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	oath_n	subject_n	1,037	5	6.8350	4	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A96259	The case of the Irish Protestants in relation to recognising, or swearing allegiance to, and praying for King William and Queen Mary, stated and resolved.	Wettenhall, Edward, 1636-1713.	1691 (1691)	Wing W1490A; ESTC R229883	19,849	30

used us But this is in our favor For it appears hereby those who were their Conquerors were our Deliverers and if it be lawful in this case for the Irish to accept of Terms 't is our duty to be thankful to God that there are those now come who can give Terms both to them and us This Plea sufficiently justifies us Irish Protestants against any possible Imputation to us from our Irish Adversaries in this behalf And as to our English Friends we will suppose them more sensible of our Condition than that before them we ought to make Apologies when in our Consciences we want none But as to the Irish let me tell them farther no imaginary freedom of theirs can now in Conscience exempt them from this Subjection The People of the Jews the Seed of Abraham were never in bondage to any as free born a People certainly as Irish Men can be yet when God put them under the Yoke of Nebuchadnazzar his command by the Prophet encouraged too by a blessing annext is serve the King of Babylon and Live The same which God speaks now by the Voice of his Providence to the Natives of this Kingdom in as much as he has left nothing else possible to them They must therefore be subject not only for Wrath but Conscience sake and for Men to swear to do what is their duty to do cannot certainly be unlawful VIII FURTHER not only God but even King James II. has made it impossible to his Protestant Subjects to keep the Oath of Allegiance to him For that Oath expresly as well as another ordinarily taken by many of us I mean the Oath of Supremacy obliges all who have taken it not only to defend to the uttermost of their power His Majesties Person Heirs and Successors but both His and Their Crown and Dignity Which Crown and Dignity signifie as the Oath of Supremacy and so the Law interprets those Terms all Jurisdictions Preeminences and Authorities granted or belonging to the Kings Highness his Heirs or Successors or united and annexed to the Imperial Crown of this Realm that is of England The Crown of England saith our Law is Imperial and subject to no Prince on Earth but only unto God If therefore a Prince will subject his Crown and so his People to a Foreign Power and especially to that Power which has now these several Ages incessantly and indefatigably by all means within its Sphere studied and endeavor'd the Ruin of them and the Extirpation of their Religion I mean to the Pope of Rome it becomes impossible for the Subjects of such a King at once or together to the uttermost of their power to defend His Person and His Heirs and Successors His and Their Crown and Dignity The Kingdom of England of which by Law and Prescription Ireland is a Branch and dependent has ever been avowed and to this day is a Free Kingdom But how Tributary and enslaved it would become by being again subjected to the Papacy I list not to aggravate yet cannot but in short take notice that the Heir by the Subjects defending and maintaining such a King Possessor loseth of his Power and Rights and so doth the Crown of its Dignity Preeminence and Authority In such case therefore a Man can no more keep this Oath than he can reconcile Contradictions which even the Roman Catholick Divines ordinarily Teach is not in the power of Omnipotence And such is the Case between James II. and all the Protestants of these Three Kingdoms But it was worse with the Poor Irish Protestants than with the rest of the People of any of his Majesties Dominions We though most of us English-men were not only subjected to Roman Catholicks but to the most inveterate of them Irish Roman Catholicks Enemies to us on other scores besides our Religion contrary to the express Laws of both Kingdoms in this behalf contrary to the manifest Interest of the Heir contrary to the Honor and Dignity of the Crown of England from which as far as an Act of an Irish Parliament could do the feat this Kingdom of Ireland was by Statute solemnly past in that their Parliament above mentioned in effect actually separated and disunited The Crown of England was hereby to lose the Kingdom of Ireland a very considerable Emolument certainly as well as Honor and Jurisdiction These things are notorious matter of Fact and so publickly manifest that they cannot be denied I speak not of being subjected to a French Government and Governors of our being enforced to supplicate many times for our Liberties and Lives I am sure for the supports of our Lives the eating the Bread and wearing the poor Clothes which of our own were left us and some of us directly for our Lives even in Cases wherein we were Offenders against no Law of God or of Man Military or Civil I speak not I say of our being necessitated thus to supplicate to Governors of a Foreign Nation and Language who could not understand us when addressing to them in our own Speech and would not understand our Interpreters in theirs I speak not of Pacts and Sales of which great Evidence as to this Kingdom of Ireland or a great part of it might be given nor of other like or more odious things as designedly avoiding all that might exasperate some Men or together immoderately aggravate others Guilt as well as our Oppressions But it is hereby as clear as the Sun that if there could be degrees in natural Impossibilities there lay the highest natural Impossibility on all but especially the Irish Protestants in the Circumstances they were in to keep this Oath and that not by any fault of their own for they were cast into this impossibility by the Prince to whom by that Oath Allegiance was or was to have been due Now forasmuch as no one can be bound to that which is impossible of all Men the Irish Protestants stand not by the Oath of Allegiance bound to defend the Person of James II. in his or their present Circumstances IX IF it should be said by any These Pleas can only discharge Subjects of so much Allegiance as can be proved unlawful or impossible but they shall still stand obliged to what is lawful and possible I allow it for truth and together Avow that notwithstanding our Performance of what either or both the fore-mentioned Branches of Recognition by the present King and Queen required of us do contain We both may and I doubt not all considerative conscientious Persons within these Kingdoms Do bear and pay all lawful parts or Instances of Duty to our late King And principally what the Article of King John's Magna Charta in such Case as this exacts The Safety of the Persons of the King and Queen and of their Children we look upon as most religiously inviolable None of us would attempt or consent to any attempt upon their Sacred Persons There is indeed a Child in Controversie touching which it must at least be

for a Protestant People to assist and defend in the Exercise and Possession of Regal Power such a King as James II. has made and carried himself for they could not thereby but manifestly contribute and put their Hands not only to the destroying their own but their Protestant Fellow Subjects Estates Liberties and Lives and what is more their Common Religion too * The proof of these Particulars by some Historical Instances in the Treatment which the poor Irish Protestants found from those in Power under the late King would cast such Odium on more perhaps than were guilty that I cannot persuade my self to set it down and possibly it is so notorius that I need not Enough has fallen from my Pen in the Sequel through a kind of Impotency or too tender Sense of what I have seen If it be said the King promised to maintain us in the Profession of our Religion and Possession of our Estates Liberties c. He did indeed so promise and I believe of himself at first intended it But he had put the Power of all into such Mens hands thar he could not perform what he had promised Were not our Rights our Lands our Goods and our Churches themselves taken from us contrary not only to his Promises but Proclamations And which of any of these especially our Churches tho upon his express Command under his Hand and Seal was ever restored What can be expected from him who first incapacitates himself to perform and then makes fair Promises Did not the Irish Act of Attainder debar the King of his Prerogative to pardon those which it made Criminals and Traitors contrary to the Law of Nature that common Test of Equity so much appealed to by some in the late Irish House of Lords for flying merely to preserve their Lives or securing themselves from Irish Mercy that is from what I will not say Nor will I insist upon what I might add and aggravate By the Constitution and Laws of the Religion he professes he either had sworn to destroy or ought to have sworn to destroy both us and our Religion And when Men first swear to do a thing and then promise not to do it and capacitate themselves to perform their Oaths but incapacitate themselves to perform their Promises which can be expected should take place the Promise or the Oath I may safely avow in behalf of the Protestants of the three Kingdoms there is not a conscientious Man amongst us would ever have withdrawn from King James even our Active Obedience could we have secured our Religion and good Conscience by active Adhesion to him I will add also because in my Conscience I believe it had not the securing the Protestant Religion more forcibly moved the Prince of Orange than the Ambition of a Throne he would never have attempted so speedy a Succession In a Word we did obey as far as God's Command goes Gods Command is with Limitation Obey in the Lord we did so We did obey as long and as far as was lawful and that is as far as any Oath can bind us for to an unlawful Act no Oath can bind Herod's Oath did not bind him to cut off S. John Baptist's Head nor can our Oaths oblige us to be Assistants and aiding to the cutting off the Heads of innocent Protestant Peers or hanging up such Commons and to the disarming and putting out of Power all Protestants and arming and advancing all Papists and so destroying our selves Neighbors and Religion This is unlawful by the Law of God VI. I might here instead of saying King James has made the Allegiance due to him by this Oath unlawful for Protestants to pay have said perhaps with more Propriety of Speech he has made the Oath as to him void and null For all his Subjects who took it were supposed by Law to swear to a Legal King that is to a King who would govern according to Law and protect his Subjects and their Rights as by his Oath and Law bound Such a King the Oath was design'd to and actually to such a King we swore Allegiance But such King James did not please to be Wherefore by this Oath no Allegiance is due to him But I thought this notion might seem to some more subtile and the proof of it might as above suggested have been more odious than the other Each comes much to the same final issue for according to either the Obligation ceaseth as concluded and the Reader may take in his Candor which he pleases To proceed then VII GOD has made it to us the Irish Protestants here at least morally impossible to perform to King James the Duty which in the Oath of Allegiance we swore Therefore the Obligation of that Oath ceaseth as to him or which is the same we are not bound to him by that Oath I doubt not but that our Adversaries will say defending the Person and Possession of a King by force of Arms to be a point of Allegiance I say we are here by God's Providence unable to defend King James by Arms in the Possession of the Crown Not to mention that it is not long since our Roman Catholick Adversaries by King James's Orders as they said took away our Arms from us and surely we are not perjur'd for not being in Arms for a King who would not suffer us to bear Arms God has now put us under the Power of the Second William the Conqueror whom I must affirm besides his being more ways than one otherwise justly intitle'd to have a Right to our Allegiance by Conquest that which gave the King of England the first and still avowed Title to Ireland I do averr us in Ireland conquered and with my Heart bless God for it For besides our being thereby delivered intirely and finally I hope from Popery we are delivered also if we attend thereto from all Scruple which would stick in us touching the Will of God as to our Subjection to our new King For we cannot doubt but that we ought to be subject to them whom God has set over us And when by his Providence he so plainly pulls down one and sets up another we cannot doubt who it is whom he has set over us If still any will doubt I demand of them what should a vanquish'd Multitude what should Men Women and Children brought under Subjection do Must they all dye Martyrs for the Title of a Prince who would not preserve their Rights by Law and Peace and through the hand of God has not been able to defend his own or theirs by War Do not the Irish Roman Catholicks who blame us most daily make Conditions for themselves and shall it be unlawful for us to do the same The great difference betwixt them and us as to our present Circumstances is They were conquered with their Swords in their hands We as being their Prisoners perhaps they may think Slaves and Properties as it has been too plain to us they would have

confest what a most zealous and constant adherent of King James's the same too if I mistake not more than once in great Power and Trust under him has not doubted to publish to the World The business of the Prince of Wales has been so carried as if those whom it most concerns that it should be true had not had a mind it should be believed or words to that effect for I have not the Paper by me 't is intitled Englands Crisis It is to me an ungrateful task to give such Descant or Illustration to this ingenuous Acknowledgment as the Case requires but instead thereof I must be so faithful to my own sense as to add That the Persons most concerned for the Legitimacy of that Child have now so farther managed the matter that I see not how its Legitimacy is possible ever to be made out to the Publick Satisfaction of these Nations Wherefore in my Apprehension it must remain a doubt till the day shall come that shall open all things In the mean time being there is the same Reason of things not in being and of things not apparent no Man can forfeit his Allegiance for not being sollicitous for the preservation of this Child especially now it is removed out of the Sphere of our Defence as well as Knowledge As to any other part of Allegiance imaginable in the present Juncture lawful or possible it would be considered in special what the Particulars are Our Counsel would never be taken and we have been declared again and again not to be trusted yea and notwithstanding the utmost fidelity of many of us reviled and treated as such As to our Prayers what it is not lawful for us to endeavor it is not lawful for us to pray for But it has been shewn King James has made it unlawful for us to defend him in his Possession and Exercise of his Regal Power And to bring him back thereto as far as human Prudence I think can see were but to bring our Religion and its Professors under the same Yoke Opressions and danger of Extinction under which we so lately groaned therefore this it is unlawful to pray for As far as we may lawfully pray for him we own we do nor is it inconsistent with the Prayers required of us for King William and Queen Mary Amongst those who Err and are Deceived amongst Our Enemies Persecutors and Slanderers whom we beseech God to have mercy on to forgive them and turn their Hearts by way of Eminency we tacitly comprise our late King In secret also perhaps by name we further pray That God would take from him all Ignorance hardness of Heart and contempt of his Word and to bring him home to Christ's Flock that he may be saved amongst the remnant of the true Israelites To do this for him by Name in publick would be looked upon as Affront and publick Reproach To do it in secret as it is Prudent Charity so it is a Loyalty we disown not Thus Samuel mourned for Saul even when God had rejected him and it repented the Lord that he had made him King And beyond what I have thus openly and freely specified I acknowledge I see not any part of Loyalty and Devotion left lawful or possible to us Irish Protestants in behalf of King James II. except any would have added a sublime degree of Civil Honor the saluting or serving him upon the Knee or such like of which together with a Revenue ample enough to maintain a Court I think there ought to be no dispute but none of these interfere with the Recognition required X. Now to return from Objections and to proceed with what was above propounded Lastly it is to be said for the Protestants who now are at least who all along these Troubles remained in Ireland they are as fully and directly Released from this Oath at least from that part of Allegiance Defending King James by force of Arms as Reason Equity or even Express Law can be well conceived to release them In all Civil Othas if the Power imposing the Oath and to whom the Oath is made shall release the Obligees such Obligees are discharged of their Oath and reduced to their first Liberty Now I say we the People before specified were three ways released either from the whole Oath or at least from this part of it which some expect we should own our selves bound to of fighting for King James II. First the whole Oath of Allegiance Summer was twelve-month by King and Parliament a Parliament at least whose Authority and Legitimacy our Adversaries will not impeach was in this Kingdom by express Statute repealed under the Name if my memory fail not of the New Oath of Allegiance And whereas some Peers upon Reasons which are not needful here to be inserted stood against the Repeal of it and one excepted against that style The New Oath of Allegiance the Answer was returned by them who ruled assigning the Reign in which that Oath of Allegiance was made a point wherein the Objector was not at all ignorant as I take it but I am sure was born some Ages at least a long Age and upwards since that Reign and so never took any elder and I am as confident never any Newer or Later Oath of Allegiance to King James Wherefore being by this Repeal released from that Oath of Allegiance and having never taken any other such Irish Protestants as I speak of are under no Oath of Allegiance to King James the Second and that through his own and his Dear Roman Catholick Parliaments Act. Which being I think the only Service they did us we ought not but with thanks to acknowledge and record it to Posterity tho what Service thereby they did THEIR King as appropriating him to themselves they used to call him we must leave him and them together at their leisure to consider Again we Irish Protestants were not only disarmed as abovesaid but by iterated Proclamations interdicted to have any kind of Arms in our Houses tho merely for the Defence of them from Thieves and Robbers and that under divers Forfeitures which in each later Proclamation were still made severer and in the end as I remember the Penalty was no less than being proceeded against as Traitors How far these Proclamations were executed upon many innocent persons in City and in Country by such who coming into our Houses to search for Arms could easily find what themselves had hid I have no mind to speak But certainly King James's forbidding us so strictly to wear or have Arms was on his part a Discharge to us from the use of them tho in his Defence For what it was Treason for us to Have how could it be Allegiance or Duty for us to Vse Lastly it must not be omitted here what is with the greatest Assurance reported by Multitudes even of our Adversaries that upon the late Defeat at the Boyn King James himself told his Irish Commanders then about him He