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	parent_n	teach_v	4,178	5	7.2526	4	true

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A43648	An apology for the new separation in a letter to Dr. John Sharpe, Archbishop of York, occasioned by his farewell-sermon, preached on the 28th of June, at St. Giles's in the Fields.	Hickes, George, 1642-1715.	1691 (1691)	Wing H1841; ESTC R12652	21,953	20

you believed you could write Satisfactorily upon the Subject but you were afraid the Government would not like your Reasons and in truth my Lord you had reason for what you said for no Government can like this time-serving and precarious Principle of swearing Allegiance unto Princes Indeed a distressed Government may connive at it in a time of Exigence but it can never approve it it may be content with it upon Force when it can have Allegiance paid upon no better terms but when it grows strong enough it will despise such beggarly Elements of Subjection being the Anthers of then to condign Punishment and order their Books to be burnt by the hand of the Common Hang-man For my own part I am not afraid to tell your Grace that I hope to see such Bishop and Priests become Base and Contemptible in the Eyes Loth of King and People that expound St. Paul as you and Dr. Sherlock have done contrary to the Rules of moral Equity and Justice and advance Allegiance to the Government upon a Principle that is destructive to it and the true and lasting Peace of the Kingdom in which our Happiness does consist No Divines of the Church of England but you and Dr. Sherlock and a few more since the Revolution ever so expounded Rom. 13.1 and 1 Tim. 11.1 2. and I have so good Opinion of the Constancy of our Clergy to their Principles that I verily believe were your Exposition proposed to the Convocation they would condemn it as contrary to right Reason and the moral Duties of Religion acording to which all the general and unlimitted Precepts in the Gospel concerning relative Duties ought to be limitted and understood Doth not Nature it self at first hearing teach us that the Apostle by higher Powers and Kings in those two places meant rightful higher Powers and Kings And will not you your self grant that in other places where he or other Apostles exhorts Children to obey their Parents Wives to obey their Husbands Servants their Masters and the People their Pastors that he me us only such as are truly and rightfully so though according to you own Observation He makes no restriction or distinction what Father Husbands Masters and Pastors are to be obeyed and what not But you imply that the reason of this Exhortation to pray for Kings is general and are not the Reasons as general upon which he exhorts us to perform our relative Duties of our other Superiours as hath been observed in the several learned Answers to Dr Sherlock to which I humbly refer your Grace for your better information in the following Order as I have read them with great Delight and Satisfaction The Title of an Vjurper after a through Settelement examined p. 39 and forwards The Duty of Alleg ance settled upon its true Grounds according to Scripture and Reason Chap. 3. Dr. Sherlock 's Case of Allegiance considered Sect. 3. The Examination of the Arguments drawn from Scripture and Reason in Dr. Sherlock's Case of Allegiance in the Examination of Sect. 4. Pag. 28 I have taken upon me to direct your Grace to these particular places in hopes that you will read them and impartially examine the Reason of these learned Anthours against Dr. Sherlock's way of Expounding the Apostle Rom. 13.1 and by consequence against your own who after this manner have expounded the Apostle's Precept of Praying for Kings in a Sense as unlimitted as he hath done the other of Subjection to them viz. of Praying for Kings without distinction provided they are in Possession of the Throne These Expositions my Lord as some Men think reflect upon their Majesties and the Acts of Recognition and if you have no more to say to justifie your Praying for them Exaltabunt Jacebei the Adversaries I fear will have occasion to triumph My Lord I could name some great Men among you who when they were directed to read some of their Books replied that they were satisfied and desired not to be unsettled but I expect better things from a Person of your Candour and Ingenuity Nay my Lord I think you are bound in Honour and Conscience to examine your Adversaries Reasons against the unlimitted Sense of the Apostle's Exhortations for fear you should happen to be in the wrong and continue to delude the People by an Exposition of his Words apparently contrary to the dictates of natural Reason and by consequence to the meaning of that holy Spirit by which the Apostle wrote You cannot but know that this unlimitted Sense in which you expounded the Apostle is of ill Fame and hath been generally disapproved by the learned Divines of our Church it was insisted on it the times of the late Usurpation by Phanatical time-serving Writers but rejected with disdain by the Martyrs and Confessors of Loyalty among the Suffering Clergy-men as it now is by Jacobeans It was so expounded by Mr. Jenkins who in the late Usurpation argued for Subjection as Dr. Sherlock doth now and was ever after Infamous for it and exposed without Mercy for it by your old Acquaintance Dr. Grove now Bishop of Chichester as you may see in the Margent ‡ Answer to Mr. Jenkins's Farewell Sermon p. 15. It is a most excellent Presertative against Tower-hill But what is this famed Position of the Doctor 's As far as I can learn it was laid down in these very Words or to this purpose Regimen Politicum fundatur in Provident à D●i Extraordinarià This Mr. Jenkins calls his asserting Providential Disposal though one might conjecture what this means yet it had not been so clear without the Comment which he has made upon it in the beginning of his humble Petition to the Supreme Authority the Parliament of the Common-wealth of England in short it is this That whoever they be that get the Power into their hands the Providence of God evidently appears in removing others and investing them with the Government And he looks upon it as his Duty to yield to this Authority all active and chearful Obedience even for Conscience sake This is a fine pleable Principle as a Man can wish 't will lap about your Finger like Barbary Gold Thus when King Charles the First of blessed Memory had the Power in his hands this was an Extraordinary Providence and the Right of Government was in him But stay it may be the Dector had not studied the point so soon but to be sure when the Parliament got the better that was an Extraordinary Providence ideed and then indeed without doubt they were the Supreme Authority as this Petitioner styles them and so was Oliver Cromwel and so was Richard and so was the Rump and so was the Committee of Safety and so was I know not who and so round until his Majesties most happy Restauration and then because there was an Extraordinary Providence in that so is he too and so Mr. Jenkins is as good a Subject as can be desired and so he had been whoever had come And

their Principles Nay sometimes their Principles unless they can change them will oblige them to doe so though they do not think Schism can change its Nature and this they think is their own Case and therefore they challenge you and the whole Regnant Church of England with all the advantage if its Churches and Revenues but more particularly the Intruders as they do not stick to call them and all their Electors and Consecrators to prove that their Separation is a Schism All your Arguments about it are couched in a few trifling Questions of which this that follows is a terrible one Have we not the sam Government in Church and State that we formerly had And they appeal to your Grace's Conscience upon second Thoughts and as you expect to be called to Account for the Sincerity of your Ansiver at the dreadfull Tribunal of God if we have the same Government we formerly had Do you know of no Changes it hath undergone which may reasonably aflect the Mind of every true Englishman as well as the Conscience of a good Subject Was there no substantial Reason for throwing the Word rightfull out of the New Oath of Allegiance Or for the Declaration that so many made for the ease of their Consciences at the taking of it And do not many among you still complain in private of the Alterations that the Revolution hath made in the Government and wish them unmade again You cannot but know they say that there are many Grumbletonians and half Penitents among you and therefore they wonder with what Confidence you could put this Question about the Government as well as that about the Prayers But they say your Question is fallacious because it is not to be put about the Government but about the Governours and they think you will not say that they are the same They also make some distinctions about Things and Titles which I shall not here recite because I believe your Grace hath heard of them and knows them to be very material in Controversies of Allegiance of which Praying for the King next to Fighting for him is a principal part and therefore they say that in contests about Crowns in Christian Kingdoms the Subjects at the peril of their Souls are bound to consider for which of the contesting Princes it is their Duty to pray as well as for which it is to fight The next Question to this say they is as little to the purpose wherein you ask Have we not the same Articles and Doctrines of Religion publickly owned and professed and taught without the least alteration To this they Answer That there are many Doctrines relating to the Controvertie between you and them taught licensed and allowed which have been condemned by your Predecessors of the Church of England in the late Usurparion and formerly and of late censured by the famous University of Oxford and which they verily believe a free Convocation would yet censure as contrary to the Doctrine of the Church of England such as these are the Resisting the Deposing the Forfeiting Doctrines which are to be seen in your licensed Tracts The Doctrine in behalf of bare Possession that it gives a Right to a Crown to which another King hath a legal Title that will justifie a recuperative War the Doctrine of Providence and actual Administration the Doctrine which makes War God's Court and Victory his Sentence lately asserted by the Bishop of St. Asaph The Doctrine of laying aside Kings for Mocal Incapacity and another fine Doctrine that Force from what Cause soever will disengage Subjects from their Oaths of Allegiance and justifie their entring into contrary Obligations and they appeal to your Grace's Conscience if these Doctrines not to mention others which used to be so much branded and decryed by our Divines in Popish and Presbyterian Writers be Articles of our Religion or Doctrines of the Church of England and the Preaching and Printing these Doctrines with Allowance not mentioning the Preferments Men have for Teaching of them is an Argument they say that the Articles and Doctrines you speak of are not owned but disowned not professed but suppressed and that they are not taught so publickly as formerly because they are not pleasing and some Men you know do not love to teach displeasing Things though they be true lovely honest and just But say you again What Government is there in the World will not meet with such Subjects that are not satisfied with it and if that disaffection be a just Reason to break Communion with the Established Church what Ligaments have we to tie Christians together Here they say my Lord you couch a Fallacy which it did not become your Grace to make for the dissatisfaction of Subjects or rather if you please of the People against any Government is they say of two sorts one upon the account of want of a good Title in the Governours and another upon the account of want of good Administration and with respect to the later they acknowledge there are very few Governments which have not in some measure dissatisfied their Subjects but this sort of dissatisfaction they say is very consistent with Church Communion under any Government though the Church-men should happen to favour the Male-administration as sometimes they chance to do But then with respect to the former sort of dissatisfaction which is upon a moral Account they say it becomes a just Reason to break off Communion with the Church when an acknowledgment of Right in wrongful Governours at whom they are so dissatisfied is made a condition or part of the Communion in the Prayers and Sacraments of the Church in the partaking of which Communion doth consift In this case they say the change of Names in the Prayers as to the use of them affects the Consciences of People as much as the change of them in the Oath of Allegiance and therfore for the People to joyn in them would not be to hold the unity of the Spirit but to make themselves Parties to that which they think an unrighteous Usurpation which would be a great Sin But you tell us again That great Revolutions have happened in all Ages and Countries and that you believe it will not easily be found that ever any Christians separated from the Church upon the account of them Here my Lord they distinguish again and say that Revolutions of Government are also of two sorts one in which the new Governours happen to acquire a clear and undoubted Title to the Government and the other when they acquire the Government without a clear and undoubted Title which happens when another claims it by a clearer Title and prosecutes his Claim As to the first sort of Revolutions they acknowledged with your Grace that never any Christians did or ought to separate from the Church upon the account of them But as to the second they assert that they commence just Causes as of Non-subjection so of Separation when owning the Right of the new Governours