he be never so true a Subject and all unlikely to make any resistance or to think any evil unto your Grace P. 184. Whereas it is they that go about to make Insurrection to the maintaining of their worldly pomp and pride and not the true Preacher Who is he that would be a Traitor or maintain a Traitor against your most excellent and noble Grace I think no Man yea and I know surely that no Man can do it without the great displeasure of the eternal God. For S. Paul commandeth straitly unto all Christians to be obedient in all things Rom. 13. on this manner Let every man submit himself to the authority of the higher power for whosoever resisteth the power resisteth the ordinance of God and they that resist shall receive to themselves damnation 1 Pet. 2. Also S. Peter confirmeth this saying Submit your selves unto all manner of ordinance of man c. Wherefore if every man had the Scriptures as I would to God they had to judge every Man's Doctrine ☞ then were it out of question that the Preachers thereof either would or could make or cause to be made any Insurrection against their Prince seeing the self same Scripture straitly commandeth all Subjects to be obedient unto their Princes as Paul witnesseth saying Warn them saith he that they submit themselves to princes and to powers and to obey the officers Now how can they that preach and exhort all Men to this Doctrine cause any Insurrection or Disobedience against their Prince Call to mind the old Prophets and with a single eye judge if any of them either privily or apertly stirred up the People against their Princes P. 185. Look on Christ if he submitted not himself to the high powers paid he not Tribute for all he was free and caused Peter likewise to pay Suffered not he with all patience the punishments of the Princes Yea Death most cruel altho they did him open wrong and could find him guilty in no Cause Look also on the Apostles and if ever they stirred by any occasion the People against their Princes yea if they themselves obeyed not to all Princes altho the most part of them were Tyrants and Infidels Consider likewise those Doctors which purely and sincerely have handled the Word of God either in Preaching or Writing if ever by their means any Insurrection or Disobedience rise among the People against their Princes but you shall rather find that they have been rather ready to lay down their own Heads to suffer with all patience whatsoever Tyranny any Power would minister unto them giving all People example to do the same Now to conclude if neither the Scripture neither the Practice of the Preachers thereof teacheth nor affirmeth that the People may disobey their Princes or their Ordinances but contrariwise teacheth all Obedience to be done unto them it is plain that those Bishops or rather Papists do falsly accuse those true Preachers and Subjects which thing would appear in every Man's sight if by their violence the Word of God were not kept under Now is this the Doctrin that I do Preach and Teach ☜ and none other as concerning this matter God I take to record and all my Books and Writings that ever I wrote or made and only I allow and favor them which further this Doctrine of Christ and of this I am sure mine Adversaries or rather Adversaries to Christ's Doctrin must bear me witness After this he proceeds to demonstrate that the Pope and the Papistical Bishops are they who Preach to the People the contrary Doctrin as that St. Peter exempts himself and his Successors from being subject to Superiors that Subjects may be disobedient to their own Lords and that the Pope may Depose Kings that he hath autority to break all Oaths Bonds and Obligations and other such like positions and then adds there is no Officer that hath need to be afraid of Christ's Gospel nor yet of the Preachers thereof ☜ but of those privy Traitors can no Man be too wary the Scripture commandeth us to obey to wicked Princes and giveth us none autority to Depose them who was more wicked than Herod and yet St. John suffer'd Death under him Who was wickeder than Pilate and yet Christ did not put him down but was Crucified under him Briefly which of all the Princes were good in the Apostles days and yet they deposed none So that God's word and their own learning and the Practice of our Master Christ and his Holy Apostles are openly against them p. 190. there is no People under Heaven that more abhors and with earnester heart resisteth and more diligently doth Preach against Disobedience than we do Yea I dare say boldly let all your Books be search'd that were written this 500 Years and all they shall not declare the autority of a Prince and the true obedience toward him as one of our little Books shall do that be condemn'd by you for Heresie p. 202. 204. And then he impeacheth them of denying that the King's Power is immediatly of God while it can never be proved that ever we spake against God or our King. The same Learned and Holy Martyr in his Discourse that Mens Constitutions not grounded in Scripture bind not the Conscience is of the same mind If the power command any thing of Tyranny against Right and Law always provided that it repugn not against the Gospel p. 292. 293. 294. nor destroy our Faith our Charity must needs suffer it for as St. Paul saith Charity suffereth all things also our Master Christ If a man strike thee on the one Cheek turn him the other For if he doth exercise Tyranny if he command thee any thing against right or do thee any wrong as for an example cast thee in Prison wrongfully if thou canst by any reasonable and quiet means without Sedition Insurrection or breaking of the common Peace save thy self or avoid his Tyranny thou may'st do it with a good Conscience but in no wise ☞ be it right or wrong may'st thou make any resistance with a Sword or with Hand but obey except thou canst avoid as I have shewed thee but if the Cause be right lawful or profitable to the Common-wealth thou must obey and thou must not sly without sin But suppose the King should condemn the New Testament in England and command that none of his Subjects should have it is he to be obeyed or not this will be a great Scourge and an intolerable plague My Lords the Popish Bishops would depose him with short deliberation and make no Conscience of it they have Deposed Princes for lesser Causes than this is a great deal But against them will I always lay Christ's Fact and his Holy Apostles and the Word of God. If the King forbid the New Testament c. under a temporal pain or else under the pain of Death Men shall first make faithful Prayers to God and then diligent
first brought from another Country and is no way natural to our own tho the Infection hath been taken by too many who had an ill Temper prepared for it Cons Dr. Jackson's Works Tom. 3. l. 12. ch 8. p. 978. their Loyalty and Peaceableness may be the Fruits of their Education or their good temper but not of their Faith or as Dr. Sherlock says they may be loyal as Englishmen but they cannot be so as Papists Would we therefore judge of the Doctrine of our Church we must consult her Articles Canons publick Homilies publick Offices of Devotion General Orders of her Bishops Censures of her Universities and Writings of her greatest Men who have vindicated her Doctrine and explained her Belief and this Method I shall use to discover what hath been owned by the Church of England as to the Doctrine of Non-resistance or Passive Obedience CHAP. I. The Doctrine of the Thirty nine Articles THE Articles of our Church have been always looked upon as the stated Doctrine of our whole Church to which all her Priests are obliged to make their Subscriptions they are allowed a place in the Body of the Confessions of the Protestant Churches and are highly commended by Foreigners as well as by our own Writers for * Bishop Ridley's Farewel Letter apud Fox tom 3. p. 506. this Church hath in matters of Controversie Articles so penned and framed after the Holy Scriptures and grounded upon the true understanding of God's Word that in short time if they had been universally received says Bishop Ridley the Martyr they should have been able to have set in Christ's Church much concord and unity in Christ's true Religion and to have expelled many false Errors and Heresies wherewith this Church alas was almost overgone Nor is this that excellent Prelate's peculiar Opinion but of the whole Church which ordains †Can. 3. an 1604. That whosoever shall affirm that the Church of England by Law establish'd under the King's Majesty is not a true and Apostolical Church teaching and maintaining the Doctrine of the Apostles let him be excommunicated ipso facto And Can. 5. Whosoever shall affirm that any of the thirty nine Articles agreed in the Synod 1562 are in any part superstitious or erroneous let him be excommunicate ipso facto Anno 1552. In the Convocation held at London Articles of Religion were agreed upon of which the Thirty sixth runs thus The Civil Magistrate is ordained and allowed of God and therefore is to be obeyed not only for wrath but also for Conscience sake And expresly asserts That the Bishop of Rome hath no Jurisdiction in this Realm of England In the Articles of our Church under Queen Elisabeth anno 1562. it runs thus and so continues to this day The Queens Majesty hath the chief Power in this Realm of England and other her Dominions unto whom the chief Government of all Estates of this Realm whether they be Ecclesiastical or Civil in all Cases doth appertain and is not nor ought to be subject to any Foreign Jurisdiction And it is remarkable ‖ Rogers's Praef. to the 39th Artic. that these Articles of 1562. were published in the same year in which the Massacre at Vassey in France was committed by the Duke of Guise and when all the Protestants in the Country were sentenced to Death by the Parliament of Paris It is true this Doctrine is not limited to the particular Case of Subjects taking up Arms but it seems to me by two necessary Consequences to be deduc'd from it 1. Because if the Pope who pretended by a Divine Right had no power over Kings much less have the People any power who pretend to an inferior Right that of Compact 2. Because the Article makes no distinction but excludes all other Power as well as that of the Pope And in truth the Plea is the same on either side the Pope says as long as the Prince governs according to the Laws of God and the Church of which he is the Interpreter so long the Censures of the Church do not reach him and say the People as long as the Prince governs according to the Laws of the Land and of the meaning of those Laws themselves are the Interpreters so long are they bound to be obedient but as soon as the King doth any thing that may contradict the Pope then he is deservedly say the Romanists excommunicate deposed and murdered and when he usurps upon the Peoples Liberties then he ought to be deposed by the Peoples the Arguments on either side are the same and for the most part the Authorities for as * Moderat of the Church of England ann 17. §. 19. p. 481. Dr. Puller well observes both Papists and Dissenters deny the Supremacy of the King one attributes it to the Pope originally the other to the People and the same Arguments that the Pope useth for his Supremacy over Kings the Disciplinarians use for establishing their Sovereignty CHAP. II. The Doctrine of the Injunctions and Canons IN the Infancy of the Reformation under Henry the Eighth for there I begin the Restoration of Religion to her Purity in this Kingdom as Dr. Burnet does †Burnet hist Reform l. 3. p. 226. tom 1. And Fox tom 2. p. 387. Anno 1536. Injunctions were issued out the first of which is That every Man that hath Cure of Souls shall for the Establishment and Confirmation of the King's Authority and Jurisdiction sincerely declare manifest and open for the space of one quarter of a year next ensuing once every Sunday and after that at the least wise twice every Quarter in their Sermons and other Collations that the Bishop of Rome 's usurp'd Power and Jurisdiction having no Establishment or Ground in the Law of God was of most just Causes taken away and abolish'd and that the King's Power is in his Dominions the highest Power and Potentate under God to whom all men within the same Dominions by God's Commandment owe most Loyalty and Obedience afore and above all other Potentates in Earth Now if a King be above all other Powers then he cannot be accountable to any other Power and so ought not to be resisted Anno * Burnet's Collect. of Records p. 181. 1538. came out the Lord Cromwel's Injunctions as they were called wherein the same Duty is injoyned in the same Words This also is the first of the Injunctions of Edw. the Sixth †Sparr Collect. p. 1 2. An. 1547. the Preface to which Injunctions acknowledges that part of them were formerly set out by Henry the Eighth and the rest added by King Edward the Sixth This also was the first of the Injunctions of Queen Elizabeth with a very little variation and accordingly in the Articles of Enquiry of Archbishop Cranmer in the Diocess of Canterbury under Edward the Sixth the first is Whether all Persons c. have preach'd against the usurp'd Power of the Bishop of Rome Secondly Whether they have preach'd and
1. That those Serm. at St. Mary's Oxf Jan. 30. 1660. and before the King Jan. 30. 1661. who promise Obedience to the King only so far as he preserves the true Religion and Liberties of the Kingdom withal reckoning themselves Judges of what Religion is true what false and when these Liberties are invaded and when not do by this put it within their own Power to judge when Religion Faith and Liberties are Invaded as they think convenient and from such judgment to absolve themselves from their Allegiance 2. That those very Persons who thus covenanted had already from Pulpit and Press declared the Religion establish'd in the Church of England and then maintain'd by the King to be Popish and Idolatrous and withal that the King had actually Invaded their Liberties was there any thing in the Book of God to warrant this Rebellion Why yes Daniet dreamed a Dream and there is also somthing in the Revelation concerning a Beast and a little horn and a fifth Viol and therefore the King ought undoubtedly to dye ☜ others plead providential dispensations God's work it seems must be regarded before his Word as if when we have a Man's Hand-writing we should endeavour to take his meaning by the measure of his foot we have lived under that model of Religion in which nothing hath been counted impious but Loyalty nothing absurd but restitution the Church of England is the only Church in Christendom we read of whose avowed Practices and Principles disown all resistance of the Civil Power and with the saddest experience and truest Policy and reason will evince it self to be the only one that is durably consistent with the English Monarchy let Men look back into its Primitive Doctrin and it's History and they will find neither the Calvin's nor the Knox's the Junius Brutus's the Synods nor the Holy Common-wealths on the one side nor yet the Bellarmin's nor the Mariana's on the other SECT IX And here it is necessary to mention the several Addresses that own the same Doctrin and I shall begin with that of the two Universities that of Oxford runs thus being according to an Act of Convocation dated Febr. 21. 1685. May it please your Majesty c. We your Majesty's most dutiful c. as we can never swerve from the Principles of our Institution in this place and our Religion by Law establish'd in the Church of England which indispensibly binds us to bear all Faith and true Obedience to our Sovereign without any restrictions or limitations so we presume to assure your Majesty that no consideration whatsoever shall be able to shake that stedfast Loyalty and Allegiance which in the days of your Blessed Father that Glorious Martyr and in the late times of discrimination stood here firm and unalterable to your Royal Brother and your Self under the sharpest trials and that we shall constantly by God's assistance with our utmost zeal and sidelity improve all those advantages wherewith God and your Majesty have intrusted us in this ancient nursery of Learning to promote the quiet happiness and security of your Majesties Reign over us Thus also the University of Cambridge in their Address tendred by the Vice-Chancellor Gaznum 2019. c. Mar. 23. 1684. We do with all humble submission present to your Sacred Majesty our unfeigned Loyalty the most valuable Tribute that we can give or your Majesty receive from us this is a Debt which we shall be always paying and always owing it being a Duty naturally flowing from the very Principles of our Holy Religion by which we have been enabled in the worst of times to breed as true and stedy Subjects as the World can shew as well in the Doctrine as Practice of Loyalty from which we can never depart Many other Addresses Gaz num 2008. 2012. 2013. 2016. 2018 c. of the same kind were made by the University of Dublin by the Bishop and Clergy of the City of London the Bishop and Clergy of Chester the Bishops of Bath and Wells and of Hereford and in truth of all the Dioceses I think in England Scotland and Ireland besides such as were tendred by Lords Lieutenants Grand Juries and particular Societies For which Sense of the Nation in those days I must refer the Reader to the Prints while I only subjoin the memorable Close of the Address tendered by the Bishop Vicar-General and the Clergy of the Cathedral and City of Bristol The Church of England is peculiarly indeared to us for that above all that is called Religion in the World it twists Piety with Loyalty and without Reserve Recognizeth your Sacred Majesty as the Sovereign and Supreme Power within your Majesties Realms and Dominions against whom there is no rising up and only less than God himself According to the Dictates of that most excellent Religion we abhor all those Antimonarchical Persons and Principles which would either exclude Princes from their just Rights or disturb the peaceable enjoyment of them And we earnestly beseech the King of Kings that your Majesties Throne may not only be Established but raised still higher upon the ruins of those that shall endeavour to Subvert or Supplant it SECT X. Dr. Stillingfleet Origin Brit. c. 5. p. 319. inquiring into the Reasons why the Saxons were called into Britain by Vortigern quotes Gildas who affirms That after the Britains found themselves deserted by the Romans they set up Kings of their own and soon after put them down again and made Choice of worse in their room Adding it is plain that he supposes that the Britains in that Confusion they were in took upon them without regard to their Duty to place and displace them But withal he observes that then the Britains were left to their full liberty by the Roman Empire that there was no Line remaining to succeed in the Government nor so much as to determine their Choice which made them so easily to make and unmake their Kings who lost their Purple and their Lives together This must needs breed insinite confusions among them and every one who came to be King lived in perpetual fear of being served as others had been before him And the natural Consequence of this jealousie of their own Subjects was looking out for assistance from abroad which I doubt not was one great reason of Vortigern 's sending for the Saxons hoping to secure himself by their means against his own People although it proved at last the ruin both of himself and his People And whereas Cressy in his answer to my Lord of Clarendon's Vindicaon of the Dean of S. Pauls had objected That days of Thanksgiving were kept for the discovery and prevention of such personal Treasons as the Gunpowder Treason but none for the Deliverance of the whole Kingdoms from almost an Universal Rebellion as if their were no necessity of requiring from any a retraction of the Principles of Rebellion or a promise that they shall not be renewed Answ to the
was call'd in which both the Universities most amicably agreed resolving only to give an account of the Proceedings at Oxford in the Years 1â—22 1647 and 1683 the Decree of 1622 was made the 25th of June in full Convocation on this occasion †Antiqu. Oxon. l. 1. p. 326 327 c. Mr. Knight of Broadgate Hall now Pembroke College preaching at S. Peter's in the East on Palm-Sunday upon 1 Kings 19.9 What dost thou here Elijah started this Question Whether it were lawful for Subjects in the defence of themselves when persecuted for Religion to take Arms against their Prince which he held in the Affirmative for which Doctrine when he was convened by the Vice-Chancellor he pleaded the Authority of Paraeus in his Commentary on the xiii to the Romans and the Example of King James who assisted the Rochellers against their King and was for that reason sent to Prison the Vice-Chancellor making the Bishop of St. David's Laud who in May of the same Year had his Conference with Fisher the Jesuit acquainted with it from whom the King was inform'd who ordered Knight and his Sermon to be sent up the Author being committed a Prisoner to the Gate-house in Westminster where he lay two Years and at last by the intercession of one of his Fellow Prisoners with Bishop Williams was releas'd and having ask'd the King's Pardon went into Holland where in a short time he died When Knight was complain'd of the King sent to the Vice-Chancellor to injoin the Students of Divinity to lay the Foundation of their Studies next to the holy Scriptures in the Fathers and Councils and to abstain from the Writings of either Jesuits or Puritans and accordingly the Heads of Colleges the Professors c. met in Convocation the Bishops that were then about the Court having condemn'd the Doctrine and the Books that contain'd it as seditious and contrary to the holy Scriptures the Decrees of Councils and Dictates of the Fathers and to the Doctrine and Constitutions of the Church of England and censur'd among others this Proposition * Proposit 2. v. Antiqu. Oxon. p. 327. That Subjects not private Persons but inferior Magistrates may take Arms to defend themselves the Commonwealth the Church and true Religion against their Sovereign or the superior Magistrate upon these Conditions If 1. The Prince turn Tyrant 2. If he compel his Subjects to commit Idolatry or to blaspheme 3. When any great injury is done 4. If they cannot otherwise be safe in their Fortunes their Lives and Consciences upon condition also 5. That under the pretext of Religion or Justice they do not seek their own advantage and 6. That their Arms be managed with much moderation Moderamine inculpatae tutelae These are the Terms of the Proposition and the Censure of the University runs thus This Proposition is false and seditious and so craftily restrain'd under such Conditions annex'd as every seditious Person may make use of to vindicate himself And the third Proposition which is of the same kind is alike condemn'd so that it is no wonder that Gillespy in the Preface to his Sermon calls this Doctrine the new Oxford Divinity and I wish no worse had been ever broach'd or owned there Nor did the University rest here but withal decreed and declared That according to the Canon of the holy Scriptures Subjects ought by no means forcibly to resist their Prince and that it is not lawful to take Arms either offensive or defensive against the King upon the account of Religion or any other Pretence requiring all the Members of the Convocation to subscribe the Censures and enjoyning all that should be admitted to any Degrees to take an Oath to consent to the determinations of that Convocation while the Commentary of Paraeus was burn'd in the Church-yard of St. Mary's at Oxford at Paul's Cross in London as it was likewise burn'd at Cambridge that University joyning with her Sister of Oxford in the Condemnation of those seditious Doctrines For as a * Doublet Ep. ad Gerh. Voss learned Foreigner who at that time was upon the spot informs that Knight citing for his Opinion the Authority not only of Paraeus but also of Bucanus and Junius Brutus affirming further that it was the Opinion of all the Reformed Divines and illustrating it by this instance that If the King of France should while his Army laid Siege to any Town of the Protestants his Subjects happen to fall by the hand of any of the besieged he was justly slain nor was he that killed him guilty of any crime both the Universities condemn'd the Doctrine and though at Oxford only Paraeus's Book was burn'd yet at Cambridge they also burn'd Bucanus's Common places and Junius Brutus or Hubert Languet's Vindiciae and damn'd the Authors to perpetual Infamy my Author adding that the Cambridge Doctors were the more fierce of the two whether because they hated the Puritans or were the Majority of them at least Remonstrants the Censure of that University Doublet saw when he was at the Commencement it being put into his Hands by him who drew it up upon his promise not to transcribe it What hinder'd it's publication I know not while the same year Dr. David Owen publish'd his Anti-Paraeus seu Determinat de Jure Regio adv David Paraeum at Cambridge anno sc 1622. Octavo in which the Doctrine of Resistance is throughly confuted This Censure and the Execution done upon his Book much troubled the old Paraeus And his Son * Append. in Comment ad Rom 13.5 vit Paraei says that his Father meant what he wrote not of Kings endowed with an absolute power but of such as were admitted to their Crowns upon condition while the illustrious Hugo Grotius thought so well of it that he hath inserted it at large in his Works †Vot pro pace ad Art. 16. p. 661. with a high commendation affirming That the Reverend Memory of King James the first the wisest King of Great Britain and the honor which he owed to the University of Oxford which at that time foresaw the Calamities which England afterward suffered and a just fear lest the pernicious Doctrine might do more mischief ingaged him to reprint the Censure To which Determination Dr. Prideaux Dr. Abbot and the other eminent Men of that time gave their suffrage Anno 1647 June 1. The same famous Academy met in Convocation and declared their Judgment concerning the Solemn League and Covenant and a few of their Reasons why they could not take that Covenant I shall transcribe * Ad calc vit Sanderson p. 174. as they were drawn up by Bishop Sanderson 1. We cannot take the Oath without acknowledging in the Imposers a greater power than for ought appeareth to us hath been in former times challenged †P. 181. 3. We cannot take the Oath without manifest danger of Perjury ‖ P. 182. the Oath being contrary to the Oath of Supremacy by us taken
Doctrines to murder Princes are not of the Gospel-Spirit Bishop Hacket's Sermons on Psal xli 9. on the Gowry's Conspiracy p. 740. 741. Surely above all Men if the Clergy be not careful to set forth the honor of this day with great Honour and Solemnity it is their Ignorance or their Negligence Had these furious Sword-men that laid their Weapons to his Throat found an austere Master nay a Tyrant they must have born with it and not touch the Man that bears the Character of the Lord 's Anointed Dr. Sharp before the House of Commons Apr. 11. 1679. p. 35. O may God so inspire you That by your means the Person of his sacred Majesty and the Rights of his Crown may be secured against all wicked Attempts And p. 39. Let us hate all Tricks and Devices and Equivocations both in our Words and in Carriage Let us be constantly and inflexibly loyal to our Prince and let no consideration in the World make us violate our Allegiance to him And in his Sermon preach'd before the Lord Mayor 1680. speaking of the upright Man He is one studiously endeavouring to preserve his Allegiance to his Prince Pag. 19. He is a Man that honors the King that is observant of the Laws that is true to the Government and meddles not with them that are given to change In his Sermon preached at the Yorkshire Feast Feb. 17. 16 79 / 80. p. 17. We may do a great deal of good by our good Examples of Loyalty SECT XXII And to evince that this hath been the unquestion'd Doctrine of all the Members of this Church I shall subjoin many other Testimonies * Bish of Lincoln Principl and Posit p. 7. That England is a Monarchy the Crown Imperial and our Kings supreme Governors and sole supreme Governors of this Realm and all other their Dominions will I believe I am sure it should be granted seeing our Authentick Laws and Statutes do so expresly and so often say it In our Oath of Supremacy we swear That the King is the only supreme Governor supreme so none not the Pope above him and only supreme so none coordinate or equal to him so that by our known Laws our King is solo Deo minor invested with such a Supremacy as excludes both Pope and People and all the World God Almighty only excepted by whom Kings do reign from having any Power Jurisdiction or Authority over him This Book hath its Imprimatur not from any mean hand but from my Lord Bishop of London himself which is to me a plain implication that his Lordship did then own the Doctrine and so we have another Testimony to the Truth †Burnet's Vind. c. printed at Glascow p. 7. c. The Vindication of the Authority c. of the Church is full to this purpose Obj. May not Subjects when opprest in their establish'd Religion defend themselves and resist the Magistrate doth not the Law of Nature direct Men to defend themselves when unjustly assaulted Answ We must distinguish between the Laws of Nature and the Rights and Permissions of Nature now self-defence cannot be a Law of Nature ☜ for then it could never be dispenc'd with without a Sin nay were a man never so criminal he ought not to suffer himself to be killed neither should any Malefactor submit to the sentence of the Judge but stand to his defence by all the force he could raise and it will not serve turn to say for the good of Society he ought to submit for no Man must violate the Laws of Nature were it on never so good a design Christ's dying for us shews that self-defence can be no Law of Nature otherwise Christ who fulfilled all Righteousness had contradicted the Laws of Nature ‖ Pag. 10. He then proceeds to demonstrate that Magistrates derive not their Power from the Surrender of the People for none can surrender what they have not ☜ Take then a multitude of People not yet associated none of them hath power of his own Life neither hath he power of his Neighbor's since no Man out of Society may kill another be his Crime never so great much less be his own Murtherer A multitude of People not yet associated are but so many individual Persons therefore the Power of the Sword is not from the People nor is any of their Delegation but is from God. * Pag. 35. Consider that Christ was to fulfill all Righteousness if then the Laws of Nature exact our Defence in case of unjust Persecution for Religion ☜ he was bound to that Law as well as we for he came not to destroy but to fulfil the Law both by his Example and Precepts if then you charge the Doctrine of Absolute Submission as brutish or stupid or as contrary to the Law of Nature see you do not run into Blasphemy by charging that Holy One foolishly for whatever he knew of the secret Will of God he was to follow his revealed Will in his Actions †Pag. 39. If fighting at that time when Saint Peter drew his Sword for preserving Christ from the Jews were contrary to the Nature of his Kingdom so the Rule of the Gospel binding all the succeeding Ages of the Church no less than those to whom it was first deliver'd what was then contrary to the nature of Christ's Kingdom will be so still * P. 42. I shall add one thing which all Casuists hold a safe Rule in matters that are doubtful viz. That we ought to follow that side of the doubt that is freest from hazard ☞ here then damnation is at least the seeming hazard of resistance therefore except upon as clear evidence you prove the danger of absolute submission to be of the same nature that it may ballance the other then absolute submission as being the securest is to be followed * P. 41. Obj. But he is the Minister of God to thee for good and if they swerve from this they forsake the end for which they were raised up and so fall from the Power and right to our Obedience Answ It is true the Sovereign is a Minister of God for good so that he corrupts his power grosly when he pursues not that design but in that he is onely accountable to God whose Minister he is c. The same Author continued stedfast to this Doctrine when he left Scotland and came into England * Ser. on Jan. 30. 1674 / 5. p. 7. 9. David when Saul was most unjustly hunting his life would not stretch forth his hand against him seeing he was the anointed of the Lord from Almighty God the King had his Power and to him he knew he was to give an account of his Administration Affirming that the Enemies of that Royal Martyr P. 38. by Oaths and Counter-Oaths which they often took had their Consciences so seared as to be past feeling till they threw off all sense of God and Religion and set up professedly
Rulers and it is no News to hear it of them Elias had such measure measured unto him Micheas all of them faithful to Princes ever were so accused We say the Doctrine of Rome is no Friend to Princes and here he instances in the treasonable Books and rebellious Insurrections of the Papists and adds shew the Princes the Gospel hath deposed shew the Princes that Popery hath not wronged It is our Doctrine that we firmly hold and they fully defie That he that taketh the Sword shall perish with the Sword i. e. he that taketh it without the bounds of a calling warranting him and that calling he afterward says is only the Prince's Order as all Rebels ever do that he which resisteth the Superior Powers resisteth the Ordinance of God and to his own Damnation that we ought to obey and be subject not for Fear but for Conscience sake that the Weapons of Subjects be but Prayers and Tears c. See then whether Popery or God's holy Gospel which we hold stand better with the safety of Princes and flourishing Estates of Kingdoms c. SECT IV. Among the Works of Dr. Lawrence Humfreys Preached at Oxford 1588. which he published against the Romanists his seven Sermons on 1 Sam. 26.8 9 c. To persuade Obedience to Princes c. are not the least considerable In which having in the Epistle Dedicatory commended that Saying of S. Ambrose Rogamus Auguste non pugnamus We beseech O Emperor P. 22 23. we fight not and in the first Sermon mentioned the many Rebellions of the Papists he says Such a Catholick Faith must be maintain'd by such Catholick Means namely by open Rebellions privy Practices in a Catholick and Universal Manner that is by all unlawful Means P. 24. That when Scruples arise against such traiterous Enterprises then the Pope hath this Religion and Omnipotency P. 32. that he can dispense with any Oath In the second Sermon he teacheth every one his Duty It is lawful for a Magistrate to put to death a Malefactor otherwise no Spirit no Reason no Friend no carnal Respect can authorise any Man of his own Head or his private affection to draw weapon against any man much less against a double and compound person P. 34. c. as the Prince established by Law and publick Authority If Christ found fault with his Servant Peter fighting in his own quarrel ☜ host much more will he be angry with them that take weapon against his anointed Prince his Lieutenant in the Earth What do these Giants and Tyrants of the World think Or what do they esteem of the Blood of a Prince Or what do they imagine of the Ordinance or Institution of Princes Are they Upstarts by themselves c. No it is only the Ordinance of our living God. P. 36 37 By Office he representeth God he is God by name Saul himself is named here the anointed of the Lord so are all other Potentates that are by their Vices evil Men yet by Office the Ordinance of God Prov. 8. Job 34. By me rulers reign the Hypocrites rule not without him And why are the bad as well as the good advanced Austin gives two Reasons hereof It is not unjust that wicked men receive power to hurt both that the patience of the good may be tryed and the wickedness of the evil punished And if they are set up by God they cannot fall but by God. P. 43. What were the Magistrates in the time of Peter and Paul but Heathen and Tyrants as Nero and such others and yet Paul exhorts every soul to be subject to the higher powers and whosoever resisteth c. Even Nebuchadnezzar a Tyrant and Infidel was to be prayed for Chrisostome amplifyeth the excellent Integrity and Faithfulness of David toward Saul the anointed Serm 3. p. 56. in that David did this in the Old Testament where some revenge was in a sort permitted c. But to kill him or any the anointed of the Lord is contrary to the Law of Nature and all Laws Those that are disloyal and Rebels are not good Christians P. 63. P. 78. P. 106. We of this Land do swear and protest in the name of Christ a fidelity to God to the Prince and to our Country this Oath must be kept Many Laws have been made against Treason and Rebellion yet the unbridled and cruel Subjects have always unkindly and unnaturally conspired against their Prince and against their own Country Our King Ethelred complains in an Oration in this sort We are overcome of the Danes not with Weapon or force of Arms but with Treason wrought by our own People Anno 1593 Reprinted 〈◊〉 1640 c. Doctor Richard Bancroft afterward Bishop of London and Archbishop of Canterbury published his Dangerous Positions c. the whole Design of which Treatise is to expose and ' condemn the Republican Principles then newly broached in England by the Lovers of the Geneva Platform I have already in the Reign of Queen Mary given his Sentiments of the Proceedings of the English Exiles at Francfort against Knox whose Principles were so infective that they inflamed his own native Country and threw it into a most unnatural Rebellion of which their Ministers were the prime cause and shall add his sense of those seditious Doctrines and Practices * Lib. 1. cap 3. But because some peradventure will labor to excuse these Proceedings and to color the same with some pretence of zeal and great desire they had to be delivered from Popish Idolatry and Superstition I have thought it convenient to let you understand how far they are from making any such pretences in their own behalf and with what new Divinity Positions Mr. Knox and Mr. Buchanan have amplified the Geneva Resolution ☞ viz. That if Princes refuse to reform Religion the Magistrates and People may lawfully do it by force of Arms to the Justification not only of their said Attempts and Actions but also many others of the like nature Ch. 4. And afterward he mentions their Positions That Princes for just causes may be deposed That it is not Birthright only nor Propinquity of Blood that makes a King lawfully reign above a People professing Jesus Christ If Princes be Tyrants against God and his Truth their Subjects are freed from their Oaths of Obedience The People are better than the King and of greater Authority c. Of all which and many the like Propositions he averrs that they tend to the disturbance and utter overthrow of the freest and most absolute Monarchies that are or can be in Christendom and that they are contrary he was sure both to the Word of God and to all the Laws and Customs of this Realm But I must transcribe the greatest part of the Book should I cite all that is to my purpose in it while I leave to the Reader 's private Consideration that and his other excellent Treatise called a Survey
☜ for if upon abuse of mdependent Authority they that have it lose and forfeit it ipso facto then authority and abuse of authority at least extreme abuse of it cannot stand together which is contrary to that of St. Augustine where he saith nee tyrannicae factionis perversitas laudabilis erit de bono consugali c. 14. si regiâ clementâ—â— tyrannus subditos tractet nec vituperabilis ordo regiae potestatis si rex crudelitate tyrannicâ saeviat aliud est namque injustâ porestate justè velle uti aliud est justâ potestate injustè velle uti i. e. â—â—ther shall the perversness of Tyrannical Usurpation ever be praise worthy ☞ though the Tyrant use his Subjects with all Kingly clemency nor the order of Kingly Power be ever subject to just reprehension thâ—ugh a King grow fierce and cruel like a Tyrant for it is one thing to use an unlawful Power lawfully and another thing to use a lawful Power unrighteously and unjustly SECT IV. After the happy discovery of the damnable Gun-powder Treason and the just execution of the wretched miscreants that were engaged in it the Parliament met at Westminster which had been first summoned Anno 1603. and with it a Convocation the Members of which reslecting upon the horrid design of Garnet and his Accomplices thought themselves in justice to their Sovereign and their own Principles obliged when they met to censure and condemn such Doctrins as led Men to such Rebellious Practices hereupon the Prolocutor of the lower house Dr. Overall then Dean of St. Pauls afterwards Bishop of Coventry and Litchfield then of Norwich whose vast learning gives him a character beyond all that can be said of him here drew up a Treatise which being reviewed by the Upper House of Convocation was mutually agreed on and declared to be the Sense of the Church of England in that very Svnod which made the Canons that as yet are lookt upon as the Code of our Church a Manuscript of which Acts This Book is since Printed by W. Kettilby an 1690. lib. 1. c. 2. and Canons having been happily put into my hands I cannot but think my self obliged to transcribe some Passages that discover the belief of our Church representative at that time They positively assert that God having created our first Parents and purposing to multiply their seed into many Generations for the replenishing of the World with their Posterity did give to Adam for his time and to the rest of the Patriarchs and chief Fathers successively before the Flood Authority Power and Dominion over their Children and Offspring to Rule and Govern them adding further Can. 2. if any Man shall affirm that Men at the first without all good Edacation or civility ran up and down in Woods and Fields as wild creatures resting themselves in Caves and Dens and acknowledging no Superiority one over another until they were taught by experience the necessity of Government and that thereupon they chose some among themselves to order and rule the rest giving them power and authority so to do and that consequently all civil Power Jurisdiction and Authority was first derived from the People and disorder'd Multitude or either is originally still in them or else is deduc'd by their consents naturally from them and is not God's Ordinance originally descending from him and depending upon him he doth greatly err Thus they account for the Government of the old World nor did the Flood alter the nature of Authority or alienate the Rights of Princes for say they If any Man shall affirm Can. 6.11 that the civil Power and Authority which Noah had before the Flood was by the deluge determin'd or that it was given unto him again by his Sons or Nephews or that he received from them the Sword of his Sovereignty or that the distribution of the World to his three Som did depend upon their consents or received from them any such authority as without the same it could not lawfully have been made or that this Power c. did not proceed from God or were not properly his Ordinance but that they had the same from the People their Offspring he doth greatly err Besides it is generally agreed upon cap. 16. that obedience to Kings and Civil Magistrates is prescrib'd to all Subjects in the 5th Commandment Ex 20.12 where we are enjoyn'd to Honour our Parents whereby it follows that subjection of Inferiors unto their Kings and Governors is founded upon the very law of Nature and consequently that the sentence of Death awarded by God himself against such as shewed themselves incorrigibly disobedient to their Parents or cursed them or struck them was likewise due unto those who committed any such offences against their Kings and Rulers being the Heads and Fathers of their Commonâ—ealths and Kingdoms which is not only apparent by way of consequence but likewise by example practice and precept as where Shimei is judged to die for cursing of David the Lords Anointed where David himself appointed by God to succeed King Saul would not be induced by any perswasions to lay violent hands upon his Master the King. If any Man therefore shall affirm Câ—n. 16. that it was lawful in the Old Testament either for Children or Nephews to have been disobedient to their Fathers being their chief Governâ—rs from the Creation till Moses 's time or afterward either for the Children of Israel either under Moses Joshua the Judges or their Kings to have been disobedient to them in their lawful commandments or to have murmured or rebelled against them or that it was in those times more lawful unto Subjects for any cause whatsoever either to curse their Princes Kings or civil Governors ☞ or to bear arms against them or to depose them from their Kingdoms or Principalities or to lay violent hands upon their Persons than it was in the said times lawful upon any occasion for Children either to have cursed their Parents or to have rebelled against them when they did reprove or correct them or to have withdrawn themselves from their subjection saying unto them they being private Men we will be no more your Children or you shall be no more our Fathers or bearing civil authority over them we will depose you from your Government over us and will be no longer ruled by you or to have offered any violence to them or to have beaten them and much less to have murder'd them he dâ—th greatly err After this they deduce the Scheme of Paternal and Regal Government through the several Ages of the Church down to the time of the Jewish Kings and when they considered the case of Uzziah who for offering to burn Incense on the Altar which was peculiarly the Priests Office was by God smitten with leprosie â— 1. Can 22 they aver if any Man shall affirm that Azariah and the other Priests used or that they lawfully might have used any violence or force against the
infant Age of the Church whom Tortures made happy Infamy glorious the Contempt of Gold rich and the Crown not of a Kingdom but Martyrdom made august And as Truth is the same in all Climates so was this learned Man in whatsoever place Providence fixt for when he came into England he had the same Notions as fully appears by his Epipistle to Fronto Ducaeus written Ann. 1611. wherein discoursing of S. Gregory Nazianzen's Observation of old that Mens preposterous Zeal had destroy'd their Charity he adds But Good God! Pag. 82 Lond. 1611. Had the Father lived in our Age what Complaints would he have made To see so many Men acted by a preposterous Zeal under the pretext of Religion and Piety most wickedly and irreligiously not only break the Peace of the Church about Trifles but undertake Rebellions Treasons most cruel Massacres of innocent People overthrowing of lawful Governments and the Murther of Princes this is your privilege at this time of day as he addresses himself to the Roman Catholicks that not only the grave Citizens and Senators of a Nation assembled in a general Convention tho what they should do of this kind is unlawful but even the Mobile assume to themselves a Power of Abdicating Kings forfeiting their Kingdoms and giving them to whom they please and of abolishing all Laws under the pretext of Piety which Villany no Religion tho never so profane and impious except yours meaning the Popish ever allows P. 100 c. or hath ever formerly allowed Garnet 's chief Crime was that he had either forgotten or neglected S. Paul 's Advice consenting to the doing of evil that good might come thereof this he ought not to have done had he demonstrated himself a true follower of Jesus Christ for what Precept or Example bad he of our holy Saviour for his so doing Who was a Lamb without blemish and reprov'd the preposterous Zeal of James and John the Apostles with You know not what spirit you are of i. e. You think your Zeal is commendable which hates the Samaritans and would destroy them but I do not require such a cruel sanguinary and destructive Zeal from my Followers what I require is Charity that is Patient Edifying and which covers a multitude of Sins this I approve of and this I would have practised by those to whom I am to leave my Peace This he would not have done had he remembred P. 104 105. how severely our holy Saviour chastised Peter when he rashly cut off Malchus 's Ear. But Zealots are very seldom removed from their purposes by any consideration of Laws either divine or humane whatever School teaches this Doctrine is not Christian it is the School of Antinhrist and of Satan for the Devil was a Murderer from the beginning ☞ a true Abeddon and Apollyon but the Doctrine of our holy Saviour Jesus Christ is perfectly contrary to this for he prescribed no other remedy to his Disciples against all manner of Injuries but Flight Patience and Prayers that rejoycing in hope being patient in Tribulation and praying continually as the Apostle advises they might triumph over all their Adversaries These were the only Arms that the Apostles used wherever they laid the foundations of the Gospel these were the only Weapons which the Fathers of the ancient Church only knew no man took Arms or raised Rebellion against his Prince these were the fruits of the Hildebrandine Doctrine which flyes at the Crowns of Emperors Kings and Princes c. SECT IX Against this modest and learned Epistle of Isaac Casaubon did Eudaemon Johannes write which Dr. Prideaux * Pr. at Oxford 1614. c. 2. p. 76. afterward the King's Professor of Divinity and Bishop of Worcester answered in which he compares the Jesuits and Buchanan and Knox together branding them justly with the name of Traytors as King James had done before him and avers P. 107. that the Popish Writers bred in the School of Hildebrand call a lawful King a Tyrant if excommunicated by the Pope whereas a Tyrant according to the Doctrine of the Sorbon and of the Men of ancient sincerity and simplicity is opposed to a lawful Prince and signifies one who hath invaded an Empire that is not his own by Force and evil Arts and then adds If an Apostate should reign in France P. 109. or England who exceeded Julian or the Grand Signior it is not the duty of his Subjects to dethrone him For who can lift up his hand against the Lord's anointed and be innocent ☜ Did the Israelites attempt any thing against Nebuchadnezzar or the Christians against Julian and the Heathen Emperors Did they use any other Weapons besides their Prayers and their Tears Let us use these Arms and if the King do amiss let us expect when God will punish him let not his Subjects tumultuously oppose him And whereas Mariana had affirmed P. 123. that when Princes openly invade the Rights of their Subjects and there is no other way left to maintain the publick Safety then it is lawful to take Arms and murder Kings he replies here is no mention made of the Patience of the Subjects the just Judgments of God the Obligation of Oaths the sacred Authority of Princes conferr'd on them immediately by God the Duty of Subjection not only when we live easie under the Government for our Profit but when we suffer under it for Conscience sake by the Maxims of the Jesuits P. 130 131. the People are made the King's Judges to enquire into his Faults and to punish him as they think fit when he does amiss What difference is there if this be true between the Rights of Princes and their Subjects A Subject breaks the Laws and he is punish'd by the King the King violates his Promises and his Subjects tell him We will not have this Man longer to rule over us Admirable security of the Persons and Crowns of Princes We obey our Princes for Conscience sake P. 60. we believe them to be immediately constituted by God if they rule well they are God's greatest Blessing if they degenerate into Apostasie or Tyranny they are God's Scourges to punish the Sins of a People as * Rom. 13. and in 1 Pet. 2. Calvin says truly If a King abuse his Power he shall render an account to God in time but for the present he doth not lose his Authority We urge not Compact but we pour out our Prayers our Bishops do advise not threaten †Id. Serm. on Gowry's Conspir p. 4 6 7. The same learned Bishop in his Sermon on the 5th of August at S. Maries before the University preaches the same Doctrine When occasion is offer'd howsoever they otherwise strive to appear good Subjects Traytors will be ever ready to vent their Treasons Hypocritical Traytors watch their times and are ready to vent their Villany upon the least advantage In the 2 Kings 19.37 where we read that Adrammelech and Sharezer slew their
Doctrin of the Church and would fain defend it as the uniform belief of the Reformed much more to the same purpose may be found in the same Book which I recommend to the Reader 's perusal the Learned Author of which wrote after his Father's Copy and therefore I have joyned them together tho according to the exact rules of Chronology I should have given the junior du Moulin a place in the next Reign CHAP. VI. The History of Passive Obedience during the Reign of King Charles the Martyr SECT I. WEre we to judge of the righteousness of any Cause and of its being acceptable to God by the prosperity of its outward circumstances and to intitle Heaven to the owning of all the designs which providence promotes as some Divines both then and since have argued more consonant to the Doctrin of the Alcoran than the Holy Gospel then the most Excellent Prince Charles I. was a vile Malefactor and fell justly a sacrifice to the rage of his rebel Subjects but the true Sons of the Church were of a more Orthodox belief and chose rather to suffer with their Master the Lord 's Anointed than to enjoy the ease and preferments which then were the rewards of perfidiousness and disloyalty as the first part of this History hath amply proved And though Dr. Sybthorp's Sermon called Apostolical Obedience was severely censured nor is it fit to defend every Proposition in it yet the then Bishop of London Dr. George Mountain approved it publickly in Print as a Sermon learnedly and discreetly Preached Testim ante concion and agreeable to the Ancient Doctrin of the Primitive Church both for faith and good manners and to the Doctrin established in the Church of England and therefore under his hand gave authority for the Printing of it Ma. 8. 1627. Mr. Hayes Could any thing privilege Loyalty toward Kings Serm. at St. Mary's Oxon. on Esth 1.15 1624. p. 3 21. Eminence and Alliance might be fair pretences but neither of these could yield Queen Vasthi advantage but what shall any dare to limit Sovereignty and prescribe Majesty it's duty shall he that enjoys the subjection of others by the Law be subject himself to the Law no in no other sense than that of Aquinas not that the Law should lead him by compulsion but lead him by directive persuasion if he conform his actions to the prescript of the Laws it is of his own accord if he do not is he lyable to account Yes but it is only to God against thee only have I sinned says King David Ps 51. those modest times had not the face to capitulate with their Sovereigns the pride of Faction had not yet hatch'd this rebellious Doctrin ☜ that if Kings obey not Laws Subjects have leave to disobey their Kings no let it glory in no Ancienter Author than New Rome and in no better success than confusion and seeing it owes it self to Jesuited Patrons let it be banish'd this Land together with their Persons Mr. Adams When Saul was in David 's hands In 2d ep of Peter pr. 1633. p. 755. his Men alledge God's promise and the advantage concurring and what was David 's charm to allay the fury of those raging Spirits he is the Lord 's Anointed Saul did not lend David so impenetrable an Armour when he ran to encounter Goliah as David lent him in the plea of his Unction not one of the discontented Out-laws durst put forth a hand of violence against him the image and impress of that Divine Ordinance strikes such an awe into the hearts of Men that it makes even Traytors cowards so that instead of smiting they tremble like those whose Office it is to suffer not to do fear God honour the King there was never Man that feared God but he also honored the Prince But let us hear P. 759 c what the Synod of Hell can plead for disobedience how if the Prince be bad an Enemy to truth and goodness a Ravisher a Persecutor raising powers for the extirpation of the Gospel here if ever a Subject may renounce all Allegiance for here is power against power Man against God and the Subject of both left to follow either Answ in this streight some for fear of the King Shipwrack their faith and these are Traytors to God others by a defensive sword in their hand Rebels to the King ☞ there is no question but God must be obeyed even against the King when the King commands things against God. what then shall we resist him with violence no God never Warrants that practice no not against a Prince that denies him there is an active Obedience and a passive I may not execute his impious commands I must suffer his unjust punishments the vices of Men cannot frustrate the institution of God peruse Mat. 5.44 and Rom 12.17 this will tye the Hands of Christian Subjects Samuel offer'd not to depose Saul though the express Sentence of God had cast him off and he was Excommunicated by a higher power than ever came from Rome Saul lived and dyed a King this he illustrates by the examples of the Jews and Primitive Christians and adds what resistance did those Primitive Christians make to those barbarous outrages but praying for the Emperor's life when under the Emperor's command they were bleeding to death neither did they suffer because they were not able to resist but it was their Doctrin c. Christians never prove losers but when they unjustly sight for their own preservation provide we the buckler of patience not a sword when the decree was gone out by Ahasuerus this was their refuge preces lacrymae the Apostles could work miracles yet they resisted not the ordinate powers this charge St. Paul gives the Romans even while Nero was their Emperor a Monster whom divers held to be Antichrist that Religion then cannot be right that pulls down Princes seeing neither Moses in the Old Testament nor Christ in the New nor Levite nor Prophet Apostle nor Disciple either counsell'd or practised against Government which should decide the point that hath cost the Lives of so many Christians and still threatens more Tragedies P. 763. there was never Prince to whom some Belialist took not some exceptions it were ill with Princes if their state depended on the good liking of their Subjects Subjects unfaithful at the heart may be without the suspicion of their Prince but they beheld Rebels in the Court of Heaven we be bound to be subject not only for wrath but for conscience sake In all the time of David 's prosperity there was no news of Shimei he looks like a fair Subject but he that smiles on David in his Throne P. 821. curs'd him in his Flight there is no security in that Subjects Allegiance that hath not God in his Conscience he that poysons the People with the male opinion of their Prince is the most dangerous Traytor to rip up the faults of Kings is bold
the Rebel's Catechism wherein he shews that Lucifer was the first Author of Rebellion that the Rebellion even of the heart makes a Man guilty of Damnation in the sight of God much more that of the tongue or the hand that one branch of the Rebellion of the hand is the composing and dispersing of false and scandalous Books and Pamphlets tending to the dishonour of the King the other the taking up Arms against such Persons P. 6 7. cons p. 9 10 11 c. to whose Authority they are subject and it is worth our observation that not only the bearing Arms against the King is declared to be Rebellion by the Law of England but that it was declared to be Rebellion by the chief Judges of this Kingdom at the Arraignment of the Earl of Essex for any Man to seek to make himself so strong that the King should not be able to resist him although he broke not out into open act even defensive Arms are absolutely unlawful in the Subject against his Sovereign in regard that no defensive War can be undertaken but it carrieth with it a resistance in it to those Higher Powers to which every Soul is to be subject we find it thus resolved in Plutarch P. 12. that it was contrary both to positive Laws and the Law of Nature for any Subject to lift up his hand against the Person of his Sovereign with much more to the same purpose The same Author near about the same time See his Ecclesia Vindicata p 645 c Prâ—at Lon. 1681. wrote a Treatise intitled the stumbling-block of disobedience removed to shew that Kings ought not to be controuled by their Subjects either singly or in a body the whole of which learned Treatise as well as his other Vindications of the Doctrins and Rights of our Church will sufficiently repay the Reader 's expence of pains and leisure And in his Sermon on May 29. 1681. it is to be observed that such as draw their Swords upon God's Anointed use commonly to throw away the scabberds also and find no way of doing better but by doing worse no middle way for them to walk in but either to bear up like Princes or to dye like Traytors SECT VI. Of the same belief was Sir John Spelman in his Case of our affairs in Law c. that the Sovereignty is in the King's Person inseparably Pr. Oxf. 1643. p. 15 17 19. and the allegiance of the Subject by Law thereto inseparably annex'd fortifyed and enforc'd by Religion under the severe menace of damnation what streight then of humane Affairs can be so violent as to make Christian Subjects contrary to sworn Faith to Law and to Religion not only to disobey their Sovereign but resist and Invade the Sovereign Rights c. Anno 1641. Sir Tho. Ashton and many others Noblemen and Gentlemen of Cheshire tendred a Remonstrance to the Parliament against Presbyterian Government and in it they affirm that the donation of Sovereign Power is solely from God and so will he have the revocation too he doth not subject them to the question of inferiors but puts a Guard upon their Sacred Persons which to violate though in our own defence is a breach of his command even when persecuted as David was by Saul which precepts are renewed in the Gospel we see our selves bound by Oath to acknowledge and support that Regal Government our Statutes have establish'd our Laws approved History represents most happy to whom all Primitive times yielded full obedience to whose Throne Christ himself yields Tribute whose Persons God will have Sacred whose actions unquestionable whose Succession he himself determines and whose Kingdoms he disposes Tacitus tho a Heathen advises us to bear with the riots and covetousness of Kings as with barrenness and other infirmities of nature for while there are Men there will be vices but they cannot continue long and will be recompenc'd when better come In the 19th year of this King came forth a little book called an Appeal to thy Conscience as thou wilt answer it at the great and dreadful day of Jesus Christ p 2 3 c. the Author of which says that Subjects may not take up Arms against their lawful Sovereign because he is wicked and unjust no tho he be an Idolater and Oppressor 1. Because it were an high presumption in us to limit that command which God doth not limit now our obedience to Superiors is always commanded without limitation 2. We may not think evil of the King much less may we take up Arms against him 3. St. Paul saith recompence to no man evil for evil Rom. 12.19 If to no Man then certainly not to thy King 〈◊〉 That which peculiarly belongs to the Lord thou oughtest not without his Authority to meddle with but vengeance is his 5. Rom. 13. Every Soul none excluded must be subject there is no Power but of God if so then the Power of a wicked Prince is from God and the penalty of resisting is everlasting damnation both of Soul and Body in Hell-fire for ever 6. In Eccl. 8.1 2. the Covenant made by the People to obey their King is called the Oath of God and who dares break this Oath of God 7. God commands Touch not mine Anointed therefore thou mayest not smite him therefore thou mayest not bear Arms against God's Anointed 8. For Subjects to take up Arms against their own King tho an Idolater and an Oppressor is contrary to the practice of God's People in all Ages the Jews and the Prophets Christ and his Apostles and the Primitive Christians 9. God's heavy judgments on those who have taken up Arms against their Prince tho an Idolater and Oppressor ought to be a warning to us how we do the like this is contrary to the Doctrin of the Church of England in her Homilies then he answers the usual objections for resistance resolves several doubts and removes other little scruples and in the close of all passionately advises all Men to return to the Lord and to do their duty P. 51. for 't is strange says he that God's Church can be no way preserved the Subjects liberty no ways maintain'd but by sin who ever heard unless from a Papist that the way to Heaven was through Hell shall we do evil that good may come Rom. 3.8 It would be a very needless labor to cite all the passages to this purpose that occur in the Books written between the year 1644. and the time of the King's Murther and therefore I shall refer the Reader to the Regal Apology Printed 1648. the Kingdoms brief answer to the Declaration of the Commons Pr. 1648. the Plea for the King and Kingdom 1648. with many other Treatises of the same kind only I shall mention Bishop Rainhowe who took the degree of Doctor of Divinity An. 1646. Vid. Bish Rainbow's life p. 41. when his chief Question on which he made his Thesis was Ecclesia Anglicana tenet
mischief common to this deposing Power of the Pope and Commonwealth Principles Is the justifying of Rebellion on the account of Religion which is done to purpose in Boucher and Reynolds whom he cites at large and then proceeds to his second Proposition that whosoever does renounce the deposing Power hath no reason to refuse the Oath of Allegiance and then adds P. 29. it is very true this hath been the effect of this Blessed Doctrin in the Christian World Seditions Wars Bloodshed Rebellions what not But I ought to transcribe all that excellent Preface were I strictly to do the Author or the Cause justice while I refer the Reader to it at his leisure SECT II. Dr. Tennison in his Epistle Dedicatory to his Examination of Hobbs's Creed says Hobbs's Creed examin'd Lond. 1670. that Hobbs hath framed a model of Government pernicious in its consequence to all Nations and Injurious to the right of his present Majesty for he taught the People soon after the Martyrdom of his Royal Father that his Title was extinguish'd when his adherents were subdued and that the Parliament had the right ☜ because it had possession he hath subjected the Canon of Scripture to the Civil Powers and taught them the way of turning the Alcoran into Gospel and for these and the like Tenets he calls him an insolent and pernicious Writer P. 2. and when Mr. Hobbs had asserted that Nature had made all Men equal so that no Man can thereupon claim to himself any benefit P. 129 130 131. to which another may not pretend as well as he that from equality of condition competition arises fomented by equality of hope and from thence a War of every Man against every Man c. he rejoins that it is a very absurd and unsecure course to lay the groundwork of all Civil Polity and Reformed Religion upon such a supposed state of Nature as hath no firmer support than the contrivance of your own fancy let Philosophers discourse and make different Hypotheses of the motion of the Stars but when the temporal and eternal safety of Mankind is concern'd as in the Doctrins of Civil and Moral and Christian Philosophy then are Hypothesis framed by imagination as exceedingly dangerous as they are absurd wherefore such Persons who trouble the World with fansied Schemes and Models of Polity in Oceana's and Leviathans ☞ ought to have in their minds an usual saying of the most excellent Lord Bacon concerning a Philosophy advanced upon the History of Nature that such a work is the World as God made it and not as Men have made it for that it hath nothing of imagination for the faithful accounts of time give us another account of the Origin of Nations P. 13â— our Parents being before the Institution of Commonwealths absolute Sovereignâ—s in their own Families P. 141 142. after which he confesses that prejudice and self interest doth usually blind the understanding and cause it to put evil for good and humour and education and profit for reason and adds P. 147. if Men be lawless in a State of Nature and for the mere sake of temporal security do enter into Covenants and are obliged to justice and modesty and gratitude and other such like sociable Virtues only because they conduce to our Peace and to the keeping of us from the deplorable condition of a War of every Man against every Man then when any Subject shall have fair hopes of advancing himself by treading down Authority and trampling upon the Laws in a prosperous Rebellion what is It according to your Principles which can oblige him to refuse the opportunity If it be said that one Covenant is this that we must keep the rest It will be again inquired what Law engageth Men to keep that past seeing there is no Law of more ancient descent except it be that of Self-preservation for the sake of which we suppose the Covenants to be broken so that without the obligation laid upon us by Fidelity the Law of God Almighty in our nature antecedent to all humane Covenants P. 148 such Pacts will become but so many loose materials without the main binder in the fence of the Commonwealth which will therefore be trodden down or broken through by every herd of unruly Men Men are apt to violate what they esteem most just and sacred for the sake of Reigning and they will be much more encouraged to break all Oaths of Duty and Allegiance ☞ when they once believe that their ascent into the Throne and possession of the Supreme Power like the coming of the reputed Heir unto the Crown * Lord 〈◊〉 Hen. 7. p. 13. as in the case of Henry VII doth immediatly clear a Man of all former Attaindors this Doctrin is of the same strain with that pernicious Book Intitled Nature's Dowry Printed the year after the Leviathan that Rebeilion is not iniquity P. 149. if upon probable grounds it becomes prosperous that he who usurps not like a Politician is therefore a Villain because he is a Fool that all Usurpers in the World stepping up into the Throne by means likely to further their ascent pursue the Fundamental Law of Nature and are rightful and undoubted Sovereigns that the Earl of Essex in the Reign of Queen Elizabeth when he miscarried was a Rebel and a Traytor because he was a weak and unfortunate Politician but that Oliver who was sure of being Protector by the inclination of the Soldiery and possession of the Militia was a Lawful Prince after this he with justice taxes Mr. White as the †p. 93. first part of this History gives an account and then shews that Bishop Bramhal fled from England rather than submit to the Usurpation and that the other Bishops that staid at home P. 153 154. promoted the Cause of their Sovereign which if all zealous Loyalists had withdrawn themselves would by degrees have dyed away and because they refused the Oaths imposed at the Peril of their Lives and of their Fortunes ☜ they therefore are not to be judg'd treacherous in undermining the Usurp'd Government or disloyal to the King in injoying protection under Oliver whom they neither arm'd nor own'd in Power P. 156. It is not for you to pretend to Loyalty who place right in force and teach the People to assist the Usurper with active compliance against a dispossest Prince and not merely to live at all adventure in his Territories without owning the Protection by unlawful Oaths or by running into Arms against their Dethroned Sovereign P. 157. thus you give encouragement to Usurpers and also when Civil discords are set on foot as it happens too frequently in all States you hereby move such People as are yet on the side of their Lawful Prince whose Affairs they see declining to adjoin themselves to the more prosperous Party and to help to overturn those Thrones of Sovereignty at which a while before they
Strength hath made it possible and so at length the Robbers Sword and Pistol will come to be the only Standard of Justice all other Power must be cancell'd and we must come at last to make the Power of doing wrong to be the only measure of Equity and Right All these things are at least true pag. 28. when there is any Person in being to whom the Title or Succession of the Supremacy does belong which blessed be God is our Case at present And therefore that great Argument which was brought to vindicate the Usurpation of the successful Rebels in the late Wars namely that the People were not bound to adhere to their Prince when the Prince was disabled to defend the People supposes no other Obligation upon Subjects than mere Interest and so evacuates and makes null all Obligations of Conscience We shall therefore before we part from this Inference fix it as a certain Rule by which every conscientious Subject may and ought to guide his Practice That so long as there is any Person of the Royal Race ☜ to whom by the Course of Succession according to the Tenor of the Law of the Land the Crown does belong so long we have a lawful Supremacy and so long we shall be bound in Conscience to be in Subjection 3. Are we bound to be subject to the Higher Powers for Conscience sake and does the Obligation of Conscience come only from God Then I do infer that to bind the People to be in Subjection to their Prince there is no necessity of any Bargain or Contract between them and the reason is because that Obligation that binds the Subject to Obedience in this Case is founded immediately and directly upon the Law of God. Lastly Are we obliged to be subject to the Higher Powers out of Conscience pag. 31. and is this Obligation â—id upon our Conscience by God Then I do infer That no worldly Inconventence that we can possibly suffer by such our Subjection can be a sufficient warrant for our Resistance And the Reason is plain and easie because our secular Interest be it what it will can never be a sufficient Counterpoise to our Duty and he that will break God's Commands because it is for his secular Advantage can at best but make that foolish Bargain in the Gospel that is to gain the whole world and in exchange for his Purchâ—se to lose his own Soul. Mr. Wake is also of the same mind Answ to the B. of Oxâ—â—'s Reasons l. 34 c. for when the Bishop of Oxon charges the Church of England as if she set up the Charge of Idolatry as a Standard against Monarchy he replies That it is a Calumny upon the whole Body of the Reformed and that he might dare venture to say that there is not the least reason to be apprehensive of Violence he knows very well how free the Christians of the Three first Centuries were in laying the very same Charge against the Gentile World and yet we do not find that ever they shewed themselves the less obedient to their Emperors upon the account of it And tho I am verily perswaded that the Romanists are guilty of Idolatry yet I thank God I am not conscious to my self of one Disloyal Thought to my King. And what I can thus truly profess in my own behalf I doubt not but I may do for all others the true and genuine Members of the Church ☞ and who by being such must I am sure by Principle be obedient Subjects As for this Author he has made a broad Sign that he intends to leave us by insinuating that the Charge of Idolatry ought to be followed by Blowes We who do protest against certain Practices as idolatrous do also protest against violating Loyalty upon the account of Religion Did we indeed profess that of Idolatry which some others do of Heresie that it is a sufficient ground for the Excommunicating of a King and the absolving his Subjects of their Allegiance had we ever been caught not in Oatesian Conspiracies but in real Plots against our Sovereign upon this account there might then have been just cause for such an insinuation But whilst our Principles are so loyal that we have even been laught at for our asserting them it was a very unreasonable apprehension to think that the Charge of Idolatry should in the bottom have been the design against the Monarchy which we have so often declared and in the Person of our present King have shewn we think our selves obliged to support whatever his Religion be who is to sit upon the Throne The truth is when I consider how heinous a Suggestion this is and what little Foundation there is either from our Principles or our Practices to support it I am under some temptation to reply to this Author Nemo hoc potest credere nisi qui possit audere and this I hope may serve for my excuse if I have at this time appear'd in defence of a Charge in which every true Member of the Church of England is so highly concern'd Let the same Mind be in us pag. 15 16. which was also in those Primitive Christians before mention'd Let us still be careful to maintain the Character of the best Subjects as we have long asserted the most Loyal Principles that as the Prosperity of our King makes up a considerable part of our daily Prayers so by a sincere discharge of all humble Obedience towards him he may effectually see that excepting only our Duty towards God we are much more forward and ready to do his Majesty effectual Service than any Man can be whose Loyalty is not supported by Religion We set before our People the Examples of the Primitive Christians with what an humble Obedience they submitted themselves to their idolatrous Emperors and underwent the most cruel Persecutions for their Religion sake even when they had Power sufficient to have asserted their Faith and to have destroyed both the Idolaters and their Idols together and by these Maxims we exhort them to walk God be thanked Id. 2d Def. against the Bish of Condem est Part. p. 75 76. the Pulpits Zeal hath ever been employed to keep up in the Subjects that Duty which by God's Command they owe to their Prince and nothing is at this day next to our Zeal for our Religion more our desire and endeavour than to make Men Loyal to their Sovereign Our Pulpits still speak the same Principles of Subjection ☞ they ever did We are neither asham'd of the Doctrin of Passive Obedience nor afraid of its Practice tho some of your accquaintance have endavoured to laugh both that and us out of countenance Our steadiness to our Religion shall never make us fail in our Duty to our King. In one word We will both by our Preaching and Actions make it our business to fulfil that great Evangelical Precept of rendering unto Cesar the things that are Cesar 's and unto