Selected quad for the lemma: book_n
Text snippets containing the quad
|
ID |
Title |
Author |
Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication) |
STC |
Words |
Pages |
|
A57717
|
An Enquiry after further satisfaction concerning obeying a change of government beleeved to be unlawfull Tendred to the Presbyterian proposer, by way of reply to his book intituled; The lawfulnesse of obeying the present government. By a dissenting brother
|
|
1649
(1649)
|
Wing R2042_CANCELLED; Wing I209D; Thomason E556_24; ESTC R17423
|
7,710
|
14
|
give up their consent This Romulus did institute as the great councell a Senate consisting of 100 men Which number afterwards encreased The power of the Senate to confirme a supreame Governour may be proved out of Livius and other authors And that Nero had the consent of the Senate is cleere by what the proposer p. 3. cites out of Tacitus in these words The Sentence of the Souldiers was followed with the consent of the Senate and then it was not scrupled in the provinces And that Claudius had also the consent of the Senate may be gathered out of approved authors and is not denyed by the proposer I say then that though the Souldiers could not give them a legall title yet the Senate both could and did That an unlawfull means and a legall title may meet together I shall illustrate by a similitude in an other kind The Usurer lends a man 100 pound and has his bond for the principal and 8 pound interest the borrower dyes the Executor may pay that 8 pound above the principal because though the Usurer hath not a morall right to that 8 l. by lending upon usury yet he hath a legall title to it by the bond of the deceased So he that by usurpation encroaches upon a Crowne if besides this he gaines also a legall title may be obayed upon that legall title though not upon the ground of Usurpation To this purpose is that De jure Magistratuum p. 22. vitium quod ab initio usurpationi inerat potest postea emendari adeo ut qui ab initio tyrannus fuit possit legitimus et inviolabilis magistratus offici si videlicet postea liber et legitimus accesserit eorum consensus qui verum et legitimum magistratum creare et constituere possunt The like answer to what I have given to that text Rom 13 doth Mr. Burroughs give to Dr. Ferne his words are these p. 7. The apostle requires them not to resist their power their {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} he doth not charge them not to resist their Tyranny Certainly they could have no power but that which was given them by some agreement if they challengd further it was no authority at all And afterward p. 8. what they got and held meerely by force without any consent or agreement was no power no authority at all but might be resisted notwithstanding that prohibition From the Scripture argument the proposer passes to historicall observasions about the interruption of lineall succession to the Crowne in England To which I might Answer that a facto ad jus non valet argumentum Whatsoever title others have had in former ages if the title since be cleere wee neede not trouble our selves with those observations which the proposer sayes Learned men and states-men have been ignorant of I shall therefore here only cite some passages out of a parliamentary acknowledgment Anno 1. Iacobi Regis Your most humble and loyall Subjects the Lords spirituall and temporall and the Commons in this present Parliament assembled in most humble and lowly manner doe beseech your most Excellent Majesty that as a memoriall to all posterities amongst the records of your high court of Parliament for ever to endure of our loyalty obedience and hearty humble affection it may be published and declared in this high court of Parliament and enacted by authority of the same that wee being bounden thereunto both by the lawes of God and Man doe recognize and acknowledge that immediately upon the dissolution and decease of Elizabeth late Queene of England the imperiall Crown of the realme of England and of all the Kingdomes Dominions and rights belonging to the same did by inherent birthright and lawful and undoubted succession descend and come to your most Excellent Majesty as being lineally justly and lawfully next and sole heir of the blood royall of this realme as is aforesaid and that by the goodnesse of God almighty and lawfull right of descent under one imperiall Crowne your Majesty is of the Kingdomes of England c. King And thereunto we most humbly and faithfully do submit and obleige our selves our heirs and posterities for ever untill the last drop of our blouds be spent And doe beseech your Majesty to accept the same as the first frnits in this high court of Parliament of our loyaltie and faith to your Majesty and your Royall Progeny and Posterity for ever The Proposer likewise cites the judgement of a few divines and casuists for obeying the commands of an Vsurper And I beleeve those that abound with books may meet with far more of the contrary judgement But because our faith must not stand in the wisdome of men and we are upon a case of conscience wherein the opinions of men are of smal weight I judge it superfluous to multiply Authors take therefore only 2. for a tast Mr. Burroughs answer to Dr. Ferne p. 7. there is no body here that yet hath attempted to take any power away from the King that law hath given him Howsoever the point of inheritance of conquest can not hinder for first none inherits but that which his Progenitors had and his Progenitors had no more originally then by eonsent was given them therefore the difference between Kings by Inheritance and Kings by election in this case is not much And for conquest that only settles former right or makes way to some farther agreement to adde to what was former the right comes not from power to conquer or act of conquering but from some agreement precedent or consequent de jure Magistratuum p. 27. is qui alienos invadit nullo modo sibi subditos et si cupiat juste et ex bono et aequo dominari sicut de Pisistrato et Demetrio Phalaraeo apud Athenienses legimus potest tamen jure impediri etiam armata manu et a quibusvis vel infimae sortis quibus vim inferre voluerit quum nullo jure illi obstringantur From the alledging of Authors the Proposer comes again to arguing and urging the former Scripture tells us it speaks not of obeying those that shall be powers but the powers that are and those that are in authority I grant it is spoken of the present powers but who are those surely those which are constituted powers not those which are pretenders to power Whatsoever force rises up to hinder the Parliament yet the Parliament is a power in being because it has a legall being To this purpose is that which we read in Mr. Burroughs book intituled The glorious Name of God the Lord of Hosts which book was printed by order from a Committee of the House of Commons In that book p. 47 he tels us the Kingdome hath a Parliament in being untill both Houses have agreed to disolve it And in his answer to Doctor Ferne p. 3 He places the Emphasis upon the word power for thus he writes We distinguish between the man that hath the power and the power of that man and say although the power must not be resisted according to the letter and sence of the Text yet the illegal will and wayes of the Man may be resisted without the least offending against the Text To what the proposer demands concerning the covenant I will onâ— only tell you what is lately publisht by Mr. Canne a great patron of the late proceedings in his booke against the Covenant p. 7. his words are these It is not possible that ever this Common wealth should be setled according to what the Parliament hath lately declared and the Covenant duly observed so incompatible is the one with the other To the proposers passage concerning heirs and successors in the Oath of allegiance I say with submission to better information whereas the office of a King may outlive the race of a King there are therefore mentioned not only heirs but successours that in case heirs faile yet Kingship might not dy and therefore heirs is set first and successours after But of this enough and it may be also this may seeme superfluous for if the proposed alteration goe on it will exclude both heirs and successours To the last Quere of the proposer if I understand the meaning of it there may be a sufficient answer pickt out of the last passage which I cited out of Mr Burroughs I shall therefore here conclude with the councell of the most wise God given by the wisest of Men prov. 24. 21. 22. My Son feare thou the Lord and the King and meddle not with them that are given to change For their calamity shall rise suddenly and who knoweth the ruine of them both FINIS
AN ENQUIRY After further satisfaction concerning obeying a change of Government beleeved to be unlawfull Tendred to the Presbyterian Proposer by way of Reply to his Book Intituled The lawfulnesse of obeying the present Government By a dissenting Brother ROM. 14. 23. He that doubteth is damned if he eat because not of faith for whatsoever is not faith is sinne LONDON Printed for G. T. Anno Dom. 1649. To the Author of a Book intituled The lawfulness of obeying the present GOVERNMENT Honoured Sir HAving seen your treatise and being in the number of those to whom your discourse is directed I do in my own and others behalfs returne you thanks for your offer and endeavour to hold forth somewhat for the satisfaction of those who desire to walke by rule and cannot comply with alterations great sudden and of publick concernment upon such grounds as peradventure take with some others In the argument you expresse your self thus a declaration hath been lately published wherein the grounds are exprest of setling the present government with which if any be not so far satisfyed as to think that settlement lawfull yet even to such is this discourse directed which proposeth proofs that though the change of a government were beleeved not to be lawful yet it may lawfully be obeyed I hope you wil not take offence if I having many times read over and as I was able weighed your treatise do acknowledg that I am not yet satisfyed in that which is made the busines of your book I suppose also that I shall not in this writing givâ— offence to any of different Iudgement and I am apt to beleeve that those that are true to the principles of Liberty of Conscience wil not take offence at me for proposing in a peaceable way the grounds of my scruples to such a casuist as if the worke it self be feasable may be a probable instrument of clearing that case wherein he hath appeared and therin both satisfy the spirits of many that truly fear the Lord and be serviceable to the establishing of the new fabrick in a more honourable and lasting way than the greatest penaltyes can encompasse For my self I shall only adde thus much that I am perswaded if you knew how much unbeleef lodges in my heart and how great inconveniencyes I must wrestle with in case my scruples be not satisfyed you would not much doubt but that I would be as willing to receive satisfaction as you have exprest your selfe to give it Thus leaving the following lines to your consideration I rest SIR Yours obliged and to be obliged An Enquiry after further satisfaction concerning obeying a change of government beleeved to be unlawfull THe Question is this whether though the change of a Government were beleeved not to be lawfull yet it may lawfully be obeyed A late Treatise proposeth proofs for the affirmative which before we come to examine it will not be amisse to consider some things by way of premise towards the clearing of the point in question And here in the first place let it be considered whence it is that this or that particular person comes to be a Subject to this or that particular Government or Governour and this may be foure wayes 1. In regard of originall or naturall descent and inferiority Thus in the first age of the World Cain Abel Seth and tâ—e rest of Adams Children and their Of-spring were under the government oâ—Adam by naturall right and this is founded upon the primitive tearms of the 5th Commandement Honour thy Father And to this head we may referre the subjection of the younger Brother to the elder as being in ordinary course the Heir of his Fathers government And thus with Chrysostom Musculus and others I understand that as spoken by God to Cain the elder Brother concerning Abel Gen. 4 7. Vnto thee shall be his desire and thou shalt rule over him The like Phrases are used in the 3d. chapter v. 16. concerning the subjection of the Wife to the government of the Husband 2. In regard of some speciall precept or institution of God So whensoever God doth expresly assigne a person to government over a Kingdom the Subjects of that Kingdome are thereupon bound to obey that person So David was taken from feeding of Sheep to be Ruler over Israel 1 Sam. 16. 1. The Lord said unto Samuell fill thine Horn with Oyle go I wil send thee to Jesse the Bethlemitâ— for I have provided me a King among his Sons The like we read concerning Iesu who was in particular appointed by God to be King over Israel These cases are extraordinary and the ground of obeying in these cases is that Soveraignty of God whereby he bestows authority on whom he pleases exprest by some speciall word whereby in such cases the title of government may be known to be by divine donation Ier. 27 5. 6. I have made the Earth the man and the beast that are upon the ground by my great power and by my out-stretched Arm and have given it unto whom it seemed meet unto me and now have I given all these Lands into the hand of Nebuchadnezer the Kiâ—g of Babylon my servant 3. In regard of place Suppose a man with his family goes into some place which hath neither owner nor Inhabitant he plaâ—â— and possesses that place and hath by right of primitive possession autâ—ority to govern in that place and if afterward any other come to dwell within compasse of that Plantation he ought to be subject to the Governour and government of the place and so ordinarily whatsoever Kingdome a man comes into he is during his abode there subject to the authority of the place and here is the proper roome for that saying persona sequitur locum And upon this account it is that the fourth Commandement enjoynes the governour of a Family or City to see that the Sabbath be not prophaned by the stranger that is within their gates for whilst he is within their bounds he is within their jurisdiction and thus the patriarks by sojâ—urning in AEgypt became subjects to Pharaoh 4. In regard of consent When those that are free to dispose of themselves or others under a Government or Governour do by such consent constitute or lay a foundation for Government Thus was the originall of the Romans under Romulus â—s the learned Author of the Treatise de jure Magistratum in subditos informs us A Romulo populus Romanus creatus fuisse dicitur quia prius originalis populus non fuerit sed multitudo quaedam ex varijs gentibus populis collecta Romulus in has gentes collectitias non nisi ex ipsarum consensu dominatus est The Scripture gives many instances of the right of government founded in consent or agreement amongst others the case of Iepthath is cleer Iudg. 11. 8. 11. The Elders of Gilead said unto Jephthah go with us and fight against the Children of Ammon and be our head over all the Inhabitants