Selected quad for the lemma: kingdom_n
Text snippets containing the quad
|
ID |
Title |
Author |
Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication) |
STC |
Words |
Pages |
|
A64277
|
The vindication of a late pamphlet (entituled 0bedience and submission to the present government demonstrated from Bp. Overal's Convocation-book) from the false glosses and illusive interpretations of a pretended answer / by the author of the first pamphlet.
|
Taylor, Zachary, 1653-1705.
|
1691
(1691)
|
Wing T602; ESTC R37878
|
32,401
|
41
|
Divine Right for they had no Civil Right or Legal Claim to the Crown for Joram being in Possession and the other out his Title was far better by all Humane Laws And as for Ahud his being acknowledged a Subject he could pretend no Legal Title to the Crown Nor can he evade this by saying that they had both Gods express Nomination for that cannot alter the nature of things and create them a Civil Legal Title altho it gives them a Divine Authority which is far Superior unto it 'T is true he affirms that the Convocation expresly asserts Jehu to be a Lawful King page 5. but I expect he should recall his words unless he can make a Note of Similitude As of necessity to be a Character of Identity and prove things that may be construed only to be alike or equal to be the very same for the words are That Jehu upon the knowledge of Gods will page 46. and the Submission of the Princes and Captains of Israel unto hsm As to their Lawful King did put in execution the said Message by killing Joram Where the words only express the fullness of the Submission of the Captains to him who submitted as intirely As to their Lawful King but need not at all to respect a Legal Title for he had none Thus the Author hath declared what he means by Right and Authority and doubts not but to manifest it in its due place to be the meaning of the Convocation too For Secondly The account that he hath given of the calling of this Convocation and the Circumstances of Affairs that during its continuance occur'd which was to consider of the Claim of the United Provinces as to their being a Free and Independent State doth very plainly Evidence it For since their Authority could have no Legal Foundation it must wholly be derived from a Divine Interposition and it was not Civil Right but Gods Providence and Pleasure that possessed them of the Powers of Government I know the Answerer pretends the Doctrines of Passive Obedience and Non-resistance to be the whole Design of the Book page 21. Now all that I shall say to this at present is that neither of these is so much as once expresly named in all the Book and that this is the whole design of it will be found difficult for him to prove But upon the apprehension of these different Ends and Intention of the Convocation the different Construction of the words of the Book are in some measure grounded therefore as I promised Thirdly I must impartially and in their own words state the Matter in Debate betwixt them And the Author plainly affirms that Right and Authority may be separated and that when they are so separated page 5. the Claim of Right i. e. Civil Right without the Authority i. e. the Divine Power of Government cannot challenge our Allegiance On the other side the Answerer asserts that Right without Authority may page 4. and ought to challenge our Allegiance and that Authority without Right cannot challenge it Now if Reason might decide it since the Authority even in Civil Right comes from God and the Powers that be are ordained of God it seems strange that the Ordinance of God cannot command our Allegiance because it doth not quadrate with the Constitution of Man or that God who is acknowledged by the Answerer to be above all Laws cannot by his Providence dispose of his own Power but according to Law But I must remember that our Appeal was to be to the Convocation book and to it therefore let us go which is the last thing Fourthly To adjust the Authority that each Party brings from the Convocation-book that the Unprejudiced Reader may see on which side the plain Truth doth lye I will begin with the Author whose Assertion is That the Claim of Right without Authority is not sufficient to challenge our Allegiance the terms of which being before explained he produceth these Authorities from the Convocation-book to confirm it which if a Man will but open his Eyes are positive and determinative The Ground on which the Convocation builds the Justification of Jehu and Ahad in laying violent hands on their lawful Sovereigns clearly prove it for that is this that God may and is able to overthrow any Kings or Emperors page 53. notwithstanding any Claim Right Title or Interest which they can challenge to their Countries Kingdoms or Empires So that here is an Authority to which the Captains did pay Allegiance as to their Lawful King acknowledged without Right and executed without Guilt To put this past all doubt the Convocation-book having told us that it was not lawful for any Person whatsoever ibid. upon pretence of any Revelation Inspiration or Commandment from the Divine Majesty either to touch the Person of his Sovereign or to bear Arms against him makes this Exception Except God should first advance the said Person from his private Estate and make him a King or an Absolute Prince to succeed his late Master in his Kingdom or Principality Which words if they were not intended to express a Separation of Authority from Right and when they are so separated to vindicate our Allegiance to the Person whom God from a private Estate advanceth to be King have no design or meaning at All. It is to no purpose for the Answerer to pretend here Gods express Nomination for that is only to say that God may do by Revelation what he cannot by Providence and the one ought to be obeyed and not the other whereas if it be Gods doing in either way it requires our Submission Again the Convocation book expresly teacheth page 57. That Authority tho unjustly gotten and wrung by force from the True and Lawful Possessor who surely had and is here supposed to have the Legal Right being always Gods Authority is ever when any such Alterations are throughly settled to be Reverenced and Obeyed by all sorts of People and that for Conscience sake Where if they do not distinguish Authority from Right and require our Obedience to Authority against Right no words can declare it Again speaking of such Governments as are founded on being begun by Rebellion and I hope the Answerer will not say that Rebellion hath Right on its side the Convocation owns them when throughly settled page 59. to have Gods Authority and that the People who live within the Territories of such new Governments are bound to be subject to Gods Authority If this be not Demonstration I will pretend no more to it for it is hence plain enough that the Claim of Right without Authority cannot challenge our Allegiance 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The Case of the Moabites and Ammonites who had thus Authority over the Jews the History of the Kings and Chronicles and the very frame of the Governments in being throughout all the World are so many Instances of this Truth What the Answerer affirms to be the meaning of the
whose gracious Doing they not only supposed but so proved it to be that the Answerer it seems was not stiff enough to deny it And then for His Majesty no Obligation of a Subject was upon him but if he suspected himself to be wronged and there was violent and unsatisfied Suspicion of Wrong in the Highest Nature both to himself and the whole Kingdom countenanced abetted and designed to be established nothing could restrain him from seeking his Right but a Tame complying Willfulness to sit down content with his own Loss and the Kingdoms Ruin All that could be pretended to the contrary is the Unseasonableness of seeking his Right for as David they may say He should have waited till the Lord should smite the King or his day should come to dye or that he should descend into Battle and perish As for the last his late Majesty is resolved to provide against that but to this I reply that his then Majesties Counsels had so ordered the Affairs that they had made it absolutely necessary for his present Majesty then to seek his Right or never in that the Parliament that was to be called would doubtless by the indirect means that were used have been such as would have acknowledged and confirmed the Impostor and so Excluded their present Majesties from the Crown Add to this his late Majesties Willful Recess and tell me then If Providence did not proceed in such a manner as to make a clear passage to Submission and so a justifiable ground to act upon Thus far I see no Guilt then for what the Answerer seems to insist on those Active Spirits that had an hand in the Revolution by deferting the late King James I excused them so far that he takes no notice of it and therefore I again Repeat it and say that his Cause in their Conscience being Bad they neither could nor ought actually to assist him An Equity of the Cause being necessary to the Justification of a War I now should have done but for full satisfaction in the case there is one thing I ought not to pass by The Answerer would make you believe that bare Possession is that Authority or Divine Right that the Author all along speaks of and so an Usurper my be possessed of it an Athaliah or Antiochus or a Cromwell Now the Author thinks that there are certain Indices and Notes whereby the Possession that he speaks of and the Authority that is insisted on may easily be discerned and distinguished For the Convocation supposes a Thorough Settlement before they Appropriate Obedience to the New Government So that Possession in General cannot challenge the Allegiance but yet the Authority they speak of may for want of which Authority both Athaliah and Antiochus though they had got Possession were Rightly opposed Now what these Notes are besides what is delivered in the Pamphlet from the Convocation's Notion of a Thorough Settlement will easily appear For they requiring the Power and Protection or Favourable Dealing of a Prince and Consent of the People to compleat a Settlement in Opposition to these 1. Usurped Possession seldom or never suffers the State to enjoy its Rights Quiet and Protection so that it is in vain if it weee possible to yield Obedience Violence Plunder and Oppression do generally attend Usurped Possession Law and Justice are stifled and Arbitrariness rules in all things Those who do not comply are not permitted to sit down in Peace and enjoy the Common Benefit of Protection but are Harass'd Proscribed Persecuted and Undone There is no Connivance or Favour but Power and Wilfulness manageth all Things so that it is scarce possible for them to yield a Due and Full Obedience For besides that Honour Reverence and Homage which though owing to the Supreme Power a Ruin'd and Oppressed Subject can be hardly conceived to Give The very Oppression it self disables them from paying Customs Taxes and Tributes which are other Branches of this Allegiance so that the Service of a Liege Subject can scarce be given an Usurper on the contrary where it is Authority that is advanced there the Good of Community is intended no Violence Arbitrariness and Injustice practised but Law hath its course and every unsuspected Man his Liberty and Right This is the very case of Antiochus Epiphanes and Athaliah Of the first the Convocation-book expresseth it And of the last it is to be supposed that she continued to Rule as she entred with the utmost Cruelty and Violence nay and the very Reason of her Sons Wickedness for which he was punished by God is imputed to her Instigation in that she is said to be his Counsellour to do Wickedly And of her as well as of Antiochus the Jews would have eased themselves sooner had they but had power for the Scriptures gives this as the reason of her Usurpation that the House of Ahaziah had no power to keep still the Kingdom When therefore Jehoiada had strengthned himself with the Levites and Officers he dethroned the Usurper and exalted Joash to the Crown Secondly A Usurpation never meets with a quiet and peaceable Submission of the People I mean of the great Body of them for no Revolution can expect them all There are always powerful Confederacies and Designs against it and 't is only an Interested Party that Supports it You shall meet not only with private Murmurings but loud open and what is worst of all most just and true Complaints So that Mens Spirits are kept on such a Ferment that they may be over-awed but cannot be won to a Willing Submission But where it is Gods Gracious Doings you shall observe such a Chearful Compliance a ready Homage and Acclamations so Universal that such a Voice of the People can scarce be otherwise Interpreted than the Voice of God I desire the Answerer to Scan over the Differences betwixt Gods Permissive and his Positive Providence for if I be not grosly deceived from the Principles that I have laid down and the Interest the People have in Consenting to the Form of Government he may if he please discern the Difference betwixt 42 and 88. In Usurpations besides the Violence committed at the grasping at a Crown which for the future hardens all Good Mens Hearts against it the Subject not enjoying Protection under it as never any but an Interested Party do cannot be thought to be so fond of Chains as to Kiss and Court them by paying their Obedience under them nor do they ever generally own it by submitting Chearfully and Thankfully unto it Whereas when there is a Revolution upon an Appeal to God for Justice and Equity the Prince treats his People with such Tenderness Care and Circumspection as becomes one that being advanced by thinks himself accountable to God for the Trust he hath committed to him And on the other hand the People deport themselves with those returns of Chearfulness and Thanks in their Submission as are befitting a People delivered from Wrong Tyranny and Slavery And by