Selected quad for the lemma: authority_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
authority_n	law_n	power_n	time_n	3,535	5	3.5329	3	true

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A44655	A letter to Mr. Samuel Johnson occasioned by a scurrilous pamphlet, intituled, Animadversions on Mr. Johnson's Answer to Jovian in three letters to a country-friend : at the end of which is reprinted the preface before the History of Edward and Richard the Second, to the end every thing may appear clearly to the reader, how little of that preface has been answered / both written by the Honourable Sir Robert Howard.	Howard, Robert, Sir, 1626-1698.	1692 (1692)	Wing H3000; ESTC R4333	26,604	76

is to be submitted because such or such are of this or that Opinion yet since I have set down the Doctrine asserted in our Days when the hazard of Religion it self did not seem to prevail above Flattery and Design I will briefly shew also the Opinions of our Ancient and most Authentick Authors which have been often quoted and therefore I will be very short in it I will begin with an Original Agreement in Magna Charta printed by the present Bishop of Salisbury which declares That if the King should Uiolate any Part of the Charter and refuse to rectify what was done amiss it should be lawful for the Barons and People of England to distress him by all the ways they can think of as Seizing his Castles Possessions c. According to which seems grounded the Opinion That a King is not a King where his Will governs and not the Law For if a King's Power were only Royal then he might change the Laws and charge the Subject with Callage and other Burdens without their Consent But the King has a Superiour God also the Law by which he is made King For a King is constituted that he should govern the People of God and defend them from Injuries which unless he performs he loses the very Name of a King From that Power which flows from the People it is not lawful for him to Lord it over them by any other Power that is a Political not a Regal Power Let Kings therefore temper their Power by the Law which is the Bridle of Power So that the right understanding of this Law of Resisting or not Resisting in Cases of Necessity seems to depend on the Intention of those that first entred into Civil Society from whom the Right of Government is devolved on the Persons governing Certainly no Civil Society ever made a Contract with intention to be oppress'd or destroyed and he there observes that Men did not at first unite themselves in Civil Society by any special Command from God but for their own Safety to withstand Force and Violence and from this the Civil Power took its rise I will now proceed to a more proper way of Argument than Quotations and briefly consider the Reason of Government and the necessary Consequences in respect of the Conditions of the Governing and the Governed and as a Builder that designs to build strongly I will use a Foundation laid by that excellent Architect Mr. Hooker in his Ecclesiastical Polity I will faithfully transcribe his Words and though not join'd together in his Discourse yet the Reason is so strong that guides an Argument of this nature that it has naturally its own Cement and Connexion which will appear in these following Words Presuming Man to be in regard of his depraved Mind little better than a wild Beast they do accordingly provide notwithstanding so to frame his outward Actions that they be no hindrance to the Common Good for which Societies are instituted unless they do this they are not perfect it resteth therefore that we consider how Nature finde out such Laws of Government as serve to direct even Nature depraved to a right End To take away all such natural Grievances Injuries and Wrongs there was no way but growing into a Composition and Agreement among themselves by ordaining some kind of Government Publick and by yielding themselves subject thereunto that unto whom they granted Authority to rule and govern by them the Peace Tranquillity and happy Estate of the rest may be preserved Men always knew that when Force and Injury was offered they might be Defenders of themselves they knew that however Men may seek their own Commodity yet if this were done with Injury to others it was not to be suffered but by all good Men and by all good Means to be withstood Impossible it is that any should have compleat Lawful Power but by Consent of Men or immediate Appointment of God because not having the natural Superiority of Fathers their Power must needs be either usurp'd and then unlawful or if lawful then consented unto by them over whom they exercise the same They saw that to live by one Man's Will became the cause of all Mens Miseries this constrained them to come into Laws The Lawful Power of making Laws to command whole Politick Societies of Men belongeth so properly unto the same entire Societies that for any Prince or Potentate of what kind soever upon Earth to exercise the same himself and not either by express Commission immediately and personally received from God or else by Authority derived at the first from their Consent upon whose Persons they impose Laws is no better than mere Tyranny Laws they are not therefore which Politick Approbation hath not made so but Approbation not only they give who personally declare their Assent by Voice Sign or Act but also when others do it in their Names by Right originally derived from them as in Parliament c. Thus strengthened by this great Man to whom the Church of England has justly paid a particular Veneration I shall with the more confidence proceed to do the Nation Justice and begin with those granted and undeniable Principles That the Authority Power and Right of Self-Defence and Preservation was naturally and originally in every individual Person and consequently united in them all for Ease Preservation and Order but every one could not be a Governour and Governed and without Agreement where to fix a useful Power to execute such convenient Agreements or Laws as should be consented to for their own Good and Benefit they could not be safe against one another for if Interest and Appetite were the free Guides without the check of any Law or Punishment Mankind must be in a state of War and destroying one another the certain Consequence of that Condition for Faith and Justice in all could not be depended upon to be sufficiently binding unless Men had no depraved Natures but had been endued with such Original Vertue and Justice that they were as sure and careful of their mutual Preservations as Laws or the fear of Punishment could oblige them For this reason were Laws invented and consented unto and 't were a fatal Absurdity if the Cause was for Preservation by the Power of such Laws that those Laws should have no Power to limit or confine the Authority of Him or Them that were chosen to govern by the Conditions contained in them for otherways the Mischief was but chang'd and they that out of a reasonable apprehension had bound themselves from oppressing one another should give unlimited Power to others to do it if they pleas'd so that unless this ridiculous Supposition could be granted it must be acknowledged of consequence that though the Magistrate was set above the People yet the Law was set above the Magistrate For where any thing is to be observed and obeyed there a perfect Superiority is acknowledged Whoever therefore is set up to

against the Political Laws he is bound by the Common Laws of Soveraignty not to resist him or defend his Life against him by force It is to be observ'd that here are two sorts of Law God's Law and the Devil's Law that which supports and defends Right is God's Law that which takes away Life unjustly is the Devil's Law for he was a Murderer from the beginning But Contradictions are so frequent in that Discourse that I do not wonder to see the zealous Author shew one in his own particular and incogitantly perhaps profess a violent Resolution to break his own sacred Rule of Passive Obedience For I suppose if a Woman scolds and gives hard Names she is not Passive for then Billingsgate is Passiveness incorporated And I shall desire the Reader to judg whether there be much difference in theirs and our Author 's active Tongue-Assault for he loudly cries out with a very sharp Excursion That he should rather think it his Duty than the breach of it to tell not only a Popish Prince but a Popish King to his Face did he openly profess the Popish Religion That he was an Idolater a Bread-Worshipper a Goddess-Worshipper an Image-Worshipper a Wafer-Worshipper with an c. as if he had more Names in store for him But I must do the Author right to let the Reader know that Jovian was written when King James the Second was Duke of York and had not declar'd himself a Papist and perhaps he thought he would never have done such a rash thing but yet for fear of the worst the Author retreats to his Doctrine of Passive Obedience from this dangerous Sally he had made with an unadvised Boldness and then tells us 't is reasonable to depend on the Conscience of a Popish King and seemingly returns to a modest Repentance that he had express'd such a Displeasure against one that worshipped more Gods than one for after this terrible muster of hard Names he falls back as he was and pays such a profound Devotion to Passive Obedience that now he seems to extend it even to Thoughts as not to think ill of his own rail'd at Idolater this I suppose may be called forward and backward or to blow hot and cold in the same breath to make the Contradictions appear plain enough This Opinion yet he sticks most to if you will trust him as much as he advises you to trust the Idolater and tries to give you a Reason for it for he says That Suffering as in the Case of the Thebean Legion can never happen in Great Britain we of these Kingdoms having such Security against Tyranny as no People ever had I suppose he forgets his own Position and means a Truth that he before destroyed the Security he means if he can mean any after he has taken away all must be the Political Power that is the Laws Can any Man have the Charity to believe that he could think he proposed any Security from Laws that had set up an Imperial Power or Soveraign Law as he calls it which is the Will of a King to take them all away if he pleases He might as well tell us of a Security by certain Deeds to all which were fix'd Revocations and yet would have us depend on such Arbitrary Settlements without Right or Power to oppose those Revocations thus the continued Contradictions appear that mingle with such Notions A Man that stutters much in his Speech is hardly to be understood but such an excessive Stammering in Writing makes it much harder to guess what a Man means But in another place he gives us an additional Reason for trusting and to deter us from examining a Tyrant's Actions or opposing the Imperial that is Arbitrary Power which is That a King is accountable to none but God To make good this Opinion he quotes some of the Church-of England-Divines and of the Reformed Bochart a French-man whose Authority he often repeats As to these of the Church of England Mr. Johnson has fully answered that and quoted Statutes enough and Judgments of Convocations in Queen Elizabeth's Time that assert and support a contrary Doctrine to this unlimited Passive Obedience for they approved the Resistance of those in Scotland and France who actively and by force attempted to defend their Religion and Liberties I shall only add the Precedent of King Charles the First reputed the Church of England's Martyr He was of the same Judgment with the Church and State in Queen Elizabeth's time witness that Business of Rochel who took Arms upon the same account and received Assistance from him which approved an active Opposition against the Oppression brought on their Religion and Liberties But I find not only our Author but he that writ the History of Passive Obedience is a great Admirer of Bochart calling him the Glory of the Reformed and having quoted many of the Church-of England-Divines he then as well as Bochart's Letters to Dr. Morley quotes some other of the Reformed Divines But though I do not think this Cause depends as Mr. Johnson says upon telling Noses yet I will set down in the Margent that I may not interrupt my Discourse the several Opinions of eminent Reformed Divines which the Author of the History of Passive Obedience being so industrious to search Opinions must probably omit as not being useful for his business and indeed there are very few Arguments that may not be supported with Opinions for Flattery Design or present Interest has caused more Opinions than the true just Reason of the subject Matter could ever allow But if we should build a Confidence on this Foundation and the Prince be such a one as either does not believe or consider there is such an Account to be made up we should be miserably deceived And it hath not been frequently known that a Prince has liv'd as if he ever apprehended any Account in the other World to be given of his Actions in this all these Doctrines are but insinuating Flatteries to make Princes forget Men for the Service of God can hardly be performed by the Neglect of Men. But if the Author would have us believe that a King is accountable to none but God he ought to explain himself to us in the particular of K. James the Second a profest Papist and tell us to which of all his Gods he is to be accountable for our Good whether to a piece of Bread a Wafer an Image a Goddess or to all I could not have been so ingenious as to make his own Position so ridiculous as he himself has contrived to do it but in it self it appears a very strange Doctrine to trust to the Account a Popish King is to make with his God for those he believes his God will damn 'T would seem as rational for a Man to take an Estate to hold by the Life of a Man that he believed was to be certainly executed There is another as rational a

Proposition to incline us to believe and depend on this Doctrine of Passive Obedience That Subjects to have a right to judg when they may resist or withstand their Soveraign is a thousand times more inconvenient and pernicious to Humane Society than patiently submitting to the abuse of Soveraign Power And in another place confirms this with a Notion of a very high strain telling us that a Popish Successor or give him what Character you please nay let him be a complicated Tyrant a Pharaoh Achab Hieroboam Nebuchadnezzar all in one nay let the Spirit of Galerius Maximin and Maxentius come upon him yet he is sure it will cost fewer Lives and Desolation to let him alone than to resist him This Author is very apt to be fierce and lofty in his Expressions as if Noise would be more prevalent than Reason Before he mustered up False Gods that a King worshipped and now musters up as many Tyrants to mould into one King And yet such an Idolater and complicated Tyrant is not capable to do as much Mischief as opposing him will cause He could have invented but one strain higher for the Cause of Passive Obedience by adding the Devil to the Idolater and complicated Tyrant and then our Passive Obedience had been to submit to what in Baptism we promised to fight against the World the Flesh and the Devil And the Position holds as true in relation to him as such a Prince that it were the cause of more Mischief to oppose the Devil than to submit to him Dr. Sherlock expresses this more modestly That Non-Resistance is the best way to secure the Peace and Tranquillity and the best way for every Man 's private Defence for Self-defence may involve many others in Blood and besides exposes a Man's self And in another place tells us 'T is the best way to prevent the change of a Limited into an Absolute Monarchy This is not to prove the Doctrine of Passive Obedience but the Benefit of it and in some measure it may possibly be true that weak and particular Defences or Oppositions may rather bring Destruction upon some than save all but a Nation cannot fall under that Danger that unitedly defends its own Religion and Laws On the other side the passive Submission to such a complicated Tyranny must more probably hazard the Subversion of Religion and Laws and consequently Freedom and Property And indeed 't is a strange Assertion that all these Qualities joined in one Man cannot do as much Mischief as a Nation 's opposing the Ruine that he would bring upon them which resolves into this Absurdity that if they have a Right to relieve themselves yet 't is unwise to attempt it for fear of causing that which would certainly be done without it But these Positions have been sufficiently confuted by several Tyrants who have destroyed as much as they could have done had they been enraged by any unsuccessful Opposition And at this very instant the King of France may convince any one that there was hardly more Cruelty to be committed than has been acted by him He had corrupted most of Christendom to this prudent Passiveness by which he was capable to bring more Ruine on his own and other Kingdoms than he would ever attempt to have done had he been opposed and the Passive Obedience that was shewed at first to his growing Tyranny did not prevent but cause the change of a Limited into an Absolute Monarchy so that on the contrary the Doctrine of Passive Obedience seems calculated for the Meridian of Tyranny I hope this Argument will be yet more confuted by the Benefit Christendom will receive by the opposing that Tyrant whose Persecution of Christians and burning Countries does not yet seem to the Asserters of Passive Obedience to be Mischief enough to allow that an unresisted Tyrant cannot do as much as will probably happen by opposing him Certainly if the Destruction the King of France has made do not convince them 't is only that Mischief is not Mischief if done by a King But Dr. Hicks says That the Laws of all Governments allow every Man to defend his Life against an Assassine by which he shews his Imperial Law is no Law of Government And Dr. Sherlock tells us No Man can want Authority to defend his Life against him that has no Authority to take it away By this confession of the two Learned Doctors the Point seems to be clear'd for an illegal Assassine and one that has no lawful Authority to kill is I suppose all one and whatever is acted or done in such a nature against Law is Murder so that all that is done against Law may be rightfully opposed For surely they cannot mean though they speak in the singular Number that it is lawful to oppose one Man that acts against Law and not many that is to say a lawless Prosecution if by many is not a lawless Prosecution and if Dr. Hicks's Distinction be brought in aid That the Imperial Power may make a lawless Attempt or Prosecution lawful then his illegal Assassine may be a lawful Executioner so that 't is reduced to this Demonstration That their Position is either Nonsense or a direct Confutation of their own Doctrine I will only add one Confutation more that Dr. Sherlock gives to this Doctrine which is in his own words That every Man has the right of Self-preservation as entire under a Civil Government as he had in the state of Nature This is a great Truth but if it be so their Doctrine must be false for in the state of Nature no Man owes a submission to another for being under no Covenants or Obligations he remains free from Subjection and is his own Judg and cannot properly be judged by another Now how these are to be reconcil'd seems very difficult I think I may say impossible that a Man under Government should pay Passive Obedience to every thing and a Man in the state of Nature not obliged to pay Obedience to any thing and yet to have as equal a Right to Self-preservation in one Condition as well as another For we are told expresly That in case the Soveraign will Tyrannically take away the Subject's Life he is bound by the Common Laws of Soveraignty not to resist or defend his Life against him by force Now in the state of Nature there is no Subject nor Soveraign and therefore by the contrary a Man may defend his Life against Violence And what can be meant then by having as much Right of Self-preservation under a Civil Government where we are told we must not preserve our selves by force as in a Condition where we are free and naturally oblig'd to do it But in this as in other intoxicated Conditions where Men have imbib'd something too strong for them in the midst of their disorderly Expressions Truth will sometimes break out contrary to their Interest and perhaps intemperate Designs But though I do not believe that the Reason of any thing