Selected quad for the lemma: england_n
Text snippets containing the quad
|
ID |
Title |
Author |
Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication) |
STC |
Words |
Pages |
|
A61980
|
Nine cases of conscience occasionally determined by Robert Sanderson.
|
Sanderson, Robert, 1587-1663.
|
1678
(1678)
|
Wing S618; ESTC R25114
|
76,581
|
200
|
answer Wherein albeit I shall not come up to the full of what your Letter declareth to be your desire viz. In giving a particular Judgment and estimate of the Eight several Arguments therein proposed and the additional Quaere in the Postscript yet you shall find something tending towards your satisfaction therein by touching upon those points so far as the straits of time would suffer wherein the difficulty of the whole business seemeth chiefly to consist First then it is to be considered that Allegiance is a duty that every Subject under what form of Government soever by the Law of Nature oweth to his Country and consequently to the Sovereign Power thereof For the very same Law which we may call the Law of Nature at least in a large acceptation which inclineth particular men to grow into one civil body of a Common-wealth must necessarily withal imprint a sense and tacite acknowledgment of such a duty of Allegiance in every inferior member of the body unto the Caput Communitatis or Sovereign Power by which that Common-wealth is governed as is necessary for the preservation of the whole body So that the bond of Allegiance doth not arise originally from the Oath of Allegiance as if those that had not taken the Oath had a greater liberty to act contrary to the Allegiance specified in the Oath than those that have taken it have or as if in case the Oath should be quite laid aside there should be no Allegiance due But it is so intrinsecal proper and essential a duty and as it were fundamental to the relation of a Subject quâ talis as that the very name of a Subject doth after a sort import it insomuch that it hath thereupon gained in common usage of speech the stile of Natural Allegiance Whence all these inferences will follow 1. That the bond of Allegiance whether sworn or not sworn is in the nature of it it perpetual and indispensable 2. That it is so inseparable from the relation of a Subject that although the exercise of it may be suspended by reason of a prevailing force whilest the Subject is under such force viz. where it cannot be imagined how the endeavour of exercising it can be effectually serviceable to restore the Sovereign Power to the right owner for the establishment of that Publick Justice and Peace wherein the happiness of Common-wealths consisteth yet no outward force can so absolutely take it away or remove it but that still it remaineth virtually in the subject and obligeth to an endeavour so soon as the force that hindred it is over of actually exercising of it for the advantage of the party to whom of right it is due and the advancement of the common good thereby upon all fit occasions 3. That no Subject of England that either hath by taking the Oaths of Supremacy or Allegiance acknowledged or that not having taken either Oath yet otherwise knoweth or believeth that the Soveraign Power in England to whom his Natural Allegiance is due is the King his Heirs and lawful Successors can without sinning against his Conscience enter into any Covenant Promise or Engagement or do any other Act or Acts whatsoever whereby either to transfer his Allegiance to any other party to whom it is not of right due or to put himself into an incapacity of performing the duties of his bounden Allegiance to his lawful Sovereign when it may appear to be useful and serviceable to him 4. That therefore the taking of the late Solemn League and Covenant by any Subject of England notwithstanding the Protestation in the Preface that therein he had the Honour of the King before his eyes and that express clause in one of the Articles of it wherein he swore The Preservation of the Kings Person and Honour was an act as clear contrary to the Oath of Allegiance and the Natural Duty of every Subject of England as the Assisting of the King to the utmost of ones power which is a branch of the Oaths and the assisting against any person whatsoever with his utmost power those that were actually in Arms against the King which was the very end for which that Covenant was set on foot are contrary the one unto the other 5. And that also for the same reason no Subject of England that hath taken the Oaths and understandeth them or is persuaded that the Sovereignty of this Realm doth of right belong to the King his Heirs and lawful Successors can without sinning in like manner against his Conscence take the Engagement now offered if he so understand the words wherein it is expressed as if they did contain in them and require of the Promiser an acknowledgment that the Supream Power of this Realm whereunto the Subjects owe their bounden Allegiance is rightly vested in those persons that now exercise it or as if they did import an utter Abjuration or renouncing of that Allegiance which was formerly held due to the King II. This being cleared the next enquiry must be Whether or no the words of the Engagement will reasonably bear such a construction as to the understanding of a rational and conscientious man may seem consistent with his bounden duty and Allegiance to his lawful Soveraign Whereof I think there need be no great question made if it be well considered 1. That all expressions by words are subject to such ambiguities that scarce any thing can be said or expressed in any words how cautelously soever chosen which will not render the whole speech capable of more constructions than one 2. That very many men known to be well affected to the King and his Party and reputed otherways both learned and conscientious not to mention the Presbyterians most of whom truly for my own part when we speak of learning and conscience I hold to be very little considerable have subscribed the Engagement who in the judgment of Charity we are to prefume would not so have done if they had not been persuaded the words might be understood in some such qualified sense as might stand with the duty of Allegiance to the King 3. That as you write it is strongly reported and believed that the King hath given way to the taking of the Engagement rather than that his good Subjects should lose their Estates for refusing the same Which as it is a clear evidence that the King and they who are about him to advise him do not so conceive of the words of this Engagement as if they did necessarily import an abandoning of the Allegiance due to him so 't is if true a matter of great consideration towards the satisfaction of so many as out of that fear only have scrupled the taking of it For the doing of that cannot be reasonably thought to destroy the Subjects Allegiance which the King who expecteth Allegiance from all his Subjects advisedly and upon mature deliberation alloweth them to do III. But all this being granted that the words of the Engagement are capable of such construction
him by adding or altering a few words to have declared that intent if he had thought it conducible to his own ends it will be presumed also that it was out of respect of self-interest that he forbare so to do and chose rather to leave his meaning in such general words as will not exclude the sense which bindeth but to the Less and consequently that his declared intent obligeth to no more but to the Less only IV. To bring the matter yet closer and to put it up to the present Cases there are yet two things more to be done First To shew what different constructions the highest I mean and the lowest the words of the Engagement are fairly capable of And Secondly to find as well as we can whether of two is more probably the meaning intended by the Imposers to be declared by the words The words are these I do promise to be true and faithful to the Common-wealth of England as it is now established without King or Lords Wherein there are sundry ambiguities 1. First In the words true and faithful by which may be intended either the promise of that Fidelity and Allegiance which was formerly acknowledged to be due to the King c. to be now performed to those that are presently possessed of the Supream Power as their right and due Or else that promise of such a kind of fidelity as Captives taken in the War promise to their Enemies when they fall under their power viz. to remain true Prisoners of War and so long as they are in their power not to attempt any thing to their destruction 2. Secondly In the word Common-wealth by which may either be meant those persons who are the prevalent party in this Kingdom and now are possessed of and do exercise the Supreme Power therein as if the right of Soveraignity were vested in them Or else the whole entire Body of the English Nation as it is a Civil Society or State within it self distinguished from all other Foreign Estates Taken in the former sense the fidelity promised to the Common-wealth relateth directly to the upholding of that party who are the present Governors de facto and imports subjection to them as de jure But taken in the latter it relateth the safety of the Nation and importeth no more as to the present Governours but to live peaceably under them de facto and to yield obedience to them in things absolutely necessary for the upholding Civil Society within the Realm such as are the defence of the Nation against Forainers the furtherance of Publick Justice and the maintenance of Trade 3. In the words as it is now established c. which may be understood either by way of approbation of what hath been done by way of abolishing Kingly Government and the House of Peers and placing all Authority and Power within this Realm in the House of Commons Or else 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 only as a clause simply and barely reciting what manner of Government it is that this Nation de facto is now under viz. a Government by the Commons only without either King or House of Lords Which Ambiguities considered The highest construction that can be reasonably made of the words is to this effect I acknowledge the Soveraign Power of this Nation whereunto I owe Allegiance and Subjection to be rightly stated in the House of Commons wherein neither King nor Lords as such have or henceforth ought to have any share And I promise that I will perform all Allegiance and Subjection thereunto and maintain the same with my fortunes and life to the utmost of my power And the lowest construction that can be reasonably made of the same words is to this effect Whereas for the present the Supreme Power in England under which Power I now am is actually possessed and exercised by the House of Commons without either King or Lords I promise that so long as I live under that power and protection I will not contrive or attempt any act of hostility against them but living quietly and peaceably under them will endeavor my self faithfully in my place and calling to do what every good member of a Common-wealth ought to do for the safety of my Country and preservation of Civil Society therein V. Now cometh in to be considered in the last place the great Question whether of the two constructions it is That which bindeth to the Most or This which obligeth to the Least the words can well bear that the formers of the Engagement did rather intend to declare by these words They that think the former want not probability of reason to ground their persuasions upon For they consider that those who are presently possessed of the Supreme Power are not minded to part with it if they can hold it And that the likeliest way to hold it is if they can possibly bring the whole people of England or at least the far greatest part thereof to acknowledge that they are rightly possessed of it and to promise Subjection and Allegiance to them as such And that therefore the Engagement being purposely devised and set on foot as the fittest engine to expedite that work must in all reason intend to oblige so far Which being so contrary to their Judgement and persuasion concerning the duty and Oath of Allegiance I cannot blame those that so understand the words of the Engagement if they abominate the very thought of taking it But there wanteth not great probability of Reason on the other side to induce us to believe that the latter and lower sense is rather to be deemed the immediate and declared intent of the Imposers whatsoever cause of suspition there may be that the former meaning may be more agreeable to their secret reserved and ultimate intent between which two if there be any difference as it is not impossible but there may be the Engager is not concerned in it or not yet the Equivocation if there be any in that must be put upon the Imposers not on the Promisers score For thus believing there are amongst others these Probabilities 1. That many prudent and consciencious men of the Royal Party as well Divines and Lawyers as others have thus understood it who we presume would not for any outward respect in the world have taken it if they conceived any more to have been intended in it 2. That it hath often been affirmed both publickly and privately in several parts of the Kingdom if we may believe either common fame or the reports of sundry credible particular persons by those that have persuaded or pressed others to subscribe that the same is the very true intent and meaning of it and no other 3. That if the Imposers had been minded to have declared an intent of binding to more they might easily have framed the words so as not to be capable of a construction binding to Less 4. That as is also credibly reported whilst the form of the words was under debate the