Selected quad for the lemma: lord_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
lord_n	bishop_n	england_n	king_n	11,097	5	3.7389	3	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A41952	Reflections upon Mr. Johnson's notes on the pastoral letter by William Gallaway ...	Gallaway, William, b. 1659 or 60.	1694 (1694)	Wing G178; ESTC R8149	33,013	66

then he is the Lord of the Fee and by Consequence Allegiance is due to him Allegiance being also now in our present Acceptation An Obedience according to Law that is to say not a Blind nor absolute Obedience but such an Obedience as is defined and limited by the Law then the Scruple that arises out of the Word Allegiance vanishes In this short Remnant our Noter tells us there are abundance of things liable to Exception Fi●st That he out-runs the Constable in taking for granted an Oath of Obedience where he hath neither proved bare Obedience much less a promise of Obedience onwardly to be due for which I refer my self to what passed on the former part of the Paragraph There was no need of a Promise of bare Obedience because they did actually Obey and therefore the Bishop argues as I before observ'd That ●or that Reason they might Promise to Obey and if Promise then Swear The Bishop always own'd them to have the Point of Right and how they came by it in his 21 st page which I have already taken notice of Secondly He here gives us a Notion of Allegiance by the halves for he says It is in its Original signification nothing but the Service due to the Chief Lord of the Fee You only give the Bishop's Sense by halves therefore I will recite his own Words contained at large in the 24 th and 25 th pages of the Pastoral Letter The very Term of Allegiance rises out of the Feudal Law by which the Chief Lord of a Fee when he made any Grants to his Vassals took them bound in co●sideration of these Grants to adhere to him to defend his Person and to assist him in his Wars but all this being done by the Vassals in consideration of the Fee that was granted an Original Contract is plainly implied in it so that if the Lord of the Fee should go to take away the Fee it self or to change the Nature of the Subjection in which the Vassals were put by the first Grant then the Oath which was grounded on it could not be suppos'd to bind them any longer So that the Bishop supposes a Reciprocal Duty between the Lord of the Fee and the Vassal because if the former violated his Contract the Obligation of Allegiance ceased Thirdly He makes the King the Lord of the Fee to entitle him to our Oath of Allegiance It is nothing so for the people of England do not hold of the King what Holy Church does I know not they may be his Vassals for ought I know I am sure I am none 'T is fixing your own private Construction upon the Bishop's Words when you write as if he should suppose the King to be Landlord of all England or as if Holy Church as you are pleas'd to express your self own'd or paid any Allegiance different from other people The Bishop tells us plainly Our Allegiance in general is an Obedience according to Law which he explains Not a Blind nor Absolute Obedience but such an Obedience as is defined and limited by the Law Which imports that we owe no other Obedience and therefore if we are commanded to do or suffer any thing that is contrary to Law the Obligation of our Obedience ceases and we may refuse it And here I will insert what the Bishop affirms to this purpose in his Measures of Submission to the Supream Authority which may serve to clear him from the unjust ond malicious Imputations of ignorant as well as prejudicial Men. Pag. 9. There is nothing more evident than that England is a Free Nation that has its Liberties and Properties reserv'd to it by many positive and express Laws If then we have a Right to our Property we must likewise be suppos'd to have a Right to preserve it for those Rights are by the Law secured against the Invasions of the Prerogative and by consequence we must have a Right to preserve them against those Invasions It is also evidently declared by our Law that all Orders and Warrants that are issued out in Opposition to them are null of themselves and by consequence any that pretend to have Commissions from the King for those Ends are to be considered as if they had none at all since those Commissions being void of themselves are indeed no Commissions in the construction of the Law and therefore they who act in vertue of them are still to be consider'd as private persons who come to invade and disturb us Fourthly He makes a King in Fact to be Lord of the Fee We have been too long haunted with this word Fact and therefore I will try to lay the Goblin The Bishop hath nothing to do with your Goblin● Fact He always own'd the King's Right to the Crown to be Legal and by the Virtual Consent of the People If the Bishop chances to write any word though in the Application of it it relates to other persons without ever weighing or considering the intention or d●sign of it He runs away with his whymsical mis-apprehension of the ma●ter and from his own mistake makes and forces the Bishop to say or write any thing to his squinting purpose The Bishop applies himself to the Non jurors because as they could not deny him to be King in Fact that is to be in possession of the Throne so they ought to swear Allegiance to him in consideration of the Protection he gave them and that they liv'd under his Government whether they did or would own him Rightful King or not Your Supposition of Forcible Entry which ●ollows is altogether impertinent as to the Bishop because he hath told you over and over that the King hath a Right to possess the Throne by that Legal Possession of it which was given him by the Lords and Commons Fifthly He would have people swear an Obedience according to Law in Opposition to a Blind and Absolute Obedience though they are still to retain their Passive Obedience which is certainly Blind and Absolute Obedience or else there is no such thing in the World In this place more particularly I appeal to Mr. Iohnson's greatest A●mirers if they have but common Justice for Truth whether any Iesuit could have perverted the Intention or Sense of any Author more Villainously and Bare-fac'd than he hath the Bishop's in this Note Is here the least shadow of an Insinuation of Passive Obedience when our Allegiance is declar'd an Obedience only according to Law that is to say Not a Blind or Absolute Obedience but such an Obedience as is defined and limited by the Laws Now what could have been express'd more opposite to Passive Obedience Nor can they or any others retain their Passive Obedience if they keep to the Laws because Passive Obedience is a tame submission to those illegal Commands of a King that are evidently against and tend to destroy all Law No Man hath asserted the Laws and Publick Liberty with more Reason nor more Nervously enforc'd than the Bishop of

nothing can be more proper to do it than a Text of Scripture Observe the Axiom A man m●y lawfully promise to do every thing he may lawfully do Now the Instance Our Saviour commands If any man compel me to go a mile with him to carry his burthen to go with him twain From which he in●ers But is it therefore lawful for me to promise this man to be his Pack horse all my Life and to starve my Wi●e and Children c. No no by no means lawful Besides you can't be a Pack-horse and your own Instance will not let you be worse than an Infidel There is a great difference between lawfully promising and being compell'd to do any thing and therefore your Instance is nothing to the purpose I can find no power of Conviction in it and I am afraid it is like an Estate left in our late Diego Wickhams ' Will because all Compultion takes away the Liberty of doing or not doing Promises to do or not do signifie nothing when I am Forc'd or Hinder'd Besides your Inference is an unlawful Action and you cannot lawfully promise therefore you are oblig'd not to promise any man to be his Pack horse and by that means to starve your Wi●e and Children and therefore you may not lawfully do it I may lawfully promise to assist my Neighbour to carry his Burthen and therefore I may lawfully do it For any thing I know our Noter may be a good Lawyer but I am sure he is but a Dabbler at instancing To proceed to the Second Instance 'T is as great a Conquest for a Philosopher to refute an Axiom as a General to take a strong Town in Flanders and therefore our Noter brings another battering Instance against it I 'le assure you Mr. Iohnson I have no prejudice against your Person I will neither lessen your Merits nor Sufferings But I am in the way of writing Mr. Iohnson my Controversy is only with your Book and though I by my self I I say that my Motion I was sure was Right being drawn by my own Hand which is more positive perhaps than Old Bracton would have said so I by my self I say that your Instance is wrong therefore I will mind the Process Out of this long and truly impertinent Story I put this short Case It was certainly lawful for me to submit to this Vsage when I could not help it but I had deserved to die the Death of a Dog and had betrayed the Rights of an Englishman if I had entred into Engagements to abide by it Observe the Consequence therefore a man may not lawfully promise to do every thing which he may lawfully do O profound Logician Now I would fain understand how Mr. Iohnson will reconcile his lawfully doing of that which he tells us was compulsorily wrongfully and illegally inflicted and more especially when he declares in his 15 th page That Forc'd Obedience is not the Obedience of Men It is Passive and Dog-kennel Obedience If I should pursue this Point and prove that he hath a Grain of Passive Obedience about him he would certainly hang himself therefore I desist and won't be guilty of Murder This is so pretty an Instance that I can't chuse but repeat it once more It was certainly lawful for me to submit to this Vsage when I could not help it Ay ay 't is very true too true we must all submit when we can't help it there 's no Remedy but Passive Pati●nce But you know the Old Saying Patience per Force is a Medicine for a mad Dog Now I don`t find by the Story thar you lawfully promis'd to submit to this Usage which you might have done too if you had thought it fit because you tell us It cost you Two or Three Fees not to be kept in Acta Custodia So that our Impregable Axiom holds out still That a Man may lawfully promise to do what he may lawfully do Having defeated your first and Second Line jam ad Triari●s ventum est I think I had as good stop here lest in his Second Part I should be noted on as a Couquering Clergyman But the best on it is I fear no Character he can give me and therefore will attack him in his third Instance At the Parliament at Oxford in 65 when they made the Five Mile Act there was the same enslaving Project on foot as there was afterwards in Seventy odd to Swear to the Government in Church and State without Alteration The Wise Lord Treasurer Southampton was against it and said that though he liked Episcopacy yet he would not be Sworn to it Because he might hereafter be of another Opinion And perhaps he had been further off ●rom that Oath if he had lived till now I smell your design in this instance 't is to let us know that you don't like Episcopacy so well now as formerly for any story that you could have thought on had been as much to the purpose as this If the Lord Southampton was satisfied with Episcopacy at that time he might have taken an Oath to it especially if it had been Enacted into a Law so to do A Law would have concluded his Opinion and determin'd his Compliance till it had been repeal'd and had he liv'd till now Episcopacy would have been the same thing as then The Virtual Consent of every individual Person is given when a Law is made and therefore I must obey when what is commanded is not undeniably a sin and my Disobedience is a sin when the matter is lawful So that rebus sic stantibus a man may lawfully promise to do what he may lawfully do and if there be an evident and publick Alteration in the Subject Matter the Obligation ceases Neither do I apprehend any Reason from the Law of God or Men but that every Man may swear Allegiance or to be quiet under our present Government though they would have had things otherwise setled because a private Opinion is not to be oppos'd against the general Determination of the Body of the Nation And to me it appears Imprudence and Mockery that after the Non-Iuring Passive Men have beat King Iames out of the Kingdom as far as their Principles allow'd with their Primitive Weapons Prayers and Tears That is that now we are deliver'd by Providence and Second Causes from Popery and Slavery that the very same men some of which put their Helping Hand too are praying it back again for the French Court is the worst in the World to instruct Princes to govern according to Laws and I don't hear Father Peters is turn'd Protestant Now to the part of the Bishops Paragraph which follows in these words And as it appears that there lies no just Objection to the swearing Obedience so there arises none from the word Allegiance for that being in its Original Signification nothing but the Service that a Vassal owed to the Chief Lord of the Fee If the King is owned in Fact to be our King