and Religion which are mine by the Laws of God and Man may I not secure them with a good Conscience Every Man has a Right to preserve himself his Rights and Priviledges against him who has no Authority to invade them And this was the Case of Moses who seeing an Egyptian smiting an Hebrew he slew him And Samson made War upon the Philistines for burning his Wife and her Father who were both but private Persons who knew they could have no other kind of Justice against them but what the Law of Nature gives every Man We ought saith the Learned Junius Brutus in his Discourse of Government to consider that all Princes are born Men. We cannot therefore expect to have only perfect Princes but rather we ought to think it well with us if we have gained but indifferent ones therefore the Prince shall not presently be a Tyrant if he keep not measure in some things if now and then he obey not Reason if he more slowly seek the Publick Good if he be less diligent in administring Justice For seeing a Man is not set over Men as if he were some God as he is over Beasts but as he is a Man born in the same Condition with them as that Prince shall be proud who will abuse Men like Beasts so that People shall be unjust who shall seek a God in a Prince and a Divinity in this frail Nature But truly if he shall wilfully subvert the Republick if he shall wilfully pervert the Laws if he shall have no care of his Faith none of his Promises none of Justice none of Piety if himself become an Enemy of his People or shall use all or the chiefest Notes we have mentioned then verily he may be judged a Tyrant that is an Enemy of God and Men And by how much longer he is tolerated the more intolerable he becomes and they may act against him whatever they may use against a Tyrant either by Law or just Force Tyranny is not only a Crime but the Head and as it were the heap of all Crimes therefore is he so much the more wicked than any Thief Murtherer or sacrilegious Person by how much it is more grievous to offend many and all than particular Persons Now if all these be reputed Enemies if they be capitally punished if they suffer pains of Death can any invent a Punishment worthy so horrid a Crime The Laws are the Nerves and Sinews of Society and as the Magistrate is above the People so is the Law above the Magistrate or else there can be no Civil Society He who makes himself above all Law is no Member of a Common wealth but a meer Tyrant If a Magistrate notwithstanding all Laws made for the well-governing a Community will act plainly destructive to that Community they are discharged either from Active or Passive Obedience and indispensibly obliged by the Law of Nature to Resistance Is it not reasonable and just I should have a right to destroy him who threatens me with Destruction for by the Fundamental Law of Nature Man being to be preserved as much as possible when all cannot be preserved the Safety of the Innocent is to be preferred I say he who having renounced his Reason the common Rule and Measure God hath given to Mankind by endeavouring to destroy me is thereby become as a Beast of Prey and ought to be treated accordingly The Laws says Tully are above the Magistrates as the Magistrates are above the People He who is destructive to the Being of another hath quitted the Reason which God hath given to be the Rule betwixt Man and Man of Justice and Equity hath put himself into the State of War with the other and is as noxious as any savage Beast that seeks his Destruction No Man in Civil Society can be exempted from the Laws of it for if there be no Appeal on Earth for Redress or Security against any Mischief the Prince may do then every Man in that Society is in a State of Nature with him in respect of him Thucidides l. 2. saith Not only those are Tyrants who reduce others into Servitude but much rather those who when they may repulse that Violence take no care to do it but especially those who will be called the Defenders of Greece and the Common Country but yet help not their oppressed Country If a Man may be a Wolf to a Man nothing forbids but that a Man may be a God to a Man as it is in the Proverb Therefore Antiquity hath enrolled Hercules amongst the number of the Gods because he punished and tamed Procrustes Busyris and other Tyrants the Pests of Mankind and Monsters of the World So also the Roman Empire as long as it stood free was often called the Patrocine against the Robberies of Tyrants because the Senate was the Haven and Refuge of Kings People and Nations It is as lawful and more reasonable to prevent the overthrowing of our Religion Laws Rights and Priviledges from any Man or Men whatsoever amongst our selves as from a foreign Power because one acts contrary to the Laws of God and the Country and the other being not subject to the Laws of the Country can be no ways bound by it It was thought no Injustice in the Ship to cast out the Prophet when they found he was likely to prove the Wrack of them all and the Almighty shewed he approved of their Act by quieting the Storm when he was gone The Scripture that hath set us none but good Examples tells us That some Princes should not have one of their Race left that pisseth against the Wall Now what were their Faults but Idolatry and Oppression of their People Then how can it be a Sin in a Nation to free themselves from an idolatrous and oppressing King When it is done by the greatest and most considerable part thereof it does silently imply a Consent of God for it cannot be Covetousness or Ambition that moves such a Multitude When once the Christian Religion is become a part of the Subjects Property by the Laws and Constitutions of the Country then it is to be considered as one of their principal Rights and so may be defended as well as any other Civil Right since that those different Forms of Government that the Jews were under is no Rule for the Government of any Nation or People whatsoever The Principles of Natural Religion give those who are in Authority no Power at all but only secure them in the Possession of that which is theirs by the Laws of the Country That Cause is just which defends the Laws which protects the Common Good which shall preserve the Realm And that Cause is unjust which violates the Laws defends the Breakers of the Laws protects the Subverters of the Country That is just which will destroy Tyrannical Government that unjust which would abolish just Government that lawful which tends to the Publick Good that unlawful which tends to the Private

escaping fights Simon and kills him The Historians of those Times calls him not a Rebel or a Traytor but a Martyr for the Liberties of Church and State If Resistance be unlawful upon any Account whatsoever then were all those People guilty of Rebellion who in all Ages have resisted or turned out their Evil and Destructive Kings and Governours and then the Jews were guilty of this Sin for slaying and turning out several of their Kings without any appointment from God in Scripture So likewise the Primitive Christians did involve themselves under the Guilt of St. Paul's Damnation for resisting of their Kings and Emperors and likewise the Christians in all Ages since who have resisted their Princes by turning them out c. And then Bishop Athanasius Author of our Creed and those Christians with him did also come under the Guilt of St. Paul's Damnation for approving of Calaritanus's Book which according to the Doctrine of Passive Obedience was a Treasonable and Rebellious Book for the Incendiaries to Rebellion are as guilty as they that are actually in it And then all those Princes that have been set up by the People in the room of those whom they have turned out for their Evil Government were Usurpers and consequently all those who have succeeded them where the Descent of the Blood is altered are Intruders Usurpers and no lawful Kings Were the Doctrine of Passive Obedience without reserve a True Doctrine no doubt but we should have had a better Account thereof than from a few Court-Divines who have most learnedly interpreted the Will and Pleasure of the Prince against the Laws of Nature or of the Country to be the Powers which St. Paul requires Obedience unto under the pain of Damnation So by consequence the Law ceaseth to be the Powers then we are in a worse condition than in the State of Nature With what Face can any Man assert that Passive Obedience without reserve is the Doctrine of the Gospel which is charging God with as palpable a Contradiction as any two things can be it being diametrically opposite to the Law of Self-preservation which is the Law of Nature and the Decree of the Almighty which Law is Sacred and not to be infringed by any Man God never commanded any thing contrary to the Law of Nature unless it were in the Case of Abraham in commanding of him as a tryal of his Faith to offer up his Son Isaac Protection is the only cause of Allegiance and Obedience is plain from the Example of David and his six hundred Men who were protected from Saul and his Army by Achish King of the Philistines who gave them Ziklag to live in and David and his Men fought for the Philistines against the Geshurites Gezrites and the Amalekites and subdued them David owed no Allegiance to Saul who sought his destruction is plain for when Achish told David that he and his Men should go with him to fight against the Children of Israel David offered his service and said to Achish Surely thou shalt know what thy Servant can do Then Achish said unto David Therefore I will make thee keeper of my Head for ever So David and his Men went in the rear of the Army and when the Lords of the Philistines would not let David and his Men fight for them lest they should betray them into the hands of Saul and his Army then David expostulated with Achish and said What have I done and what hast thou found in thy Servant so long as I have been with thee unto this day that I may not go fight against the Enemies of my Lord the King 1 Sam. Chap. 27 28 29. This is a plain case that David intended to fight Saul and his Army Now the Intention of the Mind is as bad as the Act and yet it is no ways said that David repented thereof or of his arming the six hundred Men before mentioned with design to fight his lawful Soveraign King Saul The Primitive Christians took Protection to be the only cause of Allegiance For when Julian the Apostate was chosen Emperor of the Romans not by the free Consent of the People but by the Souldiers during the Life of Constantius the lawful Possessor of the Throne The Christians did not reckon themselves obliged to fight for Constantius against Julian for they troubled not their Heads with the Rights of Princes Augustus tho he had violently usurped the Throne yet he was confirmed in it by the People and Senate of Rome who established it in his Family by a long Prescription when St. Paul's and St. Peter's Epistles were wrote of Obedience to the Laws to Kings and Magistrates so that we see that Obedience was required to an Usurper under the pain of Damnation when the Government was confirmed to him by the People that is by the Majority for it cannot be thought by every Body consented thereto Apolonius Thyanaeus writing to the Emperor Domitian saith These things have I spoken concerning Laws which if thou shalt not think to reign over thee then thy self shalt not reign In Matrimony which is the nearest and strictest Obligation of all others by which those who were two are made one Flesh if one Party forsakes the other the Apostle pronounceth the Party forsaked to be free from all Obligation because the Party deserting violates the chief Conditions of Marriage c. 1 Cor. 7.15 And shall not the People be much more absolved from their Allegiance to that King who has violated his Oath and the Laws of the Land the very cause for which they swear Allegiance to him Absolute Monarchy is inconsistent with Civil Society and therefore can be no Form of Civil Government which is to remedy the Inconveniencies of the State of Nature No Man or Society of Men have Power to deliver up their Preservation or the Means of it to the absolute Will of any Man and they will have always a right to preserve what they have not Power to part with No power can exempt Princes from the Obligation to the Eternal Laws of God and Nature As no Body can transfer to another more Power than he has in himself and no Body has an Absolute Arbitrary Power over himself or over any other to destroy his own Life or take away the Life and Property of another therefore a Man cannot give such Authority to any or subject himself to the Arbitrary Power of another for the Law of Nature is an Eternal Rule to all Men whose Actions must be conformable to that Law which is the Will of God For the Fundamental Law of Nature being the Preservation of Mankind no human Law can be good or valid against it and much less the Will and Pleasure of a Prince against the Law and Custom of the Country which shall be prejudicial to the Subject As the Happiness and Prosperity of Kingdoms depend upon the Conservation of their Laws if the Laws depend upon the Lust of one Man would not the Kingdom

fall to ruin in a short space But the Laws are better and greater than Kings who are bound to obey them Then is it not better to obey the Laws rather than the King Who can obey the King violating the Law Who will or can refuse to give Aid to the Law when infringed It is impossible any Body in a Society should have a right to do the Community harm All Kings and Princes are and ought to be bound by the Laws and are not exempted from them and this Doctrine ought to be inculcated into the Minds of Princes from their Infancy Let the Prince be either from God or from Men yet to think that the World was created by God and in it Men that they should serve only for the benefit and use of Princes is an Absurdity as gross as can be spoken since God hath made us free and equal But Princes were ordained only for the Peoples benefit that so they might innocently preserve Human and Civil Society with greater Facility helping one the other with mutual Benefits In all Disputes between Power and Liberty Power must always be proved but Liberty proves it self the one being founded upon positive Law the other upon the Law of Nature With what Ignorance do some assert that Adam was an Absolute Monarch and that Paternal Authority is an Absolute Authority for that the Father of a Family governs by no other Law than by his own Will and the Father is not to be resisted by his Child and that Adam had a Monarchical Absolute Supream Paternal Power and that all Kingly Authority is a Fatherly Authority and therefore irresistable and that no Laws can bind the King or annul this Authority How could Adam be an Absolute Monarch when God gave him the Herbs but in common with the Beasts Gen. 1.29 30. Can it be thought that God gave him an Absolute Authority of Life and Death over Man who had not Authority to kill any Beast to satisfy his Hunger certainly he had no Absolute Dominion over even the Brutal part of the Creatures much less over Man who could not make that use of them as was permitted to Noah and his Sons Gen. 9.3 where God says Every moving thing that liveth shall be meat for you even as the green Herbs have I given you all things Is it not as reasonable to believe that God would have cursed Adam if he had killed his Son Abel as Cain for killing him Cain was very sensible every one had by the Law of Nature a right to kill him for being guilty of Blood when he said every one that found him should slay him Gen. 4.14 God made no exemption to the greatest Man living who should be guilty of innocent Blood when he said He that sheddeth Mans Blood by Man shall his Blood be shed Gen. 9.6 neither Noab or his Sons were exempted from this great Law and therefore could have no absolute Authority since God has no where given any Man such Authority there can be no such Authority for the Community cannot make themselves Slaves by investing such an Authority in any Man should they do it it is not binding it being against the Law of Nature If Noah was Heir to Adam I ask which of Noah's Sons was Heir to him for if by Right it descended to all his Sons then it must have descended to all their Sons and so on if so then are all Men become equal and independent as being the Off-spring of Adam and Noah If it descended only to the eldest and so on then there can be but one lawful Monarch in the World and who that is is impossible to be found out so that Paternal Monarchical Authority take it which way you will it comes to just nothing at all Where human Institution gives it not the First-born has no right at all above his Brethren No Man has an absolute Authority over the Creatures much less over Mankind because they were given for the use of all Men as occasion should serve should any Man or Men destroy them for their Will and Pleasure beyond what is necessary for the use of Man or for his Preservation it would be a Sin and therefore could be no Authority for God authorizes no Man to commit a Sin tho he often permits it The Law of God and Nature gives the Father no absolute Dominion over the Life Liberty or Estate of his Child and therefore he can have no absolute Authority and where there is no absolute Authority there can be no absolute Subjection due There is an eternal Obligation on Parents to nourish preserve and bring up their Off-spring and under these Circumstances Obedience is due and not otherwise What is a Father to a Child more than another Person when he endeavours to destroy him Nay is he not so much the more odious as the Act is more barbarous for a Father to endeavour to destroy his own Off-spring than for another Person endeavouring it certainly in such a case no Passive Obedience can be due it tending to his Destruction not for his Good which is no Fatherly Act and therefore not to be submitted to He that lets any Person whatsoever destroy him when it is in his power to preserve his Life by defending himself does tacitly consent to his own Death and therefore is guilty of his own Blood as well as he that destroys him Whereas by defending himself there can be but one guilty of Blood which is the Invader in which Defence if he kills the other his Blood lies at his own door By which it follows that Passive Obedience to unjust Violence is a Sin but resisting such Violence is no Sin but the Duty of every Man The first Duty that I owe is to God the second to my self in preserving my self c. the third to my Parent and Soveraign in obeying them in all things reasonable and lawful By all the Precepts in Scripture which require Obedience to Parents Homage and Obedience is as due to the one as to the other for 't is nowhere said Children obey your Father and no more the Mother is mentioned before the Father in Lev. 19.3 Ye shall fear every Man his Mother and his Father Sure Solomon was not ignorant what belonged to him as a King or a Father when he said My Son hear the Instructions of thy Father and forsake not the Law of thy Mother And our Saviour says Matth. 15.4 Honour thy Father and Mother And Ephes 6.1 Children obey your Parents c. If Paternal Authority be an absolute Authority I ask Whether it be in the eldest of the Family if so Whether a Grandfather can dispense with his Grand-Child's paying the Honour due to his Parents by the fifth Commandment 'T is evident in common Sense the Grandfather cannot discharge the Grand-Child from the Obedience due to his Parents neither can a Father dispense with his Child's Obedience due to the Laws of the Land therefore the Obedience required to Parents in Scripture