Selected quad for the lemma: cause_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
cause_n	evil_a	good_a	reason_n	2,746	5	5.3703	4	true

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A62025	Reasons of the present judgement of the Vniversity of Oxford concerning The Solemne League and Covenant, The Negative Oath, The Ordinances concerning discipline and vvorship : approved by generall consent in a full convocation, 1, Jun. 1647, and presented to consideration.; Judicium Universitatis Oxoniensis. English	Sanderson, Robert, 1587-1663.; Zouch, Richard, 1590-1661.; Langbaine, Gerard, 1609-1658.; University of Oxford.	1647 (1647)	Wing S624; ESTC R183228	29,783	44

should be printed and published in all the Parish-Churches and Chappells of the Kindome there to stand and remaine as a testimony of the clearnesse of their intentions whether the subjecting of our selves and brethren by Oath unto such punishments as shall be inflicted upon us without Law or Merit at the sole pleasure of such uncertaine Judges as shall be upon any particular occasion deputed for that effect of what mean quality or abilities soever they be even to the taking away of our lives if they shall think it convenient so to doe though the degree of our offences shall not require or deserve the same be not the betraying of our Liberty in the lowest and the setting up of an Arbitrary Power in the highest degree that can be imagined The substance of the fift Article being the settling and continuance of a firm peace and union between the three Kingdomes since it is our bounden duty to desire and according to our severall places and interests by all lawfull meanes to endeavour the same we should make no scruple at all to enter into a Covenant to that purpose were it not 1. That we doe not see nor therefore can acknowledge the happinesse of such a blessed Peace between the three Kingdomes for we hope Ireland is not forgotten as in the Article is mentioned So long as Ireland is at War within it self and both the other Kingdomes engaged in that War 2. That since no peace can be firme and well-grounded that is not bottom'd upon Justice the most proper and adequate act whereof is Ius suum cuique to let every one have that which of right belongeth unto him we cannot conceive how a firm and lasting Peace can be established in these Kingdomes unlesse the respective Authority Power and Liberty of King Parliament and Subject as well every one as other be preserved full and entire according to the known Lawes and continued unquestioned customes of the severall Kingdomes in former times and before the beginning of these sad distractions In the sixth Article we are altogether unsatisfied 1. The whole Article being grounded upon a supposition which hath not yet been evidenced to us viz. that this Cause meaning thereby or else we understand it not the joyning in this Covenant of mutuall defence for the prosecuon of the late War was the cause of Religion Liberty and Peace of the Kingdomes and that it so much concerned the Glory of God and the good of the Kingdomes and the Honour of the King 2. If all the Premisses were so cleare that we durst yeeld our free assent thereunto yet were they not sufficient to warrant to our consciences what in this Article is required to be sworn of us unlesse we were as clearly satisfied concerning the lawfulnesse of the means to be used for the supporting of such a Cause For since evill may not be done that good may come thereof we cannot yet be perswaded that the Cause of Religion Liberty and Peace may be supported or the Glory of God the Good of the Kingdomes and the Honour of the King sought to be advanced by such means as to our best understandings are both improper for those Ends and destitute of all warrant from the Lawes either of God or of this Realm Lastly in the conclusion our hearts tremble to think that we should be required to pray that other Christian Churches might be encouraged by our example to joyn in the like Association and Covenant to free themselves from the Antichristian yoke c. Wherein 1. To omit that we doe not know any Antichristian yoke under which we were held in these Kingdomes and from which we owe to this either War or Covenant our freedome unlesse by the Antichristian yoke be meant Episcopall Government which we hope no man that pretendeth to Truth and Charity will affirm 2. We doe not yet see in the fruits of this Association or Covenant among our selves any thing so lovely as to invite us to desire much lesse to pray that other Christian Churches should follow our example herein 3. To pray to the purpose in the conclusion of the Covenant expressed seemeth to us all one in effect as to beseech Almighty God the God of Love and Peace 1. To take all Love and Peace out of the hearts of Christians and to set the whole Christian world in a combustion 2. To render the Reformed Religion and all Protestants odious to all the world 3. To provoke the Princes of Europe to use more severity towards those of the Reformed Religion if not for their own security to root them quite out of their severall Dominions 4. The tyrannie and yoke of Antichrist if laid upon the necks of Subjects by their lawfull Soveraigns is to be thrown off by Christian boldnes in confessing the Truth and Patient suffering for it not by taking up Arms or violent resistance of the Higher Powers §. VI Some Considerations concerning the meaning of the Covenant OUr aforesaid scruples are much strengthned by these ensuing Considerations First that whereas no Oath which is contradictory to it selfe can be taken without Perjury because the one part of every contradiction must needs be false this Covenant either indeed containeth or at leastwise which to the point of conscience is not much lesse effectuall seemeth to us to contain sundry Contradictions as namely amongst others these 1. To preserve as it is without change and yet to reforme and alter and not to preserve one and the same Reformed Religion 2. Absolutely and without exception to preserve and yet upon supposition to extirpate the self-same thing viz. the present Religion of the Church of Scotland 3. To reform Church-Government established in England and Ireland according to the Word of God and yet to extirpate that Government which we are perswaded to be according thereunto for the introducing of another whereof we are not so perswaded 4. To endeavour really the extirpation of Heresies Schismes and Profanenesse and yet withall to extirpate that Government in the Church the want of the due exercise whereof we conceive to have been one chief cause of the growth of the said evils and doe beleeve the restoring and continuance thereof would be the most proper and effectuall remedy 5. To preserve with our estates and lives the liberties of the Kingdome that is as in the Protestation is explained of the Subject and yet contrary to these liberties to submit to the imposition of this Covenant and of the Negative Oath not yet established by Law and to put our lives and estates under the arbitrary power of such as may take away both from us when they please not onely without but even against Law if they shall judge it convenient so to doe Secondly we find in the Covenant sundry expressions of dark or doubtfull construction Whereunto we cannot sweare in judgement till their sense be cleared and agreed upon As Who are the Common Enemies and which be the best Reformed Churches mentioned in the first

upon our Religion 1. That we practice that our selves which we condemne in the Papist viz. Swearing with Jesuiticall equivocations and mentall reservations 2. That we take the glorious and dreadfull Name of God in vaine and play fast and loose with Oathes in as much as what we swear to day in one sense we may swear the direct contrary to morrow in another And 3. It will give strength to that charge which is layd to the Presbyterian party in speciall both a by Iesuites and b Sectaries that there is no faith to be given to Protestants whatever they swear because they may swear one thing in their Words and in their own sense mean another The second way is to take the Covenant with these or the like generall Salvo's exp●essed viz. So far as lawfully I may So far as it is agreeable to the Word of God and the Lawes of the Land Saving all Oathes by me formerly taken c. But 1. We beleeve this mocking of God would be so far from freeing us from the guilt of Perjury that thereby we should rather contract a new guilt of most vile and abominable Hypocrisie 2. It seemeth all one unto us the thing being otherwise supposed unlawfull as if we should swear to kill steal commit adultery or forswear our selves so far as lawfully we may 3. If this would satisfie the Conscience we might with a good Conscience not only take the present Covenant but even subscribe to the Councell of Trent also yea and to the Turkish Alcoran and swear to maintain and defend either of them viz. so far as lawfully we may or as they are agreable to the Word of God Thirdly for the second Article in particular in the branch concerning the extirpation of Church-Government we are told that it is to be understood of the whole Government taken collectively and in sensu composito so as if we doe endeavour but the taking away of Apparitors only or of any other one kind of inferiour officers belonging to the Ecclesiastcall Hierarchy we shall have sufficiently discharged our whole promise in that particular without any prejudice done to Episcopacy But 1. Neither the composers of the Covenant by their words nor the imposers of it by their Actions have given us the least signification that they meant no more 2. Yea rather if we may judge either by the cause or the effects we may well think there was a meaning to extirpate the whole government and every part thereof in the Article expressed For 1. The Covenant being as we have no cause to doubt framed at the instance of the Scots and for the easier procuring of their assistance in the late War was therefore in all reason so to be framed and understood as to give them satisfaction considering what themselves have c declared against Episcopacy we have little reason to beleeve the taking away Apparitors or any thing lesse then the rooting out of Episcopacy it self would have satisfied them 2. The proceedings also since the entring of this Covenant in endeavouring by Ordinance of Parliament to take away the Name Power and Revenues of Bishops doe sadly give us to understand what was their meaning therein Fourthly as to the scruples that arise from the Soveraignty of the King and the duty of Allegiance as Subjects we find two severall wayes of answering but little satisfaction in either 1. The former by saying which seemeth to us a piece of unreasonable and strange Divinity that Protection and Subjection standing in relation either to other the King being now disabled to give us protection we are thereby freed from our bond of subjection Whereas 1. The Subjects obligation Ius subjectionis doth not spring from nor relate unto the actuall exercise of Kingly protection but from and unto the Princes obligation to protect Ius Protectionis Which obligation lying upon him as a duty which he is bound in conscience to performe when it is in his power so to doe the relative obligation thereunto lyeth upon us as a duty which we are bound in conscience to performe when it is in our power so to doe His inability therefore to performe his duty doth not discharge us from the necessity of performing ours so long as we are able to doe it 2. If the King should not protect us but neglect his part though having power and ability to perform it his voluntary neglect ought not to free us from the faithfull performance of what is to be done on our part How much lesse then ought we to think our selves dis-obliged from our subjection when the Non-protection on his part is not from the want of will but of power 2. The later wherein yet some have triumphed by saying that the Parliament being the supreme Judicatory of the Kingdome the King wheresoever in person is ever present there in his power as in all other Courts of Justice and that therefore whatsoever is done by them is not done without the King but by him But craving pardon first if in things without our proper sphere we hap to speak unproperly or amisse We mustnext crave leave to be still of the same mind we were till it shall be made evident to our understandings that the King is there in his power as it is evident to our senses that he is not there in his Person Which so far as our naturall reason and small experience will serve us to judge all that hath been said to that purpose can never doe For first to the point of presence 1. We have been brought up in a beliefe that for the making of Lawes the actuall d Royall assent was simply necessary and not onely a virtuall assent supposed to be included in the Votes of the two Houses otherwise what use can be made of his Negative voice or what need to e desire his Royall assent to that which may be done as well without it 2. The f Statute providing that the Kings assent to any Bill signified under his great Seal shall be to all intents of Law as valid effectual as if he were personally present doth clearly import that as to the effect of making a Law the Kings Power is not otherwise really present with the two Houses then it appeareth either in his Person or under his Seal Any other real presence is to us a riddle not much unlike to that of Transubstantiation an imaginary thing rather devised to serve turnes then believed by those that are content to make use of it 3. Such presence of the King there when it shall be made appeare to us either from the writs whereby the Members of both Houses are called together or by the standing Lawes of the Land or by the acknowledged judgement and continued practice of former and later ages or by any expresse from the King himself clearly declaring his minde to that purpose we shall then as becometh us acknowledge the same and willingly submit thereunto And as for the Argument