Selected quad for the lemma: cause_n
Text snippets containing the quad
|
ID |
Title |
Author |
Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication) |
STC |
Words |
Pages |
|
A77471
|
A brief resolution of the present case of the subjects of Scotland in order to Episcopal government, by sacred authority re-established in this kingdome. Or, Episcopus Scoticanus redivivus. For the satisfaction of the people. Authore Phil-Alethio.
|
Phil-Alethio.
|
1661
(1661)
|
Wing B4645; ESTC R223956
|
14,376
|
22
|
of it self vacated from being binding or obligatory But Propos 4ta There is this fourth Proposition No prejudice or violence done to the right of any other man can be so highly dangerous and sinful as that prejudice and violence which are done to the just right of the Supream Magistrate and His Soveraign Authority This is undeniably irrefragable for in so far as the Publike Interest is beyond the Private in regard of worth and excellence and as to intemerable preservation so far is the prejudice done to the just right of the Soveraign Magistrate and His Authority incomparably sinful beyond what can be done to the right of any private Subject or Subjects whatsomever But Propos 5ta There is this fifth Proposition The just right of the Soveraign Magistrate and His Authority is egregiously trampled upon and prejudged when private Subjects encroach upon it and do upon suspition or jealousie of disallowed intentions or actions of their Soveraign Princes combine confederate or binde themselves to Allow Enact or Establish any thing much more to reverse or repeal allowed established and standing Laws concerning any matters belonging to Religion upon the we le or ill administration whereof the greatest security or ruine of a State depends without much more against the consent and command of lawful Soveraign Authority This Proposition is clear not only from the Municipal and known Laws of this Kingdom but even from the very Law and light of nature it self for it is obvious to every Tenderer of Soveraignty that it is one of the choisest and most inviolable Jewels of the Crown of a Supream Power to which none are co-ordinate but all subordinate as to every Supream Power as Supream all must needs be viz. That no Popular Combinations Bonds or Leagues should be among Subjects upon what score or pretence how specious soever without much lesse against the consent and command of the Authority foresaid for and if it were fâ—ee for Subjects thus at pleasure to Combine Confederate c. A King in which the Supream Power in a true Monarchy resides were but a bare weak titular King and shaddow only of a Soveraign depending prècario upon the Subjects whom at pleasure they might cast off or destroy nay and of it self it opens a patent door for the eversion and ruine of all Government and Supream Power so that any who will may by a Confederacy rebel upon one pretext or another Hence it 's evident there can be no greater encroachment upon no higher prejudice done unto Soveraign Authority then for Subjects in any-wise to Combine or Bind themselves against the Supream Royal Will and without consent of the Soveraign And if it be so high a prejudice done to the just right of the Soveraign for Subjects in any case to Combine or Confederat without him were it even to the carrying on of standing and known Laws what a heinous injury must it infer upon the Soveraignes just right for Subjects to Combine for the reversing and repealing of established and standing Laws without nay and forcibly against Royal Commands is not this the most superlative and transcendent prejudice which can be done to the just right of the Supream Authority But here now that we may a little more unfold this Proposition it would be noticed that it is deem'd a favourable plea by some for Subjects tho in no case else yet in the Concern of Religion to Combine and Confederate without the allowance or consent of Soveraign Authority for redressing abuses and reforming disorders therein especially when the Supream Magistrate being required thereto doth deny his concurrence and withhold the shoulder But such men they are not aware that in this they joyne issue with Phanatick Anabaptists and the bloodiest of the Popes devotionaries who with them in this resemble Sampson's Foxes being linkt together by the Tails though their Heads look different wayes and with them cry up the lawfulnesse of carrying on a Reformation in Religion by outward force and violence so much contrary to the wayes and Word of God Joh. 18. 36. My Kingdom is not of this world c. If it were my servants would fight Where blessed Christ Jesus doth plainly insinuate that His Kingdom being spiritual cannot must not be advanced with temporal armes for the weapons of the Christians warfare are not Carnal but Spiritual 2 Cor. 10. 4. There is no command from Christ to kill and slay the common enemies of our Religion but contrariwise to pray for our persecuters and not to resist evil Matth. 5. 44. See also other Scriptures such as Zech. 4. 6. 1 Tim. 6. 2. and 2 Tim. 2. 25 c. Nay and this course it is against the very nature of Religion it self for faith which is the Soul of Religion is an inward act of the soul which all the force in the world can neither plant nor extirpate â—am suddenda non cogenda est Conformable to this was the constant Doctrine and Practice of the Pious Sober Primitive Church which had learned better what belong'd to Authority then to resist the Ordinance of God even in a Heathen Caesar whose Religion enjoyn'd them not to kill but to be killed for it Nor was this for want of ability but of Authority As we read in the most Ancient Apologists for the Christian Faith such as Arnob. Lactant. Cyprian cont Demetr Tertull. in apol ad Scap. Just in Tryph. August in Psalm 144. Ambros in luc 22. 38. Athan. epist ad solit vitam agentes c. Then further Popular Reformation or Covenanting for Reformation of Religion without concurrence of the Supream Magistrate hath no warrantable president but rather to the contrary in Sacred Writ See those Scriptures at convenience Deut. 29. 2 10 11 12 c. Josh 24. 25. 2 King 23. 23. 2 Chron. 15. 8 12. and cap. 29. 3 10. and cap. 34. 31 32. Ezra 10. 3 4 5. In all which and in many the like you have ever the Chief Magistrates Moses Joshua Hezekiah Josiah c. concurring or rather going before the People as their place requir'd in the several Reformations therein mentionate but no where the people Covenanting upon a Reformation of Religion even in times of the worst of Kings without concurrence of the Supream Magistrate Arise for the matter belongs to thee saith the whole Assembly of Elders there met to Ezra the prime Ruler in that cited place Ezra 10. 4. To shun the force of which Argument and for a sinful impairing the Supreme Power of the Soveraign some have â—ancied a supposed co-ordination of power I shall not once name these whose impudence hath imboldned them to assert a monstrous Subordination of the Soveraign to the People betwixt our King and His People in their representative Meetings This indeed is the Arch-pillar upon which some of no small Note have laid the stresse of their Cause for the supportment of the lawfulnesse of Popular-reformings without the Supreme and Royal Consent But surely this as it
is a most pernicious so a most empty airy inconsequent speculation Inconsequent because if a co-ordination of Soveraign Power be supposed twixt King and People then a joynt concurrence of both in every act of Supreme Power is necessary if the act be not spurious and illegittimate so that by this the people de jure may no more reform without the King then the King without the People both singly considered according to this dream being but Subjecta potestat is supremae partialâ—â— and both joyntly considered only the adaequat and complete subject of Soveraignty Empty and groundlesse for what a wilde imagination is it to place a co-ordinate power with the King in the representative Body of the People when the Soveraign only hath by fundamental Law the right of calling and then of dissolving at pleasure the said Body and what an absurd phoenomenon must it needs be to conceive in a body a co-ordination twixt the Members and the Head thereof and the King is the Head of all the Tribes 1 Sam. 15. 17. and such an Head Vbi sedes meri imperij est But further this whimsey is repugnant to the true condition of Monarchy for this supposed co-ordination of the Supreme jusâ—ive Power must necessarily infer or suppose a communicability of the Soveraign Power to more then one which notwithstanding in true Monarchy is so properly belonging to and so inseparably setled in the Person of the Soveraign Prince as that it cannot be derived or communicated to any other save only in way of deputation and commission when and how far forth himself pleaseth in the outward exercise and administration of the same Since as Bodin rightly giveth it Necessâ— est ut regnum quantumcunque est ac jura omnia Majestatis in solidum VNI partitione sublatâ tribuantur alioquin non Monarchia sed Polyarchia dicetur De republ lib. 6. cap. 8. And indeed however many Sharers there are in the Supreme Power so many Supreme Governours or Soveraigns respectively and according to the different Interests they have more or lesse there shall be Oh what Chimera's of invention wil men make use of to uphold most groundlesse conceits they have once embraced for strengthning and promoving of their sinful and selfie designs and interests But to leave this Pâ—rpos 6ta There is this sixth Proposition A justifiable Oath must be undertaken in bonum finem for good ends and purposes ends consistent with the welfare of our Neighbour especially of the Church and State we live in A clause say Casuists necessarily supposed though not alwayes expressed in such engagements under this much is comprehended as that a lawfull Oath cannot engage to the doing of any thing repugnant or obstructive to the performance of some greater moral duty one or another so the Learned Grotius de jurâ— belli lib. 2. cap. 13. n. 7. Immo etiam si res quae promittitur non sit illicita sed majus bonum morale impediens sic quoque non valebit jurawentum c. Hence also it it is that we ought by no means to Vow Promise or Swear peremptorly against the doing of any thing which yet the real equity thereof either then or upon occasion farely offered may afterwards justly require and efflagitate at our hands The ground of this comprehensive Proposition briefly is because the greater moral duty is still to be preferred to the lesser as to practice and performance and in affirmative precepts this is acknowledg'dly evident these being such as oblige licet semper non tamen ad semper as Divines universally take it Propos 7ma There is this seventh Proposition No Oath is or can be justifiable or of binding force which is taken against a righteous laudable Oath formerly sworn For one lawful Oath can never make void another much lesse can an unlawful vacat the obligation of a righteous Oath It is a clear case resolv'd by Judicious Casuists that a lawful Oath cannot be contra pactum aliquod licitum prius initum for such super-faetation of dissonant Oaths or Promises doth ever beget a direct nullity in the latter So that he who hath sworn Allegiance to the Soveraign and to maintain Episcopal Government in the Church which we now suppose to be lawful and thereby bound himself to maintain the just Right Power and Authority of his said Soveraign or the forsaid Form of Church-Government he cannot by any second or supervenient Oath be tied to do any thing that may tend to the violation or infringement of his former engagement and if he have so insnar'd himself the obligation is ipso facto void and null But Propos 8va ult There is this eight and last Proposition A man is bound in conscience to reveâ—â— renounce and disclaim that Which he was induced to engage himself by Oath unlawfully to perform For an Oath which is Sacramentum pietatis as it is in the mouths of all cannot be vinculum iniquit at is cannot be a bond of iniquity No man can be by any rash Oath or any Oath whatsomever engaged so as to stand oblidged to do and perform that which is in it self sinful and unlawful to be done but 〈◊〉 bound in couscience to break that snare which was never a real but meerly a supposed Bond. Aquinas saith well 2da 2dae quaest 89. Jurans illicitum peccat jurando peccat servando Over and beyond all these there are I know many other cases in which the person once engaged to act may be disobliged from a necessary performance as when he pomises or swears to perform somewhat impossible and beyond his reach De impossibilibus enim nemo tenetur is the received maxime or when his condition is notably changed from what it was when first he entered the obligation for then some inevitable and remedilesse impediment may obstruct the performance and many such-like useful Cases may be touch'd upon but the Propositions already laid down are the most Catholick or Universal and surest Land-marks by which we may examine the legality and bindingnesse of whatever engagements where they fail All or any of them the supposed Promise or Oath doubtlesse becomes void and frustrate intangle us it may in the Snares and Bonds of sinfulnes as the wise man calls them Prov. 5. 22. but not oblige us to a necessary performance of the thing undertaken not even then when as we freely and voluntarily incur the snare much lesse when it is forced upon us which is much to be adverted in our present disquiry by an over-awing prevailing Faction This loosens and weakens the ty much if superveening thus to other circumstances for Non potest id civium consensu factum censeri quod ereptâ libertate fiat Bodin de rep lib. 2. c. 5. And now if our late Oaths Covenants and Leagues be squar'd according to these irrefragable rules above recorded what bindingnesse or obligation may be found in them will be easie to determine and resolve by their impingence upon