~1. Is it afin to break eJJery humanePenalLaw? Anfw. P.:ron·irr,0•, that i.s' confcientiouJ1y, fo that a hurn1ne bond is ccruinly h.id·on the mind, foul, or confdwcc uken m tht: larger fenfc. 11 • TakingCrnfciencc in the f\riC!cr fenfe, as including c:ffcntialty a relation to .Gods obligation, the full fenfe of 1he quell ion plainly isbut this, Whethet it bt a fin againft God 10 break., tht La.Tt of <trtan? And thus plain men might cahly underHand it. And to this it mull be: anfwered, th:lt iris in 1 wo rc.Jpdh a fin abainH God to break fuch L1ws or Commands as Rulers arc authorized by God to make: 1, Becaufe God commandeth us to obey our Rulers : There:fore he that ( fo) obeycth rh'm not, tinntth againfi a L1w of God. God obligeth us in General to obey them in all things which they are authorized by him to command: But their Law dctermineth of the pudcular mat– ter: Theteforc God obligeth us (in Confciencc of his Law) to obey them in that parliculu. 2. Be~ c•ufe by nuking 1hem hh Ol~lcers, by his Comminlon he hath given them a certain beam ofAuchQ:. ~ity, which is D:vine as .der.tved ~rom ~od :. Therefore they can command us by a power derived fromc~ d; Tb:n..fore to ddnbty IS ro Jm agamn a power dt rived from God. And thus the General of~ is ve 1 y pl~ii1 a:1•J eJiie, H0..v man tinncth againH G(Jd in difobcying the Laws of man, and con~ ftquer.rly how ( in "l. tolerablc fcn_fe of t~1ar P_hrafc:) it mJy be faid, thlt _rn~ns La~s d_o or do not Lind the cGn[cicnce (or rather, bmd us m pomt of Confcitnce;) or by a DJvtoe oblJgUIOn. MJn is 11 otGod; and therefore ar ma11, of himftlf can lay no Divim obligation on us. BUt MJtl being c(.d 1 Officer, 1. ~is own L~v .laye1h en ~sa~ oblig~tio~ deriv~tivt.ly Divim. ( For it is no LaW which hl th no oblioatmn, !J.Md 1t uno authoritative obllgauon whtch ISnot dcuvcd fromGod). 2· And GadJ own Law bindeth us to obey mamLaws. ~dl. 2. -BVt is it a fi~t to brt.ll{ every Pen,,l Law of man.? AnjB.·. I. Ycu mufi n:membcr that Man; Law is dfent ially the fignification ofm.:nt JYiU; Aud thert:fm·e obligeth no further than it. truly figni·ticth the Rui~FS Will. · 2· That iris the Act of a Power derived from God; and therefore: no further bindeth, than it is the excrclle of fuch a power. . · • 3· That it is ~iven, <·Finally for Go~s glory a,d plea[ure, ·and for the Common Good ( compre· hending the H~mour of the Rultr and the welfare of the focicty ruled ). And therefore' obligeth not . whtn it is, I. Again{\ God; 2. Or againfi the Common Good. 2. And it is fubordinatc to Gods Ir 1 s not b own LJws, ( in NJtllre and Scripture ) and therefore obligeth not to fin, or to the violation of~~~~~~~!~:'' Gods Law• bath writtcR · 1 • rh2t Laws bind not in confcience to obedience which arc againfi the Publick Good : The grem·fi Cafuifls f:ty the fsme, ocept;n:;; the c;a[e of fc•rKal: ri: rb.r wuulJ fee rais in them nny choufe but tbefe tW0 fpecial Amhor~ Ba;t. Frttgof. de Rtg)mi.re R~i?.llb!ic.,, & Grtg. Sayts« in hi~ C/a'Jii Rt~ia) ;mJ in them he fllllllind enow mor= c~teJ. Though. l tbink Come f~;~rther Cautions would make it more farisfattory. . 4· You mufl note that Laws arc' made for the Governrr.ent of Societies as fuch ,univerfally; and fo ·a.re fitted to the Corrimon Cafe,for the Common Good. And it is not poffible.but that a Law whi'h prefcribcth a duty which br accident is fo w the moll, lhpukl f!1Cet witli fome puticular fubjett to whom the c<~.fc is fo cirCurrlOantiarcd as that the fJmC act would be to him a tin : And to the [amt m.m it may be ordinarily a duty, and ' in an extraordinary cafe a fin. Thence it is that in fomc cafes (as Lent Falls, M.~.niages, &c ), Rulers oft a\:lthorizc fome pe1 fons to grant' difpenfations in certain cafts; And hence ic is fJid, chat Nec,.ffity bath no Ltw. · H.:reupon I conclude as followe1h. I· Iris no fin ro break a Law which is no Law, as being againfi God, or not authorized by him (as of a Ulurper, &c.) SeeR. H"k,crConcluf.Lib. 8. 2. Ir is no Law fo far as it is no tignificltion of the 'rue Will of the: . Ruler, what ever the words be; Thtrdore fo far it is no fin to break it. 3· The Will of the Ruler is to be judged of, not only by the Wordt, but by the EndJ of Government, and by the Rules ofHumanity. · . · 4· It being nor poffible that the Ruler in his Laws can forefee and name all exceptions, which may occur, it is eo be fuppofed that it is his Will, that the Nature of the thing, fhall be the notifier of his Will, when it cbmeth to pafs: And that if he were prefent, and this cafe fell out before him, which the fenfe and end of the Law cxt~ndcth not to, he would f<Ay, This is an excepted.Cafe. c;; There is therefore a wide difference between a General Law, and a· perfonal particular' M:J1tdate ~· . As of a Parem to a Child, or a M:ililer to a Servant : f'or this latter fully notifieth the Will of the Ruler in that very cafe, and to that very pcrfon: And therefore it cannot be faid that hete is any excepti– on, or ~hac ic is not his Will: B~t in an Univerfal or General Law, it is ro· be fuppofed thar fame, particular excepted Cafc:s will fall out extraordinarily, though they cannot be named: And chat in thofc Cafes, the Rult:rs will difpenfC:th with it• .6. Sometimes allo the Ruler cloth by the meer neglect of preffing or executing his own Laws, permit them to grow obfolcte, and out of ufe : And fometirnes he forbeareth the execution of them for fame time, or to fornefort of perfons; And by fo doing doth notifie, that it was not his Will that at fuch a time, and in fuch cafC:s they !hould oblige. I fay nor, that aU rtmifsnefi of execution is luch a fign : But fometiptJ it is: And the very word of the Law-giver; may notifie his difpenf.rion Fff ffff or
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy OTcyMjk=