Selected quad for the lemma: religion_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
religion_n	king_n	law_n	liberty_n	6,707	5	6.5575	4	true

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A70705	The letter which was sent to the author of the doctrine of passive obedience and jure divino disproved, &c. answered and refuted wherein is proved, that monarchy was not originally from God. That kings are not by divine appointment, but that all government proceeds from the people. That the obedience required in Scripture, is to the laws of the land, and no otherwise. That resisting of arbitary power is lawful. That the oath of allegiance to to the late King James was dissolved before the Prince of Orange (our present King) landed. That upon the non-performance of an oath on one side, the other becomes void, is plainly prov'd from several examples in scripture. That protection is the only cause of allegiance, and that obedience or allegiance is due to the present government is proved from Scripture, law and reason; and those texts of scriptures which relate to government, or monarchy, are explained.	True son of the Church of England.; True son of the Church of England. aut; N. N. aut; A. A. aut	1689 (1689)	Wing N45; ESTC R223803	26,704	41

but that men ●hou'd live peaceable and quiet lives and not that Magistrates shou'd be their own Carvers and instead of protect●ng and governing the people according to the Laws of the ●and destroy them 12. This is right Common-wealth Rhetorick they were Children of Belial i. e. Masterless persons as the word signi●●es who said How shall this man save us and they despised him ●ays the Text 1 Sam. 10.27 More Throats have been cut by the Doctrine of Resistance than ever were by that of Passive Obedience witness our Nation in all Ages These are Passive Obediences with a Vengeance and right Antichristian Principles to set up one Member so much above the rest that if it endeavours to destroy them they are obliged to make no Resistance more Throats have been cut by this Doctrine of Passive Obedience than that of Resistance witness all the Cruel Persecutions under the Roman Emperours the Massacres of Paris Piedmont and Ireland and many more Instances might be given But suppose the contrary the sin lies at their doors who by their Cruel Persecutions and Violations of the Rights of the People force them to right themselves 'T is certain the Gospel does no where require or permit the planting of Religion by the Sword tho the Papists have practised it in all Ages to the destroying of many Thousands of Souls We ought not to defend our Religion when the Laws of the Country are against it But the Scripture does not require us not to defend our Religion or Civil Rights which is established by the Laws of the Country Ergo we may defend them for where there is no Law there can be no transgression If it is not lawful to defend our Religion then any Army or number of Heathens may come and settle their false Religion here And if it is lawful to hinder the settling of Religion hereby a Forreign Power it must be lawful to hinder the settling of a False Religion amongst our selves as the Romish Religion is if the Scripture is true And I think no man can without Impudence deny but that King James had a design to settle his False Religion here by consequence it is lawful to hinder him When Julian the Apostate told the Christians their Doctrine was to suffer an Eminent Man of that Age wrote a Tract de Regibus Apostaticis and approved as Orthodox Doctrine by Bishop Athanasius wherein the Emperour was informed That the Christian Religion when Established by Law allowed them to justifie their Rights and not to be ruined and destroyed to gratifie an Idolatrous Prince Eccles 8.4 Where the Word of a King is there is power and who may say unto him What dost thou The Word or Command of a King is supposed to be according to the Law or Custom of the Countrey in which Acts no body ought to controul him But suppose a King be guilty of all manner of Illegalities and Cruelties must not a Bishop or a Nobleman in an humble manner tell him of his Faults Surely the Scripture never meant it in such a sence 1. Pet. 2.13 14. Submit your selves to every ordinance of man for the Lord's sake which is every Law of man whether it be to the King as supream that is the Chief Executor of the Laws or unto Governours as unto them that are sent by him which are Officers appointed by the King for the executing or fullfilling of the Laws for the punishment of evil-doers and for the praise of them that do well Rom. 13.1 Let every soul be subject unto the higher powers that is to the Laws or Customs of the Country and to the Prince as the Executor thereof for there is no power but of God the greatest Villain amongst Mankind acts by the Power of Almighty God but not by his appointment or approbation the powers that be are ordained of God the power which every man hath is from God ver 2. Whoso therefore resisteth the power resisteth the ordinance of God he that resists the Laws resists the Powers beyond which a Prince hath no power except to act by Fraud or Force which is against Divine and Humane Laws and shall receive to themselves damnation ver 3 4. For Rulers are not a terror to good works but to the evil for he is the Minister of God to thee for good a revenger to execute wrath upon him that doth evil He is the Minister of God for good whilst he administers Justice and Equity to every man and punisheth him that doth evil or violates the Laws Vers 5. Wherefore ye must needs be subject not only for Wrath but for Conscience sake which can be nothing else than to suffer according to the Laws of the Country tho never so unreasonable The Laws of Countries are supposed to be made agreeable to the Inclinations of the Majority of the People and therefore the lesser number ought to conform to the greater but if against their Conscience to suffer for it is impossible to make Laws for the Security and well-Government of a Nation to please every body Prov. 8.15 By me Kings reign and Princes decree Justice That is by the appointment or permission of God Kings and Princes reign and decree Justice but it cannot from hence be inferr'd that he commands or allows of their Injustice and endeavours to destroy the People whom they ought to preserve Rom. 12.17 Render therefore to all their dues tribute to whom tribute is due custom to whom custom fear to whom fear honour to whom honour That is Tribute Custom Fear and Honour to whom it is due by the Laws of the Land. There is no Fear due to a Prince from him who liveth according to the Laws of the Land but from him that doth not What a sin are you and all other men that are for Passive Obedience guilty of that wrest the Scriptures which was appointed for the Suffering State of Christianity whilst under Heathen Princes and without Laws to support them and compare them to our present Circumstances and would oblige us to be passive as they were though our Religion and Liberties are Established by the Laws of the Land All that Men can blame us for is for doing that which is Just viz. for rescuing a True Religion from an Idolatrous one and preserving our Laws Ancient Rights and Liberties from the Ruine and Slavery of Arbitrary and Unreasonable Men and Establishing them upon a sure and lasting Foundation I ask whether it can be found that one Christian in Ten or Twenty God hath given so much Courage and Strength as he did to the Primitive Christians to withstand the cruel persecutions of their Enemies for the sake of Religion Witness France and Hungary And many more Instances might be given by which it appears that God hath not only left us to Humane Means for the preservation of our Religion when Established by Law but that he expects it it being for the preservation of our own and our Childrens Temporal and Eternal Happiness As it

or Allegiance one to the other not to wrong molest or kill the other and one shall be guilty of the great sin of Ingratitude and cheat rob or endeavour to ruine the other or to kill him in these Cases he becomes his Enemy and the Oath which the other hath taken is thereby become void because the Covenant is broken and it is no Ingratitude in the other to right himself by Law by imprisoning him c. or to defend himself Was not King James guilty of this sin of Ingratitude in a very high Nature by breaking of his Natural and Political Allegiance which was due to the Community in destroying the Government that is the Laws and hanging many persons contrary to Law by not allowing them to plead for themselves and endeavouring to make the people Slaves to his exorbitant Will and Pleasure Now I appeal to all the World whether or no our Allegiance is not void as to King James upon his breaking of his Allegiance and whether our Allegiance ought not to be transferr'd to their present Majesties who protect us and preserve us in all our Rights c. Protection is the only Ground and Foundation of Allegiance because the Prince swears to protect and govern the People according to Law for which Reason they swear to be true to him but if he cannot or will not protect and govern them according to their Laws Rights and Priviledges they may seek for it where they can get it For no Allegiance can be due to him from the Community who endeavours to destroy it If one Prince conquers another's Country the People are at the mercy of the Conquerour and if he swear to protect and govern them according to the Law of the Country they ought to swear Allegiance to him and protect him in his Throne by fighting for him against all his Enemies as long as he continues so doing We ought to be subject to him whom the Law hath set over us and who doth protect us and not to the French King or he that is best able to protect us I could have instanced many more moral Arguments which would induce any unbyass'd man to believe that all Oaths and Contracts have a tacit meaning and upon the Non performance on the one side the other becomes absolutely void though not specified at the Agreement but for brevity's sake I shall leave them out these Proofs being sufficient to satisfie all rational impartial men 21. Though the King do not perform his Coronation-Oath yet his Subjects are not therefore absolved from the Oath of Allegiance and on the contrary the King is bound by his Coronation-Oath though his Subjects do not keep that of Allegiance The Subject is not absolved from the Oath of Allegiance for every little Violation of the King 's but if the King endeavours to overthrow the Government which he 's sworn to uphold or to make the People Slaves or destroy them they are not obliged by this Oath to stand still and let him For the Design of this Oath cou'd be nothing less than the Safety of the People as well as the King For if it was to be taken in the Litteral Sense the Parliament bound themselves and the rest of the Body to the King as Head that we should submit to the Invasions of our Religion and Liberties and the Establishing of Idolatry and to all the Outrages and Cruelties that the Devil or Man could invent even to Death it self which is Diametrically opposite to all Laws both Divine Natural and Civil and to all the Sense and Reason of Mankind and that this Oath cannot be taken in the strictest Sense though the Parliament design'd it is plain because all Oaths contrary to our Duty to God our Neighbour or our selves are invalid and by Consequence this Oath is without a tacit meaning because it tends to our own and our Neighbours Destruction There is another thing very observable here that is our Baptismal Vow by which we oblige our selves to perform all Christian Duties to God our Neighbours and our Selves which is to be pious do Justice and Charity c. which we cannot perform if we were obliged by this Oath to let the Prince be guilty of all manner of Outrages Besides all Oaths opposite to the First a man takes are not binding till the Obligation of the First ceases yet the taking of such Oaths is a great sin and ought to be avoided There is an Allegiance due to the Government as well as to the King and he that bears true Allegiance to the Government bears true Allegiance to the King and he that bears true Allegiance to the King bears true Allegiance to the Government There is a Natural Allegiance due from the King to the Government of preserving it as well as a Political one by his Coronation Oath It is truer Allegiance to defend the Government against the King and his Adherents who shall endeavour to destroy it than to defend the King and his Adherents against the Government Then how do we bear true Allegiance to the Government if we stand still and let it be violated every day If King James by his Illegal Administration gives accasion for an Invasion and cannot hinder it and makes himself uncapable to give Protection by deserting the Kingdom and so leaves his People to the Mercy of the Invader who cannot fight against him without fighting against their Religion and their Conscience Whilst they remain thus they have neither Government Justice or Benefit of the Law in this Case the Oath of Allegiance or Bond which tied them together is broken and ceases as much as if he was actually dead he being dead in Law and they are no longer his Leiges but at liberty to get protection where they can find it Upon the Fortune of War in Flanders and many other Countries where Towns and Cities have been one while one Prince's and another while anothers and so have been transfer'd forwards and backwards several times and with them the Peoples Allegiance And that this is the Practice of the whole World I need not intimate to you Now will any man say that these men have broke their Oaths by swearing Allegiance to him in Possession which must be if their former Oaths are not void and their Allegiance transfer'd to him in possession From hence it follows That Protection is the only Ground and Foundation of Allegiance The Scripture does not direct Obedience to the Right Heir but the Powers in being If the People endeavour to destroy or kill the King the Coronation Oath neither does nor can bind him to protect them but on the contrary he commits a notorious sin against the Law of Nature if he does not defend himself and destroy them if there is a necessity for it to preserve himself 22. 'T is not an reasonable that an arbitrary King should be dep●●● for that must be the meaning of forfeiting and losing the Right of governing as it is that Subjects should

THE LETTER Which was sent to the AUTHOR of the DOCTRINE OF Passive Obedience AND JURE DIVINO Disproved c. ANSWERED and REFUTED Wherein is Proved That Monarchy was not Originally from GOD. That Kings are not by Divine Appointment but that all Government proceeds from the People That the Obedience required in Scripture is to the Laws of the Land and no otherwise That Resisting of Arbitrary Power is Lawful That the Oath of Allegiance to the late King James was dissolved before the Prince of Orange our present King landed That upon the Non-performance of an Oath on one side the other becomes void is plainly prov'd from several Examples in Scripture That Protection is the only Cause of Allegiance and that Obedience or Allegiance is due to the present Government is proved from Scripture Law and Reason and those Texts of Scripture which relate to Government or Monarchy are Explained The Second Edition LONDON Printed for Tho. Harrison at the White Swan over against the West-end of the Royal Exchange in Cornhil 1689. A VINDICATION OF THE DOCTRINE OF Passive Obedience and Jure Divino Disproved c. SIR I Question not but that your Answer is the Idea of your Mind which I doubt not but to make appear to be not only pernicious but tends to the Destruction of all Humane Societies and likewise that you have wrested the Scripture and have made Notorious False Assertions For brevity sake I shall leave out your unnecessary Prologue You say you will not recite any of my Words but refer to my Propositions in that order as I have set them down being Thirty Eight Breaks or Sentences I do desire you and all impartial Men that read this Book to take the pains to read my former Sheet and number the Breaks or Assertions therein and compare them with your Answer which I have set down Verbatim that they may the better judge of the Ridiculousness thereof 1. To begin you say By the Word of God it appears That Monarchy is the Government which God hath chosen above all others and that the People were always obliged to accept that Form of Government which God had chosen for them before they did actually bind themselves See him said Samuel to all the People whom the Lord not you hath chosen 1 Sam. 10.24 Jeroboam indeed was a King of the Peoples making and presently after you know they made a golden Calf This Act of the People though permitted by God for the punishment of Solomon 's sin is more than once called Rebellion in Scripture 1 Kings 12.19 2 Chron. 10.19 1 Sam. 8.19 20 The Children of Israel importuned him for a King over them that they might be like all the nations and that he might judge them and go before them and fight their Battles Chap. 10.24 25. And Samuel said unto the People See him whom the Lord hath chosen And he told the People the manner of the Kingdom which was the Law of the Kingdom and wrote it in a book and laid it up before the Lord. Surely no man will say but that this Law was a Rule for the King to go by as well as the People And then where was his Absolute Authority Chap. 11.14 15. Samuel said to the People Come and let us go to Gilgal and renew the Kingdom there And all the People went to Gilgal and there they made Saul King before the Lord. 1 Sam. 12.12 13. Ye said unto me● says Samuel Nay but a King shall reign over us when the Lord ●our God was your King by which it appears there was no other King but God Now therefore behold the King whom ye have chosen But though he was made King by the appointment of Almighty God yet it was thought necessary the People should confirm and make him King again And 1 Chron. 29.22 The people made Solomon King the second time Which makes not a little for the Peoples Right in Electing their Kings Jeroboam was a King by the appointment of Almighty God though Elected by the People 1 Kings 11.35 Where the Prophet Ahijah speaking to Jeroboam Thus saith the Lord I will take the Kingdom out of Rehoboam's the Son of Solomon's hand and will give it to thee even Ten Tribes But with what face can you wrest the Scripture thus in saying that the Peoples chusing of Jeroboam is more than once called a sin when both these Texts which you quote relates to the aforegoing Verses wherein 't is said That King Rehoboam sent Adoram that was over the Tribute and all Israel stoned him with stones that he died which was Rebellion because it was resisting the Lawful Authority Besides Jeroboam is not mentioned as King till after this Act was committed 2. The true and real greatness of the Soveraign is never inconsistent with the Publick Advantage The true and real Greatness of the Soveraign both from God and Man is not to annihilate or destroy Government but to preserve it with Justice and Peace All Acts contrary to the Laws of the Land are far from being a true and real Greatness and therefore are inconsistent with the Publick Advantage 3. Those things which God hath joyned let no man put asunder The head cannot be well if the Members be much out of order neither can the Members rightly perform their office if the Head be sick and weak The good of the Society is indeed the End of Government but 't is Nonsence to talk of the good of a Society without including the Governour as well as the Governed The People are no ways commanded by God to put themselves into this or that Form of Government but 't is wholly left to their choice And all Government whatsoever tho after the mutual ties of Reciprocal Oaths are not joyned by God tho permitted by him But how do you wrest the Scripture which particularly relates to Man and Wife and apply it to Government as may be seen Matth. 19.6 But verse 9. allows a man to turn away his Wife for Fornication tho joyned by God. But suppose the King and People are joyned together by God is it not much more reasonable to turn away that King who shall endeavour to destroy the People or overthrow their Laws Rights and Priviledges and make them Slaves to his Arbitrary Will and Pleasure than for to turn away one's Wife for Fornication I say if a Woman forfeits her right to her Husband by breaking of her Marriage-Vow in committing of Fornication surely 't is much more reasonable that a King who breaks his Oath and endeavours to overthrow the Government and establish an Idolatrous Religion and by consequence robbing God and the Nation of their Rights should forfeit his Right to the People The Safety of the Body that is the People is to be valued before the Head which is the Chief Governour because it is an easie matter to get a Head to the Body but not a Body to the Head. 4. The Law preserves the King from Force and Violence