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
View all documents for the selected quad

Text snippets containing the quad

ID Title Author Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication) STC Words Pages
A61429 Important questions of state, law, justice and prudence both civil and religious, upon the late revolutions and present state of these nations / by Socrates Christianus. Stephens, Edward, d. 1706. 1689 (1689) Wing S5427; ESTC R228417 11,035 16

There are 2 snippets containing the selected quad. | View lemmatised text

and he is in effect only the Supream Officer and a kind of High Reeve of the Nation as the High Shire-reeve of the County who in many respects doth truly represent him And therefore because some have in our Age asserted such an Unaccountableness and Irresistibility in the King as is inconsistent with this Constitution and others from some Clauses and Declarations prescribed in some late Statutes passed soon after the Return of the late King Charles the Second may think themselves bound in Conscience to maintain the same it may be necessary to propose to their serious consideration some few Questions concerning those Clauses and the Oaths and Declarations prescribed in the Statutes of 12 13 14. Ch. 2. 1. WHether they who did take these Oaths and declare accordingly are thereby being only Declarative of their belief at that time and not promissary for the future obliged to persist in the same belief and act accordingly in all cases which may happen without further Inquiring or Examination of the Truth of that matter 2. Whether all or any of those Clauses or the Oaths prescribed in the Statutes aforesaid being all meerly Declarative and not Constitutive do or can make any real alteration in the Laws and in the very Constitution of the Government from what they were before 3. Whether the vulgar sense of those Clauses Oaths and Declarations be not inconsistant with the Natural and Original Right of Mankind to defend and maintain their Rights the special Constitution of the English Government the frequent Practice of English Parliaments and known Principles of Law allowed at this day be not contrary to the Sentiments and Practices of most Nations of this part of the World to the Judgment and Practice of divers Reformed Churches upon great deliberation in their own Case and of Queen Elizabeth King James c. and the State of England in their Assistance to other People oppressed by their Kings and their Ministers and of dangerous Consequences both to Prince and People disposing Princes with more Liberty to transgress the Laws and exposing innocent People if they believe it to oppression by them if not to Wars and Contention with them for the maintenance of their Right and therefore the Clauses and Declarations aforesaid to be either wholly rejected as false or else accommodated with some better and more convenient sense and Explication as that which no Man will deny That neither the King nor his Ministers acting according to Law may be resisted upon any Pretence whatsoever And it may deserve some Considerations 4. Whether considering the Time when these Statutes were made the ambiguous Terms in which the Declarations are drawn neither restraining them to Lawful Actions and Commssions because that would not serve the turn nor expresly extending to Unlawful because that was not likely to pass the Activity and cunning Insinuation of the Romish Emissaries and their real Interest to have the Government absolute in one governable Prince rather than subject to the Counsels and Resolves of an untractable Parliament and the Tricks which they have since imposed upon us it be not likely that in these as well as some other Statutes about and since that time there may not be some of their Projects craftily intermixed and unperceived in the transport the Nation was then in and the rather if the late late King Charles the Second had before that time entred into their Communion as is now believed And because in these things many well-meaning people may be imposed upon not only by the Authority of men whose Judgments may be byassed by Prospect of Favour and Advantage but also by Ambiguity of words as King Absolute Imperial it may be fit to note that the word King doth not necessarily import more than one having Supreme Executive power to govern according to Laws as the King of England certainly hath though the Parliament may judge whether he doth so or no. So that if any claim more that is to be prov'd from the special Constitution of the Government So the word Absolute when that is attributed to the Kings of England it is to be understood not in respect of Laws but of Tenure They hold not of Pope Emperor or any other person or State And in like manner the word Imperial when used of the Crown of England it imports no more than that it is not held of any other Crown II. Question of Law Justice and Prudence upon the Matter of Fact before related 1. WHether the Matter of Fact before related doth not contain divers very high deliberate and resolved Violations of the Laws and Constitution and tending directly and manifestly to the Subversion of the true and ancient Government of this Nation and be not good Evidence and a plain Declaration that the said King James did certainly design and endeavour the Subversion thereof and to make it Arbitrary and was therefore an Enemy to it 2. Whether all this being done at the instigation of the Papists and in favour of their Religion which obligeth them all both Prince and People to use their utmost endeavour for the Extirpation of Hereticks be not also good Evidence and an open Declaration notwithstanding their pretence of Liberty of Conscience that he was also an Enemy to the Religion and People of this Nation being Protestants and by the Pope and his party reputed and condemned for Hereticks 3. Whether the said King James having assumed to himself a power of Suspending and dispensing with the Laws and thereby invaded the Rights of the Lords and Commons and thereby and by many other open Acts declared himself an Enemy to the Government Religion and people of this Nation which are things inconsistent with the Ends and Being of Government and Civil Society and all this contrary to his Solemn Coronation Oath and through the perswasion and instigation of Jesuits and others notoriously guilty by the Laws of High Treason hath not thereby demonstrated himself incapable of the Government of this Nation and not to be further intrusted therewith and therefore 4. Whether the Prince of Orange his Coming in to preserve and maintain the Right of the Princess and himself and to defend and protect an Innocent people in the Legal enjoyment of their Religion Rights and Liberties from Violence Oppression and Destruction designed and prepared as is believed against them contrary to the Laws as Queen Elizabeth and the people of this Nation had heretofore done for his Ancestors and Countrey be not justifiable by the Laws of God and man 5. Whether the Lords Gentlemen and others of this Nation who in this case for the preservation of themselves and their Country invited the Prince to come in or after his coming entred into the Association with him for the Ends aforesaid did any thing therein but what was necessary just and lawful by the Laws of God and Man the Constitution of this Government and many precedents in this Kingdom 6. Whether the Officers and Souldiers who had
and deceitful in matters of Policy hath not just cause to suspect that it may be so also in matters of Religion and thereupon now at his Leisure to retire into some convenient place of Freedom and there to take a farther and impartial Examination whether it be not so indeed This may possibly be done effectually by well weighing but of two Considerations of great Importance and yet of no great Intricacy the one concerning the Head of their Church the other concerning the Body of their Religion and the nature and Tendency of it compared with the nature and Tendency of the Genuine Christian Religion First Whether all that special Authority and Power which the Bishops of Rome have so long claimed and exercised as peculiar to themselves and derived from Christ by St. Peter be not a gross Imposture As it needs must be if either no special Authority was ever either given or promised by Christ to St. Peter or exercised or claimed by him more than what was given by Christ to all his Apostles John 20.19 23. Mark 16.15 or exercised by them or no special Authority was ever conveyed by St. Peter to the Church or Bishops of Rome more than to any other Church or Bishop which he Founded and Instituted And besides their defect of Proof which lyeth upon them to make out in the one from the Scripture and in the other from good Authority there are two things of great weight against them First That the ancient Bishops of Rome claimed no special Authority peculiar to themselves but by other and inferiour Title and what was much less than they now claim Secondly That there was very gross Imposture and Forgery used for the introducing and promoting of this pretended Authority And if this Pillar of their Church fall the other their pretended Infallibility must by consequence fall with it And of this Subject may be Read Dr. Barrow of the Supremacy with Dr. Cave of the ancient Government of the Church Secondly Whether all that which is properly called Popery be not such another Corruption of the genuine Christian Religion by humane inventions influenced by the subtilty of Satan as was that of the Law of Moses by the Scribes and Pharisees at the time of the coming of our Saviour and directly tending to oppose enervate and affront the same This may easily be perceived by comparing the essential parts of the Christian Religion with the opposite Corruptions of Popery and the Tendency of each As 1. The Example of the Heads Christ and his Apostles with that of the Pope and his Cardinals 2. The Doctrine 3. The Worship 4. The Discipline 5. The Means of Propagation c. And to this purpose may be read Dr. Moor's Mystery of Iniquity and a little Tract call'd the Mystery of Iniquity Unvailed Written by Mr. Allen but Printed without his Name 2. Whether if upon such farther Examination it should please God to open his Eyes and give him a clear sight of his Errors and of the Evils he hath committed as well as those he hath brought upon himself it will not be his Duty and his Wisdom immediately thereupon to apply himself to do the part of a true Penitent indeed to humble himself give Glory to God by Confessing and Lamenting his Sins acknowledging the Justice of his Judgments and accepting his Punishment be content with a retired penitent Life and thereby as a part of Restitution endeavour the Peace of these Nations which he hath so much disturbed not giving any farther disturbance himself or encouraging any discontented erson but abandoning all Colour and pretence for any such Matter This would certainly prove his direct way to Happiness hereafter and possibly to greater Happiness even here than he could ever have enjoyed amidst the Distractions of the Government of three Kingdoms And all real Happiness I heartily wish him both here and hereafter 3. Whether it may not be fit notwithstanding he may not be further trusted with the Government of these Nations upon the Consideration of Humanity to treat him with Pity Civility and Respect and a Competent Annual Allowance yet such as may not by good Husbandry become in time a means of New Disturbance and upon Condition that he do peaceably retire to some remote parts as Italy or the like and continue there or at that distance without further trouble to these Nations or himself FINIS