Selected quad for the lemma: england_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
england_n	bishop_n	king_n	see_v	4,142	5	4.2666	3	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A61516	A discourse of the nature and obligation of oaths wherein, satisfaction is tendered touching the non-obligation and unlawfulness of the oath called, the Solemn League and Covenant : the acknowledgement whereof, is required of us by a late act of Parliament, intituled, An act for uniformity : published as an appendix to the Peace-offering / by the same author.	Stileman, John, d. 1685.; Stileman, John, d. 1685. Peace offering.	1662 (1662)	Wing S5552; ESTC R16314	24,193	32

It was an Oath Imposed by those Sect. 42. who had no authority to impose an Oaeth It was a Covenant entred into by Subjects and disallowed by the King who then ruled over us and now again by His present Majesty with the full consent of all the estates of the Kingdom in Parliament abrogated and therefore cannot have an obligation in analogy to and by vertue of that Law of God before mentioned Numb 30. for in this case there is the same reason of Subjects under Government as of Children under tuition or a Wife under Covertbond We had no power to enter into such an Oath or Combination nor it being denied and disallowed by our Soveraign can we be obliged by it for this must be still supposed a tacite condition That our Governours and the Laws that we are under will allow and permit it But more 3. Sect. 43. It was an Oath Unlawfully sworne and cannot but be unlawfully kept And the unlawfulness will appear in these particulars 1. It was Unlawful in the Imposition as being imposed by no lawful Authority The Laws of this Kingdom acknowledge nothing to have the force and power of a Law but from the stamp of the Royal Authority the Kings Fiat which that Ordinance which imposed this Covenant never had It must therefore be concluded to be imposed upon the Subjects of this Realm contrary to the Known Laws and Liberties of this Kingdom a thing even the same which those two Houses of P. which imposed this Oath declared when they took away and annulled the late Canons and that Oath which was so Decried for the c. viz. * Exact Coll. p. 859 860. That A New Oath cannot be imposed without an Act of Parliament which this was never established by 2. Sect. 44. Vnlawful in the Ends of it Which whatsoever and how specious soever the Pretences were have appeared sufficiently to the world to have been indeed Seditious and Rebellious The charge may seem high and too uncharitable but let it be remembred and it is too evident then to be denied This very Covenant was made the main Engine of a design the saddest the bitterest that England ever saw before to engage a people against the Church and State and to Bring in the Scots to assist them in a dismal War against the King which they would not be brought to do till this Kingdom did Covenant to throw out her Bishops and extirpate the established Episcopacy Root and Branch So that the great ends aimed at in the contriving and exacting this Covenant to be sworne was 1. Not to Reform some abuses or to take away some needless Officers or prevent some irregular proceedings in the Courts but utterly to abolish the established Government in the Church And then 2. By the Assistance of the Scots to maintain a War against the King and to reduce Him to such Terms as the Two Houses should think fit to put upon Him That they might be able to Give Laws to the King from whom they were bound to Receive them 3. Unlawful also it was in the Matter of it Sect. 45. as binding men 1. To Impossibilities if not in nature yet certainly in equit Viz. binding men to do that which they had no power no authority to do What Power or authority had Subjects to enter into such an Oath not only without but contrary to the mind consent and express Command and Will of their Soverargn What Authority P. e or Call had they to endeavour the Overthrowing of that Government as Antichristian under which the Christian Church had been happy and flourished so many hundred years and which they were by the positive Laws of our Land bound not to oppose but to obey and submit unto Id solum possumus quod jure possumus Properly we only can do that which we lawfully may do In this sense then the Covenant should bind to impossibilities which argues a Nullity unless Subjects can pretend to a power to overthrow any thing which the Law establisheth whensoever they like it not Farther 2. Unlawful it was as binding to Unjust Sect. 46. and Dishonest things also 1. Infallibly No Oath can bind to Sedition or the overthrow of those Laws that we are bound to obey and that Oath obligeth to injustice and impiety which obligeth to Perjury and the breach of former not yet cancelled obligations Now the Laws had established Episcopacy Ministers had Sworne Obedience to the Bishop There can therefore be no obligation because so much Impiety in that Oath which if it should oblige would oblige to Perjury Object I know what hath been said to this Viz. That those who have Sworne obedience to the Laws of the Land are not thereby prohibited to endeavour by all lawful means the abolition of those Laws when they prove inconvenient or mischievous But 1. Solut. 1. The Utmost of that Obedience which was sworn to the Bishops was but in Licitis Honestis in lawful and honest things And how a lawful and honest obedience should be culpable or the Laws that required it should be mischievous or inconvenient I confess I yet never could have eyes to see nor I think any man else 2. Sol. 2. Had the Laws which established Episcopacy been such yet it will seem very strange to a considering and intelligent man that presently to enter into such a Covenant and Combination and by force and power to break through those Laws and overthrow the established Government whether the King will or no should ever be accounted a lawful means Again 3. Sol. 3. Suppose it inconvenient yet Subjects have no power to Make a Law or Alter a Law for themselves If any mischief or inconvenience had been in that Law or the Government established we might lawfully have shewed the Grievances and Petitioned for a redress to those to whom only it belonged to reform them but to Swear to extirpate a Government to overthrow a Law against the Law-givers consent this is somewhat else than a peaceable petition or an honest endeavour Though we might by humble petition in such a case beg a Reformation yet without all controversie we were bound by our Allegiance Duty and former oaths to obey that which was established until the Supreme power should see it just or fit to alter it 2. Sect. 47. That Oath which bindeth men to the injury of another whom we are bound to love as we love our selves and to do to them as we would have others do to us is unjust in the matter of it and consequently unlawful and bindeth not But this Covenant bindeth to such an injury an injury not of one or two but an whole Order of Bishops who were once a Third Estate and by the good Providence of God are so now again to the depriving of them both of their Places and Power in the Church and of their Lands Estates and Livelihoods that if they lived they must live upon Alms as many