Selected quad for the lemma: england_n

Word A Word B Word C Word D Occurrence Frequency Band MI MI Band Prominent
england_n head_n king_n supreme_a 4,443 5 9.1068 4 true
View all documents for the selected quad

Text snippets containing the quad

ID Title Author Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication) STC Words Pages
A43657 Jovian, or, An answer to Julian the Apostate by a minister of London. Hickes, George, 1642-1715. 1683 (1683) Wing H1852; ESTC R24372 208,457 390

There are 2 snippets containing the selected quad. | View lemmatised text

to submit to the Penalties of the Government under which he lives But then what follows is false This is the only case wherein the Gospel requires Passive Obedience namely when the Politica Laws are against a Man because the Gospel requires our submission to the Imperial as well as the Political Laws but by the Imperial Laws in every perfect Government the Subjects are absolutely forbidden to bear the Sword against the Soveraign or to resist him upon any pretence whatsoever and therefore are bound to suffer death wrongfully rather than resist 4. That the killing of a Man contrary to Law is Murder And if the Soveraign kill a Man contrary to Law he is guilty of Murder but must answer for it to God only 5. That every Man is bound to prevent Murder as far as the Law allows But the Imperial or Prerogative Law allows no Man to prevent his own Murder by rising up against or resisting his Soveraign and therefore the last words are false And ought not to submit to be murdered if he can help it unless by help it he means help it by Prayers and Tears I hope I have already sufficiently enervated the Strength and Force of our Authors Arguments against Passive Obedience or Non-resistance and now after his Example I shall reduce the Strength and Force of what I have hitherto said into these following Propositions I. Every Man but more especially a Christian is bound to submit to the Laws of the Government under which he lives II. The Government consists in the Imperial as well as the Political Laws III. The Imperial Laws of every Government forbid resisting the Soveraign and by consequence require Non-resistance IV. Non-resistance is the same thing with Passive Obedience and by consequence Passive Obedience is required by the Imperial Laws of every Government V. Whatsoever the Imperial Laws of any Government require of its Subjects if it be not contrary to Gods Laws they are bound to perform it VI. Passive Obedience or patient Suffering of Injuries from the Soveraign is not forbid by Gods Laws and therefore Subjects are bound to perform it where it is required by the Imperial Laws And now I shall desire these Men who of late have thundred so much with Julian against the Thebean Legion to consider well what I have said in general about the Common Laws of Soveraignty when they have digested it well they will be convinced how fallaciously the Author of that Pamphlet hath dealt with them in suppressing this Notion and making them believe That there were no Laws belonging to Government but those which I call Political Laws But as I have shewed there are two Tables belonging to every perfect and regular Government one which concerns the Majesty of the Soveraign Gods Vicegerent which I may call the first Table and another which concerns the Good and Safety of the People which may be called the second Table and these two together are the Compleat and Adequate Rule of Civil Obedience and Subjection and Passive Obedience or the Patient bearing of the greatest Injuries when it is not a Duty by This is very often so by That When the Laws are against us then it is our Duty by the second Table and when the Soveraign is against us contrary to the Laws of the second Table then it is our Duty by the Laws of the first which absolutely forbid us to bear the Sword against him or to repel his Forces by Force Wherefore to answer our Authors (†) P. 87. Question I am confident Dr. Hicks was very serious and in earnest when he taught and preached up Passive Obedience for Evangelical in this case It may be seen by the Drs. Sermon and other of his Pieces that he doth not write rashly and I have reason to presume that he asserted Passive Obedience upon the same bottom that I now defend it He is far from having Men to prostitute their Lives to Malice and Violence for he would rather have them to abscond or fly but if they can or will do neither in times of Illegal Persecution he thinks there remains nothing for them to do but patiently to submit to unavoidable Death He had no reason to distinguish betwixt suffering according to and contrary to Law because he knew that neither the Laws of God nor Man allow any Subject the Benefit of forcible defence against the illegal Violence of his Soveraign but that by the Laws Imperial he ought to dye rather than resist And if this (‖) P. 87. was too light for the Pulpit and just such another Piece of Drollery as that in the Dedication to Oliver Cromwel before Killing no Murder I protest I know not what it is to be serious in the Pulpit nor what Apostolical Divinity is The Gospel from one end to the other is full of this kind of Drollery and for my own I seriously protest I had rather be Passive were it possible under a Thousand deaths in an Illegal Persecution than be guilty of such Scurrility not to say Blasphemy against the Doctrine of the Cross Our Author in this and such like Reflections writes more like an Apostate from the Christian Religion than a Minister of it and if any thing in this Answer may contribute to make him sensible of his Sin and bring him to the Humiliation and Repentance of his Elder Brother Ecebolius I shall think my pains well spent But to bring this general Discourse about the Common Laws of Soveraignty to our own Case I shall now proceed to shew That the English Realm is a perfect Soveraignty or Empire and that the King of England by the Imperial Laws of it is a Compleat Imperial and Independent Soveraign to whom the foresaid Rights of Soveraignty do inseparably belong The English Realm is a perfect Soveraignty and (‖) Sir Orl. Bridgmans Speech to the Regicides p. 12 13. Empire and the King a Compleat and Imperial Soveraign (†) Cooks Instit p. 4. c. 74. Thus by the whole Parliament 24 H. 8. c. 12. it was resolved and so declared That by sundry Authentick Histories and Chronicles it is manifestly declared and expressed that his Realm of England is an Empire and so hath been accepted in the World governed by one Supream Head and King having Dignity and Royal Estate of the Imperial Crown of the same So 25 H. 8. c. 21. the Crown of this Kingdom is affirmed to be an Imperial Crown in these words In great Derogation of your Imperial Crown and Authority Royal. So 27 H. 8. c. 24. Most Ancient Prerogatives and Authorities appertaining to the Imperial Crown of this Realm So 1 Eliz. c. 2. Restoring and Vniting to the Imperial Crown of this Realm the Ancient Jurisdictions c. So 1 Jacob. cap. 1. A more Famous and Greater Vnion of two Mighty Famous and Ancient Kingdoms under one Imperial Crown And before the Conquest King (†) Rot. Parl. 1 E 4. parte 6. at large in Cokes Inst part 4 p. 359.
Edgar stiled himself in his Charter Basileus Imperator Dominus and his Son St. Edward in a Charter which he made to the Abbot of Ramsey which my Lord Cook saith he had stiled himself Ego Edwardus totius Albionis Dei moderante Gubernatione Basileus Thus much may serve to shew that the Realm of England is a Perfect Soveraignty or Empire and the King a Compleat Imperial Soveraign Where for the Readers satisfaction I must observe That the Regal Estate is then Imperial when the King is Supream in his Dominions next under God and hath full perfect and entire Jurisdiction from God alone and all others within his Dominions by emanation from him Now this Perfection and Fulness of Imperial Power which makes an Imperial Soveraign is of two sorts such as is limited by the Laws of God and Nature only or such as is limited by the Laws of God and Nature and Civil Laws and Pactions too The Power in both sorts of Soveraigns is Imperial i. e. full perfect absolute and entire but the Exercise of it is differently bounded and regulated one by the Laws of God and Nature and the other by Humane Positive Laws and the latter Limitation doth no more destroy the Fulness and Perfection and Supremacy of the Power than the former because the Soveraign who is under Political Limitations as to the Exercise of his Power hath his Power nevertheless as absolutely fully and entirely in himself as he that is only under the limitation of Divine and Natural Laws Thus the Learned (‖) De laudibus Legum Angliae c. 9. Rex Angliae Principatu nedum regali sed politico suo populo dominatur Regnum sic institui ut lex non liberè valeat populum tyrannide gubernare quod solum fit dum potestas regia lege politicâ cohibetur Chancellor Fortescue grants the King of England to have Regal or Imperial Power although it be under the Restraint and Regulation of the Power Political as to the Exercise thereof And as a Fountain which hath Channels or Pipes made for it within which its Waters are bounded in their passage and through which they are to flow is nevertheless as perfect a Fountain and hath its Waters as fully and entirely within it self as any other Fountain whose Waters flow from it at liberty without any such Regulation So a King whose Imperial Power is limited by Humane Constitutions in the Exercise of it is nevertheless as Compleat a Soveraign and hath the Soveraign Power as fully and entirely within himself as he who is at liberty to exercise his Authority as he will To be Arbitrary is no more of the Essence of an Imperial Soveraign than to be free in the course of its Waters is of the Essence of a Fountain but as the Fountain of an Aqueduct for Example is as perfect in its Kind and generally more beneficial and useful to Mankind than a Free-flowing Spring So limited Soveraigns are as perfect and essential Soveraigns as the purely Arbitrary or Despotic and generally more Beneficial and Salutary to the World All that I have hitherto said may be better understood by distinguishing between the Being and Essence of Imperial or Soveraign Power and the Exercise and Emanation thereof As to the Being and Essence of it it is in as full perfection in the Limited as in the Arbitrary Soveraign though the Law confines and limits him in the Exercise thereof but to be confined in the Exercise doth not destroy the Being nor diminish the perfection of Soveraign Power for then the Power of God himself could not be Soveraign because there are certain immutable Rules of Truth and Justice within which it is necessarily limited and confined But God is nevertheless a perfect Imperial Soveraign over the Universe though the Exercise of his Government over his Creatures be limited by the Eternal Laws of Truth and Equity It is true that this Limitation of Almighty God is Intrinsecal and proceeds from the perfection of his Righteous and Holy Nature but yet it shews that the most perfect and absolute Imperial Power may without a Contradiction be confined within bounds and limited in the actual Exercise thereof and that such moderation and limitation of Power Absolute and Imperial doth only qualifie and temper and not destroy the Essence thereof And therefore Cook in Caudreys Case saith That by the Ancient Laws of this Realm England is an Absolute Empire and Monarchy and that the King is furnished with Plenary and Entire Power Prerogative and Jurisdiction and is Supream Governour over all Persons within this Realm And if any man will but attend well to his own Thoughts he will find no Inconsistency between the Fulness of Soveraign or Imperial Power in the Root and Essence of it and a legal limitation of the Use and Exercise thereof And from hence it comes to pass That the King of England though he be limited in the Vse and Exercise of his Power yet he is as much the Fountain of all Power and Jurisdiction within his Dominions as if he were Arbitrary He hath none to share with him in the Soveraignty but all Power and Authority is derived from him like Light from the Sun in Him alone it is Radically and Originally placed He hath no Sharers or Co-partners in the Soveraignty none Co-ordinate with him in Government no Equal nor Superior but only God to whom alone he is Subject Hence saith (†) Lib. 1. c. 8. Bracton who wrote in the Reign of Henry the Third Omnis quidem sub rege ipse sub nullo sed tantum sub Deo non est inferior sibi subjectis non parem habet in regno suo And afterwards Ipse autem Rex non debet esse sub Homine sed sub Deo And then to shew that he is a Soveraign doubly limited in the Use of his Power by the Laws of God and the Civil Laws of his Kingdom he adds Et sub Lege quia Lex facit Reg●m In the same place he calls him Vicarius Dei and saith Vices gerit Jesu Christi and nothing greater could be said of Caesar or the most Despotic Soveraign that ever was So the Statute of Praemunire 26 R. 2 c. 5. declares That the Crown of England hath been so free at all times that it hath been in no Earthly Subjection but immediately Subject to God in all things touching the Regality of the same Crown And in 25 H. 8. c. 21 the Parliament directing their Declaration to the King enacted and declared That this your Graces Realm recognizing no Superiour under God but only your Grace hath been and is free from Subjection c. And in 24. H. 8. c. 12. after the words before cited it follows unto whom a Body Politick been bounden and owen to bear next unto God a Natural and Humble Obedience He being instituted and furnished with plenary whole and entire Power Preheminence Authority c. So 2 Ed. 6. c. 2. Seing that all