Selected quad for the lemma: book_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
book_n	king_n	see_v	write_v	3,386	5	5.6121	4	true

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A25327	The Anatomy of a Jacobite-Tory in a dialogue between Whig and Tory : occasioned by the Act for recognizing King William and Queen Mary.		1690 (1690)	Wing A3053; ESTC R22595	20,621	38

least you must grant me that our Clergy do and tho' numbers of them believe King James his Right to continue and mean him when they Pray for the King yet they make no seruple of taking the Oath to this King and Queen W. Can you blame them By this Craft they keep their Livings But the Question is not what either they or you understand but what you do T. I find you have never read the Reasons why the Rector of P. Vid. Reasons why the Rector of P. took the Oath took the Oath of Allegiance to King William and Queen Mary W. Yes I have and by a very good Token I remember that he labours to prove Pag. 2. with the subtilty of a School-man that notwithstanding his Oath to this King and Queen he has not put himself out of a Capacity to perform what he swore to the last T. Right And what think you of that W. Before I tell you my thoughts I must Remark upon one Artifice of his In the Oath of Allegiance to the late King he swore to Defend him against all Conspiracies and Attempts whatsoever which he cunningly turns into Contempts that is says he That we will assert him to be our Rightful and Soveraign Prince not to hold his Crown by favour of the Pope nor to be deposable by him or any other person or power whatsoever But the unhappiness is the Discovery of this Cheat opens the Contradiction T. For my part I do not see where it lies W. Suppose for once that the Allegiance which you have sworn to King William did not Oblige you according to the sense of the Common-Law or that the Common-Law-sense did not import Active Assistance Yet you see if King James still remains your King you are bound to Defend him against all Attempts even such as may be made by this King to whom you have sworn to be true and faithful T. I see it is of good use that it should be Contempts instead of Attempts and I will believe the Vechum Saterdotis before a statute-Statute-Book W. Methinks your Priest seems by his Equitocations to be one of the Romish Cut. T. I find your usual Malice against the Church pray profane not the Sacred Order W. I see he is resolved not to be depriv'd from his Office or Order for not swallowing an Oath but such Men would do well to maintain their Character by not going beyond their Office I wish the witty Author of the Grounds of the Contempt of the Clergy would exercise his Talent on this Subject But what think you of this Opinion of Treasons and Traiterous Conspiracies T. I like it very well 't is an Opinion one may thrive by and it qualifies me for being privy to King William's Secrets without danger of being thought to lie under an Obligation to discover them because he is in actual War with King James and his Designs against our rightful King cannot be Treason or Traiterous W. If King William could carry on the War alone indeed it were something but it must be managed by many hands Orders must issue out through several Offices the Ministers of State must have Meetings and private Debates all these it seems you are bound to discover T. Yes why not I am true and faithful to King William since I discover nothing which I have from his own mouth But we are bound to observe the Meetings and Cabals of King James his Subjects Rector p. 3. dive as much as we may into the matter of their Consults use all diligence first to inform our selves and then the King or his Officers of any Plot or Practice that we shall learn to be carrying on against him W. You well know of many carrying on against this King his Crown and Dignity are you true and faithful in not discovering them T. I am not bound to speak all the truth I know W. But if you know of any Treasonable Conspiracy against the Life of this King or his Government you are guilty of Misprision of Treason at Common-Law if you do not discover it but the concealing could not be a Crime if the discovery were not a Duty and if it be a Duty it is implied in swearing Allegiance and by consequence the acting contrary to that Legal Obligation is Perjury T. You would Perjure half the Nation W. No I would have all swear without Perjury but your own Casuist condemns you of wilful Perjury T. I can find nothing like it in that Golden Apology of the Rector of P. W. What think you of this Speaking of his Apology Rector of P. It concerns not says he those who have enjoyed any Offices or places of Trust under him who are hereby bound faithfully to discharge the Duty and Service belonging to them and such if they should enter into any new Covenant or promise to cease or forbear acting according to the tenour of such Trust or Commission have no benefit of this Apology T. I see now the Parson is a Rogue he would have none but Clergy-men gain by a Government which they disown he shall no longer have the guidance of my Conscience but I will betake my self to the Reverend Dr. VV. VV. Do you mean that learned Divine of our Church who wrote the First Part of the Protestant Reconciler T. No I mean him that wrote the Second for the first is as if it had never been he having retracted it as too favourable to the Schism which he clawed off in his Preface to the second Part by way of Penance for his former and his endeavour to widen the terms of Communion and let the Rabble into the Church VV. Well for once you shall chuse your Weapon but what is it you would prove out of him T. I will prove that you ought to be hang'd W. Nay God be thanked you have done enough to deserve that if the late King should come again nor can you expect to be trusted by him But what further would you prove out of Dr. VV. T. I will prove that admit I should know of Traiterous Conspiracies against this King I should not before God be guilty of Misprision or concealing of Treason W. You must have some very subtle distinction to help you off T. You must understand that as there is a King in Fact and a King of Right so there is Treason nominal or so call'd and Treason real but there cannot be real Treason against a King only in Fact at least not such as I shall incur Damnation for Confiderations humbly offered for taking the Oath p. 57. That which we translate Damnation in the Original is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is Judgment Now by our Law Treason may be committed against a King de facto and that is punishable by the judgment of Death it therefore may be Judgment to resist the King de facto in favour of the King de jure i. e. it may be an Offence which by the Law will render me

obnoxious to Judgment W. If you are strong enough then that you may prudenly venture for your King de jure you do but your Duty T. Very true W. I fear by the sense which you put upon 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 you give all Subjects the like liberty even against a King of Right T. No Pag. 45. they shall receive Damnation who resist the present Powers which by the Law are such however they demean themselves in the Government W. Before you are aware you will make the Powers the Apostle speaks of to relate only to them that are Lawful and if they are unlawful either in the exercise or acquisition it seems the Apostle takes no care of them But by what Rule do you make 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to signifie Damnation when applied to resisting a King of Right and only Temporal Judgment when applied to the other tho' he acts beyond the Power which God or Man had entrusted him with T. Because one is by Law and the other not W. You mean one had some Power by Law the other none but still that Power which he exercised beyond the Law was none in the Eye of the Law and either 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is threatned only against resisters of a lawful Power or whether the Power be lawful or unlawful resistance is in all cases damnable T. I am sure 't is at least Damnation to resist him that has the Right W. Yes to that Power which he exercises But by what Law will you judge which has the Right or what that Right is T. By God's Law for this is a Divine Right W. Do you mean that God has ascertain'd not only the Rights of Princes but appointed the very Persons T. I mean as Dr. Hicks means Preface to Jovian p. 54. who tells us God hath given the Crown to the Royal Family for a perpetual Inheritance and hath by his Providence ordained that it should come to one of them after the decease of another according to Birth-right and proximity of Blood W. If the Doctor had considered the broken Succession he would never have argued thus from Providence for if as it will appear upon an exact enquiry more have come to the Throne out of the course than according to proximity of Blood Then all that can be inferr'd from this rectified by the true History is that God has in his Providence given it to a Family but not tied it to the next in Blood and by consequence King William and Queen Mary are our Rightful King and Queen T. You don't consider what Prejudice you do His Majesty by detaining me so long W. I should hope to do King William good Service if I could bring you to a due sense of the Obligation of the Oath which you have taken to him and since Dr. W. is a Judge which you have chosen I must refer you to his Preface for what may give you full satisfaction T. I am for the Book rather than the Preface for as the Preface to his Second Part of the Brotestant Reconciler was written after he had smarted for his Officiousness perhaps the last was written when some prosperous Accident to King William made him lay aside those Niceties with which men were to pretend to merit on both sides and perhaps he may be of the same mind with those prudent Divines of the North who were going in a full body to take the Oath of Allegiance but made an halt upon a Report of Major-General Mackay's being defeated in Scotland W. That may be but in his Preface he says P●eface to Consid He does by no means condemn those Writings which plead for taking the imposed Oath upon such grounds as do more fully justifie the title of our present Governours And is so modest to own that he has not knowledge enough in the Law to pass an exact Judgment in that matter T. Then it seems he turns us off to the Lawyers and makes no determination in the point W. Tho' he pretends not to Law Preface to Consid he produces Evidences out of History to shew that VVilliam I. was received upon an Election and Compact that the keeping St. Edward's Laws was part of the Bargain that this became part of the Coronation-Oath of our Kings And that our Learned King James the First declared in a Speech to his Parliament That he was bound to observe that Paction made to his People by his Laws in framing his Government agreeable thereto And therefore a King governing in a setled Kingdom leaves to be King and degenerates into a Tyrant as soon as he leaves off to Rule according to his Law T. King James you know was a timorous Prince and full of Dissimulation no doubt he thought to wheadle his people into something which might insensibly give him that power which he disclaimed But for Dr. W. I doubt he is of Republican Principles he would never else talk of a Compact between Prince and People W. What if you should find the same thing in the Author of the History of Passive Obedience T. That is impossible W. Does he not excuse Bishop Bilson for justifying the Revolt of the Low-Countries from the King of Spain Hist of Passive Obedience First Part p. 27. upon supposition that the Government in the Low-Countries was founded in Compact This you cannot but remember that he does and therein admits that some Governments may be so founded T. But the Second part of that History shews Second Part p. 72. that Bishop Bilson is wilfully mistaken and that what he says relates only to such Republicks and States in which upon the Invasion of Subject's Priviledges they are allowed by fundamental written known Compact as in Germany by the Bulla Aurea to resist as if that were applicable to Free Monarchies and particularly England contrary to his own express Assertion That the Subjects of England have not that warrant to draw their Sword without consent of their Prince Bilson p. 518 519. where he says he proves it at large W. I am satisfied no Prince will consent it should be drawn against himself but I take St. Edward's Law which shews that a King of England may cease to be King upon his violating his Coronation Oath of which the maintaining that is part to be as full a Compact as the Golden Bull. And Jasper Main one of the Historian's Authors admits that the Instances of the Cases of E. 2. and R. 2. may be proper if any Original Compact can be produced where 't is agreed that where the King ceases to govern according to Law he shall for such misgovernment cease to be King Besides if Bishop Bilson lays down any general Rule for resisting in all Monarchies not absolutely despotick 't will be hard for you to prove that England is to be excepted till you produce Bishop Bilson's own words without taking that Historian's Judgment who refers you to Passages where he will have his Assertion in relation