Selected quad for the lemma: end_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
end_n	law_n	people_n	safety_n	1,280	5	9.1725	5	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A45692	The doctrine of passive obedience and jure divino disproved and obedience to the present government, proved from Scripture, law, and reason. Written for the satisfaction of all those who are dissatisfyed at the present government: by a lay-man of the Church of England.	Harrison, T. (Thomas), fl. 1683-1711.	1689 (1689)	Wing H917A; ESTC R215651	4,772	2

Protection and Obedience appear to be Co-relative so the Law has appointed reciprocal Oaths to be taken for the better enforcing the performance of these respective Duties that is the Coronation Oath on the King's part and the Oath of Allegiance on the Subjects which is an Agreement or Covenant between King and People all Agreements are Covenants but much more that which hath the Obligation of an Oath to bind it I Ask whether it is not as reasonable a King Conspiring the ruine and destruction of his People by breaking his Oath or Contract and destroying the very Foundation of Government and in Lieu thereof bringing in Popery and Slavery as the late King James did he should forfeit and lose the Right of Governing as that the People Conspiring against him should suffer Death I ask whether the Authority which is inherent in our Kings be Boundless and Absolute or Limited and Determined so that the Acts which they do or Command to be done without that Compass and Bounds be not only sinful in themselves but Invalid and not Authoritative to others The word Loyal comes from the French word La Loy which is to be Legal or True to the Laws of the Land and on the contrary he that obeys the Commands of his Prince contrary to the Laws of the Land is so far from being Loyal that he is an Illegal Person and a Betrayer of the known Laws of his Countrey Passive Obedience is Popery Established by Law when ever the Prince shall please and by Consequence Slavery whereas the Subjects of England never were Slaves in any Particular nor ever would be in the darkest Times of Popery I ask where was the Doctrine of Passive Obedience when Queen Elizabeth assisted the Hollanders against their Lawful Soveraign the King of Spain and when she assisted the Protestants of France at a vast Charge in the Reigns of Charles the Ninth and Henry the Third and in King Charles the First 's Reign the Expedition of Rochel was carried on by King and Parliament and Cordially agreed to by the Fathers of our Church and yet the Protestants of France could never pretend to any such Priviledges as England can justly Claim The late King James's Life has been but one continued and form'd Conspiracy against our Religion Laws Rights and Priviledges and what can be expected from such a Prince who is a Romanist and has Violated his Oath before God and Man and endeavours to Reestablish himself with the Sword by the assistance of one of the greatest Tyrants that ever the World produced It cannot be proved that Monarchy was Originally Instituted by God Almighty or that we are Commanded to obey Kings Exclusively to all other Government I ask where was there such a thing as a King for the first Sixteen hundred years and upwards which is to the Deluge or for several hundered years after it the first King at least the first mentioned in ●oly Writ is Nimrod of the Posterity of Cham who began his Kingdom in the second Century after the Flood whose Kingdom was founded by Force and Violence so that the very foundation of Monarchy seems to be laid from this Person which makes but little for Jure Divino If Kings are by Divine appointment is it not Rational to believe that God would have Commanded all the World to have been Governed by Kings or at least the Christian World ●●d have given them a particular Law to Govern by If Monarchy be Jure Divino then all other Government is Sinful Allegiance is due to him from whom we receive Protection this is allowed on by all the World else why do men after having Sworn Allegiance to their Native Prince and going into another Countrey swear Allegiance to the Prince thereof ●llegiance is due to a King in Possession who is called a King De facto and Treason may be committed against him as well as against a King by regular descent and yet by the Law Treason cannot be committed against the rightful Heir who is called a King de Jure who is out of Possession of the Crown and all Judicial and Political Acts done by a King de Facto are as Valid and Obligatory as if they had been done by a Rightful King in actual Possession of the Throne whereas on the contrary all such Acts done by a King de Jure who is not in Possession of the Crown are totally void in like manner the Law prefers the Peace and Order of the Polity before the particular Rights of the King himself and the great end of the Regal Authority and of the Law it self is the Quiet and Prosperity of the Commonwealth 'T is an acknowledged Aphorism that the safety of the People is the Supream Law and therefore to be preferred before Titles to Succession The Succession of the Crown of England is not by Divine Right but by Political Institution and all the Prerogatives and Authorities of the Crown belong to the Successor de Facto and not to the Heir de Jure or Ex ordine being out of Possession and that Allegiance is due in such case to the former and not to the latter All the Proofs that are brought out of the Gospel for Obedience to Princes do confirm this Maxim of our Law for neither our Saviour or his Apostles bid Christians enquire into the Right and Title of the Roman Emperours but obey them under what Government it was their lot to fall for few of them could pretend a legal Title to the Crown I Challenge all the Passive Obedience and Jure Divino Men in England nay in the whole World to answer these Assertions and Propositions and prove the Doctrine of Passive Obedience and Jure Divino by Scripture Law or Reason when these are proved I dare be bold to affirm the Nation will send for the late King James and submit to his Yoke and lay down their Neck● upon the Block and stand to the mercy of the French and Irish Dragoons to Cut their Throats I Conjure all the Dissatisfied Persons in their Majesties Dominions to be satisfied with these Assertions and Propositions or to ans●er them and shew sound reason for their Dissent from the present Government for a wilful Schism in the State is a Sin and he that Endeavours to sow Dissentions amongst the People and to draw their Majesties Subjects from their true Allegiance is guilty of a double Sin. And because it may be Objected in answering these Propositions they must be forc'd to Write against the Government I do promise if they send a short but direct Answer to Mr. Randal Taylor 's to Print it with a Reply annext to it Licensed May 7. 1689. J. Fraser LONDON Printed for Randal Taylor near Stationers-Hall 1689.

THE Doctrine of Passive Obedience AND JURE DIVINO disproved And Obedience to the present Government proved from Scripture Law and Reason Written for the Satisfaction of all those who are dissatisfyed at the present Government By a Lay-Man of the Church of England GOD by no word binds any People to this or that Form of Government till they by their own Act bind themselves None ought to advance the Greatness of his Soveraign with the Publick Detriment The end of Magistracy is the good of the whole body head and members conjunctly but if we speak divisim then the good of the Society is the ultimate end and next to that as conducent to that the Governours Greatness and Prerogative The Measure of our Government is acknowledged to be by Law and therefore the King cannot confer Authority to any beyond Law so that those Agents deriving no Authority from him are meer Instruments of his Will unauthorized persons in their assaults Robbers King Charles the First 's Declaration at Newmarket 41 says that the Law is the measure of his Power There is no Absolute Authority where there is no Absolute Sub●ection due and there can be no Absolute Subjection due where there is no Absolute Authority no man wants Authority to defend his Life against him who has no Authority to take it away but no man whatsoever has any just Authority that is any Authority at all to take it away contrary to Law. He that resists the Usurpations of Men does not resist the Ordinance of God which alone is forbidden to be resisted but Acts of Arbitrary and Illegal Violence are the Usurpations of men therefore may be resisted We are bound not to part with our Lives but to defend them unless when the Laws of God or our Country require us to lay them down Voluntary Slavery is a sin against the Law of Nature which no man in his right mind can be guilty of Self-Defence never did any mischief in this World and it is impossible that one man's righting himself can do another man wrong the mischief that happens in that Case is wholly to be charged upon those that Invade mens Lives and Liberties and thereby put them upon a necessity of defending them Every man has the right of Self-Preservation as intire under Civil Government as he had in a State of Nature Under what Go●ernment soever I live I may still kill another man when I have no other way to preserve my Life from unjust violence by private hands now the hands of Subordinate Magistrates imployed in acts of illegal violence are private hands and armed with no manner of Authority at all of which this is a most convincing proof that they may be hanged by Law for such Acts which no man can or ought to suffer for what he does by Authority for illegal violence is no part of their Office. What can be more contrary to Reason and the Government of the World yea to the Goodness and Wisdome of Almighty God than that some thousands or millions of people should be so subjected to the power of one man of the same Infirmatives with themselves as in case he should command all their Throats to be cut they are obliged under the pain of no less then Damnation by a thing called Passive Obedience to submit their Necks tamely to the blow Kings were made to Govern and Protect the People not to Destroy them but I never heard that the People were made for Kings Ah but some do object the Corporation Oath binds us to be Passive the Design whereof I shall here inquire into viz. This Oath was made quickly after the Restoration of King Charles the Second from an Unnatural Rebellion and a Popish King was not then thought of King Charles the Second being as likely or likelier to live than the late King James and can it be thought this Oath was made with any other design than to prevent the like Rebellion for the future that as soon as we were delivered from one unreasonable Tyranny and Oppression we should run our selves wilfully into another which is in effect if this Oath is to be taken in the strictest sense or at least standing to the mercy of the Prince whether he will be so or no can any man be so ridiculous as to think the Legislators designed by this Oath to bind themselves and the Community to be so passive that if the King endeavoured to cut our Throats or overthrow the Laws Rights and Priviledges of the Subject and endeavour to bring in Popery and Slavery we should stand still and let him Let all the World judge whether it can with any reason be thought If an absolute Monarch should degenerate into so monstrous unnatural a Tyranny as apparently to seek the destruction of the whole Community then such Community may negatively resist such Subversion and if constrained to it positively resist such Endeavours and defend them selves by force against any Instruments whatsoever for the effecting thereof First David did so when pursued by Saul he made Negative Resistance by flight and doubtless if Negative would not have served the turn he intended secondly to make positive Resistance else why did he strengthen himself by Forces but by that Force of Arms to defend himself if then he might do it for his particular safety much rather may it be done for the publick especially in a limited Monarchy Resistance ought not to be made against all Illegal Proceedings but such which are subversive and unsufferable as when there is an Invasion actually made or eminently feared by a Foreign Power or when by an Intestine Faction the Laws and Frame of Government are secretly Undermined or openly Assaulted in both these cases the Being of the Government being indangered the Peoples safety and trust binds them as well to assist the King in securing as to secure it by themselves the King refusing A Monarch acting according to his Power not exceeding the Authority which God and the Laws have conferr'd on him is no way to be opposed either by all or any of his Subjects but in Conscience to God's Ordinance obeyed This is granted on all sides The Prince is bound to the Laws on the Authority whereof his Authority depends and to the Laws he ought to submit The end of a King is the general good of his People which he not performing he is but the counterfeit of a King. The Obligation of an Oath is dissolved by the cessation of the matter of it or by any remarkable change about the principal cause of the Oath the Obligation of a Nations Allegiance to their Prince can be nothing else but his being in Actual Capacity to Command and Protect them whensoever therefore this Actual Capacity is changed then the Obligation to Obedience must be changed also The Reciprocal Obligation there is between the King and the People binds the one to Protection and just Government and the other to Tribute and Obedience and those duties of