Selected quad for the lemma: england_n

Word A Word B Word C Word D Occurrence Frequency Band MI MI Band Prominent
england_n according_a king_n law_n 6,417 5 5.0908 4 true
View all documents for the selected quad

Text snippets containing the quad

ID Title Author Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication) STC Words Pages
A41762 The Grand problem briefly discussed, or, Considerations on the true mature and limits of obedience and submission to governours with respect to the different forms of an absolute and limited monarchy / by a divine of the Church of England. Divine of the Church of England. 1690 (1690) Wing G1506; ESTC R28666 8,624 14

There is 1 snippet containing the selected quad. | View lemmatised text

kill his Persecutors tho' lawful Governours than suffer himself to be put to death by them These are the principal Arguments for Obedience or at least submission and Non-Resistance to Governours in all Cases which we allow to be very good and cogent in debitis circumstantiis where the Covernour is absolute But that they do not affect the Subjects of our English Monarchy will I presume be granted by them that seriously and impartially weigh the following Considerations II. In a mixed Government or limited Monarchy the Obedience due from the Subject is supposed Conditional or limited whose Rule and Measure is the Laws of the Land where we live in conjunction with the Laws of God And then Obedience is Either 1. Active to all Lawful Commands i. e. in things enjoyned or at least not forbidden by the Laws of God and the Laws of the Land Or 2. Passive or Submission to the Kings pleasure in suffering patiently instead of performing such his commands as are contrary to the Laws of God but not contrary to the Laws of the Land and consequently 't is the suffering Legal Penalties though undeserved VVith this Restriction must all those Texts be interpreted which in Scripture require Obedience or Submission For If the King goes about to oppress or destroy his people without authority from God and against the plain Laws of the Land it seems reasonable that He may be opposed at least to some degree by his People or Subjects For though a Prince is Gods Vice-gerent and ought not to be Murdered or Deposed by his Subjects his person being Sacred and reserved only to the Divine vengeance yet that He may when other means prove ineffectual be by force compelled to keep within the limits of the Law seems reasonable Because otherwise the Laws are mere trifles and insignificant Formalities To what purpose are Acts of Parliament made to confirm our Liberties and Properties if after such confirmation we are no more sure of enjoying them than we were before Why are great Revenues settled on the Crown by the peoples gift for the grant of some new privilege or confirmation of former Grants if notwithstanding this the Prince at pleasure may trample upon all without the least controul Certainly had Parliaments known such a power inherent in the King uncapable of Restriction they would have saved their own and the Nations Money and not have parted with it to facilitate as it may happen their own destruction That Government in general is of Divine Institution there can be no Question St. Paul saith Rom. 13.1 There is no Power but of God but the specification of this power or the different forms of Government may depend on the pleasure of Men. As the Husbands power over the Wife is from God yet that this man in particular rather than another should exercise that power was at first from the designation consent and choice of the VVoman her self so the Magistrates power is from God yet the exercise of it by few or many hands by one absolute or by one limited by certain Laws and Rules depended originally on the consent and approbation of the people for certainly the Scripture hath not determined which of these should be done VVe read indeed the words of God Himself Prov. 8.15 By me Kings Reign and St. Paul spake of absolute Emperors when he said Rom. 13.1 The powers that be are ordained of God But it doth not follow from thence that no other form of Government hath Divine Authority For 1. As to the former Text the verse next following will prove Aristocracy to be jure Divino as certainly as that proves Monarchy to be so Prov. 8.16 By me Princes Rule and Nobles even all the Judges of the Earth And 2. As to the latter place if St. Paul had lived when Rome was a Common-wealth what should hinder but that he might have preacht the same Doctrine might he not have said of the Consuls Senate Tribunes c. The powers that be are ordained of God If Monarchy then be said to be jure Divino it must not be understood exclusive of all other Forms of Government but either in a general sense as it must be acknowledged the best and subject to fewer inconveniences than any other Form and as being the most agreeable to right Reason and the voice of Nature being the first of Governments And that which is still every where found among such people as have only the light of nature to direct them Or Finally as it best represents the supreme authority of God on Earth Earthly Magistrates being Gods Representatives do best appear to be so in a Monarchical State But that Monarchy is strictly and properly of Divine institution cannot be defended 1. Because then all other Forms of Government are wicked Inventions under which it must be unlawful to live the which I think none will assert 2. Because then the Monarch sinneth against God if he parts with the least branch of his prerogative without express license from Heaven and then our English Government it self though Monarchical must also be condemned It seems therefore as I conceive very plain that though the Kings power be from God whose Vicegerent He is and not the peoples Creature yet He may be limited in the exercise of that Power by the Laws of the Realm made by the free consent and approbation of Himself and his people And this seems to have been the opinion of our Three last Kings The Blessed Martyr Charles the I. Declared from New-Marked That the Law was the measure of his power and at another time That his Prerogatives were built on the Law of the Land King Charles the II. in His Speeches to his Parliaments several times declared his Resolution To make the Law his Rule and to Govern according to Law And King James the Second in His Speech at His first sitting in Privy Council reciting a Calumny that had been reported of Him That he was a man for Arbitrary Power to assure us of the contrary he saith I know the Laws of England are sufficient to make the King as great a Monarch as I can wish By which it appears That as the Kings of England are not absolute So the Obedience which their Subjects owe them should be measure by the known Laws of the Land If therefore the King requires that which is not forbidden by the Law of God but yet is beyond that authority which the Constitutions of the Kingdom have assigned Him his Subjects may for the sake of peace avoiding of scandal or such like end for the publick good comply by a voluntary concession with his will but they are not in Conscience bound to obey And if He pursues such illegal practices extravagantly designing to subvert the peoples Civil or Religions Rights to introduce a false Religion and Arbitrary power and enslave not only the present but all future Generations His Subjects are so far from being obliged to assist Him in such illegal and