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	owe_v	parent_n	5,339	5	9.4563	5	true

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A35632	The case of pluralities & non-residence rightly stated in a letter to the author of a book called, A defence of pluralities, &c. shewing the false reasonings and evil doctrines therein contained / by an impartial hand, and a hearty well-wisher to the Church of England.	Impartial hand and a hearty well-wisher to the Church of England.	1694 (1694)	Wing C966; ESTC R16560	28,436	93

hold two Bishopricks because some Primitive Bishops presided over two several Cities Now did ever any one in his right Wits assert the Bounds and Limits of Dioceses and Parishes to be fixed by a Jus Divinum Do not you frequently throughout your Book suppose them to be constituted and determined by Laws Humane and Ecclesiastical And if it be left to men to bound out the precincts why may they not alter unite and divide them as they please The Primitive Examples you your self answer and prove them to be of no force by the Canon which you quote part of which says Civitates praedictae nunquam proprios Episcopos habuerunt For if those Cities were never two distinct Dioceses then he who held them could not be a Dualist even according to your own argument unless you take it for granted That a Christian City qua talis be a Bishop's See which I am sure you will never be able to prove Some of our present Dioceses do indeed contain such an extent of Land as formerly made two but how came they of old to be two was it not meerly from humane Authority and why may not things be altered by the same Power they were at first constituted And therefore I am asham'd to hear you trifle and cry out Pag. 39. No humane Authority can make that lawful which God and the Nature of things have made unlawful Whoever said that God and the nature of things divided Dioceses and Parishes And what Child's play is it to talk as you do Pag. 42. where you would prove the lawfulness of Pluralities from the lawfulness of one that is Bishop of one Diocese to undertake the Administration of another during its vacancy or the incapacity of him to whom it belongs I will only observe that you make the Bishop of Sarum to lead the Van in both Cases and look upon it not as an argument but a Jest ad hominem It ill becomes one who pretends so great a Reverence and Tenderness for the Order as you do always to be aiming at a Bishop and studying to expose him tho hitherto God be thanked you have exposed your self most of all But if you do not take more care of your self you will become one of the Traditors before you are aware of it And yet as I said though I agree not with you in this medium yet thus far I agree with you in the Conclusion That Plurality is not in it self against the Divine Law and considering the Poverty of some Churches 't is absolutely necessary and some men may better merit and serve two than others one and therefore in God's Name let them have ' em Yet No Man ought to have more Souls committed to his Charge than he can or will watch over This doth evidently appear both from the Law of Nature and the Gospel whatever you pretend to the contrary For I think it will be needless to prove that by them both we are oblig'd to perform our promises and execute the several Offices we undertake and unless you have forgotten your Vows and Engagements plighted to God and his People at your Ordination you cannot but know that 't is the Vow and Office of a Presbyter of the Church of England to watch over and instruct the People committed to his charge And he who shall say that he is not obliged to serve in the Church committed to his charge doth in effect renounce his Orders in the Church of England And he who shall further assert That he is not obliged by the Vows and Promises which he hath made if they are not unlawful doth in consequence renounce the Christian and even Natural Religion And he who undertakes any Engagements which he knows he cannot perform or makes any Vows he resolves not to fulfill in taking of them he doth worse than break them So that he who accepts so many or great Benefices as he cannot or will not look after transgresses the Law of Christ and Nature too But there are two things pretended in this Case 1. The Dispensation of the Bishop To which I answer That there is no Dispensation to be had for perpetual Non-residence and neglect of the People Tho' I must confess the Dispensations are larger than a good man would wish for yet they will not come up to your purpose You often indeed call upon the Bishops to execute the Discipline of the Church and to make Incumbents perform the Terms and Conditions of their Dispensation that is to Preach Thirteen times a Year in each Church and to reside two Months which is too little in all conscience and yet as little as it is I do not doubt but if the good Bishops should take you at your word and send you and your Brethren to labour amongst your Rusticks you would think your selves severely handled and look on it as a harder imposition than that which the Parliament lays upon you and be ready to cry out of an eleventh Persecution I should look on that Pluralist to have something of Conscience who having gotten two of the best Livings in Thirty Miles distance should do at least what the Canon and his Dispensation requires of him 'T is but a low pitch of vertue to be just so good as the Law of Man would have us and yet it were well if such as you defend especially your dear self could do but this Your Dispensations which you now plead in your own defence shall hereafter rise up in Judgment against you For I know many Pluralists and I believe Sir you know one at least who Preach not half so often and reside not half so much upon both their Livings as they ought to do in each And yet after all if the Dispensation were as full as you could desire it would certainly be invalid as tending to the Breach of Vows which no Christian Bishop can pretend to without usurping a Papal Power He who shall undertake to annull a Minister's Vows of feeding the People committed to his charge may by the same Authority dispense with my Oath of Allegiance or with those Natural duties which I owe to my Parents or Children But some have answered That these Vows and Promises are to be taken in a legal sence and are qualified by those words according to the Order of this Church of England so that he who takes no more Liberty than the Canons of this Church allow cannot justly be accused for violation of his Faith But 1st The Church allows no such liberty as that of perpetual Non-residence and neglect of labour as is already proved 2dly These words do not at all affect our obligation to personal labour and therefore cannot in the least mitigate or abate it And that this may appear I will set down the whole Question of which these words are part Do you think in your heart that you be truly called according to the will of our Lord Jesus Christ and the Order of this Church of England to the Order and