Reply. More mystery still! 1. Was there no antecedent Law or Covenant of God, giving a jus societatis a Right of membership to Abraham's seed as soon as they had a being initially, and commanding them to be devoted to God in Covenant, and Circumcised, that they by investiture might have a plenary Right? Was there no such thing? O but [this gave them not a right to it before they had it.] Is the poor Church to be thus abused, and holy things thus played with? They could not be members before they had a being; nor could lay claim to it: But could not ⟨p. 37⟩Gods Law, Grant or Instrumental Covenant be made before they were born? And could it not be the Instrument of conveying right to them as soon as they were born? that is, as soon as they were subjects capable? And is not the cause in order of nature, though not of time before the effect? Cannot the Law of the Land be the fundamental cause of the Right of Infants to Honours and Estates, though till they are in being they are not capable subjects? Is not the Action ut agentis naturally antecedent to it as in patient? Is it only Gods transeunt fact of making them men and these men, and placing them in England, which maketh Infants to be members of the English Nobility, or Gentry or Citizens or members of this Kingdom? No; but it is the Laws that do morally give the Jus dignitatis, vel societatis, though their action be not terminated in any subject till it exist. For every man born in England is not born a Lord, or Esquire, or Citizen, no nor a free subject, unless the Law say it shall be so. If Foreigners or Rebels should have children here, and the Law were that they shall be Aliens, they would be no members of the Kingdom. If Mr. T. or Mr. D's children have nothing but Generation, and being born in England to show for their Inheritance, their Title will not hold.
Reply. More mystery still! 1. Was there no antecedent Law or Covenant of God, giving a jus societatis a Right of membership to Abrahams seed as soon as they had a being initially, and commanding them to be devoted to God in Covenant, and Circumcised, that they by investiture might have a plenary Right? Was there no such thing? O but [this gave them not a right to it before they had it.] Is the poor Church to be thus abused, and holy things thus played with? They could not be members before they had a being; nor could lay claim to it: But could not ⟨p. 37⟩Gods Law, Grant or Instrumental Covenant be made before they were born? And could it not be the Instrument of conveying right to them as soon as they were born? that is, as soon as they were subjects capable? And is not the cause in order of nature, though not of time before the effect? Cannot the Law of the Land be the fundamental cause of the Right of Infants to Honours and Estates, though till they are in being they are not capable subjects? Is not the Action ut agentis naturally antecedent to it as in patiente? Is it only Gods transeunt fact of making them men and these men, and placing them in England, which maketh Infants to be members of the English Nobility, or Gentry or Citizens or members of this Kingdom? No; but it is the Laws that do morally give the Jus dignitatis, vel societatis, though their action be not terminated in any subject till it exist. For every man born in England is not born a Lord, or Esquire, or Citizen, no nor a free subject, unless the Law say it shall be so. If Foreigners or Rebels should have children here, and the Law were that they shall be Aliens, they would be no members of the Kingdom. If Mr. T. or Mr. D's children have nothing but Generation, and being born in England to shew for their Inheritance, their Title will not hold.
