Selected quad for the lemma: duty_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
duty_n	child_n	honour_v	parent_n	3,428	5	9.3487	5	true

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A14777	A moderate defence of the Oath of Allegiance vvherein the author proueth the said Oath to be most lawful, notwithstanding the Popes breues prohibiting the same; and solueth the chiefest obiections that are vsually made against it; perswading the Catholickes not to resist souerainge authoritie in refusing it. Together with the oration of Sixtus 5. in the Consistory at Rome, vpon the murther of Henrie 3. the French King by a friar. Whereunto also is annexed strange reports or newes from Rome. By William Warmington Catholicke priest, and oblate of the holy congregation of S. Ambrose.	Warmington, William, b. 1555 or 6.; Sixtus V, Pope, 1520-1590. De Henrici Tertii morte sermo. English.	1612 (1612)	STC 25076; ESTC S119569	134,530	184

disturbance of him or his people c. This they so vertuous and learned did with their Prince without resistance as knowing it to be their dutie so to do and his case to be farre different from that of our Soueraigne who was neuer excommunicated nor relapsed or indeede hereticke as I haue alreadie said and could more largely proue if need were yet they did not then nor euer will denie the Popes spirituall power to excommunicate And may not the King of great Brittaine require the like of his subiects both Clergie and people and they performe the same as well as the French without preiudicating the Apostolicall power When Monsignore Fontana Bishop of Ferrara knowing well the now Duke of Modina then vsurping the title and dominion of Ferrara to be excommunicated by name in most parts of Italie did notwithstanding of necessitie communicate with him as a subiect with his Prince and did refuse to publish it in his owne Church without the Dukes consent notwithstanding the Popes order and commandement vnto him Will any man say that this good Bishop denied the Popes spirituall power to excommunicate That were ridiculous or offended in disobedience No necessitie if nought else excused So enough of this matter There is another knot to be vntied which seemeth insoluble to wit that I do beleeue that neither the Pope nor any person whatsoeuer hath power to absolue me of this Oath or any part thereof c. And that I doe renounce all pardons dispensations to the contrary Is not this a plaine denying of the Popes spirituall authoritie Cardinall Bellarmine in Tortus plainly teacheth me Tortus §. 5. that he who a little before by swearing denieth the Popes power to bind the same doth now denie his power to loose For of those words of our Lord Quodcunque solueris super terram erit solutum in coelis all Catholicke men gather that power belongeth to the chiefe Bishop to absolue not onely from sins but also from punishments censures lawes vowes and oathes when it may be expedient to the glorie of God and health of soules This knot to him that vieweth it well will not be found to haue more difficultie to vnknit then the former of binding For as it is an vndoubted veritie that no Bishop no nor the Pope can by vertue of excommunication lesse by any temporall power out of his owne territories thrust any priuate Christian man out of his possessions who before had right thereto and bereaue him thereof as hath bene proued so it is as certaine that they can no more absolue a subiect of his dutie and naturall allegiance to his Prince and of his oath of fealtie made vnto him discharging him of all subiection and obedience then they can a wife of her dutie to her husband of childrens honoring their parents or seruants their maisters being warranted for the performance thereof by the law of God Honour thy father and thy mother c. against which no power in earth can dispence nor absolue them that is release them of such dutie At this word Absolue some silly soules yea and others that would be accounted wise are as it were scandalized beleeuing that taking the Oath they shall denie the Popes spirituall power of absoluing a sinner of his sinnes in foro conscientiae which euery Priest hauing iurisdiction may do little considering that they are not like to confesse their sinnes to him this yeare or euer in their life and out of confession his authoritie stretcheth not to remit or absolue one from deadly sinne These in a sort resemble some good creatures that I haue noted in Italie when they heare the Preacher in his sermon vtter this word Confiteor will by and by knocke their breasts thinking he is talking of confession when as the word signifieth sometime to giue thankes And like people of small vnderstanding beleeue that by renouncing all pardons and dispensations to the contrary they must denie the Popes power of granting indulgences or pardons as the practise is to beades graines crosses c. and of dispensing in any case whatsoeuer it being spirituall as cannot be denied Here I stand ambiguous Prou. 26. whether I should follow Salomons counsell or no Responde stulto iuxta stultitiam suam ne sibi sapiens esse videatur Answer a foole according to his folly lest he thinke himselfe wise It shall not be haply amisse for their more satisfaction to condescend somewhat vnto such letting them to vnderstand that to men of any iudgement it must needs be ridiculous who know it cannot nor ought so to be vnderstood but onely of pardoning and dispencing or releasing subiects of a lawfull Oath of fealtie and dutifull obedience to their Soueraigne This is not spirituall power which belongeth to the Church and therefore when such pardons and dispensations shall be offered by his Holines as is neuer like to be euery good subiect is bound to renounce them as being contrary to the ordinance of almightie God I aske these what they thinke whether the Pope or any power in earth can command absolue in this sence as we take it or dispence against the law of God and nature They must needs say as truth is he cannot and according to S. Thomas doctrine In his quaesunt de lege naturae 2.2 q. 88. ar 10. in praeceptis diuinis non potest per hominem dispensari In such things as are of the law of nature and in diuine precepts it cannot be dispensed withall by man Then I inferre and it is Barclaies argument not solued by Cardinall Bellarmine But subiection and obedience due to Princes and superiors is de iure naturali diuino this cannot be denied being euident in Scriptures Therefore neither the Pope nor any power in earth can command any thing absolue or dispense against it and consequently cannot command subiects not to performe obedience to their Prince or superior in that wherein he is superior if he should it is lawfull for them not to obey him not to accept of such a dispensation We grant with the Cardinall that it appertaineth to the Popes spirituall power to absoblue from sins also from paines and censures lawes vowes and oathes verumt amen non quidquid libet licet it is not meant in all lawes all vowes nor all oathes No man I thinke will say that he can absolue from the iust ciuill lawes of secular Princes for that were in alienam messem falcem mittere and to be a monarchicall superior in temporals which is not to be admitted but onely in his owne lawes and the Canons Decrees or positiue lawes of the Church wherein I confesse he hath plenitudinem potestatis as likewise Princes haue in the commonwealth and thereby may dispense in their owne lawes as S. Thomas teacheth 2.2 q. 6.7 ar 4. Princeps habet plenariam potestatem in republica 1.2 q. 96. a. 5. ad 3. Who according to the same in another place is said to be

other kings of Iuda who were much more wicked then Saul was and on impious Ieroboam that led with him all Israel to Idolatrie Achab Ochozias Ioachaz and the rest of the kings of Israel who exceeded in all kind of impietie in whose dayes florished Ahias Semeias Elias Eliseus Isaias Ieremy and other great Prophets indued with maruellous courage zeale authoritie and sanctitie of life yet none went about to depose or take the crowne from the head of any Prince lawfully inuested though he were neuer so wicked knowing right well that whatsoeuer they wrought with Princes about the ouerthrow of some or setting vp of others or foretold what was to happen vnto them it was not by any ordinarie power that they had but extraordinary by speciall commandement and reuelation from Almightie God Now by this fact of Samuel it may well be deduced that whensoeuer the Pope gouernour of Gods house shall haue speciall reuelation from aboue as Samuel had that such a particular king is to be deposed and another placed in his roome thē it cannot be denied but he may do as Samuel did that is as I haue said he may and ought to declare the will of God reuealed vnto him without any concurrence to the execution thereof onely denouncing Gods sentence of deiection or deposition of such a Prince when he knoweth certainly that so is the will and pleasure of our Lord whose will none may contradict Voluntati eius quis resistit Who is able to resist his will nor is any to expostulate why he doth so And if such a thing should euer happen then were the argument good and sound otherwise weake and of no force If any man after this obiect vnto me that Athalia was deposed and slaine by the commandement of Ioiada the high Priest when she had reigned seuen yeares therefore it seemeth he had authoritie frō God so to do and if he had why should not the Pope haue the like ouer exorbitant Princes For solution hereof I referre him to the place of holy Scripture where he may see with halfe an eye 4. Reg. 11. that Athalia was no lawfull Queene but an vsurping tyrant who had murthered all the kingly race and so intruded her selfe most vniustly Whereupon Ioiada high Priest brought forth and presented to the people Ioas sonne to Ochozias who was strangely preserued by meanes of his Aunt Iosaba when he was but an infant from that tyrannous slaughter made by his Grandmother Athalia and together with their full consents performing the dutie of a good subiect restored the true heire to the right of his kingdome which could hardly haue bene effected without the high Priests assistance who was the chiefest in matters of religion and therefore much honoured and respected of the people So this fact of Ioiada proueth nothing but that it is lawfull for a state or commonwealth to depose an vsurper and restore the true heire to his right and not that he had any authoritie to depose any lawfull Prince were he otherwise neuer so exorbitant in life manners and beleefe or cruell in his gouernment Well Sir though this be granted that neither the Synagogue of the Iewes nor Samuel the Prophet nor Ioiada the high Priest had authoritie to depose Princes and dispose of their temporals yet can we not be perswaded but that the Church of Christ and his Vicar in earth the Pope whose power is not limited to one sort of people as it was in the old law but is extended ouer all Christians as well Princes as people throughout the world may iustly depose kings and dispose of their kingdomes when he shall iudge it expedient to the glory of God and vtilitie of the Church And the rather because this hath bene practised by diuerse precedent Popes vpon certaine Princes in these latter ages for crimes adiudged by them to deserue the same which we suppose they would neuer haue enterprised had they not sufficient warrant out of holy Scriptures or examples of the Apostles and ancient Bishops of Gods Church or else authoritie from the holy Ghost by a definitiue sentence in some generall Councell We pray you touch this point so as you may resolue vs throughly whether they haue all or some of these proofes for that authoritie if they haue not then is it cleare in our opinions not to be de fide and if it be not a point of faith binding all to beleeue that his Holines hath such authoritie we see no reason why vpon his bare commandement we should so deepely plunge our selues into a sea of calamities as of necessitie we must by losing all lands and goods whatsoeuer we haue to the vtter vndoing of our selues wiues and children and hazarding our liues by perpetuall imprisonment for refusing to performe our dutie to our Soueraigne by taking the Oath of allegiance wherein we sweare fealtie and ciuill obedience which is due by the law of God and nature Reddite quae sunt Caesaris Caesari quae Dei Deo Render saith our Sauiour to Caesar that which is Caesars and to God that which is Gods Besides if we refuse it we shall not take away but greatly increase the heauie imputation of treason and treacherie which our aduersaries haue this long time layd on Catholickes and confirme them in this their wrong opinion that to be a true Catholicke of the Romane Church and a good subiect cannot stand and agree together Beloued brethren lest any man be scandalized at this my writing iudging it not to sauour of a true Catholick heart nor of an obedient child of the Apostolicke Church but rather to proceed from an euill affected minde fraught with passion accept for a premunition and I wish I may not be mistaken * that sincerely and without spleene or passion I intend to set downe nothing but what I shall thinke in my opinion to be truth and that I honour and reuerence with heart and mind the holy Catholicke Church of Rome acknowledging and stedfastly beleeuing with the holy Fathers that to be the mother of Churches the Sea of Peter the rocke against which hell gates shall not preuaile the house of God out of which who eateth the Lambe is profane and out of which no saluation is to be hoped for as the great D. S. Augustine and others do teach vs In serm super gestis Emer Donat. and elsewhere Hieron ep ad Dam. Amb. 1. Tim. 3. Athan. ep ad Felicem and that the Pope is the chiefe Bishop and Pastor thereof Christs Vicar in earth and successor to S. Peter prince of the Apostles who by his spirituall power giuen by Christ our Lord hath iurisdiction ouer all Christian Princes and monarchs as well as poore men so farre as is requisite to the conuersion and feeding of soules But I cannot easily be induced to beleeue that this power giuen him by Christ in S. Peter extendeth it selfe to the depriuation or deposition of secular Princes of their dominions or to the deposing

be obeyed in such a precept So say Panorm and Syluester ver obed § 5. where they say that in this case we are not to obey although the superiour command vnder paine of excommunication for it bindeth not quando malè imponitur when it is iniustly imposed Emmanuel Sa likewise Obediendum non est cum creditur inde malum oriturum Aphoris Sa ver obedien When it is thought euill may come by obeying we are not to obey Againe He is not bound to obey that thinketh the superiour commandeth vpon error as being misinformed and that if he knew the truth he would not command and also that superiours by their generall edicts intend not to bind with great detriment This Sa. And had not Catholickes I pray you before the Popes second Briefe iust cause to be perswaded that the Breues were procuted by sinister suggestions and wrong informations of some ouer-hastie and busie person and that if his Holinesse had had true and particular notice by some other true harted subiect how things stand with them have in England what perturbations they might breed in the Church and what losse and detriment was vndoubtedly to fall on such as should obey them and thereby refuse the Oath that he would neuer haue granted forth the said Breues in maner and forme as he did nor when he had granted them intended to bind Catholickes to obey to their so great detriment and damage For that were addere afflictionem afflictis which kind of crueltie is not to be thought can proceed from that holy Sea And this may suffise for answer to the point so much stood vpon by many inconsideratly precise of obeying or disobeying the Popes Breues prohibiting the iust Oath of allegiance Howbeit a word or two more may not be omitted vt obstruatur os loquentiū iniqua to flop the mouth of standerous tongues and to answer a fond or rather strong argument as some thinke and say that in dubijs as is the Popes power of deposing Princes in their opinions we are to haue recourse to the Sea of Peter for solution and there to learne what is truth to be embraced what is errour to be auoided Yea what is there decided the Church is bound to beleeue though it be that vertue is euill and vice good as Cardinal Bellarmine formerly hath taught strange doctrine Lib. 4. de sum Pont. cap. 5. §. Vltimo but now in his late Recognition retracted saying that he spake of doubtfull acts of vertues or vices For if in the old law the decision of difficult and doubtfull questions and ambiguities inter sanguinem sanguinem causam causam Deut. 17. lepram lepram were granted to the Priests of the Leuiticall stocke and to the Iudge that should be for the time much more to the Priests of the new law and to Christs Vicar the chiefe Iudge and interpreter in all Ecclesiasticall controuersies Therefore in this case of the Oath now controuerted Catholickes are to require no more but his bare precept and whosoeuer disobeyeth it taking the oath sinneth deadlie This some wise in their owne conceits and learned in the estimation of others haue said and taught howsoeuer otherwise verie inconstant in their opinions iudgements but how prudently charitably or learnedly let the discreet reader iudge These haue forgotten who it is that saith Nolite iudicare non iudicabimini Luc. 6. nolite condemnare non condemnabimini And what S. Thomas teacheth Ecclesia non debet praesumere de alique peccatum Supplem q. 47. ar 3. quousque probetur The Church ought not to iudge any of sin till it be proued Indeed if the Popes precept were such as S. Iohn Euangelist recommended and often inculcated to his Disciples at his departure out of this world Hieron lib. descrip Eccles which was as S. Hierome writeth Filioli diligite alterutrum Little children loue ye one another then as he said vpon their tediousnesse of hearing it so oft repeated Praeceptū Domini est si solum fiat sufficit It is our Lords precept and if it only be done it sufficeth then I say we should not need to diue farther in seeking reasons but simply to obey quia praeceptum Papae est because it is the precept of the Pope but by reason of the infinite difference betweene the commanders and the commandements we must craue pardon if we say Et si solum fiat non sufficit if in this case of the Oath there be but his bare precept it is not sufficient Touching the other point I must needes confesse that in obscurities and doubtfull questions and difficulties in the Law of Christ all Christians are to repaire to him that sitteth in Peters chaire for the light of interpretation and true solution thereof as S. Hierome did to Pope Damasus Hieron ep ad Damasum desiring if he had erred in his writings to be corrected by him Also Athanasius in his distresses appealed to Foelix and Iulius Popes of Rome S. Iohn Chrysostome to Innocentius Coste rus in Enchir. de sum Pont. Calendion of Antioch to Pope Foelix and other ancient Fathers in their distresses and difficult causes were wont alway to seeke for succour and redresse of the Pope of Rome then being but in cases perspicuous wherin are no ambiguities or doubts to be made against which nothing was euer formally decreed in any generall Coūcell nor by any ancient Father taught but is most plaine and euident in holy Scriptures and as cleare as the Sunne in the firmament that needeth not And such is the duty of inferiours to superiours of subiects to their lawfull Princes of children to parents of rendring to Caesar that is Caesars and so forth for which there is an expresse commandement from the Highest wherein no power created can dispence or iustly command the contrary Which if any should attempt to do as his Holinesse seemeth to haue done in prohibiting the Oath of allegiance it may well be by a Catholik English subiect in all humilitie and reuerence to the Sea Apostolicke yet with Christian courage answered Non obedio praecepto Regis sed praecepto legis 2. Macch. 7. I obey not the precept of the King that is the Pope but the precept of the law And Obedire opertet Deo magis quàm hominibus Act. 5. We must obey God rather then men To conclude in such a case not to do as the Pope commandeth in this Breues so there be no cōtēpt as I haue said of his precept is no mortall sinne ex fine enine morales actus speciem habent See Caiet 5. Precepti transgressio Tho. 2.2 q. 105. ● 1. ad 1. For morall acts haue their formality of the end and such disobedience being materialis tantum maketh not a deadly sinne cose quently no sin at al. And this much as touching obedience to the Popes H. Breues It followeth now that we treat briefly of a subiects dutie

is not deliuered vs by man but is proclaimed from God admitteth no humane dispensation at all neither is it lawfull for any man in any sort to absolue from these that is Ioan. De Turrecrē in can Lector dist 34. diuine precepts Such I take our Oath of allegiance to be published and proclaimed by God commanding subiects and all inferiors to render vnto Caesar and all superiours their due against which no dispensation no absolution can be of force And herein I say not that his Holinesse cannot dispence or absolue from any Oath but from this particular Oath wherein is nothing promised which is not manifestly law full and profitable and due to him to whom it is made and in such an Oath S. Thomas saith 2.2 q. 89. ar 9. ad 3. dispensation seemeth to haue no place because besides the obligation to Almightie God there riseth a new to his Maiestie which cannot be released by Pope subiects or any other then by himselfe to whom it is made Neither doth the Popes power extend to the taking away of the right of a third person in matters which are not Ecclesiasticall as Caietan affirmeth And therefore cannot absolue a subiect from an Oath of allegiance to his Prince for that it would be preiudiciall vnto him Caiet In 2 2. q. 89. ar 9. Praelatus Ecclesiasticus etiam Papa c. An Ecclesiasticall Prelate saith he yea the Pope hath not in such maner power ouer Oathes as ouer vowes Because it is not in the Popes power to take away the right of a third man in matters not Ecclesiasticall as it is in his power to change to wit vowes into something more acceptable to God for that he is Gods Vicar and is not the Vicar of that man neither is he so ouer him as he may depriue him of his goods at his pleasure Tolet. instr sacer li. 4. c. 23. nu 3. Whereto agreeth Card. Tolet Quando iuramentum c. When an Oath is to the vtilitie of some third person it cannot be dispenced withall no not by the Pope without the consent of the third person as also the Pope cannot take away an other mans goods Whereto tendeth our Oath but to the vtilitie or good of his Maiesty and to his great preiudice would it not be if his subiects should accept of any absolution from the same Speculator likewise denieth that the Pope may absolue any man from a lawfull Oath Tit. de legato §. nunc ostendendum n. 24. because the bond of keeping an Oath and performing it to God is of the law of nature and diuine By this appeareth that iust and lawfull Oathes being such as may be preiudiciall to a third person cannot be dispenced withall But the Church vseth to remit an Oath extorted by force or feare It may be answered that if such an Oath extorted be manifestly vniust and would be against the law of God to be taken without force or feare no violence or feare of losing goods or life can make it lawfull Which doctrine is taught in the Canon-law lib. 1. Decretal de his quae vi metusue cap. 2. in glossa and 15. c.q. 6. in glossa Extra de iureiurando that for no feare it is lawfull to incurr e a mortall sin C. super co de vsuris Which in another place is taught also of a veniall sinne Therfore an Oath extorted of a thing vnlawfull the Church vseth not to remit or release when as no man will thinke that vnlawfull Oaths are to be kept as hath bene said before What say you then to lawfull Oathes yet compelled by feare of losing goods libertie c If it be iust and lawfull which thou art required to do why doest thou refuse to do it and why expectest thou compulsion to make thee to performe that which in dutie thou art bound I know thou wilt grant that a father may shake his rod threaten to correct his child and beate him if of stubburnnesse will not aske blessing or will not do his dutie by obeying him So may the Magistrate who carrieth the sword ad vindictam malefactorum not onely threaten but really punish and force thee to performance of that which is lawfull and thou oughtest otherwise to do And God himself the patterne of good gouernment threatneth hell fire and punisheth seuerely the transgressors of his law with many corporall afflictions and therby forceth many to obserue and keepe his commandements which of loue without any such compulsion they ought in dutie to do Will any hereof inferre that the Pope or any power on earth can absolue these from performing their duty to God or man for that it is extorted by feare Then I conclude that lawfull Oathes such as are made by subiects to Princes of their fidelitie bind in conscience although they be forced on them by feare of punishments and cannot be dispenced withall To this purpose Caietan saith that Oathes of him that promiseth whether they be coacted or voluntarie Caiet in 2.2 si habent materiam bonam moraliter do binde in the court of conscience Whereas some will say that Popes haue practised this authorie of absoluing subiects from lawfull Oaths it may be answered with Ioan. de Turrecrecremata Syluester Soto and others That the facts of Popes make not an article of faith And it is one thing to do somewhat de facto and another to determine that so it ought to be done de iure Turrecremata speaking of vnlawfull dispensations saith And if it were so done at any time by some Pope either ignorant in diuine learning or blinded with couetousnesse of mony which for such exorbitant dispensatiōs is accustomed to be offered or else to please men it followeth not that he could do it iustly that was Clement 3. dispencing with Constantia a professed Nunne to marrie with Henrie 6. Emperor son to Fredericke 2. The Church is gouerned or ought to be gouerned by rights lawes not by such facts or examples Thus you see that it is no denying his Holinesse spirituall power to say that he cannot dispence in all lawes all vowes or all oathes nor consequently absolue me of this Oath of allegiance How I pray you can I sweare truly as I must if I do well that which neuer was determined or defined by the Church but is matter of opiniō diuersly held of diuers learned men Verie well and without sinne And you may obserue what is commanded in holy Scripture to such as shall take an Oath Ierem. 4. Iurabis Domino in veritate in iudicio in iustitia For then is a man said to sweare truly that his doctrine of opinion v. g. that the Pope cannot by any authoritie depose Princes or such a thing is true not onely when he certainly knoweth it to be so but also when he is perswaded in his conscience vpon probable reason Tolet. instru sacer l. 4. c. 21 nu 4. Syl. verb. periurium 22. q. 2.