Selected quad for the lemma: duty_n

Word A Word B Word C Word D Occurrence Frequency Band MI MI Band Prominent
duty_n allegiance_n law_n oath_n 1,012 5 7.8657 4 false
View all documents for the selected quad

Text snippets containing the quad

ID Title Author Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication) STC Words Pages
A81910 Considerations concerning the present Engagement, whether it may lawfully be entered into; yea or no? / Written at the desire of a friend, by J.D. November 27. 1649. Imprimatur, Joseph Caryl. Dury, John, 1596-1680. 1649 (1649) Wing D2842; Thomason E584_12; ESTC R205387 21,796 26

There is 1 snippet containing the selected quad. | View lemmatised text

CONSIDERATIONS Concerning the present ENGAGEMENT WHETHER It may lawfully be entered into YEA or NO Written at the desire of a friend by J. D. JOHN 3.21 He that doth the Truth comes to the light November 27. 1649. Imprimatur JOSEPH CARYL LONDON Printed by John Clowes for Richard Wodenoth at the Starre under St. Peters Church in Cornhill 1649. CONSIDERATIONS CONCERNING The present Engagement SIR YOu have obliged me many wayes to serve in all that I can for your good but the matter of your speciall concernment wherewith you have acquainted me of late doth lead me of mine own accord by mine own inclination beyond all obligations to endeavour your satisfaction Seeing then your conscience is scrupled about the engagement which by the Parliament is offered to be taken and you say you cannot subscribe thereunto till three main doubts concerning the same be cleared I shall take them into serious consideration to shew you what I think of the weight thereof which indeed is of exceeding great moment For you say 1. That the Oath of Allegiance and the Nationall Covenant are still binding and contradictory to this present engagement 2. That the present Power by which the engagement is tendered is very doubtfull as a power unlawfully usurped to which usurpation you think you will be accessary if you take the Engagement 3. That the consequence of the Engagement seems to tend to an opposition against the lawfull Heir of the Crowne and the right constitution of the Parliaments whereunto you are pre-engaged and from which you cannot recede To satisfie your desire I shall lay before you as briefly as may be my sence thereof that you who have been alwaies wel-affected to the common cause of Liberty against the designs of Tyrany may be helped somewhat to discerne how lawfull or unlawfull how expedient or unexpedient it will be for you to take or not to take this Engagement for the publick good and the discharge of your duty towards the same First then concerning the Oath of Allegiance and the Nationall Covenant represent unto your self the true meaning thereof and so order your thoughts to do that which is answerable thereunto The Oath of Allegiance as you know did bind all men as Subjects in Law to be true and faithfull to the Kings Person to his Heirs and Successors as they were invested with the Authority which the Law did give them nor was it ever meant by the Parliament which Enacted the Oath of Allegiance that any should be absolutely bound to the King his Heirs as they were men to be true and faithful to their personal wils but only to them their wils as they had a Legall standing that is to the Authority conferred upon them by the consent of the People which was testified in under a Law whereunto the King and his Heirs were bound for the Kingdoms good by Oath So that the obligations of King and subjects are mutuall and must needs stand and fall together according as the condition by which they are begotten is kept or broken which is nothing else but the Law according to which he and his Subjects agree that he shall be their King and they shall be his Subjects For as you were sworn to the King so he was sworne to you as you were bound to be faithfull to him so he was bound to be faithfull to his trust nor is he your Liege further then he is faithfull thereunto If then he be found unfaithfull to his trust you are ipso facto absolved from your Allegiance unto him and if according to Law he receives not his Authority you are not in Law his Subject at all Now the just and naturall foundation of all Lawes is the reason of the Body of every Nation in their Parl. which hath the sole Right to propose chuse the Lawes by which they will be Ruled Whence it hath been as I suppose a perpetual custome in this Nation for the Commons at all times to aske and propose the making of Laws and for the Lords and King to give their consent thereunto the Lords as the Judges in cases of transgression and the King as the executer and publick Trustee for the administration of the common good and wealth thereby for in a Kingdom there is a Common-wealth as the intrinsicall substance of the Being thereof for which all things are to be done by King and Lords as the publick servants thereof and Ministers not Masters of State therein If the King then should set himselfe wilfully to be above this Reason of the Nation which is the onely Originall of the Law and refuse obstinatly the Lawes which they shall chuse to be setled he puts himself ipso facto out of the capacity of being a King any more unto them and if this can be made out to have been the way wherein the late King set himself and that it was the designe of the House of Lords to uphold and enable him to follow that way it is evident that so far as he did by that means actually un-King himself as to this Nation so far also they that assisted him in that design did un-Lord themselves in the State thereof and if this was the guilt of the house of Lords by other practises and proceedings more than by an indifferency and complyance with the Hamiltonian in vasion to help the King to such a Power I know not what to answer for them But as to the meaning of the oath of Allegiance as by the perpetuall consent of all ages it never was otherwise understood and by the third Article of the Nationall Covenant which is another branch of this doubt may be made manifest It is then undeniable that the third Article of that Nationall Covenant was never meant by those that made it or that took it to be opposite to the sence of the Oath of Allegiance but altogether agreeable thereunto What then the meaning of that Article is must needs also be the true sence of the Oath of Allegiance That Article then doth oblige you to preserve the Right and Priviledges of the Parliament and the Liberties of the Kingdom in your Calling absolutely and without any limitation but as for the Kings Person and Authority it doth oblige you onely thereunto conditionally and with a limitation Namely in the preservation and defence of the true Religion and Liberties of this Kingdom If then the King did not give to the Representatives of the Nation that assurance which was satisfactory and necessary that their Religion and Liberties should be preserved none but his Subjects were bound either by their Allegiance or Covenant to defend his Person and the Authority which was conferred upon him The Oath of Allegiance therefore was bottomed upon the Laws which the Representatives of the Nation in Parl. had chosen to be observed concerning their Religion and the Liberties of the Kingdom which he refractorily either casting off or seeming to yield unto in such a way that no trust