An answer to a letter from a clergyman in the city, to his friend in the country containing his reasons for not reading the declaration.

About this Item

Title
An answer to a letter from a clergyman in the city, to his friend in the country containing his reasons for not reading the declaration.
Author
Poulton.
Publication
[London :: s.n.,
1688]
Rights/Permissions

To the extent possible under law, the Text Creation Partnership has waived all copyright and related or neighboring rights to this keyboarded and encoded edition of the work described above, according to the terms of the CC0 1.0 Public Domain Dedication (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/). This waiver does not extend to any page images or other supplementary files associated with this work, which may be protected by copyright or other license restrictions. Please go to http://www.textcreationpartnership.org/ for more information.

Subject terms
Halifax, George Savile, -- Marquis of, 1633-1695. -- Letter from a clergyman in the city to his friend in the country.
Link to this Item
http://name.umdl.umich.edu/A55530.0001.001
Cite this Item
"An answer to a letter from a clergyman in the city, to his friend in the country containing his reasons for not reading the declaration." In the digital collection Early English Books Online. https://name.umdl.umich.edu/A55530.0001.001. University of Michigan Library Digital Collections. Accessed May 18, 2025.

Pages

ANSWER.

This Paragraph runs all along upon a meer Begging the Que∣stion. For it would enforce an Argument from a Topick that nei∣ther

Page 5

can nor ought to be allowed him: Besides, that it smells very strong of Common-wealth Logick: as pickeering against the Power of Princes, and insinuating the Declaration to be Illegal, contrary to the Laws of God and the Land, and therefore not to be obey'd. So that a greater presumption certainly could not have enter'd the Breast of a Clergy-man of the Church of England, than thus to question the Legality of the King's Publick Acts. Certainly it was never thought unlawful, till this Gentleman found it out, for a King to grant an Act of Indulgence and a Toleration of Religion to his Subjects. And then again to say, the King can do no wrong, insinuates that some Body has done wrong, in advising the Order: which is a Reflexion of too great Importance for men of Loyal Di∣spositions to scan. If he mean that the Order, or rather the De∣claration, is contrary to the Law of the Land, that is to say, to the Penal Laws, and the Law enforcing the Test, that is absolutely to deny the King's Royal Power of Dispensation, which has alrea∣dy render'd them invalid. For he should have first made it out that the Penal Laws and Test were such Sacred and Inviolable Sta∣tutes, that all things done contrary to them, were contrary to Justice and Equity, before he had so slily Inferr'd an Impossibility of giving his Consent to reading the Declaration, as contrary to the Law of the Land, and the Act of a Superiour Authority nor justifi∣able by the King himself. But this Gentleman did not consider that there is no such Stress to be laid upon the Sanctimony of the Penal Laws, and that supporting the Test. For that the Conditi∣ons of all Humane Laws are, That the Law be Honest, Just, Pos∣sible, Convenient to Time and Place, and Conformable to Religi∣on and Reason. In every one of which Characters the Penal Laws, &c. are deficient, if for no other, though there are many, yet for that very Reason alledg'd in His Majesties Declaration, be∣cause they discourage and disable his Majesties Subjects that are well inclin'd and fit to serve him, from doing him those Ser∣vices which by the Law of Nature they are bound to do. But he goes on

Do you have questions about this content? Need to report a problem? Please contact us.