Selected quad for the lemma: duty_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
duty_n	bind_v	law_n	nature_n	1,568	5	5.4669	4	true

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A96592	Jura majestatis, the rights of kings both in church and state: 1. Granted by God. 2. Violated by the rebels. 3. Vindicated by the truth. And, the wickednesses of this faction of this pretended Parliament at VVestminster. 1. Manifested by their actions. 1. Perjury. 2. Rebellion. 3. Oppression. 4. Murder. 5. Robberies. 6. Sacriledge, and the like. 2. Proved by their ordinances. 1. Against law. 2. Against Equity. 3. Against conscience. Published 1. To the eternall honour of our just God. 2. The indeleble shame of the wicked rebels. And 3. To procure the happy peace of this distressed land. Which many feare we shall never obtaine; untill 1. The rebels be destroyed, or reduced to the obedience of our King. And 2. The breaches of the Church be repaired. 1. By the restauration of Gods (now much profamed) service. And 2. The reparation of the many injuries done to Christ his now dis-esteemed servants. By Gryffith Williams, Lord Bishop of Ossory.	Williams, Gryffith, 1589?-1672.; Burgess, Anthony, d. 1664.	1644 (1644)	Wing W2669; Thomason E14_18b	215,936	255

c. 16. and confirmed unto him by Act of Parliament yet upon his death-bed confessed he had no right thereunto as Speed writeth 4. Because it was determined by all the Judges at the Arraignment Reason 4 of Watson and Clerke 1. Jacobs that immediately by descent his Majestie was compleatly and absolutely King without the Ceremony of Coronation which was but a royall ornament and outward solemnization of the descent And it is illustrated by Hen. 6. Speed l. 9. c. 16. that was not crowned till the ninth yeare of his reigne and yet divers were attainted of High Treason before that time which could not have beene done had he not beene King And we know that upon the death of any of our Kings The right heire to the Kingdome is King before he is crowned his Successor i● immediately proclaimed King to shew that he hath his Kingdome by descent and not by the people at his Coronation whose consent is then asked Why the peoples consent is asked not because they have any power to deny their consent or refuse him for their King but that the King having their assent may with greater security and confidence rely upon their loyalty Respect 2 2. As the Kings of Israel had full power and authority to make warre and conclude peace to call the greatest Assemblies as Moses Joshua David Iehosaphat and the rest of the Kings did to place and displace the greatest Officers of State as Solomon placed Abiathar in Sadoc's roome 2. Chron 19.11 and Iehosaphat appointed Amariah and Zebadiah rulers of the greatest affaires and had all the Militia of the Kingdome in their hands The absolute authority of the Kings of England Coke 7. rep fol 25. 6. P●lyd Virgil. lib. 11. Speed St●w c. so the Kings of England have the like for 1. He onely can lawfully proclaime warre as I shewed before and he onely can conclude peace 2. There is no Assembly that can lawfully meet but by his Authority and as the Parliament was first devised and instituted by the King as all our Historians write in the life of Hen. 1. so they cannot meet but by the Kings Writ 3. All Lawes Customes and Franchises are granted and confirmed unto the people by the King Rot. Claus 1. R. 2. n. 44. Smith de repub Angl. l. 2. c. 4. c. 5. 4. All the Officers of the Realme whether Spirituall or Temporall are chosen and established by him as the highest immediately by himselfe and the inferiour by an authority derived from him The absurdities of them that deny the Militia to the King 5. He hath the sole power of ordering and disposing all the Castles Forts and strong Holds and all the Ports Havens and all other parts of the Militia of this Kingdome or otherwise it would follow that the King had power to proclaime warre but not to be able to maintaine it and that he is bound to defend his Subjects but is denied the meanes to protect them which is such an absurdity as cannot be answered by all the House of Commons 6. The Kings of Israel were unto their people their honour their Soveraignes their life and the very breath of their nostrils as themselves acknowledge and so the Kings of England are the life the head and the authority of all things that be done in the Realme of England Smith de Repub. l. 2. Cambden Britan p. 132. supremam potestatem merum imperium apud nos habentes nec in Imperii clientelâ sunt nec investituram ab alio accipientes nec praeter Deum superiorem agnoscentes and their Subjects are bound by oath to maintaine the Kings Soveraignty in all causes and over all persons as well Ecclesiasticall as Civill and that not onely as they are singularly considered but over all collectively represented in the body politique for by sundry divers old authentique Histories and Chronicles it is manifestly declared and expressed that this Realme of England is an Empire and so hath beene accepted in the world In the P●eface to a Sta● 24. Hen. 8. c. 12. governed by one supreame Head and King having the dignity and royall estate of the Imperiall Crowne of the same unto whom a body politique compact of all sorts and degrees of people divided in termes and by names of spiritualty and temporalty have beene bounden and owen to beare next to God a naturall and humble obedience 3. As the duty of every one of the Kings of Israel was to be Respect 3 Custos utriusque tabulae to keepe the Law of God and to have a speciall care of his Religion and then to doe justice and judgement according to the Law of nature and to observe all the judiciall Lawes of that Kingdome so are the Kings of England obliged to discharge the same duties 1. To have the chiefest care to defend the faith of Christ The duty of the Kings of England and to preserve the honour of Gods Church as I shewed before 2. To maintaine common right according to the rules and dictates of nature And 3. To see the particular Lawes and Statutes of his owne Kingdome well observed amongst his people To all which the King is bound not onely virtute officii in respect of his office but also vinculo juramenti in respect of his oath which enjoyneth him to guide his actions not according to the desires of an unbridled will but according to the tyes of these established Lawes neither doe our Divines give any further liberty to any King but if he failes in these he doth offend in his duty 4. As the Kings of Israel were accountable for their actions Respect 4 unto none but onely unto God and therefore King David after he had committed both murder and adultery saith unto God Psal 51.4 Tibi soli peccavi as if he had said none can call me to any account for what I have done but thou alone and we never read that either the people did call or that the Prophets perswaded them to call any of their most idolatrous tyrannicall or wicked Kings to any account for their idolatrie The kings of England accountable for their actions onely to God tyrannie or wickednesse even so the Kings of England are accountable to none but to God 1. Because they have their Crowne immediately from God Reason 1 who first gave it to the Conquerour through his sword and since to the succeding Kings Smith de repub l. 1. c. 9. by the ordinary meanes of hereditary succession Reason 2 2. Because the oath which he takes at his Coronation binds him onely before God who alone can both judge him and punish him if he forgets it Reason 3 3. Because there is neither condition promise or limitation either in that Oath or in any other Covenant or compact that the King makes with the people either at his Coronation or at any other time that he should be accomptable or that they should question

professo yet give me leave in the interim to say this much First touching Covenants and Vowes it is plaine enough 1. What Vowes and Covenants are allowable that although the superiour may with Ezra cause the inferior to Vow or sweare the performance of his duty that he is bound by the law of God and nature to performe so Abraham caused his servant to sweare fidelity when he sent him for Isaack's Wife And so the King may cause his Subjects to take the Oath of their Alleageance Gen. 24.3 and the lawfull Generall cause his Soldiers to sweare their fidelity unto him yet the inferior subject can not sweare or if he sweares he ought not to observe it when be doth it contrary to the command of him that hath command over him Numb 30. per totum as you may see in Numb 30. throughout Therefore as children may not vow any thing though it be never so lawfull contrary to their fathers command or if they doe they ought not to keepe it so no more may any Subject Vow or make a Covenant contrary to their Kings command or if they doe they ought not to observe it and they are as you see absolved by God himselfe Ob. If you say Ezra and the Jewes did it contrary to the command of Artaxerxes Sol. that was then their King I answer that it is most false for 1. Ezra was the Priest Nehem. 8.2 9. and the chiefe Prince that was then over them and Nehemiah had his authority from the King and he was the Tirshatha that is their governour saith the Text Nehem. 10.1 and therefore they might lawfully cause them to take that Covenant 2. They had the leave and a large commission from Artaxerxes to doe all that they did as you may see * See Ezra 7.11.22 c. neither can you finde any syllable that Artaxerxes forbad them to doe this in any place 3. This Covenant of Ezra and his people and Nehemiah's was to doe those things that they had covenanted before to doe For so the text saith Let it be done according to the Law Ezra 10.3 which God had expressely commanded them to doe and which they could not omit though they had not covenanted to doe it without great offence so if our covenanters sweare they will serve God and be loyall unto their King as they vowed in their baptisme they shall never finde me to speake against them but to propose a lawfull Covenant to doe those things that God commandeth and is made with the leave and commission of the supreme Prince to justifie an unlawfull Covenant to doe those things that were never done before never commanded by God but forbidden both by God and especially by the King in the expressest termes and most energeticall manner that might be is such a piece of Divinity as I never read the like and such an argument a dissimili that never schollar produced the like 2. The examples of Queen Elizabeth and King Charles answered 2. For the examples of Queen Elizabeth King Charles assisting Subjects for their Religion sake against their lawfull Princes two things may be said the one in Divinity the other in Policy 1. By way of Divinity First for Divinity I say vivendum est praeceptis non exemplis we have the sure word of God to teach us what we should doe and no examples unlesse they be either commended or allowed in Gods word ought to be any infallible patterne for us to follow Secondly for Policy 2. By way of Policy which may be justified to be without iniquity I doubt not but those men which knew the secrets of State and were privie to the causes of their actions are able to justifie the proceedings of these Princes in their assistance which perhaps they did not so much simply in respect of their Religion as of some other State policie which we that are so farre from the helme have no reason to prie unto Besides you may know that neither King Charles nor Queen Elizabeth were Subjects to the other Kings but were every way their equall if not more and independent Princes And to bring the actions of such absolute Monarches the one against the other How wickedly they deceive the simple people to justifie the actions of Subjects against their Soveraigne is such Logicke as the other example was divinity Queen Elizabeth did so against the King of Spaine ergo any Subject may do so against his King or rather Queen Elizabeth did that which for ought we know was most lawfull to be done against the King of Spaine ergo the Earle of Essex may doe that which we doe know to be most unlawfull against King Charles This is the doctrine that they teach their Proselytes but that they give this poyson in a golden cup and hide their falshood under a shew of truth but I hope ere long you shall have these things more fully manifested unto you CAP. XX. Sheweth how the rebellious Faction forswore themselves what trust is to be given to them how we may recover our peace and prosperity how they have unkingd the Lords annointed and for whom they have exchanged him and the conclusion of the whole ANd now having committed all these things and much more wickednesse then I though I had the tongue of Angells can expresse I am perswaded many of them seeing the miraculous mercies of our God in protecting and assisting His Majesty farre beyond their thoughts and imaginations doe begin to thinke on peace and accommodation which they presuming on the Kings lenity made sure to themselves whensoever they pleased and indeed dulce nomen paci● and the feet of them that bring tydings of peace are more specious then the fairest countenance of aurora Esay 52.7 then the sweet face of Helen Psal 85.10 Rom. 1.7 1 Cor. 3. 2 Cor. 2. c. But seeing righteousnesse and peace have kissed each other and the Apostle joyneth grace and peace alwayes together as two deere friends saith S. Aug. so deere that si amicam pacis non amaveris neque te amabit pax ipsa and these men are filled with all unrighteousnesse and have trampled the grace of God and their King under feet and having sworne forsworn themselves over and over as at their baptisme that they would keep Gods commandements whereof this is one to be obedient unto our Kings at their admittance to any office to beare faith and true alleagiance to His Majesty Rom. 13.1 1 Pet. 2.13 at the beginning of this last Parliament to maintaine the Kings just rights and all the priviledges of Parliament How the Rebels swore and forswore themselves together with the liberty and property of the Subjects and yet immediately to forget their faith to breake all these oathes and to make shipwracke of their conscience to drive the Bishops out of their House which is one of the first and most fundamentall priviledges of the

verba mutare nemini latae ab illo sententiae qualicunque modo contraire and no man dares alter the Kings words nor gain-say his sentence whatsoever it is And we reade that the Turke is as absolute in his Dominions and as readily obeyed in his commands as the Tartar and yet these Subjects learne this duty of honour and obedience unto their Kings onely by the light of nature and if grace and the Gospell hath made us free from this slavish subjection should we not be thankefull unto our God and be contented with that liberty which he hath given us but because we have so much we will have more * And as the Poët saith Like Subjects arm'd the more their Princes gave They this advantage tooke the more to crave Lucan lib. 1. and seeing God hath delivered us from the rage of tyrannous Kings we will free our selves from all government and disobey the commands of the most clement Princes We may remember the fable of the Frogs when they prayed unto Jupiter to have a King and what was the successe thereof omnia dat qui justa negat and he that undutifully denyeth his due obedience may unwillingly be forced to undue subjection as the Israelites not contented with just Samuel shall be put under an unjust Saul So God may justly deale with us for our injustice towards our King to deny that honour unto him which God commanded to be given and the very Heathens have not detained from their Kings But 3. Christians 3. Lest with Saint Paul we should be blamed though unjustly for bringing the uncircumcised Greeks into the Temple for alleadging the disorderly practice of blinde Heathens to be a patterne for these zealous Christians which thing notwithstanding our Saviour did when he preferred Sodome and Gomorrah before Capernaum Matth. 11.21 yea Tyrus and Sydon before Corazin and Bethsaida we cannot want the example of good Christians and a multitude of most holy Martyrs to shame the practice of these prophane hypocrites For 1. Christ h●mselfe exhibited all du● honour unto wicked Kings 1. Christ himselfe the author and the finisher of our faith never left any plainer marke of his religion then to propagate the fame by patience as on the other side there cannot be a more suspicious signe of a false religion then to inlarge it and protect it by violence and therefore when the Inhabitants of a certaine Samaritane village refused to admit Christ and his Disciples into their Towne Luke 9.54 and so renounced him and his religion James and John two principall members of his Court remembring what Elias did in the like case 1. Reg. 18. 2. Reg. 1. asked if they should not command fire to consume them as Elias did that is if they should not use their best endeavours and be confident of Gods assistance to destroy those prophane rejecters of Christ and refusers of his religion Our Saviour though ever meeke yet now moved at this their unchristian thought rebuked them with that sharpnesse as he did Saint Peter when he committed the like errour Matth. 16.23 and said You know not what manner of spirit you are of as if he had said you understand not the difference betwixt the profession of Elias and my religion for he was such a zelot that jure zelotarum and the extraordinary instinct of Gods Spirit that was in him might at that time when the Jewes were governed by a 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as Josephus saith and God presiding as it were their King amongst them and interposing rules by his Oracles and other particular directions that should oblige and warrant them as well as their standing Law doe this or the like act though not authorized by any ordinary Law and those actions thus performed are as just and as legall as any other that proceed legally from the authority of the supreame Magistrate but that dispensation of the Prophets is now ended and the profession of my Disciples must be farre otherwise for I doe not authorize my servants to pretend to the spirit of Elias or to doe as Phineas and others extraordinary men among the Jewes have done but they must learne of me to be meeke and lowly in heart Matth. 11.29 and rather to suffer wrong of others then to offer the least injury unto their meanest neighbour much lesse to resist their supreame Magistrate And when Christ was apprehended How Christ carried himselfe before Pilate and the High-Priests not by any legall power of the supreme Magistrate but by the rude servants of the High Priests and Saint Peter as zealous for his Master as our Zealots are for their Religion drew his sword and smote off Malchus eate a most justifiable and commendable act a man would thinke to defend Christ and in him all Christianity our Saviour bids him put up his sword and he addes a reason most considerable to all Christians for all they that take the sword shall perish by the sword that is all they that without lawfull authority take the sword to defend me and my religion with the sword they deserve to suffer by the sword and it is very well observed by the Author Pag. 6. of resisting the lawfull Magistrate upon colour of religion that the two parallel places quoted in the margent of our Bibles are very pertinent to this purpose for that Law concerning the effusion of bloud Gen. 9.6 being not any prohibition to the legall cutting off of Malefactors is notwithstanding urged against S. Peter to shew that his shedding of bloud in defence of religion was altogether illegall and prohibited by that Law and the other place where immediately after these words Revel 13.10 He that killeth with the sword must be killed with the sword the Holy Ghost adjoyneth here is the patience and the faith of the Saints doth most clearely shew that all forcible resistance is inconsistent with the religion of the Saints because their faith must be ever accompanied with their patience and it is contrary to their profession to save themselves by any violent opposition of them that have the lawfull authority But that example which is unparallel'd is the suffering of Christ under Pontius Pilate for the whole course of their proceeding against Christ was illegall when as no Law can be found to justifie the delivering up of an innocent person to the will of his accusers John 19.16 as Pilate did our Saviour Christ and our Saviour had ability and strength enough to have defended himselfe for he might have commanded more then 12 Legions of Angels to assist him yet our Saviour acknowledging the legall power of Pilate to proceed against him John 19.11 that it was given him from above makes no resistance either to maintaine his doctrine or to preserve his life but in all things submits himselfe to their illegall proceedings and gives unto the Magistrates all the honour that was due unto their places and you know the rule