Selected quad for the lemma: authority_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
authority_n	king_n	law_n	person_n	8,134	5	5.4280	4	true

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A34536	An enquiry into the oath required of non-conformists by an act made at Oxford wherein the true meaning of it, and the warrantableness of taking it, is considered / by John Corbett ...	Corbet, John, 1620-1680.	1682 (1682)	Wing C6254; ESTC R5701	7,310	22

AN ENQUIRY INTO THE OATH Required OF Non-Conformists By an ACT Made at OXFORD Wherein the True Meaning of IT and the Warrantableness of Taking it is Considered By JOHN CORBETT late Minister at Chichester LONDON Printed for Tho. Parkhurst at the Bible and three Crowns in Cheapside near Mercers Chappel 1682. An ENQUIRY into the OATH Required of NON-CONFORMISTS By an ACT made at OXFORD The OATH I A. B. do Swear that it is not Lawful upon any pretence whatsoever to take Arms against the King and that I do abhor that Traiterous Position of taking Arms by his Authority against his Person or against those that are Commissionated by him in pursuance of such Commissions and that I will not at any time endeavour any Alteration of Government either in Church or State THE Interpretation of the Oath here given is not peremptorily determined but probably concluded and humbly proposed by the Inquirer to men of sober and Impartial Judgment in order to the clearing of his own Judgment and the settling of his own Conscience about this important Matter In Considering the Warrantableness of taking this Oath these two main things do necessarily come under consideration I. Whether the words do signifie a just and good meaning according to a Rational Interpretation II. Whether such just and good meaning was the very meaning of the Law-makers in the Enacting of this form of Words The First Inquiry is whether the Words do signifie a just and good meaning according to a Rational interpretation Now in the way of Rational Interpretation these things are to Observed 1. We must proceed no otherwise than the Words will bear in their ordinary signification For Words as taken in their common use are the first and most noted means of signifying the Mind of those that use them Therefore to force upon them a sense in it self Rational enough which is Alien from their ordinary signification is indeed Irrational 2. A Meaning which the Words taken by themselves may bear may not be rigidly insisted on against the intent of the Law For the Words of a Law are many times more rigorous than the intent nevertheless they are but subservient to it and may not be urged to the perverting of it 3. It is Rational to Interpret a Law if the Words will bear it in a sense agreeable to right Reason and Equity For by the Reverence that is due to Governours we are forbidden to put upon their Acts a sense repugnant to Reason and Equity unless that repugnancy be apparent 4. It is Rational to consider this Law not by it self alone but as it is a Law of this Realm and in Conjunctionwith the other Laws there of and consequently to interpret it farre as the Words will bear in a sense consistent with the constitution of the Realm and with the other Laws and with the ordinary legal Practice For the Law-makers must not be supposed to enact things inconsistent unless the inconsistency be manifest In this way of proceeding I come to consider the just and good meaning which the words of the injoyned do admit The First Part of the OATH I do Swear that it is not Lawful upon any pretence whatsoever to take Arms against the King IN this part these or the like words I do hold or I do believe are necessarily and evidently to be understood For the thing that the Law seeks or aimes at is not the truth of the Proposition which is presupposed but the discovery of the swearers Judgment concerning it This may further appear from some other Act where the said Words are expressed in the like imposition I Swear that I hold it unlawful to take Arms against the King As for these words upon any pretence whatsoever they signifie no less than upon any cause or in any case whatsoever so that this Tenet as I apprehend is sworn to without any restriction or limitation But then it must be considered that these Words to take Arms against the King must be taken in their due and legal sense and so taken they import the resisting of the Soveraign Authority or the power ordained of God which is not Lawful upon any pretence whatsoever I know it is objected that some of the most eminent Assertors of the power of Princes as Grotius ` Barclay c. have Restrictions and Cases of Exception in this Point But I conceive that the objected Cases of Exception delivered by them are not properly Restrictions laid upon the Tenet but Explanations of its meaning that their Readers may not mistake some for delinquents against it who indeed are not such according to their Judgement The design of this part of the Oath is to Renounce all Rebellion and all resistance contrary to due Subjection as not to be justified upon any Cause or in any Case that may come to pass And its due legal meaning is Rationally conceived to be That it is not Lawful upon any pretence whatsoever for any of the King's Majesties Subjects to take Arms against his Person or Authority or any of his Rights and Dignities The Second Part of the OATH And that I do abhorre that Traiterous Position of taking Arms by his Authority against his Person or against those that are Commissionated by him in pursuance of such Commissions THE Position of taking Arms by the Kings Authority against his Person is justly to be disclaimed Though the King's Person and his Authority be distinct yet they are not separate The King's Authority is inherent in his Person and in no other Though it be exercised by an other during his Natural incapacity as in his infancy yet his Person alone is the proper Seat and Subject of it and that other exerciseth it only in his Name and as his Vicegerent Indeed sometimes an inferiour Authority as that of a Judge or Justice of Peace or Constable is called the King's Authority but in proper signification it is no more than the Authority of the said Officers derived from the King as the Fountain thereof Now it is most absurdly spoken or imagined that the King's Authority which is inherent in his Person only can be exerted in taking Arms against his Person Likewise it is as absurdly spoken or imagined that an Authority inherent in an other but derived from the King and dependent on him should be so exerted The following Words or against those that are Commissionated by him are most Rationally understood of those that are Legally Commissionated by him Likewise by pursuance of such Commissions is meant Legal Pursuance It cannot reasonably be supposed that a Law on the behalf of Persons Commissionated doth intend any other than such as are Commissionated not against but according to Law A Commission against Law is no Commission Wherefore Commissionated in this place is of the same import with authorized The Third Part of the OATH That I will not at any time endeavour any Alteration of Government either in Church or State I Confess that these Words I will

that the generality or Majority of them intended to bind men by Oath from lawfully endeavouring in their places such Changes about particular Laws or Canons as they themselves ordinarily make in their Places by Voting in Parliament and some of them being Clergy-men by Voting in Convocation Or can it Rationally be supposed that they intended to bind only one sort of men called Non-conformists from lawful endeavours of the publick good while others were left free If it be Objected that Law-makers may in some particular Law have a meaning repugnant to Equity and to the Ordinary Course of Law and legal Practice my answer is that the Reverence and Charity which is due to our Superiours forbids us to conceive that they have such a meaning unless we be compell'd to it by convincing Reason Now we are not compell'd to conceive thus by the Words of the Oath for they carry it fairly for a very good meaning nor by the Scope of the Law which is expresly declared to prevent the distilling of the Principles of Schism and Rebellion into the hearts of his Majesties Subjects nor yet by any publick or open Act of the Law-Makers Have the Majority of them as so many single Persons severally declared such a meaning as is suggested in the Objection Or can it reasonably be imagined that they would ever so declare Or is there any other Evidence or convincing Reason to be produced for it The Will of the Lawgiver which the Subjects are bound to take notice of is that which is so publick and open that they may be inform'd of it if they be not culpably negligent But if any shall imagine him to have a private Will or Aim in the contrivance of a Law different from his publick and open Will and meaning the Subjects are not concerned therein because it is not the Law or Will of the Lawgiver as such For a Law is the Will of the Governour not as meerly existent but as declared Wherefore touching this Oath that which the Subjects are concerned in is to know what is the apparent or sufficiently declared meaning of the Law-makers therein and that the same is Just and Good Being it is further noted that it is no more than the meaning of the Law-makers expressed in the Words of the Oath touching two general Positions and a general promise that is sworn unto in the taking thereof In the first part of this Oath the Person upon whom it is imposed is called to swear this general Tenet according to the true intent of the Words That it is not lawful upon any pretence whatsoever to take Arms against the King but not that this or that case is a taking Arms against the King which is not signified by this Oath but by the Law and State of this Kingdom In the second Part he is called to abjure the general Position of taking Arms by the King's Authority against his Person or those that are commissionated by him according to his Laws But who are Commissionated according to Law and who are not is not signified by this Oath but by the Law of this Kingdom Likewise in the third Part he is called to make this General promise upon Oath that he will not at any time endeavour any Alteration of Government either in Church or State by any unlawful means But what means are unlawful and what are not is not signified by this Oath but by the Law and Constitution of this Kingdom And it behoves him in all particular Cases that may come under the said Generals to judge and act as the said Law and Constitution doth determine I have used the best of my Understanding in this Inquiry and I should not thus labour in it were it not my own concernment What I can discern thereof I have impartially set down yet if any thing here written should be found Erroneous I disclaim and revoke it The issue of the whole disquisition is to propose it to the Consideration of Sober Judicious and Unprejudiced Persons whether the full meaning of the prescribed Oath be not expressed in this more explicate from here following I Do Swear that I do believe that it is not Lawful upon any pretence whatsoever for any of the King's Majesties Subjects to take Arms against his Person or Authority or any of his Rights and Dignities And that I do abhor the Traiterous Position of taking Arms by his Authority against his Person or against those that are Legally Commissionated by him in the Legal pursuance of such Commissions And that I will not at any time endeavour any Alteration of Government either in Church or State by Rebellion Sedition or any other means forbidden or not Warranted by Law It is the Duty of a Subject to give due security for his Loyalty to the King and his Government And it is the Property of one that feareth God to fear an Oath I think I have set forth the true intent and meaning of the Oath and I do not see how it can be reasonably taken otherwise Nevertheless in the matter here discussed I am unavoidably timorous and therefore have published this Inquiry to the intent that if I be in the right I may be confirmed in it by the sufficient Testimony of others but in Case I have misunderstood it that I may be better informed and set Right My design is to expedite my self and others concern'd in the taking of this Oath from groundless scrupulosity yet I would not encourage my self or others to take it in a wrong meaning If I take it it must be in the sense before given which I think is a full renouncing of those Principles of Schism and Rebellion against which this Law designs to secure the Government FINIS Several Tracts not yet Printed prepared for the Press and left under Mr. John Corbett's own hand-writing intended shortly to be Published are as follows 1. MAtrimonial Purity 2. An Humble endeavour of some plain and brief Explication of the Decrees and Operations of God about the free Actions of Men. More especially of the Operations of Divine Grace 3. A Discourse of the Church and of the Ministry thereof 4. A Tract of Certainty and Infallibility 5. Of Divine Worship in three Parts 1. Of the Nature Kinds Parts and Adjuncts of Divine Worship 2. Of Idolatry 3. Of Superstition less than Idolatry 6. The true State of the Ancient Episcopacy 7. The present Ecclesiastical Government compared with the Ancient Episcopacy 8. A Consideration of the present State of Conformity in the Church of England 9. An Account of his and other's Judgment and Practice and their Vindication against Mis-representations made of them and Hearty desire of Unity in the Church and of Peace and Concord among all true Protestants for the strengthening of their Common Interest in this time of Danger With his Judgment as to Communion with Parish Churches in the Worship of God 10. His Humble Representation of his Case touching the Exercise of his Ministry 11. Discourses between Dr. Gunning late Bishop of Chichester and himself wherein are several Humble Defences made both as to his Principles and Practice