suggested prologue: to define "care" before introduction of the logic of why the "generative principle" can result in its active form expressed thru the tort law doctrine of “duty of care".
in the following clip Mark Passio masterfully breaks down the “lost (generative) principle” of “care” in his presentation: "Natural Law - The REAL Law Of Attraction And How To Apply It In Your Life."
notice how the “geometry” of this “eighth principle” is the implied “circle” that encompasses all other 7 natural law principles? isn't that coincidentally just as “equity” encompasses all other forms of “law”? this “seed of life” pattern is also echoed in the rhetoric (wisdom) of equity as the soul, spirit and “seed” of all “law” which is expressed by John Bouvier's definition:
after considering the above, can one now construe how “equity” is a generative cause that created the “duty of care” doctrine of tort law? isn't it logical that the absence of care would require the necessity for an area of law for restitution and recovery remedy? thus would these conclusions lead one to see the ethics in the definition of care as a way to illustrate how equity could be the moral foundation that defined such a doctrine?
this begins the “duty of care” series promised in: Why the 7 Liberating Arts & Sciences are only requirement for Sovereign Learning
in order to further develop the idea of “duty of care” one must have a concept of ‘law’, government and most important of all: ‘equity”, because without equity there can be no justice and “relief” when ‘law’ fails, nor any just rule of government (by self, externally or any combination thereof).
The Living Network recommended: https://youtu.be/xEHt7Tt3zmQ?t=1698 >> 28 minutes in the interview starts with Brother Gregory author of: “Contract, Covenants, and Constitutions”. as a long-time student of brother gregory's work, this is a favorite text to share with new people. but must share this caveat:
the book will only take you up to a 1st century understanding of what the new covenant established, and only a background of the double-mindedness that modern society has yet to come out of. what does this mean? means: yes, gov't by contract is not the creator's way. and yes, the old covenant way (aka keeping biblical law for justification) is superior to today's martial belligerent occupation of the united states over the bankrupt American republic -- that has been in abeyance since Abe Lincoln's civil war (see Lincoln's 1st executive order 100 - lieber code for the reality of today's martial u.s. govt operation). but even the American republic was built on a constitution (as amended in 1791) which only created a "religious society" (see: Preamble Religious Intent) yet even the American republic was still not based upon the new covenant, but the "common law" of England (see: "the levitical priesthood of tennessee" ).
so what if one became more like a berean and studied further? would one come to a clearer understanding of how the "agape" (love) defined in the new covenant re-definition of "the duty of care" and how the messiah, yahshua, fulfilled Psalms 98:9 (as evidenced in Acts 17:31)? then when one studies the history of the development of equity, will a clearer idea emerge of how the new covenant can be better understood?
this blogger leaves the duty to the kings to search out the matter that the King of kings hid thru parable... this might help:
two suggestions were made that started this path of study into equity for finding superior relief (justice) over "remedy" (compensation)... instead of continuing a multi-decade study of law -- i.e biblical, common, commercial, private, statutory, etc.
1st - a friend recommended one read Gibson's "suits in chancery" (1907) on equity jurisprudence and then study early books on trusts (before 1930). So I proceeded to take up a serious study of Gibson's with my underline markers and later compiled a cliff-note intro: "Why Equity is King - and the Maxims are its essence".
2nd - studied under Christian Walters' "New Trust Technology", then when he left his own group to correct his mistakes. . . he create a new one: "Kingdom of God with Eyes of Equity" before he passed on. this last was the more important influence... e.g.
. . . finding "equity" in the bible. one starts with defining the word: - 'Justice; right. In practice, equity is the impartial distribution of justice, or the doing that to another which the laws of God and man, and of reason, give him a right to claim. It is the treating of a person according to justice and reason.. . . The Lord shall judge the people with equity Psalms 98:9." (Websters 1828)
then one could go to books on "equity" to define how it's come to be interpreted as the "rule" of practice in "chancery". - "the highest court of justice"... proceeds upon rules of equity and conscience, moderates the rigor of the common law, and gives relief in cases where there is no remedy in the common law courts"
as Gibson wrote: The student who has made these principles a part of his mental habit, who has incorporated them into his very intellectual being, has already mastered the essence of Equity. So fundamental are these maxims that he who disputes their authority is regarded as beyond the reach of reason.
1. Equity sees that as done what ought to be done.
2. Equity will not suffer a wrong to be without a remedy.
3. Equity delights in equality.
4. One who seeks equity must do equity.
5. Equity aids the vigilant, not those who slumber on their rights.
6. Equity imputes an intent to fulfill an obligation.
7. Equity acts in personam.
8. Equity abhors a forfeiture.
9. Equity does not require an idle gesture.
10. He who comes into equity must come with clean hands.
11. Equity delights to do justice and not by halves.
12. Equity will take jurisdiction to avoid a multiplicity of suits.
13. Equity follows the law.
14. Equity will not aid a volunteer. (As Lord Eldon said: “if you are a volunteer you shall not have the help of a Court of Equity to make you a cestui que trust.”)
15. Where equities are equal, the law will prevail.
16. Between equal equities the first in order of time shall prevail.
17. Equity will not complete an imperfect gift.
18. Equity will not allow a statute to be used as a cloak for fraud.
19. Equity will not allow a trust to fail for want of a trustee.
20. Equity regards the beneficiary as the true owner.
"Some of these principals are so comprehensive and fruitful, that one who has grasped them in their fullness of conception has already mastered the system of equity; all else is the mere application of these grand truths to particular circumstance." - Professor John Norton Pomeroy
what about equity today? over the past decade one has found many fellow students who've helped compile huge reference libraries of quotes on equity and trusts. here are some from just one group:
"The exclusive equity jurisdiction is not ousted by statute or else by any express terms or clear and necessary implication. Equitable jurisdiction once having attached to a case, will be maintained for the final adjudication of all rights involved." Charles Phelps "Juridical Equity"§268
"To sum up this result in one brief statement, all equitable estates, interests, and primary rights, and all the principles, doctrines, and rules of the equity jurisprudence by which they are defined, determined, and regulated, remain absolutely untouched, in their full force and extent, as much as though a separate court of chancery were still preserved." Pomeroy §354
"It is easy to say that the distinctive modes of equity procedure are alone abrogated by the legislature, while the principles, doctrines and rules of the equity jurisprudence and jurisdiction are wholly unaffected; While the external distinctions of form between suits in equity and actions at law have been abrogated, the essential distinctions which inhere in the very nature of equitable and legal primary or remedial rights still exist as clearly defined as before the system was adopted, and must continue to exist until the peculiar features of the common law are destroyed, and the entire municipal jurisprudence of the state is transformed into equity." Section 355 in Pomeroy, 1905 edition
On Certain Equitable Remedies.- While it is undoubtedly true that with the exception just mentioned of the right conferred upon the direct assignee of a legal thing in action, all the equitable estates, interests, property, liens, and other primary rights 1 recognized by the equity jurisprudence, and all the principles, doctrines, and rules of that jurisprudence which define them, determine their existence, and regulate their acquisition, transfer, and enjoyment, are untouched and unaffected. Equitable Remedies, Pomeroy, Section 357, page 591
when one investigates the historic development of equity, one will discover its origins developed by the chancelor’s of england from discerning the new testament books of the anointed king: yahshua’s confrontation with the pharisees over the “just” application of creator’s law. as the perfect example of how to fulfill creator’s covenant & law, “the messiah” is the embodiment of “right-doing” (i.e. righteousness – a.k.a. “equity”).
. . . so to understand the original source from whence “equity” is derived is to understand the true essence of the new covenant the creator made thru the “anointed” finished work to establish a new administration for a “new heavens & new earth”. this is for the student to seek out by one’s own study to see if its so. then one will find why Acts 17:31 is proof that “the redeemer” of the “saved” out of “this present darkness” (i.e. the world) is the “judge of righteousness that governs the people with equity” (ps 98:9)
* "Love does no wrong to its neighbor. Therefore love is the fulfillment of the Law." https://biblehub.com/romans/13-10.htm
* "A new commandment I give you: Love one another. As I have loved you, so also you must love one another." https://biblehub.com/john/13-34.htm
* “The entire Law is fulfilled in a single decree: “Love your neighbor as yourself.” https://biblehub.com/galatians/5-14.htm
* "Since you have purified your souls by obedience to the truth so that you have a genuine love for your brothers, love one another deeply, from a pure heart.” https://biblehub.com/1_peter/1-22.htm
* "Draw near to God, and He will draw near to you. Cleanse your hands, you sinners, and purify your hearts, you double-minded.” https://biblehub.com/james/4-8.htm
so why is "duty of care" important, and how can it generate change for the better? "by what standard" can one define "right" from "wrong"? if one claims there is a standard that defines what "care" is, then is one not obligated to define one's measurement? mustn't there be a 'just weight and measure' for there to be an equality of justice?
in the next installment of the duty of care series we'll attempt to go into what such a standard requires as "duty" (agape). But first a definition is needed:
By This Standard - The Authority Of God's Law Today, by Greg Bahnsen - http://www.garynorth.com/freebooks/docs/2c6a_47e.htm
No Other Standard - Theonomy and Its Critics, by Greg Bahnsen - http://www.garynorth.com/freebooks/docs/219e_47e.htm
Dr. Gordon Stein (Athiest) vs Dr Greg Bahnsen - https://youtu.be/anGAazNCfdY
Transcript (for above) - http://andynaselli.com/wp-content/uploads/Bahnsen-Stein_Transcript.pdf
One needs the "old training" (old covenant administration of "God's law" - i.e. creator's law) before one can understand the "new training" (new covenant administration defined by the two great commandments) - otherwise known as "equity" which this article has attempted to illustrate. which leaves this conclusion:
. . . one must master "natural law" to understand "nature and nature's creator" before one can learn the principles and maxims of equity that bring "relief" where the "law" fails for complete justice.
conclusion. One must learn "obedience training" within the pursuit of truth (trivium), to process the logic of the parables that define justice (i.e. equity). And the best source for that is a simple book called Obedience Training, B.A. Hunter: https://archive.org/details/ObedienceTrainingByBAHunterSearchable
Only by mastering the "old training" can one be "self-governing" (i.e. without a "leash" under a "master") thru operation under the "new training" (equity). which leads into the next article:
why a "royal priesthood"? what alternative does "equity" provide to overcome man's bankrupt traditions of "church, state, and money"? What is the "ecclesian way"?