them when the rebellious Israelites in Moses's absence would needs make a God that is a Leader or Ruler to go before them they contributed their ear-rings to the carrying on that design but the effect and issue of that contribution was only a Calf I beseech you remember from all our contributory Plate from the silver basin even to the smallest bodkin whether we have any productions amongst us better than this P. 30. Men who decry the Pope yet cry up themselves into an Authority as great as his not only over the People Id. Visit Sermon at Lewis Octob. 8. 1662. p. 43. but over the Prince whatsoever therefore teacheth Children Obedience to their Parents Subjects Loyalty toward their Sovereign whatsoever teacheth the afflicted patience the happy temperance the faithful perseverance and all sorts of People Charity is that sound Doctrin which we must Preach the Congregation learn. Dr. Gardiner It is high time for Sovereign Majesty to send a strict injunction of taking heed Sermon at St. Mary's Ox. on Act Sund. 1622. p. 25 c. that we poyson not our studies with the Writings of Puritans and Jesuits for the one no less than the other under colour of Zeal and pretence of Holy Discipline corrupt and spoil green age before it can discern and season new Vessels with unseasonable liquor witness that detestable and trayterous instruction encouraging Subjects to resist their supreme Rulers when they are notoriously tax'd of injustice and cruelty so that Kings according to them shall be no longer Kings than they serve their turns are not these Gospellers where they broach such Tenets mere Popes are they not like to Antichrist that sits in the Temple of God but advanceth himself against all that is called God or do they not work like Sampson who laid hold on the Pillars whereon the house did stand that overthrowing them the house and the men might fall into a common ruin I am sure God's word says Touch not mine Anointed and do my Prophets no harm and this Commandment of Obedience is without distinction Jeremy chap. 29. commands the Israelites even those which were Captives under Heathen Kings not to resist but to pray for them and for the Peace of Babylon and it is acceptable to the Lord says St. Paul 1 Tim. 2. not that ye resist but that ye make supplications and prayers for Kings and for all that are in authority the Prophets the Apostles and Christ himself subjected themselves to the Power of Magistracy and therefore when the Disciple did draw his Sword in Christ's defence he was commanded to put it up the examples are not to be numbred of God's punishments upon those that have resisted authority by God ordain'd and establish'd In the Old Law it was death if a Man had resisted the Higher Power Corah with all his was consumed with fire Dathan and Abiram were swallowed up of the earth because they seditiously resisted Moses and Aaron We know what end Absalom came unto when he had expelled his Father out of his Kingdom what seem'd more goodly to the eye of the World than that notable act of Brutus and Cassius who destroyed Caesar reputed a Tyrant and yet that those their doings were not allowed of God the end declared wherefore it is not lawful to resist supreme Rulers the they swerve from the line of justice for it pleases God sometimes to punish his People by a tyrannous hand and in such a case to resist what else is it but tollere martyrium to take away the occasion the Glory and Crown of Martyrdom Anno 1647. Dr. Jasper Mayne publish'd his 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 P. 5. or the Peoples war examined c. and in it he affirms that suppose the King invade the Peoples Liberties which could not possibly be preserved but by Arms taken up against the Invader yet the King being this Invader unless by such an Invasion he could cease to be their King and they to be his Subjects I cannot see how such Rights could make their defence lawful and this he proves P. 6 7 c. by shewing the Divine Institution of Kings and what rights God allowed them particularly that of being supreme independently Lord of his own actions whether unjust or just as not to be accountable to any but God after which he proceeds to shew P. 12 c. wherein the supreme Power consists P. 16 17. and that those particular rights do belong to the Kings of England wherefore the Crown is Hereditary where the tenure is not conditional nor hangs upon any contract where the only obligation upon the Prince is the Oath that he takes at his Coronation to rule according to the known Laws of the place tho every breach of such an Oath be an offence against God to whom alone a Prince thus Independent is accountable for his actions yet 't will never pass for more than perjury in the Prince no warrant for Subjects to take up Arms against him were a King misled by evil Counsellors ☞ did actually trample upon the Laws of the Kingdom and the liberty of his Subjects yet unless some Original Compact can be produced where 't is agreed that upon every such incroachment it shall be lawful for them to stand upon their defence that where the King ceases to govern according to Law he shall for such Misgovernment cease to be King to urge such unfortunate Precedents as a deposed Richard or a dethroned Edward two disproportioned examples of popular fury the one forc'd to part with his Crown by resignation the other as never having had legal title to it may shew the injustice of former Parliaments grown strong never justifie the pitch'd Fields that have been fought by this If this supposition were true the King being bound to make the Law his rule by no other obligation Sect p. 20 21 c. but his Oath at his Coronation than which there cannot be a greater I confess and where 't is violated never without repentance scapes unpunish'd yet 't is a trespass of which Subjects can only complain but as long as they are Subjects can never innocently revenge but they will say they have all this while fought for the defence of the Protestant Religion c. all which resolves it self into this unchristian bloody conclusion P. 36. that an Assembly of profess'd Protestant Divines have advised the two Parliaments of England and Scotland confess'd Subjects to take up Arms against the King their lawful Sovereign have thereby set three Kingdoms in a flame Id. def of his Serm. against Cheynel p. 4. c. This Doctrin that it is not lawful to propagate Religion how pure soever it be by the sword is that Religion to which I profess my self ready to fall a Sacrifice is that defamed true Protestant Religion for which the Holy Fathers of our Reformation dyed before me Dr. Peter Heylyn Anno 1643. Print Oxf. p. 2 3 c. publish'd
Emperor while the good Bishop in his Embasly to Maximus carried himself as the Father or Guardian of his Prince ☞ tho he had been provok'd in the most tender part by his Prince's endeavors for the introducing of Arianism others perhaps if they had been in his condition would have look'd upon this Tyrant's Maximus declaring for the truth as such an opportunity that Providence had offer'd for the Preservation of the Faith and since the Empress was of a false Religion and the Emperor was govern'd by her why should they not set up this Maximus as the Protector of the true Faith But Ambrose and the Bishops were of another mind they knew what it was to dye for their Religion p. 346. but did not understand what it was to brigue or to resist and I pray how did the Bishops comply with the Usurper Maximus were any of them instrumental to his advancement did they Preach up his cause and the lawfulness of his revolt did they ever press the People to bring in their Plate and contributions or after his successes and the Murther of Gratian did any of the Bishops justifie the Usurper's Proceedings and Preach and Print in defence of that barbarous Regicide did they flatter him as the preserver of Religion the David the Champion of Israel with much more to the same purpose Dr. Williams Printed his Sermon Preach'd July 26. 1685. Seâ—â—ful 26. 1685. on Rom. 3â—7 8. p. 11. being on the day of publick thanksgiving for the late victory over the Rebels to vindicate the City Clergy and particularly himself who was censured as if the Sermon was not to the purpose of the day and occasion as he says in his Epistle Dedicatory to the Bishop of London Grant this that evil becomes lawful by a good end and when we think our selves secure we make all compacts broken Oaths dissolved all difference betwixt Superiors and Inferiors confounded it exposes the Church and State to every pretender and any one that hath a mind P. 20 21. will never want a reason for Insurrection and Rebellion as no Religion hath more discountenanc'd such Principles and Proceedings than the Christian so no Nations nor Persons have more discountenanc'd the thing than those who have profess'd it it is too notorious to be dissembled for that there have been Rebellions against and depositions of Princes dissolutions of Governments taking and breaking of Oaths and other things apparently evil of that and the like kind done to serve a Cause a Party or a Church is no Mystery now a days Christian Religion teaches the wholsom Doctrin of being subject to the Higher Powers and that they that resist p. 22. shall receive to themselves damnation from the confessions of Faith in all the â—rotestant and Reformed Churches nothing can be drawn p. 23. that will justifie Opposition or Rebellion against Civil Authority but they expresly declare against it when Queen Mary was a known Member of the Roman Church yet the Protestants first joyned with her against the Lady Jane Grey who was invested with the title of Queen and was a Protestant And this particularly is the avowed Doctrin of the Church of England in all its Articles and Homilies at large three of which are against Rebellion Do they find in the Sermons of the Ministers of the Church of England Id. Apol. for the Pulpits p. 3 4. the Doctrines of the Peoples Power over Princes of the lawfulness of resisting their Sovereigns or rather where have the Rights of Princes and the Subjection and Obedience of the People in all lawful Cases and the Non-resistance in any Case ☜ been so much asserted That Loyalty which concerns all of all Perswasions is taught in the Pulpits of the Church of England which obliges them to be as loyal when the Prince is of a different Religion as when he is of the same with them The same Author also in his Difference between the Church of England and the Church of Rome having cited our Articles Homilies c. to prove the chief Power of the King and that he ought not to be resisted and shewn how contrary to this Doctrin the Decrees of the Church of Rome are he subjoins pag. â—1 The Church of England teacheth the King in all his Realms hath Supream Power in all Causes whether Ecclesiastical or Civil For God alloweth neither the Dignity of any Person ☜ nor the Multitude of any People nor the Weight of any Cause as sufficient for the which Subjects may rebel So Dr. Grove in his Examination of Bell. 15th Note viz. Temporal Felicity pag. 393. Since the Power of Deposing Princes hath been openly assumed and frequently practised and never yet condemned by any either Pope or Council since the Doctrin of Equivoeation and many other absurd and Impious Opinions are taught by their Casuists and made use of by their Confessors in directing the Consciences of their Penitents and since these and many more very dangerous Errors do not only escape without a Censure but are approved of and encouraged by their Governors I cannot see how they and their Church can possibly be excused from the Guilt of them Mr. Thomas Stainoe B. D. and Archdeacon of Brecknock preach'd Sept. 6. Ann. 1686. Seem on Rom. 13.5 Epist Ded. before the Lord Mayor and says that he publish'd it That it might be instrumental to convince the People of their Duty to their King because it was for that very reason that he preach'd it That there is no Man so much a ravening Wolf inwardly pag. 3. but he will put on Sheeps Cloathing and tho his Resolutions are bent upon Rebellion yet his Discretion and Prudence will prompt him to pretend Religion The least that can be inferr'd from the words will be a Subjection to lawful Authority and by consequence also to our own Prince For the truth of all which I shall urge no more at present than the tacit Confession of his most avowed and professed Enemies who after all their contrivance of Wit Anger and Malice could at length pitch upon no better expedient to prevent his Right of Accession than a Bill of Exclusion Now such a Bill either presupposes an antecedent Right or it does not if it does not then it must be confess'd that they did most elaborately trifle whilst they took a great deal of pains to bring that about that was already done to their hands If it does then we have what we look for and that is that the Injustice of their Actions does make good the Justice of his Title and affords us a tacit Confession that there was no other way to overthrow that Title but by overturning the very Foundations of the Government it self pag. 7. We are therefore obliged in Conscience to be in subjection to the Superior Powers because God himself commands us so to be God hath given the lawful Magistrate a Title to that Authority pag. 12. to which we
defensive ☜ against his Majesty his Heirs and lawful Successors Neither is the King accountable to them or to any other besides God These are the Essentials of Sovereignty There is but one Case wherein a good and loyal Subject will refuse to obey his Prince and that is p. 60 61 v. p. 66 96 97 119 120 154. when such Obedience will by no means consist with his Obedience to God But there is no Case whatsoever wherein he dares either to resist or reproach the Person or Authority of the King or to offer any Indignity to him To fight against him is to fight against God whom the King represents upon any pretence whatsoever it cannot be done without open Perfidiousness and Rebellion Such are Monsters of Men and are as natural brute Beasts made to be taken and destroyed So S. Peter describes them 2 Pet. 2.10 12. Mr. David Jenner in his Prerogative of Primogenitures * Lond 1635 P. 48. asserts the same Cause Altho the Law of God is indeed above all Kings and if they wilfully transgress the same they are all accountable unto God and unto God only for the same yet in this Kingdom of England no Statute Law is or can be above the King because it was the King that first gave life and being to the Law of the Land the King by his Royal Assent made the Law to be what it is viz. a Law But the Law of the Land did not make the King to be what he is viz. a King for the King was King before the Law. That the Doctrin and Practice of Deposing lawful Kings P. 122. and Excluding the right Heir from succeeding in the Throne for his being an Heretick Idolater ☜ tyrannical and wicked is grounded upon nothing but Popery and Fanaticism Mr. Hancock in his Answer to the Viscount Stafford's Memoires Lond. 1682. p. 31. I could make it evident that the same Maxims of Political Divinity the same Arguments and many times the same Phrases and Expressions are to be found in the Heads of both Factions I know 't is disputed whether the Ring-Leaders of Sedition among us poyson'd the Jesuits or the Jesuits them but I do not envy the Bishops of Rome the Honor of having first poyson'd them both with Antimonarchical Doctrins If Milton the great Oracle of one of the Factions had own'd himself to be a Papist there had been no reason to wonder at the Impiety of his Doctrins which he either did or might have learnt from the Popes and greatest Divines of the Roman Church It was truly alledg'd by Salmasius that the Doctrin of the sacred and inviolable Authority of Princes was preserved pure and uncorrupt in the Church till the Bishops of Rome attempted to set up a Kingdom in this World paramount to all Kings and Emperors but he with his usual Confidence acquits the Popes and charges his Antimonarchical Principles on Luther Zuinglius Calvin Bucer Martyr Parcus and all the Reformed Divines Bellarmine P. 50. Parsons Creswel Suarez c. are the Men that furnish'd the leading Faction among us with Principles and Precedents with Arguments and Texts of Scripture ☞ out of whom they either did or might have derived the Grounds of the War against the King of erecting an High Court of Justice and of bringing him to the Block John Goodwin P. 53. in one of his Pamphlets hath this remarkable Expression As for offering Violence to the Person of a King or attempting to take away his Life we leave the Proof of the lawfulness of it to those profound Disputers the Jesuits P. 166 c. I have fairly represented those Doctrins and Principles which strike at the very root of our establish'd Religion and Government with the Arts and Instruments which have been used by the prevailing Faction of the Roman Church for the Subversion of them ☞ And I know no stronger Argument against the truth and goodness of any Religion than that it supplants moral Righteousness and serves to be a Bond of Conspiracy allowes of Sedition and Treachery Injustice and Cruelty for how can that Religion be from God which maketh Men unlike to God as had or worse than if they were left to the Principles and Inclinations of their own Natures Of the Church of England I will only say It hath establish'd the Right of Kings upon such sure and unalterable Foundations that it is the Interest as well as the Duty of the Civil Power to support and defend it Mr. Animadv on Ob. Ch. Govern. Preface Smalridge Certainly that Doctrin which invades the just Rights of Princes can hope but for few Proselytes among those who have constantly defended them in their Writings asserted them in their Decrees and upon all occasions vindicated them with their Swords For we do not lye open to the imputation of a condition'd and distinguishing Loyalty who have shewed our readiness to imitate the glorious Examples of our Fathers and were prepar'd had not God's good Providence prevented our Service to have transcribed that Copy lately at Sedgmore which they set us formerly at Edg-hill And in truth our steady Fidelity to the Prince is so unquestionable that our Enemies have been pleased to ridicule what they could not deny and have made Passive Obedience bear a part in our Character when the Muse hath been enclin'd to Satyr Thus also the Person of Quality who wrote the Reasons Why a Protestant should not turn Papist P. 30 31. I am then quite out of conceit with your Religion since I cannot embrace it without endangering my Loyalty by reason of the Deposing Doctrin in case I live up to the pitch of its real Principles But 't is all one to me so long as I remain a Protestant what Religion my Prince is of tho I could wish he were of the same I profess because his Authority over me and my indispensible Obligation to submit to him do not depend upon his Opinion or Religion but upon his Birth-right yet have we not reason to doubt if the zealous sort of Roman Catholicks would not think it lawful to take Arms against their Prince turn'd a Heretick since the French League against Henry the 4th was upon this very account styled Holy and had I not been particularly acquainted with the Principles of the Church of Rome I had never conceived how it came to pass that such great Numbers of learned and well-meaning Men too could be guilty of such a horrible wickedness as that was and forget themselves so far as to pretend Holiness in an open Rebellion against their lawful Prince I am then more satisfied with the Loyalty of a Protestant especially of the Church of England who acknowledgeth the Prince to be a Supreme Governour over all his Subjects and Sovereign Judg in all Cases than with that of a Roman Catholick who seems to set limits to his Power by such restrictions as neither Reason nor Scripture can warrant Mr. Pomfret
their Doctrine to have been of God had their Actions been so contrary to all the Precepts of Natural Divinity And in this matter does the Learned Dr. Dr. Dove's Serm. before the Sons of the Clergy 1687. Dove vindicate the Integrity of our Church in a few but as significant Words as any of his Brethren when speaking of some who suffered much for their Constancy to the Faith and their Fidelity to the Crown he terms them Two inseparable Notes of a genuine Son of the Church of England Dr. Puller * Moderat of the Ch. of Engl. ch 12. § 5. Other Sects deny the King's Supremacy in Matters Ecclesiastical either claiming a Power of Jurisdiction over him or pleading a Privilege of Exemption from under him where as the Clergy of the Church of England like good Christians and good Subjects neither pretend to any Jurisdiction over the Kings of England nor withdraw their Subjection from them †Sect. 6 7. And then he vindicates that Expression of Can. 1. of the Synod 1640. That the Order of Kings is most high and sacred The Moderation of our Church doth not favour any Doctrines or Practices which are prejudicial to the safety of human Society in general It doth no where pretend to remit the Divine Laws or dispense with Oaths or transfer the Rights of Kingdoms c. Contrariwise it requires of all of its Communion to give the King such Security of their Allegeance and Fealty as may be a sufficient Security to his Government ‖ Chap. 17. The Romanists and Separatists extremely agree in their Principles against the Civil Magistrate according to that of Bishop Lany * Bishop Lany's Serm. on 1 Thess 4.11 The Papists and Presbyterians hunt in Couples against the King's Power and Supremacy It is admirable to see how the Commonwealths Men in the times of the late Rebellion received their Principles from the ancient and modern Writers of the Jesuits and other Papists and still agree with them in most of the Republican Doctrines and Tendencies of them to the like Practices Both deny the Supremacy of the King one attributes it to the Pope originally the other to the People and the same Arguments which the Pope useth for his Supremacy over Kings the Disciplinarians use for establishing their Sovereignty The Pretence of the King's Authority against his Person was hatch'd under the Roman Territories and was made use of in the Holy League of France The Rules for making a King to be a Tyrant and then ceasing to be a King that it may be lawful to attempt any thing against his Person and Life are so much the same §. 20. that they cannot be more I need not here relate how many Doctrines of the Romanists tend to dissolve the very Bonds of relative Duty one towards another absolving People from their Oaths and Allegiance No Faith to be kept with Hereticks c. How do many Principles of our Enthusiasts and Separatists tend to destroy the Relations of King and Subject Bishop and People c. SECT XXXII Dr. Scott * Serm. July 26. 1685. p. 2. P. 13 14. Absalom accomplish'd his design partly by declaiming against the Maleadministrations of his Father's Government partly by promising them a thorough Reformation if ever he arrived to be a Judge in Israel Every Man knows or might easily know if he were not extremely wanting to himself that his King is the Vicegerent of his God and that being so he is indispensibly obliged by all the ties of Reason and Religion to submit to his Will and reverence his Person and bow to his Authority and that he cannot lift up his hand against him without fighting against God himself the Truth of which is as obvious to our natural Reason and as plainly asserted in holy Scripture as of any Proposition in Religion ☜ so that I dare boldly affirm a Man may find as many Pretexts for any Vice whatsoever even for Drunkenness Whoredom or Perjury as ever were made for Rebellion and were I to set up for a publick Patron of Wickedness I hardly know a Villany in nature so black and monstrous which I could not more plausibly recommend to Mens Reason and Consciences than this of Resistance against lawful Authority which is such a complication of Villanies such a loathsome mixture of hellish Ingredients as is enough to nauseate any Conscience but a Devil 's And tho Conscience and Religion are the Colors it usually marches under yet is the imposture of this Pretence so fulsome and bare-fac'd that no Man in his Wits can be innocently abused by it for certainly that Man must have a great mind to rebel his Will must have a strong Byass of Pride or Discontent Faction or Ambition in it that in despite of all the evidence from Reason and Scripture to the contrary can persuade himself that it is lawful for him and much less P. 15 16. that it is his duty to lift up his hand against his Sovereign And therefore for Men to appeal to God in a Cause so apparently wicked is not submissively to refer themselves to him but openly to mock and affront him and to make a vexatious Appeal to God's Judgment again in a Case which he hath so often and so expresly judged already is a common Barretry 't is not to consult but to tempt him and under pretence of submitting to his determinations openly to defie his Authority in effect it is to appeal from his Will to his Providence and to bespeak him to declare himself against his own Declarations In the case of Rebellion there is not only a peremptory Disobedience to those Laws of God which require our dutiful Submission to our lawful Superiors ☞ but also a direct Renuntiation of the divine Authority it self for all Sovereign Power is immediately founded in the Dominion of God who being the supreme Lord of the World no person can have right to govern in his Kingdom under him but by Commission from him Kings therefore are only accountable to him P. 17.18 and if so then for any of their Subjects to presume to call them to account by a publick form'd resistance is to arraign God's own Authority and invade his peculiar it is to thrust him out of his Throne and set themselves down in it and then to summon his Authority before them and require it to submit its awful Head to their imperious doom and sentence While therefore we behave our selves factiously and rebelliously towards those whom God hath set over us we live as Out-laws in the Kingdom of God without any respect to that visible Authority by which he governs the World and if this be so then for Subjects to rebel against their Prince is neither better nor worse than to appeal to God against his own Authority and to put this impious Case to him Whether it be he or they that have the Right of Governing the World. I profess * Id. Serm.
the hearts of Princes like Rivers of Waters You know how before the coming of Christ the Jewish Church by the command of Ahasuerus was to be destroy'd Esth 4. both young and old c. here the whole Church by the barbarous designment of Ahasuerus seem'd to be in the very Jaws of death yet they take no arms they consult not how to poyson Ahasuerus or Haman they animate no desperate Person suddenly to stab them but there was only great sorrow among them and fasting and weeping c. This Book gave so much disgust to a party of Men in this Kingdom that they could not be quiet till something was Printed under the name of an answer to it tho every Pamphlet that is so called does not deserve that name and to make it pass the more plausibly it assumes the same title Deus Rex and is said to have been Printed at Colen An. Dom. 1618. the Author of which tho unquestionably a Papist as appears by many passages in the Book affirms p. 13. that the Scots had undoubtedly the true spirit of the Gospel who profess'd and for it he quotes Knox 's History of the Scotch Church that they would be Subjects to no one unless they could enjoy their desired Reformation p. 19. and that the former Dialogue falsly asserts that Kings have their Power only from God and are accountable only to him and that the duty of Subjects cannot be dissolv'd if the King turns Tyrant Infidel Heretick or Apostate and that Kings are not to be deposed or resisted unless by prayers and tears tho they are fall'n into so much impiety and madness as to seek the ruin of the Church and the destruction of Religion Which Assertions the Author condemns but with no reason and a great deal of injustice while he owns and improves the Romish Doctrins of resisting and deposing Princes in many places so easily are Men inclined to be despisers of Dignities and blasphemers of Dominions Gabriel Powel says De Adiaplyris Lond. 1606. c 8. §. 34 p. 69 that when St. Paul bids us be obedient for conscience sake that he means we must no way offend the Magistrate by rebelling against him but that we must keep a good Conscience in his sight who hath set the Magistrate over us ‖ §. 93. p. 71. for his Power is from God and to the just praise of our Reformation he adds * c. 9 Sect. 35. p. 79 that no Church in Europe reform'd her self more orderly than the Church of England in which nothing was done tumultuarily by force and arms or by fraud but all alterations were made by the supreme Power of the Nation agreeable to the Word of God and the Example of the Primitive Church Oliver Oâ—mered in his picture of a Papist It is not lawful for Subjects to attempt the murthering of their Sovereign for Religion sake or for any pâ—etence whatsoever Go with cresset and torchlight throughout the whole Book of God and throughout the spacious volumes of the Ancient Fathers and tell me whether any Priest Levite Evangelist Apostle Ancient Father ever hath taught counsell'd and much less practised the like I say not against Lawful Magistrates ☜ but tyrannous Rulers and such as were reprobated of God p. 176. the Prophet Isaiah complain'd of the Exactions and Oppressions of the Kings of Israel shew'd them their faults and admonish'd them of God's vengeance but he did not animate encourage and incite the People to avenge themselves of their Princes and to lift up Arms against them the Prophets Amos Micah and Zephaniah give sufficient testimony that the Rulers in their times were very wicked Men and such as did grind the faces of the Subjects and yet all this notwithstanding they did not advise the Subjects to mutiny or rebel against their Princes When Rome was pure and primitive you shall find p. 179. the arms of the Church were tears and prayers but now they are degenerate from their former purity and openly threaten the lives of Kings the ancient Romans shall in judgment rise against you and condemn you for they conspired not the death of Pagans Infidels and Tyrants that made havock of the Church of God c. SECT VI. Among these Divines I will place one Civilian the famous Albericus Gentilis who tho Born in Italy yet lived long in England the King's Professor of the Laws in the most Famous University of Oxon of which he was one of the greatest Ornaments I shall not mention what he says on this subject in his Books de Jure belli since he hath undertaken it professedly in his three Royal Disputations London 1605. 4 to as he calls them in the first of which treating of the absolute power of a King wherein his Notions are very agreeable to the Sentiments of his Master King James in his true law of free Monarchies to which he refers he affirms that he is absolutely supreme p. 9 10 17. who acknowledges nothing above him but God to whom only and not to any other he is to render an account he confesses there were some Magistrates improperly called Kings such as the Kings of Sparta and of Egypt to which last there were laws set how far they should walk and how often bath themselves who might be accus'd when they were dead and being convicted be denied decent Burial but those do not deserve to be called Kings whose Subjects pay them no more obedience than they please A Prince is a God upon Earth his Power is greater than either that of a Father of old over his Children or that of a Master over his Servants All Princes are feudataries to God p 17. to whom they ought to render an account of their Government who is their only Judge p. 34. 't is a Maxim in the Civil Law Princeps legibus solutus est a Prince is free from laws the Greek Interpreters understand it of his freedom from Penal Laws for a Prince hath no Judges who can compel him others that he is exempt from the coaction not from the direction of the law but all agree against any force to be used against him This and much more to this purpose the Reader will meet with in that first disputation while the third treats largely how unjust any violence is p 39. p. 100. which Subjects use against their King by King he says he means such a Prince as hath no Superior no Judge or Governor over him he means also a lawful Prince not a Tyrant but such a lawful Prince who rules Tyrannically i.e. seeks the destruction of the Commonwealth It is a fundamental and unquestionable Law that Men ought to honour their Prince p. 101 102. and not to speak evil of him and that what injuries ought not to be done to a Parent parad 3. ought much less to be done to a Prince but no Man says Tully can take away the life of his Father without
who can lift up his hand against the Lord 's Anointed and be innocent 1 Sam. 26.9 or do they consider his commands in the Proverbs of Solomon 24.21 my Son fear God and the King and meddle not with them that are given to change or his counsel in the Book of Ecclesiastes 8.1 I counsel thee to keep the King's commandment and that in regard of the oath of God or because they possibly may pretend that they are exempted from or unconcern'd in the commands of Obedience delivered in the Old Testament do they know and remember the Precept given to all Christians by St. Peter submit your selves to every Ordinance of Man for the Lord's sake c. or that terrible Sanction of the same command they that resist shall receive to themselves damnation left by St. Paul in his Epistle to the Romans who then were the miserable Subjects of the worst King the worst Man nay I think I may add truly the worst Beast in the World that so all Rebels mouths might be stopt for ever ☜ and left without all colour and pretence whatsoever to justifie resistance of Sovereign Power Undoubtedly if they did know and consider and lay to heart these places of Scripture or the fearful judgment which befel Corah Dathan and Abiram for this very sin which they now commit and with a high hand still proceed in it would be impossible but their hearts would smite them as David 's did upon an infinitely less occasion and affright them out of these ways of present confusion and eternal damnation SECT III. Dr. 10 Serm. Prâ—at Lon. 16 â— P. 10â— Arthur Lake Bishop of Bath and Wells Magistrates are from God and he resides among them Magistrates must proceed like God God can and will redress the evils that spring from them because he is Sovereign in and over those places and persons which are misgoverned by them P. 131. what is our lesson truly first as Nazianzen advises as near as we can though we cannot as constantly as God not to have a heart and not a heart but to say with King David I have sworn and am stedfastly purposed it were to be wish'd there were such a constancy in our Oaths so many would not retract the Oath of that Allegiance which they owe without an Oath Dr. Sermon at St. Mary's Cambr on Judg. 21.25 1642. p. 27 28 29. Stephens The King's Commission is signed from Heaven by me Kings Reign his Authority is conferr'd by Heaven he is the Anointed of the Lord his power descends from Heaven obedience to him is required from Heaven 1 Pet. 2. it is the will of God that you submit your selves to the Government of your Kings I have heard the Prophet David suspected by some as partial in his own cause just like the Northern Borderers who conceived the Eighth Commandment thou shalt not steal to be none of God's making but foisted in by Henry the Eighth to shackle their thievish fingers but I dare oppose the 13th Chapter of the Epistle to the Romans against the power of Men or Devils which would trample upon the necks of Kings suppose thy King very wicked he hath more need of thy Prayers to make him better suppose him to be a Tyrant he will give thee the fairer occasions to exercise thy virtue of patience suppose him to be a Persecutor he 'll do thee a courtesie he 'll send thee to Heaven by violence Saul was an unnatural Tyrant against his own Son Jonathan P. 30 31. ☞ a bloody Persecutor of the Priest's of God a Sacrilegious Usurper of their Holy Offices a demoniacal furious Man possest with a Devil and on David 's part his life was sought for and by sparing Saul he should undo himself he had all the opportunity that might and security could administer unto him he was Saul 's adopted Son by Michal 's Marriage he was a Successor to the Kingdom by the Prophet's Unction and yet for all this who can lift up his hand c. are we Christians do we know the virtue of an Oath What think we then of the Solemn Oath of our Allegiance an Oath which can receive no dispensation no absolution from any power whatsoever contrary to the assertions of Bellarmine and Parsons is the establish'd Doctrin of the Church of England in the 37 Article the King's Majesty hath the chief Power in this Realm of England and his other Dominions and is not nor ought to be Subject to any jurisdiction whatsoever the six parts of the Homily against Rebellion are so full and apposite that we must either disclaim them from being the Interpreters of the Doctrin of our Church or sit down convinc'd in the manifest truth of this assertion c. Consider seriously against whom would you take up Arms Id. Serm. on Judg. 4.23 p. 78. is it not against the Power against the Ordinance of God they are Men before God but they are Gods before Men. the whole earth combining could not make St. Bernard willingly offend his King and shall the fear of a threatned plundering make us oppose our King shall the common rout persuade me to go to Hell for company 'T is true God sometimes refines his Church in the Furnace of Persecution neither then does he leave it naked and disarm it but what are the Churches weapons St. Ambrose had his dolere potero potero flere his sighs and groans against the Gothish Soldiers St. Bernard fought to death against Lewis of France non scutis aut gladiis sed precibus fletibus prayers and tears were his Sword and Buckler Nazianzen overcame Julian but it was lacrymis ubertim effusis by softning his Adamantine Heart with salt drops from their eyes thence flows the only Sea we can overthrow Pharaoh 's Host in SECT IV. P. H. Corah of the tribe of Levi joyn'd with Dathan c. Sermon at Cambr. 1640. on Numb 16. 3. p. 5 6. of the tribe of Reuben the Levite or Clergy alone would have wanted power and strength the Laity or Reubenite alone could not have had so fair a colour and cloak of Religion to cover their rebellious practices but both join'd together make a strong Faction and a fair show our surest course is to judge Mens Persons by their actions if their actions be unsound and irregular P. 10. 2. p. 11 c. if they gather themselves together against God's express word and commandment against their Prince and Sovereign be their outward appearance never so specious we may assure our selves that they neither fear God nor regard Man but only to serve their own turns if God in absolute and unlimited terms pronounce ☜ whosoever resisteth the Power resisteth the Ordinance of God I cannot see how the goodness of the end be it Religion or Reformation or the common good can warrant any such resistance from the transgression of God's Ordinance P. 15. cons the place unless these and the like limitations
Griffith Serm. 25. Mar. 1660. called fear God and the King p. 11. v.p. 39. and p. 8 9. If God command one thing and the King should command another then God's command is to be preferred and yet let me tell you that the King is not to be disobeyed for a true Christian is obliged to a twofold obedience Active and Passive Where the King commands things Lawful there yield Active Obedience and know that it is your duty to do them but if he should command such a thing as you may not lawfully do then you must not resist but suffer patiently for your not doing it and that is your Passive Obedience and in both these you may still keep a good Conscience for though God be to be preferred yet God will not have his Anointed to be disobeyed Dr. Jane Dean of Gloucester Ser. at the Consecr of Doctor Crompton Bishop of Oxon p. 30 31 32. Such is the peculiar genius of Christianity that where ever it is either Preacht or Received it can create no jealousie in the State. The ground upon which this Assertion stands is this that it disclaims all title to the Sword but leaves him that takes it to perish with it though it be drawn in defence of Christ himself In the Church then as of old in Israel there was no Smith to provide Swords and Spears though against their persecuting Philistines To obey Authority was taught and practised under a Nero and their Submissions were as unparallel'd as their Provocations And we may truly suppose under the Roman Emperors that had the Doctrine of Obedience been as truly received by their Heathen Subjects as it was Preacht by S. Paul and practised by the believing Romans they had effectually provided for the publick Tranquillity without any further need of Forts and Armies to secure it Dr. Outram The Glory of the King Ser. Jan. 30. 1664. p. 141 149. the Privileges of the Parliament the Liberty of the Subject the Purity of Religion these are written upon the Face of the design The Principle is doing evil that good may come of it and breaking Laws that we may the better observe them These Men went to Rome to whet the Ax and borrowed an Arrow out of the Roman Quiver secretly to shoot the Lord 's Anointed Were the Prince a Nero p. 160. Paul would charge us we should not resist and would charge resistance with damnation Sir Orlando Bridgman at the Tryal of the Regicides says Try. p. 10 12. v. p. 15 52 182 283. I must deliver to you for plain and true Law that no Authority no single Person no Community of Persons not the People Collectively or Representatively have any coercive Power over the King of England And this he proves at large in the same place The Crown of England is and always was an Imperial Crown Now I do not intend any Absolute Government by this It is one thing to have an Absolute Monarchy another thing to have that Government absolutely without Laws as to any coercive Power over the Person of the King. God is my witness what I speak V. p. 13 14. p. 280. V. p. 281 282. I speak from mine own Conscience that is that whatsoever the case was by the Laws of these Nations the Fundamental Laws there could not be any coercive Power over the King. And this he there proves from the obligation of the Oaths of Allegiance and Supremacy c. Mark the Doctrine of the Church of England and I do not know with what spirit of Equivocation any Man can take that Oath of Supremacy Her Articles were the judgment not only of the Church but of the Parliament at the same time And the Queen and the Church were willing that these should be put into Latin that all the World might see the Confession of the Church of England So also Sir Heneage Finch P. 51. then the King's Sollicitor General The King is not accountable to any coercive Power See also the accurate Treatise See also Nalson's Counter p. 35 c. 3â—9 Com. Interest of Kings p. 139 c. p. 3. called the Harmony of Divinity and Law which proves that it is a damnable sin to resist Sovereign Princes and answers all the little objections of the Republicans to the contrary I shall here only mention Mr. Foulu's History of the Plots and Conspiracies of the pretended Saints and briefly transcribe a passage or two out of Dr. Sprat Bishop of Rochester his True account of the horrid Conspiracy At that time under the color of the only true Protestant the worst of all Unchristian Principles were put in Practice all the old Republican and Antimonarchical Doctrines whose effects had formerly proved so dismal were again as confidently owned and asserted as ever they had been during the hottest rage of the late unhappy Troubles p. 21. See p. 41. The Lord R was seduced by the wicked Teachers of that most Unchristian Doctrine which has been the cause of so many Rebellions That it is lawful to resist and rise against Sovereign Princes for preserving Religion p. 43 44. Other Principles were that the only obligation the Subject hath to the King is a mutual Covenant that this Covenant was manifestly broken on the King's part ☞ that therefore the People were free from all Oaths and other tyes of Fealty and Allegiance and had the natural Liberty restored to them of asserting their own Rights and as justly at least against a Domestick as against Foreign Invaders p. 131. v. p. 132. The whole design of A. S's Papers was to maintain That Tyrants may be justly Deposed by the People and that the People are the only Judges who are Tyrants That the general Revolt of a Nation from its own Magistrates can never be called a Rebellion which Positions the Historian calls with great Truth and Justice Villanous Opinions p. 133. and such as if allowed it will be impossible for the best Kings or the most happy Kingdoms in the World to be free from perpetual Treasons p. 164. and Rebellious Plottings But his Majesty hath just reason to acknowledge that the main body of the Nobility and Gentry stood by him so has the whole sound and honest part of the Commonalty so the great Fountains of Knowledge and Civility the two Universities so the wisest and most learned in the Laws so the whole Clergy and all the genuine Sons of the Church of England ☞ a Church whose glory it is to have been never tainted with the least blemish of disloyalty Dr. Pocock In ch 8. Hos 4. p. 388 389. Some Interpreters by Setting up Kings but not by me would understand Saul but that cannot with reason be imagined Others looking on the sin of the Israelites to be their defection from the House of David on which God had intayled the Right and Title of the Kingdom and their changing of the Kinghom and Priesthood of their own heads
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
make the Case parallel he must suppose our Houses of Convocation to have several times declared these damnable Doctrins and given encouragement to Rebels to proceed against their Kings and the University of Oxford to have condemn'd them how come the Principles of the Regicides among us to be parallel'd with this Doctrin when the Principles of our Church are so directly contrary to them and our Houses of Convocation would as readily condemn any such damnable Doctrins as the University of Oxford and all the World knows how repugnant such Principles are to those of the Church of England And none can be Rebels to their Prince but they must be false to our Church The same Author in his accurate Preface to the Jesuits Loyalty says P. 1 2. that tho the Jesuits walk in darkness and do mischief his intention was to set such marks and characters upon them that when others see them they might take the wind of them and avoid the infection and that he publish'd the Jesuits Treatises because some poysons lose their force when they are exposed to the open air and thereupon addressing himself to the Jesuits he endeavours to prove two things P. 3. 1. That if you do not renounce the Popes power of deposing Princes and absolving Subjects from their Allegiance you can give no real security to the Government 2. That if you do renounce it you have no reason to stick at the Oath of Allegiance to prove the first he says it is allowed by all Friends to our King and his Government ☞ that the Commonwealth Principles are destructive to it and that none who do own them can give sufficient security for their Allegiance I shall therefore prove that all the mischievous consequences of the Republican Principles do follow upon the owning the Pope's Power of deposing Princes P. 4. Now the mischief of the Commonwealth Principles lay in these things 1. Setting up a Court of Judicature over Sovereign Princes ☞ 2. Breaking the Oaths and Bonds of Allegiance Men had enter'd into 3. Justifying Rebellion on the account of Religion As to the first of setting up a Spiritual High-Court of Justice at Rome it is no satisfaction in this case to distinguish of a direct and indirect power for however the Power comes the effect and consequence of it is the same The question is whether the Pope hath any such Sovereignty over Princes as to be able by virtue thereof to depose them and the Commonwealth's Men do herein agree with you for they do not say that the People have a direct Power over their Princes which were a contradiction in it self for Subjects to command their Sovereigns but only that in case of breach of Trust the People have an indirect power to call their Princes to an account and to deprive them of their Authority but are the Commonwealth Principles the less mischievous to Government because they only assert an indirect Power in the People the main thing to be debated is P. 5. whether Sovereign Princes have a Supreme and Independent Authority Inherent in their Persons or no or whether they are so accountable to others that upon male-administration they may be deprived of their Government the Republicans and Assertors of the Pope's deposing Power are agreed in the Affirmative of the later Question and only differ whether the Power be in the Pope or the People to call Princes to an account and even in this they do not differ so much as Men may at first imagine for however the Primitive Christians thought it no flattery to Princes ☜ to derive their Power immediatly from God and to make them accountable to him alone as being superior to all below him as might be easily proved by multitudes of testimonies yet after the Pope's deposing Power came into request the Commonwealth Principles did so too and the Power of Princes was said to be of another Original and therefore they were accountable to the People Thus Gregory VII not only took upon him to depose the Emperor and absolve his Subjects from their Allegiance but he makes the first constitution of Monarchical Government to be a mere Usurpation upon the Rights and Liberties of the People and did ever any Remonstrance Declaration of the Army P. 6. or agreement of the People give a worse account of the beginning of Monarchy than this Infallible Head of the Church doth What follows from hence but the justifying all Rebellion against Princes which upon these Principles would be nothing else but the Peoples recovering their just Rights against intolerable Usurpations the very worst of our Fanaticks never talk'd so reproachfully of Civil Government ☜ as your Canonized Saint doth their Principles and Practices we of the Church of England profess to detest and abhor I pray Gentlemen tell me what divine assistance this good Pope had when he gave this admirable account of the Original of Civil Government and whether it be not very possible upon his Principles for Men to be Saints and Rebels at the same time I have had the curiosity to inquire into the Principles of Civil Government P. 7. among the fierce contenders for the Pope's deposing Power and I have found those Hypotheses avowed and maintained which justifie all the Practices of our late Regicides Parson's Book of the Succession to the making of which Cardinal Allen Sir Francis Inglefield and other Principal Persons of our Nation concurred being shred into so many Speeches to justifie their Proceedings against our Late Sovereign of Glorious Memory the Book being design'd to exclude King James and thus we see P. 8. the Pope's deposing Power was maintain'd here in England by such who saw how necessary it was for their purpose to defend the Power of Commonwealths over their Princes ☜ either to exclude them from Succession to the Crown or to deprive them of the possession of it The same we shall find in France in the time of the solemn League and Covenant there in the Reigns of Henry III. and IV. for those who were engaged so deep in Rebellion against their Lawful Princes found it necessary for them to insist on the Pope's Power to depose and the People's to deprive their Sovereigns thus Boucher affirms the fundamental and radical Power to be so in the People that they may call Princes to account for Treason against the People and that in such cases they are not to stand upon the niceties and forms of Law but that the necessities of State do supercede all those things If this Man had been of Council for the late Regicides he could not more effectually have Pleaded their Cause our Countryman William Reynolds also Vindicating the Murther of Henry III. says that Obedience to Princes is so far conditional that if they do not their duty their Subjects are free from their obligation to obey them the contrary opinion being against the Law of Nations and the Common reason of Mankind and this is
God the things that are God ' s. Dr. Fowler There is nothing more certain than that for any of us to be false Dâ—sign of Christianity p. 243 251 252. and perfidious to be ungovernable rebellious or seditious upon the account of Religion it self is most unsufferable and inexcusable For if it be lawful to behave our selves after this manner upon any account whatever Religion would be the most useless thing in the World and if this were lawful upon the account of Religion only ☜ I will not stick to say that it will not be more useless and unprofitable than mischievous and hurtful Nor would the Christion Religion it self be worthy our profession if it would give us leave upon any design to allow our selves in the forementioned Immoralities or in any one whatsoever Thus to do is no other than to be irreligious to promote Religion to be unchristian to do service to Christianity and therefore to go the directest way to destroy it by the means we use for its preservation Thus to do is to oppose the Interests of our Religion to that of our Souls Id. Discour of Christian Liberty p. 175. â—ee his Discourse of Offences p. 9 10 11. and to cast these away in the defence of that It is come to that sad pass that preaching Obedience to Authority is as unacceptable Doctrin as can be to even many great Pretenders to Christianity altho it be done never so prudently and agreeably to the express Doctrin of our Saviour and his Apostles And the Notion of Obedience for Conscience sake seems almost lost among not a few which is one of the great Sins for which we have too great reason to fear there is a heavy Scourge near us Mr. Evans A moderate Man when the Honor of God or the King when Religion Sermon of Moderat 1682. p. 12. and the Welfare of his Country lye at stake then thinks it a most worthy and weighty occasion of imploying his Zeal and Activity in their Service of defending them with Courage and Resolution with his Life and Fortunes He never breaks the second Table to preserve the first nor make use of any ways to secure Religion that are contrary to or destructive of its Principles What Men esteem great Falshoods pag. 23. and call Toryism and Popery are really as true as Gospel pag. 34. I will conclude all with this Remark We may and shall if we do not timely take up bring in Popery by a heady and extravagant Zeal against it ☜ and ruin and enslave our selves by our fierce and passionate Contentions for Liberty Property and Safety p. 48. Give me the Man that is honest and constant to his Principles and to what he professes whatsoever Party or Perswasion he is of he is much more valuable to me than he that plights his Faith to the Church and gives all the Security that can be taken for his Conformity to it and then after he hath wound himself into its Communion and Preferments plays booty and acts like a Non-Conformist These are the treacherous Friends that like Vipers prey upon the Bowels of their Mother and betray her as Judas did our Lord with a Kiss Dr. Comber in his Religion and Loyalty Sec. Edit 1683. p. 8 3. v. pag. 12 13 c. If the Church of England did make worldly Interest the sole measure of her Actions they would never consider what was honest but only what was expedient and never stick at ill means to accomplish that which they account good Ends. We of this Church are perhaps the only Christians since the Primitive Ages who never dispens'd with our Loyalty to serve our worldly Ends. And if this do not commend our Policy I am sure it declares our Honesty and Integrity and must needs recommend us to all good Men as those who prefer our Duty and our Conscience before all earthly Advantages p. 39. No Religion in the World teaches and practises more Loyalty than that which is truly called Protestant and we doubt not but that if ever his R. H. should attain the Crown he will not blame our Church for that which was the Opinion of those who endeavoured to subvert it after they had renounc'd all Communion with it pag. 52. especially when it is further considered how constantly the true Protestants of the Church of England have loved and how faithfully they have served the Royal Family in all Fortunes how closely they have adher'd to the Interests thereof upon all Occasions so that whoever were true Sons of this Church our Kings have always reckon'd them their certain and undoubted Friends And when a Rebellion was designed against the blessed Father of his Royal Highness the Contrivers of it found it necessary first to seduce Men from the Church of England before they could engage them in so wicked an Action p 〈…〉 And since the happy Restoration they have incurr'd the Hatred of the bigotted Fanaticks for their perpetual standing for the King's Prerogative and their zealous promoting his and his Royal Highness's Interest The Pamphlets written in defence of the Bill of Exclusion p. 57. â—â— frequently transcribe whole Passages out of Doleman's Book Take some of their accursed Principles The Commonwealth hath Power to chuse their own fashion of Government as also to change it upon reasonable Causes The Commonwealth hath Power not only to put back the next Inheritors upon lawful occasions but also to dispossess them that have been lawfully put in possession if they fulfil not the Laws and Conditions by which and for which their Dignity was given them The Republick may cure or cut off their Heads if they infest the rest Princes are subject to Law and Order and the Commonwealth which gave them their Authority for the good of all may also restrain or take the same away again if they abuse it to the common evil The whole Body to superior to the Prince neither so giveth the Common-wealth her Authority and Power up to any Prince that she depriveth herself utterly of the same when need shall require to use it for her defence for which she gave it The Prince's Power is not absolute but delegate from the Commonwealth and is given with such Conditions and Oaths on both Parties as if the same be not kept by either Party the other is not bound With many other such Popish Positions So also the Apost Prâ—â— p. 4 5. and it is very observable that this wicked Libel of Doleman was in part reprinted Anno 1648. under the feigned Title of Several Speeches deliver'd at a Conference concerning the Power of Parliaments to proceed against their King's form of Government pag. 61. But the Protestant Church of England is not only better in all other accounts but doth hold teach and practise Loyalty above all others in the World the Divines thereof generally holding Monarchy to be of divine Right and Allegiance to be an Obligation on
Gun-powder nay the Religion of Mahomet is in this respect to be very much preferr'd before the Christian c. And having mention'd Hobbs how am I asham'd to find that his Authority and the Reasons which he derived from Milton and both from Doleman i. e. Parsons the Jesuite are of a sudden so generally received as if the Doctrine were Apostolical and ought to be preached in all the World That Power is originally in the Body of the People that the Foundation of all Government is laid in compact and that the breach of Conditions by one Party dispenses with the Duty of the other tho confirmed by Sacraments Oaths B. Saunderson's Case of a rash Vow §. 9. The several Duties that by Gods Ordinance are to be performed by Persons that stand in mutual relation either to other are not pactional or conditional as are the Leagues and Agreements made between Princes but are absolute and independent wherein each Person is to look to himself and to the performance of the Duty that lies upon him tho the other Party should fail in the performance of his Cons Praelect 5. de Juram and reiterated Promises that a Prince may be opposed in his Politick tho not in his personal Capacity that when Religion is a part of our Property it may be defended and that the Determinations of Providence are to be followed or that the Prosperity of a Cause is a Mark of its goodness And what encouragement hath the owning and complying with such Principles given to many weak and ignorant Persons who cannot distinguish between the steady Doctrines of a Church and the Opinions and Practices of some of her Members to embrace the Roman Faith and Communion I need not declare the Matter of Fact is visible while we are accused that all our former Declarations have been only pretence and juggle and that we have been Loyal no longer than we could get by it I speak this God knows not to upbraid but to deplore and if I could to confute the Calumny and with the deepest sense of the Interests of a poor despised Church which is still and will be the best the most Orthodox and most Primitive of all Christendom Nor is this Account strange and new any otherwise than as it concerns the Church of England as distinct from other Protestants since a Exomologes cap. 12. I confess I wondered that they could hope to make any Christians believe that their Reformation came from the Spirit of Christ when instead of those spiritual Arms of Charity Humility Patience and most indispensible Obedience even to Nero himself by which Christ enabled his Apostles to conquer the World to the belief of the Gospel Calvin and Luther put into the hands of their Sectaries Malice Pride Hatred to suffer for Conscience sake active Resistance against all Authority in a word the very same Weapons which the Devil suggested to Mahomet After the best enquiry I could make I could not find or hear of during our bloody Civil War so much as one single Person of the Presbyterian Calvinist Party but did actively oppose his King nor one single Minister of that Party but was a Trumpet to incite to war. Cons Loc. Cressy makes it one of the most cogent Reasons why he when he vainly thought the Church of England quite destroyed so as never to be restored could not communicate with other Protestant Churches because they tho in that Accusation he falsifies and calumniates as I shall make it appear in the following Discourse taught men That it was lawful to take Arms in defence of Religion and that when Princes persecuted the Truth their Subjects were no longer bound to obey them Nor is Cressy the only Person of the Popish Communion who hath laid this Imputation at the door of the Protestants tho without Reason or Justice while the Romish Church in one of her General Councils determins the Deposition of Princes who are not in all things obedient to her Injunctions And I hope no man can imagin that I intend to promote any disturbance by this Writing 1. Because I only do the office of an Historian not wilfully misquoting any Passage nor citing it contrary to the Authors intention and meaning as far as I understand it and this also must excuse me from being obliged to make good every Argument from Authority or Reason which my Authors use for that Province those of my Authors which are alive are obliged to manage or to acknowledg their Mistakes I intending only to shew the concurrent Testimony of our greatest Men in this momentous Point 2. Because I am told a Dr. Burnet's Royal Martyr page 6. that the Incendiary and Incendiarism were among the much abused words of the late times yet those were the great Incendiaries who kindled God's wrath and that it is from such that we may justly fear the like or rather severer Judgments if our Sins be greater than they were then i. e. When under the specious Pretexts of Liberty and Religion they first opposed and then murdered the Lord 's Anointed 3. Because he who preaches up the Necessity of Suffering and the Unlawfulness of Resisting Superiors and who avers that the Gospel teaches the followers of our Blessed Saviour to dye but not to fight for Religion is little likely to be a Disturber of Government whose Original he acknowledges to be only from Heaven and accountable only to that Tribunal For at last it will be found true that no Government can be safe while those who live under it do not own this Principle That it is not lawful upon any Pretence whatsoever to take Arms against our Lawful Sovereign since he who is Obedient and Loyal only because his Compliance advances his Designs either of Profit Pleasure Honor Revenge or any other Lust as soon as his Point is gained his Duty ceases but he who is obedient to his Sovereign Dr. Tennison Hobbs's Creed p. 159. Except a Man obey for Conscience sake all the Cords of outward Pacts and Covenants will not hold him when he dreams that the Philistines are upon him and that he can deliver himself by force from the power of his Enemies in which number the Prince himself is reckoned by ambitious Subjects out of favor Mr. Pelling's Sermon Jan. 30. 1683. p. 43. Some are for the King as long as he is rich powerful able to maintain their Interest this is the Loyalty of the Leviathan c. because he is God's Vicegerent and because God hath obliged him to be subject not only for wrath but for conscience sake can never be shook from his good resolutions and will be unalterably true to his Oaths and his Duty And when so many Men eminent for their Piety Learning and Station have unanimously agreed in delivering their Sentiments in this Point to say that whatever they said or did was to gratifie or advance their ambitious or covetous Appetites as if their Honesty like Quicksilver in a Weather-glass rose
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
necessary Erudition of a Christian Man in which the Commentary on the fifth Commandment thus instructs us Subjects be bound not to withdraw their Fealty Truth Love and Obedience towards their Prince for any Cause whatsoever it be nor for any cause they may conspire against his person nor do any thing towards the hinderance or hurt thereof or of his Estate And this they prove out of Rom. 13. Whosoever resists the power resists the ordinance of God and they that resist the ordinance of God shall get to themselves damnation And â—n the sixth Commandment No Subjects may draw their Swords against their Prince for any Cause whatsoever it be So that hereby we see that the Declaration made in the Reign of Charles the Second That it is not lawful upon any pretence whatsoever c. is no Novel Doctrine but the old Doctrine of the Church of England even in the infancy of its Reformation And again Although Princes which be the Supreme Heads of their Realm do otherwise than they ought to do yet God hath assigned no Judges over them in this World but will have the Judgment of them reserved to himself and will punish them when he sees his time And Ann. 1542. ‖ Id. Coll. of Record n. 26. p. 252. V. Fox to 2 p. 346 347. it is expresly injoin'd by the Bishop of London to his Clergy Item That every of you do procure and provide of your own a Book called The Institution of a Christian Man otherwise called the Bishop's Book and that you and every of you do exercise your selves in the same according to such Precepts as hath been given heretofore or hereafter to be given So that I suppose the Book to have been the whole duty of Man of those days SECT I. The Popish Bishops Tonstal and Stokesly in their Letter to Cardinal Pool * Apud Fox to 2. p. 351 352. prove out of St. Austin St. Chrysostom and other Fathers That a King is accountable to God only for his Faults that he hath no Peer upon Earth being greater than all Men and inferior but to God alone c. and from hence they shew That the Pope's Power and by parity of Argument the Power of the People to depose Kings is a Doctrine that will be to his own Damnation if he repent not whereas he ought to obey his Prince according to the Doctrine of St. Peter and St. Paul nay Bonner himself Ap. eund p. 673. as he wrote the Preface to the Book of true Obedience so in his Sermon at Paul's Cross Ann. 1549. in the beginning of the Reign of Edward the Sixth declares That all such as rebel against their Prince get to themselves Damnation and those that resist the higher Power resist the Ordinance of God and he that dieth in Rebellion is utterly damn'd and so loseth both Body and Soul what pretences soever they have as Corah Dathan and Abiram for Rebellion against Moses were swallowed down alive into Hell although they pretended to sacrifice to God. So much of the Doctrine of the Reformation did even Bonner himself at that time own and this also was the Opinion of the Protestants of that Age for †Ap. eund to 2. p. 592 among the Heresies and Errors collected by the Popish Bishops out of the Martyr Tyndal's Book called the Obedience of a Christian Man this is the fourth he faith fol. 113. that a Christian Man may not resist a Prince being an Infidel and an Ethnick and that this takes away free will or as it is in the ‖ Inter addend Latin Non licere Christiano resistere Principi Infideli Ethnico Tollit libertatem arbitrii Where observe that the Papists look'd upon it as if Tindal had said that it was impossible to do so whereas he only means that a Christian ought not to resist c. for the Words are thus explained ‡ Ibid. St. Peter willeth us to be subject to our Princes 1 Pet. ii St. Paul also doth the like Rom. xiii who was also himself subject to the Power of Nero and altho every Commandment of Nero against God he did not follow yet he never made resistance against the Authority and State of Nero as the Pope useth to do against the State not only of Infidels but also of Christian Princes SECT II. In the Reign of Edward the Sixth the true Religion began to flourish and at that time old Father Latimer was famous for a plain and honest Preacher * Fol. 56. he in his fourth Sermon before the King telling the Audience what Conference he had with my Lord Darsey in the Tower subjoins that when that Lord pleaded that he had been always faithful and had he seen the King in the Field he would have yielded his Sword to him on his Knees he replyed Marry but in the mean season you played not the part of a faithful Subject in holding with the People in a Commotion and Disturbance it hath been the cast of all Traitors to pretend nothing against the King's Person they never pretend the matter to the King but to others Subjects may not resist any Magistrates nor ought to do any thing contrary to the King's Laws And to put the matter out of all doubt in his Afternoon †Matth. xxii 21. Sermon at Stamford he says If the King should require of thee an unjust Request yet art thou bound to pay it and not to resist nor rebel against the King. The King indeed is in peril of his Soul for asking an unjust Request and God will in his due time reckon with him for it but thou must obey the King and not take upon thee to judge him for God is the King's Judge c. and know this that whensoever there is an unjust Exaction laid upon thee it is a plague and punishment for thy Sin. We marvel that we are plagued as we be and I think verily this unjust and unfaithful dealing with our Princes is one great cause of our plague look therefore every Man upon his Conscience ye shall not be judged by worldly Policy at the latter day Archbishop Cranmer in his Letter to Queen Mary whatever his fear might otherwise betray him to do confesses Ap. Fox to 3. p. 672. That the Imperial Crown and Jurisdiction of this Realm is taken immediately from God to be used under him only and is subject unto none but God alone ‖ p. 674. and afterward averrs That as the Pope taketh upon him to give the Temporal Sword to Kings and Princes so doth he likewise take upon him to depose them from their imperial States if they be disobedient to him and commandeth the Subjects to disobey their Princes assoiling the Subjects as well of their Obedience as of their lawful Oaths made unto their true Kings and Princes contrary to God's Commandment who commandeth all Subjects to obey their Kings or their Rulers over them It is not to be denied that this great
nevertheless he sat up and dictated his sense of it but the Earl was on a sudden by reason of the fight hurried away and whether the King had the Paper or no I cannot learn but the original or a Copy of it was by some zealous Man supprest no doubt because it condemn'd taking up Arms on the specious pretences of Religion and Liberty And according to his Sentiments was his usage he being plundred by the Parliament Army as well as the other so called Malignants SECT XI There was no little Clash between Arch-Bishop Laud and Bishop Davenant about other points but in this they agreed * Davenant deter qu. 4. p. 22. He that taketh the sword shall perish by the sword i. e. He that usurps the Sword he that uses it without permission from the King who by God's Ordinance bears the Sword now who can believe that a Prince will give leave to draw his own Sword against himself all others ought to abstain from laying hands on him whose punishment God hath by a certain special priviledg reserv'd to himself the antient Christians being harass'd with most grievous persecutions never fled to these indirect means Pag. 23. but defended the Church by those means which God hath appointed viz. by the tears of her Christians the preachings of her Priests and the sufferings of her Martyrs and what Suarez say * V. p. 24. That there is no need of a Superiour Power to keep the Pope in order because Christ will in an especial manner in this case provide for his Church may be with much greater reason said of Kings Christ himself will in a more Eminent manner defend his Church not onely against the cruelty of persecutors but also against the gates of Hell. Resistance is unlawful and contrary to God's Ordinance for St. Paul says it is a sin and worthy of eternal damnation to resist the Powers ordained of God. Put the case that Princes will not only not purge the Church of Heresies and false worship but what is worse * Id. qu. 12. p. 58. will defend those corruptions by their Authority yet in this case the people ought not to reform 1. Because God requires from Subjects to suffer whatsoever the Magistrate can inflict rather than desert the true Religion but not to compel the Magistrate for Religion is to be defended not by killing others but by dying for it our selves not by cruelty but by patience not by wickedness but by fidelity says Lactantius 2. When the people undertake such an action without the Prince's consent it is Rebellion now evil is not to be done that good may come thereof let such Men take to themselves whatever Names they please they are Traytors not Christians L. there will be great danger in so doing for should they get the Power they cannot make Laws * Qu. 17. What shall be able to keep a Man within the duty of a good Subject who will not be bound by Oaths †Qu. 30. Criminals of the Superiour Order i.e. Kings c. God hath reserv'd to his own Court and Judgment SECT XII I will not quote Arch-Bishop Laud because the Adversaries to this Doctrine aver that it was of his inventing but instead of him I will call for an unquestionable witness Arch-Bishop Usher who expresly order'd * Clavi Trabales p. 52. That Loyalty should according to the Canon be four times every year preach'd to the people while his actions were a plain Comment upon his Opinions I need not mention the regard the forein Protestant Divines had to him and the Romanists too especially Cardinal Richelieu as well as those of our own Country * Apud eund Sanders pref to the Bishop's Book While I inform the Reader that in the beginning of our most unhappy Commotions the Lord Deputy of Ireland Strafford desired the Primate Usher to declare his judgment publickly concerning those Tumults which he did in two Sermons at Christ-Church in Dublin on Eccles 7.2 Whereupon the Deputy signified it would be acceptable to the King to print the Sermons or to write a Treatise on the Subject the latter the Arch-Bishop made choice of and sent it into England with an intent to have it printed as the Martyr Charles design'd that his Subjects might receive the satisfaction from the same as himself had done In the time of the Usurper Cromwel it was not thought fit to be printed lest it might have been perverted to the support of his Power For by this time the flatterers of that great Tyrant had learn'd by a new device upon the bare account of Providence without respect to the justice of the Title the only right and proper foundation to interpret and apply to his advantage whatsoever they found either in the Scriptures or in other Writings concerning the Power of Princes or the duty of Subjects profanely and sacrilegiously taking the Name of that holy Providence of God in vain and using it onely as a stalking Horse to serve the lusts and interests of ambitious Men. In the first part of that learned Treatise the Bishop proves that the Power of the Prince is from God and that * Part. 1. §. vi p. vi Our Government is a free Monarchy because the Authority resteth solely in the person of the King whereupon it is declar'd that the King is the onely Supreme Governour of these Realms in all Causes whatsoever which could not stand if either the Court of Parliament it self or any other power upon Earth might in any cause over-rule him I say any Power whither forein or domestick and then * §. 28. He discourses at large as of the original of Regal power from Heaven so of the Law of the King proceeding in the second part to treat of the Obedience of the Subject * V. p. 109. 111 134 c. In which he plainly shews that whither the Power be good or bad whosoever does resist it by withdrawing his service from it or denying Tribute or not giving that honour to it which he ought to give resisteth the Ordinance and disposition of God by whose appointment they bear Rule * P. 145. 146. Quest But how are Subjects to carry themselves when such things are enjoined as cannot or ought not to be done R. surely not to accuse the Commander but humbly to avoid the command and when nothing else will serve the turn as in things that may be done we are to express our subjection by active so in things that cannot be done we are to declare the same by passive obedience without resistance and repugnancy such a kind of suffering being as sure a sign of subjection as any thing else whatsoever He P. 147 c. that consults with flesh and bloud will hardly be induc'd to admit this Doctrine of passive Obedience and therefore if he will learn this Lesson he must make choice of better Masters and listen in the first place to Solomon Prov. 3.5
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
secured by a patient submitting to persecuting Princes it being manifest from thence that Christianity was so far from being destroyed by the Blood of its many Martyrs that on the contrary it thrived and propagated it self by it Pag. 260. From that second Plea pass we to a third which is taken from those Oaths which Kings do commonly make before they are solemnly crowned of governing the People by the Laws the Government as some think seeming thereby to arise from a Compact between them and their Subjects upon the breach whereof on the King's part it may be lawful for the Subject to depart from their Allegiance and resist him in the Execution of his Power For Answer to which not to tell you what intolerable Mischiefs would ensue from such a Tenet as often as any seditious Man should go about to persuade the People they were not so well governed as they ought I will alledge in behalf of our own Princes farther than which we shall not need to look that which will cut the Throat of this Objection to wit That our Kings are to as full purpose such before their Coronation as after witness not only their performing all the Acts of a King but that known Maxim in our Laws that the King of England never dies From whence as it will follow that as the Kings of this Nation owe not their being such to any compact between them and their People that upon any supposed breach thereof it might be lawful for the Subject to resist them so also that the Oaths taken by them at their Coronation are not to procure them that Power which otherwise they could not have but for the encouraging the People to yield the more ready Obedience to them which they may very well do when they who are to govern plight their Faith and Reputation to govern them according to their own Laws Mr. Scrivener Book I. Part I. Of the Original Government p. 93. The Arguments to affirm that the grosser Body of the People did first of all agree upon Government and constitute their Ruler are 1. Ridiculous 2. Sacrilegious and impious 3. Impossible 4. Pestilential and pernicious to all Government 'T is a true Saying It is more to make a King than to be a King. Still I hold-this which I have not found shaken by the many Attempts of innovating Wits That there is a real Paternal Power in lawful Princes For 't is not Choice but Power that makes a King and in this case no power at all is given or can be given nor in truth ought to be taken away as the manner is from Princes entring through the Populacy into the Throne for God only is the proper and immediate Author of Right and Power which he hath inserted into Parents over their Children and hath proportionably prescribed to Kings and Princes without ever advising with the People or expecting their Consent or Confirmation This the Scripture it self calls Jus Imperii or lâ—ss significantly with us The manner of the King 1 Sam. viii 9. Not from the People but from God. Pag. 94. The most therefore that the People do when they act most in creating Kings is under God to apply the Person to the Place or Office of Governing Pag. 95. Grant that all Men were once but no body could ever tell when and in a certain place but no body could ever tell where equally free or at least all of years of Discretion which is most uncertain it would be known first how Men dare to be so presumptuous as to make such a breach of the Law of Nature as this must be viz. To part with their Birth right and to imbezzle that which God had given them concomitantly with their own Lives And this is further confirmed from the impossibility as well as impiety of making any such Translation of Power from its natural Subject the People because it cannot ever fairly or justly be brought about seeing that the People cannot unanimously much less ever did concur to the Election of any one Government or Governor They cannot all give in their Votes to such an end always some were dissenting and if they did not enter their Protest against the proceeding of their Fellows it must be because they were deterred curbed and oppressed by a more prevalent Faction obliging them and constraining them most unjustly to comply with their Opinions and Decrees for there appears no sound reason why a more numerous and powerful Faction may not as well take away my Estate because they are stronger than I as take away my Birth-right which Liberty is here asserted to be So that the very first step to Liberty must be founded in Injustice in taking away that from me which I might no less in natural reason spoil them of and in Servitude too in bringing me whom they acknowledge naturally free into unwilling Subjection Neither is the difficulty solved in saying That Reason and Nature also require that for order sake and regulating humane Society the minor part must yield to the major for upon this Supposition indeed that Power is so absurdly and inconveniently posited there doth presently appear such a necessity but my Argument is taken from the absurdity of any such necessity of Natures creating that the Supposition is very false and if it were true yet were not that Maxim true which is here brought to controul and correct the same for Nature doth not teach us much less necessitate us in any case to follow the most numerous but rather Reason and Experience and the Judgment of diligent and wise Discussers of this Point inform us That the Multitude are more inconsiderate undiscerning and injudicious than the fewer in number many times the World being generally thicker set with Fools than wise Men and Fools being commonly more apt to be led by Fools than with deeper and sounder Reasons of the Wise Pag. 96 97. The Right of Rule in the People is look'd upon as by Nature and Divine Ordinance belonging to them and therefore cannot de jure be transferred or if attempted must needs by the same Right be revocable Finding themselves most commonly destitute of that advantage they proceed to expound it more to their purpose tyrannical and boldly affirm That by the People is not meant necessarily the most but the best and soberest and godliest and such only that study really the Good of Religion and the Liberties of the People And are not these sine Doings Do not these popular Tenets hang well together and end well which in process of their own Reason and Practices confute the very first Principle of all viz. That People have an absolute supream Power to frame Governments when before they can bring matters to their intended conclusion they are forc'd to deny them Of the Obligations between the Governors and Governed p. 103. It cannot either consist with the Law of God or Nations to inflict Punishments on Princes Sovereign Not but that for instance Murder Adultery unjust
careful our blessed Saviour was to pay all due respects to any person invested with Authority and that St. Peter recommends a meek behaviour even towards them from whom we receive hard measure P. 94. That such a continued respect and practice of duty to Governours even under hard usage is that which Conscience to God will oblige to perform This duty of respectful submission is not founded upon the good temper of our Superiours but upon the Authority they receive from God and the Precepts which God hath thereupon given to us P. 97. Obj. But if Religion be concern'd and in danger doth it not behove every good Man to be zealous c. Ans 1. It is requisite he should be zealous in the diligent exercise of a holy Life and in frequent and devout prayer c. But he must not be active as an evil doer in giving himself the liberty to behave himself undutifully towards his Superiours 2. Religion can never be so in danger that God can need any sinful practices of Men to uphold his interest his Kingdom is not so weak that it cannot stand without the affistance of the works of the Devil P. 99. 3. Religion can never be opposed with greater enmity and malicious designs than it was when our Saviour suffered and yet then he reviled not P. 100. nor allow'd St. Peter's rashness The Jews aimed utterly to root out the Christian Name and there were great oppositions against Religion even fiery Tryals 1 Pet. 4.12 When yet Saint Peter requires Christians to follow the Example of our Lord's patience and meekness and to reverence Superiours 4. True zeal for Religion consists in pious and holy living not in passionate and sinful speaking To Dr. Falkner I should join his Pupil Dr. Sherlock but his Book of Non resistance is so strong and his arguments from Scripture so cogent that it is needless to make any extracts out of it and till his Adversary writes both a more becoming and a more demonstrative Answer it will be still by all wise Men look'd upon as unanswerable SECT XXIX Among the unanswerable Treatises I also reckon Dr. Hicks the Dean of Worcester's Jovian for unless scurrility confidence and a desertion of the main Argument may pass for an Answer the Reply that is yet extant deserves no Rejoinder Out of that Elaborate Commentary on the Doctrine of Passive Obedience I shall only quote one passage because it is a History of the Author's Principles and Resolution I had rather dye a Martyr than a Rebel P. 259 and I resolve by God's assistance neither to turn Papist nor Resist but if I cannot escape I will suffer according to the Gospel and the Church of England and I will Preach and Practise Passive Obedience after the example of the Prophets and Martyrs who suffered against Law and in my most melancholy prospect of things I can comfort my self with the hopes of a reward for dying at a Stake which he shall never have for dying in the Field To this purpose also the Sermon at Bow-Church Jan. 30. 1681 / 2. Together with the same Author's Artillery Sermon are worth the perusing Dr. South I have read heretofore of some Serm. 2. p. 80 81. that having conceived an irreconcileable hatred of the Civil Magistrate prevailed with Men so far that they went to resist him even out of Conscience and a full perswasion and dread upon their spirits ☜ that not to do it were to desert God and consequently to incur Damnation Now when Mens rage is both heightened and sanctified by Conscience the War will be fierce for what is done out of Conscience is done with the utmost activity and then Campanella 's Speech to the King of Spain will be found true Religio semper vicit praesertim armata which sentence deserves seriously to be considered by all Governors and timely understood lest it come to be felt P. 212. P. 236. We have seen Rebellion commented out of Rom. xiii He that makes his Prince despised and undervalued blows a Trumpet against him in Mens Hearts c. * See Dr. Freeman's Ser. before the L. Mayor 1682. p. 8. P. 242 243. To imagine a King without Majesty a Supreme without Sovereignty is a Paradox and direct contradiction The Church of England glories in nothing more than that she is the truest friend to Kings and to Kingly Government of any other Church in the World. It is the happiness of some Professions and Callings that they can equally square themselves to and thrive under all Revolutions of Government but the Clergy of England neither know nor affect that happiness and are willing to be despised for not doing so And so far is our Church from encroaching upon the Civil Power as some who are back-friends to both would maliciously insinuate that were it stript of the very remainder of its privileges and made as like the Primitive Church for its bareness as it is already for its Purity it could chearfully and what is more Loyally want all such Privileges and in the want of them pray that the Civil Power may flourish as much and stand as secure from the assaults of Fanatick Anti-Monarchical Principles grown to such a dreadful height during the Churches late confusions as it stood while the Church enjoyed those Privileges Dr. Serm. on Heb x. 36. p. 2. John Moor. Our Saviour was the first that did effectually recommend this Passive Virtue to the World and furnished Men with such true Arguments to bear their Cross as made the most afflicted state not only supportable but to be preferred before the happiness of this life P. 16 17. A good Man when he is persecuted for his Religion neither deserts it nor by any unlawful means defends it He will not renounce his Faith to escape Persecution and yet he dreads by resisting of Authority to promote the cause of Religion P. 19. it being a blasphemy against the Divine Wisdom and Power to suppose God can stand in need of our sins to bring to pass his most glorious designs and this he says of those who under pretence of defending their Rights or Religion resist lawful Authority He then in whom this virtue of Patience dwells keeps a due regard to the commands laid upon him to submit himself to the Supreme Powers and he dares not lift up his Hand against the Lords Anointed ☞ nor Levy War upon the most plausible account whatsoever nay to him it cannot but seem a wonder that the Doctrin of Resistance should have gone down so glibly with any who have read the New Testament and are baptised into the Christian Faith. All Resistance to the Supreme Authority is unlawful The Popes of Rome being the first pretenders from Scripture to a right to resist the Civil Power P. 20 21. c. And it is most certain that by the same Argument they would take off their obligation to this plain Christian Duty they
suffer for our Duty to him then ☜ and shall not fail should there ever be occasion to do it again And we have this Testimony from our King which no time nor malice shall be able to obliterate That the Church of England is by Principle a Friend to Monarchy and I think cannot be charged to have ever been defective in any thing that might serve to strengthen and support it And in the Tract It is said in the Gospel Pag. 72. that Michael the Archangel disputing with the Devil would not bring any railing Accusation against him but was content to say to him only The Lord rebuke thee Because he looked upon God as him to whom Judgment and Vengeance belonged and yet we see that the Sons of Adam are bold and desperate enough not only to condemn but to destroy Dignities which they ought to reverence and to ruin them together with whole States as their fancy leads them Agreeable to what Dr. Dr. Beveridge's Serm concerning the Excellency and Usefulness of the Common Prayer Nov. 27. 1681. Pag. 34. l Beveridge hath upon the like occasion What our grand Adversary had done before by the Papists he afterwards brought about again by other means in the Reign of King Charles the First For by what kind of Spirit the Common Prayer was then cast out you all know and some of you found by woful experience All that I shall say of it is only this That the same Spirit that then stirred up them so violently against the Common Prayer stirred them up at the same time to rebel against their King contrary to all Law and Justice And whether that was the Spirit of Christ or Antichrist God or the Devil judge you Dr. Ironside * Serm. at Court Nov. 23. on 1 Pet. 4.15 p. 1 6. P. 8 9. S. Peter gives this Injunction as an Apostle not as a Statesman Of all Principles Obedience to Magistrates the great Eye-sore and the Execution of Justice the Support of the World will be always necessary to be taught and pressed upon the Conscience We are forbidden all kind of Revenge when others injure us in our Names Goods or Persons This was the Doctrine of our Saviour and this was the Practice of our Saviour Revenge is God's and he executes it 1. Immediately by himself and that sometime in this World always in the next 2. Mediately by the Power deputed to Men and the Magistrates are called Gods in that respect pag. 21. Suffer we must for Truth not defend or propagate it by violence and in this agree the Harmony of Confessions in all Reformed Churches whatsoever some turbulent Spirits of Scotland have written to the contrary pag. 27. Inferiors have no Right to meddle with Superiors at all unless it be to defend and obey nothing else no not so much as to counsel unless called to it much less to reprove sawcily pag. 32. or contumeliously to expose c. It is very observable how particular the Apostles are in laying out the respective Duties of Inferiors Obedience in this World is the great thing the Sins of Superiors are remitted to the other World ☞ and then great Men shall be greatly tormented p. 35 36 37 38. The Acts of the Apostles and the Life and Death of Christ are perfect submission to the Imperial Laws It is therefore a true and wise saying ☞ Sedition is worse than Murther and it is pity the Saying is found so often in the Alcoran and so seldom to be met with in the Practice of Christians There be three sins in the New Testament which are threatened with signal Judgments in this Life 1. The first is doing evil that good may come thereof such men's damnation saith the Apostle is just 2. Profaning the Sacrament of the Lord's Supper 3. Profaning the Supreme Powers they that resist shall receive to themselves damnation That is these three sins make men liable not only to the Divine Wrath hereafter for so all sins without repentance expose to damnation but usually they are also attended with signal Judgments in this life and so let it be upon all the Troublers of the Earth that our Kings may be at rest and that we may lead a quiet life in all Godliness and Honesty SECT XXXI Dr. Isaac Barrow †Vol. 1. Serm. 10. p. 135. Are Princes bad or do they misdemean themselves in their Administration of Government or Justice We may not by any violent or rough way attempt to reclaim them for they are not accountable to us or liable to our Correction Do they oppress us or abuse us do they treat us harshly or cruelly persecute us We must not kick against them nor strive to right our selves by resistance We must not so much as rail or inveigh against them we must not be bold or free in taxing their Actions we must forbear even complaining and murmuring against them ☜ we must not so much as curse them in our thoughts To do these things is flat impiety against God and an invasion of his Authority who is the King of Kings and hath reserved to himself the prerogative of judging of rebuking of punishing Kings when he findeth Cause These were the Misdemeanors of those in the late times discovering therein great profaneness of mind and distrust of God's Providence as if God being implored by Prayer could not or would not had it been needful without such irregular Courses have redressed those Evils in Church or State which they pretended to feel or fear Pag. 136. In the primitive times prayers and tears were the only Arms of the Church whereby they long defended it from ruin and at last advanced it to a most glorious prosperity So Dr. Cave ‖ Primitive Christian part 3. ch 4. p. 321. There is scarce any particular instance wherein the primitive Christianity did more triumph in the World than in their exemplary Obedience to the Powers and Magistrates under which they lived honoring their persons revering their power paying their Tribute obeying their Laws wherein they were not evidently contrary to the Laws of Christ and when they were submitting to the most cruel Penalties they laid upon them with the greatest calmness and serenity of Soul Pag. 329 330. c. They were not patient for want of Power and because they knew not how to help it Julian's Army which was almost wholly made up of Christians ☞ withstood him only with prayers and tears accounting this saith S. Greg. Naz. to be the only Remedy against Persecution Pag. 351. I verily believe that had the Primitive Christians been no better Subjects than their Emperors were Princes had they practised on them those bloody Artifices which have been common among those that call themselves the only Catholicks that barbarous Dealing would have been a greater Curb to the flourishing of the Gospel ☞ than all the ten Persecutions for how could an impartial Heathen ever have believed
old saying Let us do evil that good may come thereof cries out that they speak Blasphemy and that such mens damnation is just as if he were pronouncing an Anathema Maranatha against such profane Men. But our modern Zelots how contrary are they to St. Paul They seem to have minded that one thing that they might exclude the King from his rightful Succession due to him by Inheritance and by the Laws of the Land c. Peter du Moulin * Vit. Molinaei Lond. 4◠p. 707. When he returned into France from England with much grief saw the Protestants ingaged in the Party of the Prince of Conde against the Queen Mother which War was indeed raised against the King himself and endeavoured both by his Sermons and his Letters to remove them from so unlawful a design †V. Du Moulin answ to Philan. Angl. p. 37. and the King's Party owes it to him that not one Protestant Town on this side the Loire joyned it self to the Prince of Condé And when he was forc'd to leave France and fix at Sedan the first Letter that he wrote was to the Commonwealth of Rochel as it was then called ' To persuade them to Peace to dissolve their Covnention and to throw themselves as they ought on the Kings Mercy advising them to obey the King and thereby to take away all pretence from their Enemies And if God saw fit that they should suffer extremity for every one that feared God would be sure to suffer for no other cause but for the Profession of the Gospel c. Nay du Moulin the Son says Ubi Supr p. 45. that the actions of the Men of Rochel were disallowed by the best and the most of their Church That they were exhorted to their Duty by their Divines And that this was the Sense of the National Synod of which du Moulin was the President but two months before he wrote his Letter This also is du Moulin's Doctrine * P. 795 c. Ed. Genev. 1635. in his Buckler of Faith That the Government of Kings is by Divine Right and founded upon the Ordinance of God and that God hath required Obedience to Magistrates as to those whom he hath established and that whosoever resisteth them resisteth God and that those who affirm that the Authority of Kings is of Human Institution put Kings upon maintaining their Interests by force c. That that Allegiance of Subjects is firm which is incorporated in Piety and is esteemed a part of Religion and of the service which we owe to God. And whatever the learned Hugo Grotius might have said in his Books de Jure Belli Grot. in Mat. xxvi 52. Pacis in his later Works wherein it may presumed he speaks his truest Sense he asserts this Doctrine which it appears he had well studied as if he had been a Member of the English Church whose Articles and Politie he so well understood and in whose Communion he resolved to have lived had not God in his Providence ordered it otherwise If it be once admitted says he that private Men when they are injured by the Magistrate may forceably resist him all places would be full of Tumults and no Laws or Judicatures would have any Authority since there is no Man who is not inclined to favour himself To this purpose * Vot pro pace ad art 16. pag. 66 〈◊〉 662. he censures the Practices and Writings of many of the French Church still excepting Camero confirming his Opinion by the Authority of King James and the Reasons of the University of Oxford that condemned Paraeus's Book †Animadver in animadv Riveti art 16. p. 644. For both Christ and his Apostles Peter and Paul have Preached the Doctrine that no force is to be opposed to the Supreme Power and that we ought to own and retain the Doctrine to be of Divine Right and Institution The Opinion of Monsieur Bochart the glory of the French Churche sis fully seen in his Epistle to Bishop Morley who among other reasons refused to Communicate with the Reformed Church in France because he thought they asserted the Doctrine of Resisting and Deposing Kings but Bochart expresly avers That the King is Gods Anointed and Lieutenant and so not in any case to be Resisted since he is accountable to none but God. That he who rises against his Prince is one of those Giants that fight against God. That David could not take away the Wife of Uriah Nor Ahab seize Naboth's Vineyard without being guilty of great sin but that when Samuel 1 Sam. viii 9. says of the King He shall take your sons and your daughters c. He means that when Kings commit such transgressions they are as uncontrolable as if the Actions had been lawful That in such cases a Nation ought to call upon God since there are no Human remedies against the force of a King for if a King may be resisted he cannot be a Sovereign for where Subjects may Resist they may Judge and consequently the Sovereignty is in them That when Julian Persecuted contrary to Law none of his Soldiers rose up against him though nothing was more easie would they have undertaken it since at his death it was plain that almost the whole Army was Christian David Blondel * De Formula Regnante Christo Sect. 2. §. 16. p. 172. p. 184. chastises Pope Gregory VII as for many other Usurpations upon Princes so for this among the rest for saying That a Prince hath his Power from the People contrary to what S. Paul says expresly of Nero that he was ordained of God affirming further that lawful Kings being guilty of ill management of their Power are accountable to and shall be punished by God who gave them that Power Pag. 187 but not to Men. That this Opinion that Kings were subject to any human Authority was brought into the Church near 1100 years after our Saviour came into the World when the Church could not be presumed to be in a better condition than it was when it flourished in the former Ages of Christianity And that no Man before Greg. VII ever owned the Power of any Man over Kings And this he proves from the Testimonies of Tertullian Pag. 188. Hosius of Corduba Basil Ambrose Hierom Arnobius junior Cassiodore and others who say That King David was above the coercive power of the Law nor could be called to account for his Faults And therefore says in his Confession to God Against thee only have I sinned If Subjects offend against the Laws of Justice the King corrects them but if the King offends who shall correct him None but he who is Justice it self all other persons are under the Restraint of Laws but Kings only are reserved to the Tribunal of God and therefore while according to the Apostle it is a terrible thing to fall into the Hands of the Living God it will be more terrible to Kings who have none on
Bishop Hacket P. 135 Dr. Plume ibid. Archbishop Sandcroft P. 136 Bishop Morley ibid. Bishop Wren P. 140 Bishop Laney ibid. Bishop Pearson ibid. Bishop Turner P. 141 Bishop Fell. P. 144 Bishop Thomas ibid. Earl of Clarendon ibid. Sir Robert Filmer P. 146 Sir Wid. Dugdale ibid. Dr. Lake Bishop of Chichester ibid. Dr. Allestrey P. 147 Dr. Sherlock ibid. Dr. H. Bâ—â—shaw P. 148 Dr. Falkner P. 149 Bishop Crofts P. 150 Dr. Griffith ibid. Dr. Jane P. 151 Dr. Outrant ibid. Sir Orlando Bridgman ibid. Sir Hencage Finch P. 152 The Harmony of Divinity and Law. ibid. Mr. Foulit ibid. Bishop Spratt ibid. Dr. Pâ—â—â—ck ibid. Dr. Fitz-Williams P. 153 Mr. Wagstaffe P. 154 Dr. Bisby ibid. Dr. Bernard ibid. Oxford notes on Josephus ibid. Dr. South P. 155 Several Addresses P. 156 Dr. Stillingfleet P. 157 Dr. Tennison P. 163 Dr. Patrick P. 166 Dr. Tillotson P. 167 Dr. Meggot P. 168 Dr. Hardy ibid. Dr. Goodman ibid. Dr. Burnet P. 169 Dr. Littleton P. 172 Dr. Will. Saywell ibid. Dr. Dove P. 174 Dr. Maurice P. 175 Dr. Williams P. 176 Dr. Grove P. 177 Dr. Staince ibid. Dr. Wake P. 180 Dr. Fowler P. 181 Mr. Evans ibid. Dr. Comber ibid. Dr. Pelling P. 182 Dr. Pierce P. 184 Dr. Whitby ibid. Mr. Lâ—ng P. 185 Dr. Fuller ibid. Dr. Sclater ibid. Dr. Hickman P. 186 Mr. Jos Pleydall ibid. Mr. Jemmat ibid. Mr. Stainforth ibid. Mr. David Jenner P. 187 Mr. Hancock ibid. John Goodwin P. 188 Mr. Smalridge ibid. Mr. Graile ibid. Mr. Pomfret P. 189 Mr. Nicholas Claget ibid. Dr. Carswell Vic. of Bray P. 190 CHAP. I. The Doctrine of Passive Obedience in the Reign of King Henry the Eighth when the Reformation of Religion was begun SECT I. THe two Hinges upon which the Papal Grandeur moves are the Supremacy and the Infallibility of S. Peter's Successor by the first they affright Princes from attempting a Reformation since no Man ought to controul his Superior who could excommunicate and depose him and by the second they exclude all complaints of inferior persons for what alterations ought to be made in a Church that cannot err Hereby they formerly kept the world in ignorance and a blind subjection for many Ages till it pleased God in great mercy to instruct the world that Princes were accountable to God alone whose Vicegerents they were and that all Bishops were in spiritual matters equally the Successors of our holy Saviour and his Apostles that no Man was free either from Vice or Error and that the Popes in a more especial manner had been guilty of both Idolatry and Heresie as well as gross and notorious Immoralities Among the Princes of Christendom King Henry the Eighth of England begun very early to assert his Rights and the he made not a complete Reformation himself dying in the Romish Communion as great Designs cannot be perfected in a moment yet the present Age owes to that great Prince its thanks for his abandoning the Peope his allowing the holy Scriptures in the English Tongue his abolishing many Shrines and Images to which the common People paid Idolatrous Worship and many other such Blessings In his days * Ann. 1536. Stephen Gardiner Bishop of Winchester wrote his Book De Verâ Obedientiâ to which Bonner wrote a Preface a Book so well thought of by the eminent Protestants beyond Sea Printed in 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that Melchior Goldâ—sâ—us hath given it a place in his accurate Collection of Writers for the Power of Kings against the Papal Usurpations which Book was translated into English anno 1553. and therein we are taught this Doctrine In that place God hath set Princes whom as Representers of his Image unto men he would have to be reputed in the supreme and most high room and to excel among all other human Creatures as S. Peter writeth and that the same Princes reign by his Authority as the holy Proverbs make report By me saith God Kings reign insomuch that after Paul 's saying Whosoever resisteth the power resisteth the Ordinance of God. Which Paul opening that plainly unto Titus which he speaketh here generally commanded him to warn all men to obey their Princes Paul without difference biddeth men obey those Princes that bear the Sword. S. Peter speaketh of Kings by name Christ himself commandeth tribute to be paid unto Caesar and checked his Disciples for striving who should be the greatest Kings of the Nations quoth he bear rule over them declaring plainly in so great variety of Degrees and Orders which God doth garnish this world withal that the Dominion and Authority pertaineth to none but to Princes But here some man will say to me you travail about that that no man is in doubt of for who ever denied that the Prince ought to be obeyed It is most certain that he that will not obey the Prince is worthy to die for it as it is comprehended in the Old Law and also confirmed in the New Law. Obj. But we must see will he say that the King do not pass the Limits appointed him ☞ as tho there must be an Arbiter for the ordering of his Limits for it is certain that Obedience is due but how far the Limits of requiring Obedience extend that is all the whole Question that can be demanded What manner of Limits are those that ye tell me of Sol. seeing the Scripture hath none such but generally speaking of Obedience which the Subject is bounden to do unto the Prince the Wife unto the Husband or the Servant to the Master it hath not added so much as one syllable of Exception but only hath preserved the Obedience due to God safe and whole ☞ that we should not hearken unto any man's word in all the world against God else the Sentences that command Obedience are indefinite or without exception but are of indifferent force universally so that it is but lost labor for you to tell me of Limits which cannot be proved by any Testimony of Scripture We are commanded doubtless to obey in that consisteth our Office which if we mind to go about with the favour of God and man we must needs shew humbleness of heart in obeying authority how grievous soever it be for God's sake not questioning nor enquiring what the King what the Master or what the Husband ought or may command others to do and if they take upon them either of their own head or when it is offered them more than right and reason is they have a Lord unto whom they either stand or fall and that shall one day sit in Judgment even of them We have by testimony of God's Word shewn that a Prince's mighty Power is not gotten by flattery or by privilege of the people but given of God. Christ sought not an earthly Kingdom but the state of Orders remaining still he set forth and taught the Form of Heavenly Conversation which he by his own doings declared to consist in humility and contempt of worldly things when
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
such a case Men may refuse to obey else in all other matters we ought to obey what Laws soever they make as concerning outward things we ought to obey and in no wise to rebel though they be never so hard noysom and hurtful Our duty is to obey and to commit all the matters to God not doubting but that God will punish them when they do contrary to their office and calling therefore tarry till God correct them we may not take upon us to reform them ☞ for it is no part of our duty If the Robels I say had consider'd this think you they would have preferr'd their own will before God's will for doing as they did they prayed against themselves * Id. Serm. on Ep 21. Sund after Trinity p. 196 197 Subjects may not of their own private autority take the sword or rebel against their King for when they rebel they serve the Devil for they have no commission of God so to do but of their own head they rise against God that is against the King to whom they owe obedience and so worthily be punish'd therefore good Christian People beware of rebelling against our Sovereign Lord the King. ‖ Id. 24. Sund after Trin. p. 216. The calling of the Subjects is to be obedient unto the Magistrates not to rebel against them for if they do they strive against God himself and shall be punish'd of him Another cause why Christ was circumcised is Id. Serm. on the Twelfth day p. 291. to be obedient unto common orders therefore he would suffer rather to be circumcised than to give occasion of hurly burly or uproar for the will of the Father was that Subjects should obey Magistrates and keep orders Subjecti estote cuivis potestati be obedient unto them c. look what Laws and Ordinances are made by the Magistrates we ought to obey them and this is to be understood as well in spiritual matters as temporal matters so far forth as the Laws be not against God and his Word When they will move us to do any thing against God then we must say Oportet magis obedire Deo quam hominibus we must be more obedient unto God than Man ☞ yet we may not withstand them with stoutness or rise up against them but suffer whatsoever they shall do unto us for we may for nothing in the World rebel against the Office of God that is to say against the Magistrate CHAP. III. The Doctrine of Passive Obedience in the Reign of Queen Mary SECT I. UPon the Death of King Edward VI. so prevalent were the two Families of Northumberland and Suffolk that they made a great Party to oppose the legal Succession of the Right Heir their abettors being countenanc'd and encouraged by the last Testament of King Edward but as * Cent. 16. p. 1. Fuller rightly observes the Will of the Duke of Northumberland but whatever was done in defence of the Lady Jane Grey was contrary to the Doctrine of the Church of England which taught her Children better and more wholsom Doctrine and though Archbishop Cranmer were one of the Subscribers to that Will and to the Letter sent after Edward the sixth's Death to Queen Mary yet there is much to be said in Apology for him For first Cranmer ‖ Heyl. Hist of the Refor p. 152. Fox Burnet and Godwin c. of all the Privy Council was the last that stood out having at first positively refused to sign the Will and after much reasoning and many arguments urged for the Queens Illegitimation required a longer time of deliberation and at last could be overcome by nothing but the King 's own restless importunity To whom the Archbishop had as he ought a great regard and this his resolution so prevail'd upon his Judges that though at first they committed him to the Tower with the Lady Jane Fox tom 2. p. 1289. and the Duke of Northumberland's Sons for High Treason yet though they prosecuted his Fellow Prisoners on that Statute they let fall their Action against him and prosecuted him only for Heresie to his great joy as Fox relates it The same ‖ p 1698. Author assuring us that Dr. Heath afterwards Archbishop of York did affirm to one of Archbishop Cranmer's Friends that notwithstanding his Attainder of Treason the Queens Determination at that time was that Cranmer should only have been deprived of his Archbishoprick and had a sufficient Living assign'd him with commandment to keep his House without meddling in matters of Religion Secondly that the Archbishop was encouraged so to do * Id. ibid. by the Example of all the Nobles of the Realm and the States and Judges Sir James Hales only excepted for the Lord Chief Justice Mountague had after much ado subscribed the Lawyers especially assuring him that it was no breach of his former Oath so to do And it is well known that if any thing exasperated Queen Mary against him it was not the signing of King Edward's Will but her Mother's Divorce which Cranmer so actively promoted Thirdly The Reasons were specious both from * Hâ—yl Hist Reform ann 1553. p. 151 152. Burn. par 2. p 223. Law and Policy as they were then stiled that both the Sisters were declared illegitimate and that by Act of Parliament and that were they not so yet being but of the half Blood to the King by the Law they could not succeed nor could any Foreigner by the same Law. And that the Duchess of Suffolk had waved her Title and then the Right was in the Lady Jane that this was the only way to preserve the Nation from the Vassalage and Servitude of the Bishop of Rome and from subjecting the Realm to Foreigners if the Sisters should marry out of it Fourthly Par 2 hist l. 1. p. 224. Dr. Burnet affirms that as nothing but the King 's own importunities could prevail on the Archbishop so it 's probable that he signed it only as a Witness and not as Counsellor according to a Distinction then found out by Sir William Cecil Secretary of State. But lastly This act was no Declaration of the Archbishop's Judgment in the Case of the Deprivation Deposition or resisting of Kings against which he protested through the whole tenor of his life He it was that was if not the Author * Fox p. 1697. yet the main Contriver Approver and Publisher of the Book of the Reformation the Catechism with the Book of Homilies as also of the Necessary Erudition of a Christian Man. In which Books the Power of Kings and the Necessity of Obedience together with the wretched Estate of Rebels and such as resist Authority is plainly set forth He calls the Insurrection against †Vide Herbert Hâ—â—â— 3. p. 457 King John as much as others magnifie it and what followed it plain Rebellion And having contrary to that Truth suffered himself to be over-persuaded in this one particular he publickly
acknowledges to the World his Crime and begs God's and the Queen's pardon for what he had done as appears by more than one of his Letters which are preserved to this day being set out by Miles Coverdale Bishop of Exon and some of them by John Fox and by this in particular Thomas Cranmer Archbishop of Canterbury to Queen Mary Most lamentably mourning Coverd Collect. fol. 1 2 c. and moaning himself unto your Highness Thomas Cranmer altho unworthy either to write or speak unto your Highness yet having no person that I know to be Mediator for me and knowing your pitiful Ears ready to hear all pitiful Complaints and seeing so many before to have felt your abundant clemency in like case and now constrain'd most lamentably and with most penitent and sorrowful heart to ask mercy and pardon for my heinous Folly and Offence in consenting and following the last Will of our Sovereign Lord King Edward the Sixth your Grace's Brother which Will God knoweth ☜ God he knoweth I never liked nor never any thing grieved me so much as that your Grace's Brother did and if by any means it had been in me to have letted the making of that Will I would have done it and what I said therein as well to his Council as to himself divers of your Majesties Council can report but none so well as the Marquess of Northampton and the Lord Darcy which two were then present at the Communication between the King's Majesty and me I desired to talk with the King's Majesty alone but I could not be suffered and so I failed of my purpose for if I might have communed with the King alone and at good leisure my trust was that I should have altered him from that purpose but they being present my labor was in vain Then when I could not dissuade him from the said Will and both he and his Privy Council also informed me that the Judges and his Learned Council said That the Act of entailing the Crown made by his Father could not be prejudicial to him but that he being in possession of the Crown might make his Will thereof this seemed very strange to me but being the Sentence of the Judges and other his Learned Council in the Laws of this Realm as both he and his Council informed me methought it became not me being unlearned to the Law to stand against my Prince therein and so at length I was required by the King's Majesty himself to set my hand to his Will saying that he trusted that I alone would not be more repugnant to his Will than the rest of the Council were which words surely grieved my heart very sore and so I granted him to subscribe his Will and to follow the same which when I had set my hand unto I did it unfeignedly and without dissimulation for the which I submit my self most humbly unto your Majesty acknowledging mine Offence with most grievous and sorrowful Heart and beseeching your mercy and pardon which my Heart giveth me shall not be denied unto me being granted before to so many which travelled not so much to dissuade both the King and his Council as I did And whereas it is containad in two Acts of Parliament as I understand that I with the Duke of Northumberland should devise and compass the Deprivation of your Majesty from your Royal Crown surely it is untrue for the Duke never opened his mouth unto me to move me any such matter nor I him nor his Heart was not such towards me seeking long time my Destruction that he would either trust me in such a matter or think that I would be persuaded by him It was other of the Council that moved me and the King himself the Duke of Northumberland not being present Neither before neither after had I any privy communication with the Duke about that matter saving that openly at the Council Table the Duke said unto me that it became not me to say to the King as I did when I went about to dissuade him from the said Will. Now as concerning the State of Religion as it is used in this Realm of England at this present if it please your Higness to license me I would gladly write my mind unto your Majesty I will never ☞ God willing be Author of Sedition to move Subjects from the Obedience of their Heads and Rulers which is an Offence most detestable If I have uttered my mind to your Majesty being a Christian Queen and Governor of this Realm of whom I am most assuredly persuaded that your Gracious Intent is above all other things to prefer God's true Word his Honor and Glory if I have uttered I say my mind unto your Majesty then I shall think my self discharged for it lieth not in me but in your Grace only to see the Reformation of things that be amiss To private Subjects it appertaineth not to reform things but quietly to suffer that they cannot amend yet nevertheless to shew your Majesty my mind in things appertaining unto God methink it my Duty knowing that I do and considering the place which in times past I have occupied Yet will I not presume thereunto without your Grace's Pleasure first known and your License obtained whereof I most humbly prostrate to the ground do beseech your Majesty and I shall not cease daily to pray to Almighty God for the good preservation of your Majesty from all Enemies bodily and ghostly and for the encrease of all Goodness Heavenly and Earthly during my life as I do and will do whatsoever come of me From Oxford Apr. 23. And in his Letter to the Lords of the Council Ibid. Fol. 16. apud Fox tom 2. p. 1331. a little before his Martyrdom sent by Dr. Weston and by him opened and kept he expresseth himself after the same manner In most humble wise sueth unto your Right Honorable Lordships Thomas Cranmer Archbishop of Canterbury beseeching the same to be a means for me unto the Queen's Highness for her mercy and pardon Some of you know by what means I was brought and trained unto the Will of our late Sovereign Lord King Edward the Sixth and what I spake against the same wherein I refer me to the Reports of your Honors And if still this particular Act of the Archbishop be urged as an Argument what his persuasion was as to the Rights of Monarchs it may as well be argued that Popery was then the true Religion because he once signed the Articles of it whereas his Recantation and his voluntary burning of his Right Hand were a true Discovery of his disowning the one as this his reiterated Application to the Queen for her pardon is a demonstration of his renouncing the other SECT II. And as the Archbishop refused a long time to sign this Will so the Lord Chief Justice * Heylin ubi supr p. 152. Fuller Ch. hist l. 8. p. 2 3 c. Montague refused for a long time
and Prophets submitted their persons to those wicked Princes whose Idolatry they reproved with the loss of their lives P. 359. If the Prince wilfully maintain Heresie and open Impiety the Bishops are to reprove admonish c. but still they must serve him honor him pray for him and teach the People to do the like ☜ and with meekness enduring what the wrath of the Prince shall lay upon them without annoying his person resisting his power discharging his Subjects or removing him from his Throne Which says he to the Jesuit is your way of censuring Princes P. 366. P. 382. The Church of Christ offers not any Example of resisting and deposing Princes for a thousand years ☜ It is not enough for you to have Laws of your own making to license you to bear Arms against your Prince you must have God's Law for your Warrant or else you may come within the compass of heinous and horrible Rebellion Theoph. P. 384. that is the Protestant Interlocutor That 's the Case which you take in hand that the People may punish the Prince offending as the Prince may the People Phil. i. e. the Jesuit Either the people or none must do it Theoph. And seeing the people may not do it it is evident that God hath reserved the Magistrate to be punished by himself and not given the people power over their Prince P. 502. Do not with violence restrain them but in patience possess your own souls This is the way for all Christian Subjects to conquer Tyrants and this is the Remedy provided in the New Testament against all Persecutions not to resist Powers which God has ordain'd lest we be damn'd but with all meekness to suffer that we may be crowned P. 512. If Princes presume to violate the Dominion which God hath reserved to himself we may not rebel that 's your Jesuitical Doctrine but disobey them in that or any point that is prescribed by man against the will of God and submit our selves to endure persecution for righteousness sake P. 541. If Princes embrace the Truth you must obey them if they pursue Truth you must abide them And these Passages with what hath been formerly cited out of the said Book will I think sufficiently vindicate both the Author and his Doctrine from all that is usually objected against them Especially if we consider that when the Jesuit had quoted Goodman's Book of Obedience as applauding Wyat's Rebellion the Protestant answers It is much that you measure the whole Realm by one man's merit Par. 3. p. 273 274. and more that you draw the words which he spake from the meaning which he had to warrant your Rebellions The party ☞ which you name at the same time took Queen Mary for no lawful Prince which particular and false supposal beguiled him and made him think the better of Wyat's War but our Question is of lawful Princes not of violent Intruders and therefore Goodman's Opinion which himself hath long since disliked is no way serviceable to your Seditions or as it is in the Margin Goodman's private Opinion long since corrected by himself cannot prejudice the whole Realm Goodman did not hold that lawful Princes might be thrust from their Crowns but that Queen Mary was no lawful Magistrate One of his great Arguments against her being taken from her Sex which was made by God as he dreamed uncapable of Government this being one of his and Knox's beloved Paradoxes but he lived to repent and retract them SECT III. To give the King at his entry into England a Specimen of the temper of the Zealots they tender'd him a Petition called the Mille manus Petition as if they would have intermixed their desires with threatnings by telling the King that 1000 Ministers An. 1603. as they loved to be called had influence enough on many thousands of People to incline them to give disturbance to his Government if he did not comply with their requests to which the University of Oxford wrote a full and satisfactory answer wherein they affirm that the Presbyterians allow the King not potestatem Juris p. 29. but only facti while they make him a maintainer of their proceedings but no commander in them and all the while the King submits his Scepter unto the Scepter of Christ and licks the dust of the Churches feet for which they Quote T. C. lib. 1. p. 180. This assertion they condemn together with the other Antimonarchical Antiepiscopal Doctrins of that Petition nor was this the sole judgment of that Famous University but of her Famous Sister at Cambridge whose Epistle is published at the end of that answer and wherein they aver Quicunque Ecclesiae Anglicanae doctrinam vel disciplinam vel ejus partem aliquam legibus publicis stabilitam c. that whosoever shall by writing speaking or any other way publickly oppose the Doctrine or Discipline of the Church of England or any part thereof established by publick Laws shall be uncapable of taking any Degree and suspended from any Degrees he hath formerly taken Dated Octob. 7. 1603. Dr. Anthony Rudd Bishop of St. pr. at Lond. 1604. Davids Preach'd before the King May 13. 1604. on Ps 101. v. 2. and in it gives an account of David's demeanor both before and after he attained the Crown of Israel and among other things he commends him for his patient waiting on God till Saul's Death p. 26 27. David had given proof of his rare patience in his distressed Estate during the expectancy of the Kingdom of Israel for though in that Interim of sundry years attendance after that Samuel had Anointed him ☜ before the Crown fell unto him by the death of King Saul he sustain'd many grievous troubles inconveniences and dangers yet he still possessed his Soul in patience without seeking unlawful means to hasten his own advancement by the making away of his Sovereign Insomuch as though Saul who deadly pursued him was twice by the Providence of God offer'd into his hands that he might have dâ—ne his pleasure with him first in the Wilderness of Engedi and secondly in the desert of Zâ—ph yet he spared his life and did no violence to his Person leaving him to God's Judgment and referring his own cause to God's merciful providence patiently attending the Lord's leisure till he should vouchsafe to come and put him in possession of the Kingdom To King James at his first coming to the English Throne the Learned Dr. Feild was a Chaplain as he was also an eminent Champion for the Church against her adversaries of Rome and his arguments against the Usurpations of the Popes are equally cogent against the Republicans * of the Church l. 5. c 45. p. 610. If they shall say that Sovereign Princes are subject to none while they use their authority well but that if they abuse it they lose the independent absoluteness thereof their saying will be found to be Heretical
Hereticks his anointing may be wiped off or scraped off then you may write a Book de justa abdicatione make a holy League c. but it is not Religion nor Virtue nor any spiritual Grace this Royal Anointing Christus Domini is said not only of Josias a King truly Religious but of Cyrus a mere Heathen not only of David a good King but of Saul a Tyrant even when he was at the worst Unxit in Regem Royal Unction gives no Grace but a just Title only it includes nothing but a just Title it excludes nothing but usurpation God's claim never forfeits his Character never to be wiped out or scraped out nor Kings lose their Rights no more than Patriarchs did their Fatherhood P. 809. Never was any truly partaker of the inward anointing of a Christian Man but he was ever fast and firm to the Royal Anointing The same excellent Prelate in his Answer to Tortus or Cardinal Bellarmin's Book against King James's Apology for the Oath of Allegiance says That Subjects are bound to obey their Prince by all Law London 1609. p. 16. 36. Natural Moral Civil Municipal That Christ never interdicted any Subjects Obedience his Father sent him not into the World on this Errand nor did he send any of his Followers P. 43. Let the King be a Heathen he ceases not to be a King let him be a Julian an Apostate which is worse than a Heathen yet he is a King still ☜ and against even such it is not lawful to take Arms nay it is a sin not to take Arms in their defence when they command us P. 110. Both Papists and Puritans conspire the hurt of Kings as Herod and Pilate agreed to murther Christ both being equally injurious to Kings in striving to rob them of their Authority Kings in their Kingdoms are God's Vicars P. 158 161. And the ancient Christians cheerfully obeyed them A forced Obedience rather becomes the Devil than a Christian for they are subject against their wills but to the praise of Christianity the Christians in the Infancy of the Church were so sincerely obedient that their Enemies could not bespatter them and so cheerfully patient that their Enemies were forced to admire them And it is blasphemy against Christ to think or say P. 321. that he would have any one that is his Vicar to hinder Subjects from being true to their Prince or Kings from being safe P. 384 385. Kings derive their Authority from God the people confer nothing upon them they are God's anointed not the people's the Form of Government may be from men but the Authority is always from Heaven Anno 1610 The same Learned Prelate published his Answer to Cardinal Bellarmin's Apology and therein avers †C. 2. p. 58. That every Subject is bound by his Allegiance not to suffer any one who shall endeavour either to depose his Prince or to dispose of his Kingdom he is bound to oppose himself against any Invader neither to absolve himself from his Allegiance nor to suffer himself to be absolved by any other not to take Arms against his Sovereign but to defend him from all violence in his Crown and Person and to discover all Conspiracies P. 132. To render to Caesar the things that are Caesar's The Apostles did so to Tiberius Caligula Claudius Nero Domitian The Martyrs did so to Commodus Severus Decius Dioclesian The Fathers did so to Constantius Valens and Anastasius Nay the Popes themselves did so to the Arians to Theodoric and the Goths in their times the contrary Doctrin was reckoned to be Heresie These were the Sentiments of that great man than whom while he lived the King had not a more Loyal Servant nor the Church a more Learned Prelate as the Editors ‖ Ep. Ded. Râ—gi of his Opuscula with Justice aver When Becanus a busie Jesuit had undertaken to answer this admirable Prelate's Books against Bellarmin Rich. Thompson an 1611. wrote his Vindication P. 20. and smartly censures his Adversary for saying That in England we swear Allegiance to our Kings upon these two conditions 1. As long as we stay in England 2. As long as he maintains the true Religion Both which Propositions as he says are most false and then he proceeds to confirm his Hypothesis proving in pursuance of his Design P. 27. That to the Oath of a Papist no regard ought to be had for who can believe ☞ whether he swears truly and from his Heart who defends the Lawfulness of a mixt Proposition of which one part is spoken P. 44. the other reserved The Text Touch not mine anointed only concerns Kings and in the whole Bible none are called the Lord's anointed but Kings And Rabbi Levi Ben Gershon the Jew hath commented more honestly and more like a Christian on 1 Sam. 12.24 than the Fathers of the Society of the Jesuits P. 78 79 83. All Princes even Pagans have a supreme Power over all their Subjects and in all Causes and Proscribere non posse proscribi propria sunt Regum timendorum in proprios greges ad ipsos coelitùs delapsâ autoritate ac peculiari quâdam ratione spectant i. e. To punish others and not to be punishable themselves is the peculiar Right of Kings derived unto them from above Nor was Becanus the only Antagonist that Bishop Andrews met with in this Cause Eudaemon Johannes a Cretan and a Jesuit and he needs no other Character undertakes the Defence of Garnet and the Censure of Allegiance him Dr. Samuel Collins the publick Professor of Divinity at Cambridge Cantab. 1612. undertakes wherein he averrs * Par. 2. p. 52. That the Jesuit had belyed King James when he called him a Follower of Knox to whose Opinions he was always most averse detesting both him and his Followers whom he upon all occasions rather punished than countenanced †Par. 3. c. 72. p. 252. Shew me that there is any such power I do not mean only in private persons but in the Pope or in any other mortal to depose ☞ or to murder a King. If a King do not his Duty he is to be left to the Divine Tribunal Against thee only have I sinned says David for he was a King says S. Hierom and had no one whom he might fear Understand it of coercive power not only not to punish but also not to upbraid him for who shall say to a King why dost thou so Eccl. 8.4 And who can resist him Prov. 30. P. 2.3 But you have found out this pretty Distinction that as long as a King remains a King let him be never so tyrannical his Subjects dare not oppose him but when the Pope deposes him then it is lawful boldly to oppose him And I would fain know where the odds is if the Pope or the people depose him so that if the Commons have power and the Pope consent and no danger of scandal
follow the murder of Kings is lawful and honorable Consider with your self P. 254. what a gap you open to popular Licentiousness when you praise those Men who magnifie the parricides of Princes The same Author in his Epphata to F. T. being a Vindication in English of the same Prelate vindicates the same Doctrin Cambr. 1617. in his Epistle Dedicatory he says That tho Kings die like men i. e. Quatenus homines non quatenus Reges yet we are to remember that they fall like one of the Principes i. e. one of the Angels says the Cardinal himself among others on that Psalm who we know are not judged till God judges them though no doubt but that aggravates their Judgment so much the sooner It were worth the considering what correspondence such Grounds have with the ancient Doctrine which the Cardinal and his Followers would seem so close to follow Of Chrysostome ☜ that a Sovereign King is accountable to none not only to his Subjects but not so much as to his Successor as David said that he is to be judged by God only The same Chrysostom noting that whereas the Psalmist passes over other miracles of the Wilderness in deep silence he insists only on the Death of Og and Sehon two mighty Monarchs because Kings lives are so wholly in God's Hands and the Disposition of them is alway miraculous reserved and appropriated to God himself Of S. Basil that a King is subject to no Judge Of Ambrose that nullis tenetur Legibus not only the King of Israel but not the King of Egypt Of the Pope in Theodoret who told Theodosius that it was not lawful to implead a King not only in his person but not personating another not fictione juris as the Lawyers say ‖ Ch. 1. p. 58 59. Now Obedience is become among the Ceremonies and the honoring of our Parents i. e. in truth of our Princes Patres Patriae by ancient stile ☜ and so Ezechias called the Priests his children 2 Chron. 29.11 is as subject to alteration as the Sabbath Day And because the Jewish Ceremonies may not only be omitted but may not be retain'd without heinous crime therefore it shall be Conscience to wax wanton against Princes to shake off their Yoke yea merit virtue and what not as if the Precept of honoring Parents which is the primum in promissione Ephes 6. were now secundum in omissione after that against Images P. 60 61 62. which is usually cancelled in the Popish Catechisms Against the Emperors under the Old Testament there was no rising up and as for the Emperors in the New Testament tho as they were Heathen they were neither by Christ nor his Apostles obey'd I hope Sir 't is enough that they were not resisted Kings when transported by Error they forsake their Duty Pag. 75. yet forfeit not their Supremacy We yield no Abdication of our King ☞ tho his Fault be Heresie remembring that Deus defendit oleum suum as Optatus says and Caesar non desinit esse Caesar even in Alto Gentilisino as our Saviour acknowledg'd of him Matt 22. So beinous is the Heresie of Deposing Magistrates for moral Misdemeanours A bad Head I should think which the Body will be the better for the cutting off No Iniquity can abolish Authority And if it be objected Pag. 94. P. 137. 139. that Kings must be hamper'd with a coercive Power or all must run to nothing and the Church be clean extinguishâ—d It is answered The Church gains by Patience in Persecution therefore she loses by Resistance and Opposition SECT VIII Among these domestick Champions of the King and the Truth it may not be amiss to reckon an eminent Foreigner if I may call Isaac Casaubon so who lived some Years in this Kingdom and dyed here one of the Glories of his Age before he came into England he just after the Quarrel between the Pope and the Republick of Venice An. 1607. printed a Discourse De Libertate Ecclesiastica or rather but a part of a Discourse for whereas he promises Eleven Chapters the first three are not entirely printed the rest being stopt at the Press by Order of the French King tho as imperfect as the Book is Goldastus hath thought it worth a place in his Collections and in it he shews that the true Church of God never usurp'd the Rights of Kings * Ad Lect. p. 6. Pag. 12.13 while the Popes spoil Kings of their Liberty and their Majesty too for under them it sometimes happens that Kings may be safe but they can never be secure for they so value this Liberty that to defend it they tumble all things upside down mingle Heaven and Earth things sacred and profane And whereas our holy Master's Precepts ought not to be contradicted since he hath joyned his Example to his Commands and recommended to us the Love of our Enemies Subjection to the Powers ordained of God ☞ and Obedience to them for Conscience sake they to build up and to confirm this Liberty unknown to the Primitive times do every where inkindle Wars become a Terror to Kings and Princes dispense with their Subjects Allegiance and arm them against their own Sovereigns and pretend that to violate all Laws divine and human is a holy undertaking and most acceptable unto God. As ifby an ill management of supreme Authority Pag. 17. the Authority were forfeited And if once Princes shall suffer the Foundations of their Government to be shaken in the minds of their Subjects their Government and Empire must of necessity reel and totter and fall into the dust God commands all orders of Men to render to Cesar the things that are Cesar 's Pag. 69. and let every soul be subject to the higher powers c. therefore Gregory Nazianzen says that the Civil Magistrate doth reign together with Christ nor does it make any difference that some Kings arrive to the Throne by hereditary Succession others by Election a third sort by Conquest for tho God in the establishment of a King as in the Ordination of a Priest uses the Ministry of men yet it is impious not to acknowledg that the Dominion and Power is received originally from God By God Kings reign as the holy Scriptures in almost infinite places do testifie P. 102 103. The Primitive Christians did so use the World as those that used it not as S. Paul advises for while their Zeal for Piety was flagrant while the Innocency of their Manners their mutual Love and Affection their unfeigned Humility ☜ their constant Meditation on the Joys of Heaven their Fidelity and Obedience to their Princes as far as their Conscience would give them leave lastly their incomparable Constancy in suffering all manner of Torments for the true Religion made them every day a Spectacle to the whole World they ravish'd their very Enemies to admire them and their Virtues these were the beginnings of Christianity this the
the Covenant Printed at Lon. 1640. disproves their pretended conformity with the French Churches in the points of Church Discipline and Obedience to Superiors averring solemnly P. 2. that it was ever far from our wishes that your conformity with the Reformed Churches of France should be misapplyed as a pretence of your expelling your Bishops much less a president for you to take Arms against your Gracious Sovereign P. 37 38. take it for granted that the Orders imposed upon you by His Majesty are Ungodly and Antichristian are you therefore allowed to defend Religion with Rebellion will ye call the Devil to the help of God Sure it is a prodigious kind of Christian Liberty for a Subject to draw his Sword against his Sovereign you that stand so much upon the point of conscience ought ye not to be subject for Conscience sake ☞ Were your Sovereign unjust and froward and his commands injurious unto God had ye instead of our pious defender of the Faith a fierce Dioclesian illud solis precibus patientiâ sanari potest nothing will mend it but prayers and patience it is Beza's counsel to the discontented Brethren of England conformable to that of St. 1 Pet. 3.17 Peter for it is better if the will of God be so that ye suffer for well doing than for evil doing if the Sovereign come to kill the Subject for his Religion the Subject must yield him his throat not charge his Pike against him and this he proves by Calvin's Practice and Writings P. 38 39 40. the Churches of France have lately declared to His Majesties Ambassador there their utter dislike of the Insurrection of Scotland under pretence of a Covenant with Christ P. 41. there can be no just cause to take Arms against a Lawful Sovereign after this he treats of the French Protestants taking Arms P. 46. and concludes that till the Reign of King Lewis the Arms of the Protestants were either justifiable or excusable but their Wars in his time were neither and they prosper'd accordingly P. 48. the French Protestants had to do with a King of a contrary Religion they were incens'd by many wrongs and oppressions they were in danger to lose with their Forts and Towns their Liberty their Religion and their Life the privileges which they enjoyed were rewards of their long Services by the Charter of Rochel when they yielded to Lewis XI it was granted to them that they should be no longer the King's Subjects ☞ than the King should maintain their immunities and yet these true reasons and just fears could not justifie their defensive Arms against their Sovereign but they were condemn'd by the best of their own and of their neighbors and God shewed his dislike by the ill success he gave them And much more to this purpose is to be seen in his answer to Philanax Anglicus and in his Regii sanguinis Clamor ad caelum contra Parricidas Anglicanos Hagae Com. 1652 C. 1. 〈◊〉 5. for that being is du Moulin juniors and not Alexander Morus's as was conjectured affirming with the Apostle that even the Jews would not have Crucified the Lord of Glory had they known him while the Parricides of King Charles I. wittingly and wilfully Murdered their Lawful King and with the King beheaded also the Church of England and brought upon the neighbouring Protestant Churches abundance of Dishonor and much danger while the same madness was imputed to all the Reformation which had only infected a few who falsly called themselves Reformed Nothing hath happened since the beginning of the World more contrary to the glory of God or that hath cast a greater blot upon holy Truth while the Wickedness defends it self by the Doctrin of the Gospel and is said to be perpetrated to vindicate the Protestant Religion to the just indignation and abhorrence of all the foreign Churches for which reason Salmasius P. 7. Heraldus Porree and others wrote smartly both against the Men P. 17. and their villanous Principles It is a Law not only written but born with us and springs from the most pure fountains of Nature That it is a most horrid crime for Subjects to punish their Princes and therefore we do too much honour to Parricides when we use Arguments against them for as Aristotle says they who doubt 1 Top. c 9 whether God is to be worship'd or Parents to be honoured are not to be convinc'd by Reasons but by Scourges and Salmasius hath proved by unanswerable Reasons by divine and human Authority that the Majesty of Kings is unaccountable and that Subjects have no manner of Authority over them Cap. 2. p. 29 30. There is no fallacy of Satan which more prevails upon good Men to engage them in an evil Cause than when Men contrary to God's Word believe that it is lawful to do evil that good may come thereof and that God hath need of our sinful assistance to promote his Kingdom and that whatever is design'd to promote God's Glory immediatly commences good P. 52. the Judges at Westminster were turn'd out by the Army because being consulted they had given this opinion that to judge the King was against the Laws of England Cap. 5. p. 107. to argue from Providence and Success to the goodness of a Cause is impudent one man is hang'd for that by which another gets a Crown Junius Brutus by expelling the Kings of the Family of Tarquin saved his Country another Brutus by murdering a Tyrant ruined it perhaps the later Brutus did an act of justice when he slew an Usurper but the first was very unjust who drove away a lawful King by the murder of King Charles I. Cap. 6. p. 121. the Parricides taught the rest of the World that Kings may be guilty of breach of trust to their People that the People are their Judges and may condemn and execute them and these Tenets they are not ashamed to own in their Writings that they had freed the World of its old Superstition that Kings are only obnoxious to God and can be punish'd only by him that they had set an example to all other Nations conducive to their safety and to be dreaded by all Tyrants as Cromwel wrote to the Scots after Dunbar fight what an occasion of insulting is hereby given to the Papists to say Cap. 7. p. 135. this is the Religion which brings down Reformation to us from Heaven these are the Men who cry out against the Usurpations of the Popes upon the Crowns and lives of Princes only that they might themselves have that power over Kings when they had snatched it from the Pope But the Papists would suggest this with less fierceness if they remembred that those few who left us in this point went to them and borrowed their Weapons from them C. 8 p. 148. these Monsters do not content themselves with being simple Parricides but they turn Rebellion into a
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
setting up others the deposition of Edw. 2. was as horrid Treason as was imaginable or possible to be in nature and does doing wickedly create a lawfulness if so all sins and villanies by the perpetrating them lose their natures to be evils and become lawful wickedness can be no president p. 16. no such thing as Government can be if the governed may judge and execute their Governor I wonder how Mr. Baxter can dispense with the Scriptures against using force to Kings or destroying them his distinction of Parliamentary right will not serve the turn since it is absolutely forbidden as is proved from Exod. 22.28 Ezr. 6.10 Ps 51.4 Eccl. 10.20 Prov. 24.21 1 Sam. 26.9 Rom. 13. 1 Tim. 2. 1 Pet. 2.13 P. 19. 17. which texts having some of them a relation to very Tyrants shew directly the nature of supreme Governors to be born by the People whatsoever their condition be to call them Gods is an exemption from all humane Tribunals above the condition of Mankind subject to God only as Supreme Governors cannot in nature be other I think that God would take it ill that we should mock him p. 20. ☜ p. 22. to set up a King to govern and then to reserve a Power to destroy him God doth somtimes give evil Governors and doth he not likewise give them power God himself forespake in Saul and then concluded the People in these words 1 Sam. 8.18 then i.e. when they were oppressed by their King shall they cry out i. e. seek help of God because there are no humane remedies as Grotius expounds it and call to God for help i. e. there was no means of resistance to be used on their part Kings were when Parliaments were not P. 23. we cannot suppose here in England any time of Government without Kings the Parl. therefore was a creature merely of the King's will and creating the King is the sole judge of the safety p. 27. or danger of the Republick Supremacy is the sole governing Power p. 53. and Government is a constant being the other that of Parl. but at times and by occasion that must needs be a strange Government p. 54. where the Sovereignty is divided and lying in divers powers when they differ the People are distracted in their obedience therefore the 11. of Henr. 7. was made to avoid the mischief of a divided commanding Power tho it be a gross Law and against truth many times ☜ because Usurpers did possess the Throne it is not possible to fansie governing power with a power in the People p. 57. ☜ or any Party out of the King to resist his power for then he should govern no longer than the governed Party were disposed to obey and so no Government at all there can be no such thing as a conquest of Subjects over their King p. 64. p. 65. it is Desertion or Treason not Conquest there is no footstep or mark from God of the Peoples title over Kings or their making them or giving them their Power Parliaments have declared for titles p. 69. but never can make any nor deprive right it is true divers Usurpers have had Parliament Test for their Warrant for those have most need of it but still it was acted under power enforcing and so it was nothing p. 70. but merely so long as the Power lasted Conquest is only a great Riot and multiplying of Rapines and Man slaughters it is all wickedness which is only distinguish'd from common wickedness as it transcends all other actings of Wickedness and such is conquest by excess of Wickedness to make it self above offending and punishment and if so then it cannot be in the submission of the People who are first conquer'd before they consent none of these things make right for if the outed Prince can recover and regain power these things vanish as unlawful one instance with us in England of sixty years discontinuance yet when it recovered power to act all the Usurpation went for nothing and the old came in as Right not as Conquest SECT V. Bishop Wren in his abandoning of the Scotch Covenant P. 49 50. God disposed of the Kingdom of Abiah but otherwise by Man it could never else have been done rightly nor would it ever have held no Man not all the Men in the Kingdom whatsoever is told you of the Power of the People by those that worship that many headed Monster had Power or Authority to alter that Covenant of God with David more than they had to alter that Covenant of day and night in their Seasons says God himself if Men would believe him Jer. 33.21 they were never to meddle with it unless God himself gave order expresly in it Bishop Laney We were in a sad case not long since in this Kingdom by a Civil War. Sermon at Whitehall Mar. 18. 1665 / 6. p. 19 c. they Covenanted first to extirpate the Government of the Church in this they were too bold with the King's Scepter at the next turn they take hold of his Sword too and engage themselves to a mutual defence against all opposition tho a self defence may be allowed as natural to all it is against private not publick opposition and then too as Divines generally resolve Cum moderamine inculpatae tutelae never to the hurt of others every Man may defend himself clypeo but not every one gladio the Sword is the Kings and he that takes it from any hand but his where God hath placed it shall perish with the Sword. Bishop Pearson aggravating the sin of the Gunpowder Traytors Serm. No. 5. 1673. p. 14 20 25. says Touch not mine Anointed is the voice of God nor must we do evil that good may come thereof such Mens damnation is just I cannot chuse but remember those words which I read so frequently in the Scriptures God save the King God save the King God save him from the open Rebellion of the Schismatical Party the ruin of his Father God save him from the secret Machinations of the Papal Faction the danger of his Grand-father God save the King and let all the People say Amen SECT VI. Francis Lord Bishop of Ely hath frequently asserted the same great truth The Church of Rome 's Fifth-Monarchy-Men assertors ‖ Serm. bef the King Jan. 30. 168 0 / 1. p. 13 P. 17. I mean of the Papal Universal Monarchy in the Murder of Conradine King of Naples and Sicily were beforehand with our Fanaticks and taught the Art of killing a King ceremoniously the Life and Person of the King his Office his Crown and Dignity ought to have been inviolable and sacred in the Eyes of all his Subjects if he be the soul of the Nation then it follows P. 18. that his Power is derived from above and is held from none under Heaven and as none but God can judge both Soul and Body so none but God is a competent judge
prostrated themselves for in your way of reasoning they have a right to preserve or delight themselves by any course of means and can be best protected by the prevailing side which because it hath more degrees of growing Power has it seems therefore more of right P. 158. thus it is in the choice of every Subject whom you make the Judge of the means to preserve himself to apply himself to the stronger side or for a Company combin'd in Arms and Counsel when an Heir and a Traytor are engag'd in Battel with equal success as was the practice of the Lord Stanley c. at Bosworth-field to give the day to the side they presume will most favour them but there is no tye so strong as that of Religion c. * Vid. 1. part of the Hist p. 93. and whereas Hobbs affirm'd that Covenants are but words and breath and have no force to oblige or constrain any Man but what it has from the Publick Sword he answers that thus the Prince is always in a State of danger P. 160. Society being like a State of Nature managed all by force because he cannot be a day secure of remaining uppermost seeing that the People are taught by you to believe that the right of Authority is a deceit and that every one would have as good a Title if he had as long a Sword for the many headed Beast will throw the Rider when he burthens and galls them Woe to all the Princes upon Earth if this Doctrin be true and becomes Popular if the Multitude believe this the Prince not Armed with the scales of the Leviathan i. e. with irresistible Power can never be safe P. 161. wherefore such as own these pernicious Doctrins destructive to all Societies of Men ☜ may be said to have Wolves Heads as the Laws of old were wont to speak concerning excommunicated Persons and are like those ravenous Beasts so far from deserving our love and care P. 192. that they ought to be destroyed at the common charge if the commands of Christ and his Apostles are not also Laws what means the common Doctrin in the Scripture of suffering for the sake of Christianity We are injoined to take up the Cross and to follow Christ c. Such commands and exhortations to dye rather than to obey Unchristian injunctions are deliver'd in vain yea they deserve the name of Impious if they be not a Royal Law without the stamp of Civil Authority it is therefore your opinion that it is our duty for the sake of outward safety to obey that which is the Law of our Country tho we live among the Heathens rather than to follow dangerous tho Evangelical Counsel This Doctor together with the Lords Bishops of Ely and Bath and Wells and Dr. Hooper were by the King appointed to attend the late Duke of Monmouth before his Execution and the great thing that they with reason prest him to was a particular repentance an acknowledgment that his Invasion was a Rebellion particularly urging him as the Printed account says more than once P. 1 2. if he were of the Church of England to acknowledge the Doctrin of Non Resistance to be true ☞ and therefore I believe that Pulton the Jesuit as †Pulton consider'd p. 67. himself says charg'd him unjustly that when he assisted Sir Thomas Armstrong before his Execution that he did not oblige him to an humble acknowledgment of his Crimes and particularly of the injury done to his King and Country for the * Account of the cons with 〈◊〉 p. â—3 Doctor even in the heigth of Popery thought his Loyalty more valuable than Mr. Meredith's because he as a Son of the Church of England profest he would not rebel against the King notwithstanding he might be of another Religion whereas Mr. M. being of the same Religion could not well separate Loyalty from Interest and ‖ 〈…〉 cons p. 89. avers that he is by Church Principle against resisting the Higher Powers and approves not of the excluding and deposing Doctrin taught in Mr. P's great Lateran Council before there were Jesuits and also after they arose by Bellarmine and Doleman and a long train of others in which some Popes some Synodical Men have pompously march'd To pass by General Complaints Id. exam of 〈◊〉 10 note 〈◊〉 holiness of life p. 243. we may furnish our selves with abundance of instances in the Lives of particular Men of that Communion who have been Infamous for Impiety I shall content my self with a few reflections upon two or three of this sort of Mâ—n with whom the more the World is acquainted the less veneration it will have for them Pope Gregory the Great fawn'd upon the Emperor Mauritius whilst he lived and prospered and own'd him as his Patron and the Maker of his Fortunes even before he had made his own But assoon as the Emperor and his Family were barbarously Murthered by the most Bloody Vassal and Usurper Phocas Gregory insulted over this dead Lion and flatter'd this living Monster and his Immoral Wife Leontia He used such words at his â—surped â—xaltation as he did at that which he called the Conversion of England singing profanely Glory to God in the Highest Let the Heavens rejoyce and the Earth be glad There are many things in the Roman Church it self P. 248. which by helping forward an ill life do in part deface this mark of her Sanctity Such as the Doctrins about Papal Supremacy Which last is very prejudicial to the quiet of the World especially in the Deposing Point concerning which I take leave to use the words of another with Relation to Bellarmine He was * Postscript to transl of 〈…〉 of the Leag p. 15 16 17. himself a Preacher for the League in Paris during the Rebellion there of King Henry IV. Some of his Principles are these following In the Kingdoms of Men the Power of the King is from the People because the People make the King. We hear Bellarmine in another place â—ositively affirming it as Matter of Faith if any Christian Prince shall depart from the Catholick Religion and shall withdraw others from it he immediatly forfeits all Power and Dignity even before the Pope has pronounced sentence on him And his Subjects in case they have Power to do it may and ought to cast out such an Heretick from his Sovereignty over Christians If therefore the Faith of Bellarmine be Faction whatsoever his Church is in it self it is certain as he has made it it can never he found out either as The Church or as A found Church so far as we are to look for it by the Note of Holiness SECT XII Dr. Patrick hath also fully declared his Opinion in this point for besides what hath been cited out of his works in the first part of this History he says Paraphâ— on on Ps 15. p. 75. that he who shall dwell in God's Tabernacle is a
must do nothing to shew that we are acted by the Spirit of Popery we must never forget the Station in which God hath put us â—s we are Subjects under a Lawful Prince to whom we are tyed both by Divine and Humane Laws and even the Lion's Mouth it self opening to devour us ☜ can never excuse us from our obligation to submit and suffer if God had so ordered it by his Providence that we were born under a Prince that would deliver us up to the Lion. the late Rebellion as it was managed with a Popish i. e. a bloody Spirit so many of the Arguments that were used to defend it were taken from Popish Authors P. 28. When we go out of the way of patience and submission of obedience and of bearing the Cross when we give scope to passion and rage to jealousie and mistrust and upon this fermentation in our minds we break out into Wars and Rebellion we forget that the God whom we serve is Almighty and can save us either from a devouring Fire or a Lion's Mouth we forget that the Saviour whom we follow was made perfect by sufferings and that we become then truly his Disciples when we bear his Cross even tho we should be crush'd under it we forget that our Religion ought to inspire us with a contempt of Life and the World and with meekness and lowliness of mind c. P. 29. we are not to share with the Papists in their cruelty not imitate them in their Rebellion SECT XV. Dr. Adam Littleton in his Catechism Printed Lon. 1662 â—p ded or the Grounds of Religion An ungrounded Christian will be easily peâ—suaded to give him self up to any wild Opinion or loose practice to turn Heretick or Rebel P. 334. and prove a fit instrument for the managery of Satan's designs the fifth commandment is the hinge of the two Tables and concerns the Magistrate who is God's Vicegerent on Earth and the keeper of both the Tables wherefore some assign it a place in the first Table P. 336 337. See his Ser. on Nov. 5 1675. p. 221 223 224 226. and Ser. on Jan. 30. 1677. p. 236 237 c. God having a special care of civil order and Peace in the Societies of Men honour thy Father and Mother whether thy natural Parents or the Civil Magistrate disobedience dissolves and unloosens or â—er and peace which are the bands of Society whereas oppression does but strain and gird the tyes of Government too close no Tyranny of the most wicked Prince can be so mischievous and destractive to the Publick as the Rebellion of Subjects let them pretend never so much Religion for it the great interest of society is to obey since the resisting of a Lawful Governor will in the end destroy Government it self and bring all things into consusion ☞ then he introduces God thus speaking thou inferior whoever thou art that art under anothers Power P. 343 344. thou shalt be subject to him and yield a ready and chearful obedience to him as to the Lord in all things that are just and lawful and hear with his humors and his harshness ☞ remembring that the he be a Man of like passions with thy self yet he is in God's stead and if he at any time swerve from his rule in commanding yet do not thou decline thy duty in obeying but when be biddeth thee do any thing coutrary to my will carry thy self with submission and resolve to suffer for a good conscience rather than to resist where thou canst not with a good conscience obey thou shalt not withdraw or grudge thy obedience P. 347. much less shalt thou take upon thee to call him to account thou Subject shalt honor and obey the King and his Ministers thou shalt not raise sedition to bring an odium upon the Magistrate's Person his Authority or his Council nor shew any discontent to the disturbance of the publick Peace nor take up Arms against thy Lawful Sovereign nor maintain or assist Rebellion nor meddle with those that are given to change thou shalt not offer any violence to the King 's Sacred Person but if at any time unrighteous commands are imposed upon thee have recourse to thy Prayers and make thy appeals to Heaven to God the King of Kings to whom alone they are accountable and who will in his dut time remove the oppression and call the Oppressor's to an account P. 352 353. when the hedge of Government is broken down neither Religion nor Law shall bound us this hath been England 's Case in the wicked times of Anarchy and Confusion when we complyed with Illegal Powers when our Oaths of Allegiance were eluded with the solemn cozenage of a League and sinful Combination when we were bewildred with the Witchcrafts of Rebellion and knew not the things which belong'd to our Peace but pretended to reform abuses by destroying the Offices when we rais'd War against our dread Sovereign and offered violence to the Lord 's Anointed what need have we therefore to pray fervently with the Church Lord have mercy upon us and incline our hearts to keep this Law. The same Author in his Sermon Pt. Lond. 1669. p. 24 25. called The Churches Peace asserted upon a Civil account Preach'd July 4th An. 1669. says the same thing The best Party of the Dissenters have such Principles of Policy and Government as are utterly inconsistent and incompatible with Monarchy whereas there is no one thing that the English Church doth in her Doctrin more positively affirm ☞ or in her Offices more â—ealously express than Obedience to Governors and her duty to her Sovereign thanked be God we live not now under Heathen Emperors and Pagan Governors tho if we did it were our duty to pray for them and to thank God for them too and to obey them in all lawful commands An Original of all Plots Lond. 1680. 810. cap. 1. p. 2. and where we cannot safely obey chearfully to suffer for a good Conscience Dr. William Saywel Still it hath fallen out that Men of more zeal than discretion of greater reading than judgment have struck in with the Politicians and wrote that which would most please the Men in Authority and was likely to get them most favor and reputation amongst those who could satisfie their ambition and by these means have rather served themselves than God tho with the confusion and disorder of the Church Athelsm breach of common faith and honesty P. 3. violations of all Oaths and Contracts Murders Treasons Conspiracies Rebellions long and bloody Wars Massacres Fires Underminings Poysons P. 4 5. and Subversions of Governments are the sad consequences of such dissensions in Religion that these Parts of Christendom for some Ages past have been an Aceldama or Field of Blood and many horrid and barbarous Murders have been acted upon pretence of Religion is evident from all Modern Histories and tho the Romish
the Conscience and indispensible because the King's Power is from God pag 62. to whom only Kings are accountable They pray for him three or four times by Name in all their solemn Offices their Sermons are frequent and pressing upon this Theme and their Books are numerous against Papists and their factious Scholars for the Right of Kings yea and their Actions being always Loyal do justifie they sincerely believe as they teach Dr. Sec. Edit ad Lectorem Pelling's Apostate Protestant Those Republicans who were the Movers of the Bill of Exclusion very well knew that by the sam ePower which they pretended to have to dispose of the Heir they might pretend afterwards to have to devest and destroy the Possessor of the Crown And I will presume to declare on my own and my Brethrens behalf too without begging their pardon that we still act ☞ and by the Grace of God resolve stedfastly to act upon the same loyal Principles wherewith we have hitherto endeavor'd to season the Kingdom The People cannot but be tickled at the heart p. 6 7. when they are told that they have a Sovereign Power in them which they did not dream of that they can make and unmake Kings that Crowns and Scepters lye at their Worship's Feet must make Court to them for Succession and that they can if they will bar them out and come like the Tribunes of the People of Rome with an uncontroulable Veto I am grieved at the heart and 't is enough to raise the indignation of every honest Man to find that so many among us do so inconsiderately not to say maliciously run altogether upon this Jesuit's Principles c. V. p. 9 10 11. p. 14. Doleman confidently insists on this that the Crown is not a bare Inheritance but an Inheritance accompanying an Office of trust and that if a Man's defects render him uncapable of the trust he hath also forfeited the Inheritance and from this Principle he concludes that even a true King may be deposed when he answers not the trust which the People had reposed in him This Jesuitical Doctrin did not long ago cost one of our Kings his Throne and his life too I pray God it be not so chargeable to another but t is ominous when pretending Protestants will be nibling at such Jesuitical Principles Observe that the Power of Deposing a King P. 19. naturally follows from the Doctrin of the People's Power to chuse one if any of our Clergy hold our Kings to be Divine they hold no more than what all Christians have ever held P. 21. V. p. 24 25. P. 33 34. v. loc p. 36. no more than what the Church of England hath declared no more than what the Laws of our Country do own and will bear them out in Doleman is positive that Princes may lawfully be deposed and he observes too is a remarkable instance as he calls it that God hath wonderfully concurred for the most part with such judicial Acts of the Commonwealth against their evil Princes not only in prospering the same but by giving also some notable Successor in the place of the deposed had Father Parsons been alive in our days perhaps he would have instanc'd in that blessed Bird Oliver Cromwell among the rest I happen'd to read a new Assemblies Catechism called a Political Catechism p. 38. v. p. 40 41 c. and I found it as full of the Jesuit's Venom as if it had been spit out of Doleman's own Mouth these are some of the Principles in it word for word 1. That the Government being a regulated Monarchy the King is not above the Law but is accountable to the Law and not to God only 2. That whatsoever is done by the King without and beyond the limits of the Regulation is not Regal Authority 3. That to resist the notorious transgressions of that regulation is no resisting the Regal Authority that the immediate Original of the King's Power is from the People and many other such Principles upon which the late Rebellion was raised and maintained After this he proceeds to shew that the little arts made use of to evade the obligations to Passive Obedience have been also borrowed from the Jesuits and to vindicate Dr. Hicks's Sermon on that Subject as also to shew the Parallel between the Jesuit and the Puritan particularly in their disobedience to Government violation of Oaths c. And then subjoins that when once Men are Jesuited P. 50. they will never stick at any manner of wickedness Lying Libelling Sedition defaming of Government Perjury c. you see how basely partial these Folks are in their ordinary censures P. 51. let a Man be a true Friend to the King and to the Establish'd Government and presently forsooth he is a Papist let him resuse to do evil that good may come tho that was St. Paul's way and he is called a Papist let him be for subjection to a Lawful Prince ☜ and when time serves for Passive Obedience and he is a Papist with a witness but let these Men profess the Faith and Doctrins of the Jesuits let them lye and equivocate like the Jesuits let them violate Oaths v. p 52 53 57 58. or construe them in their own sense like the Jesuits let them dispense with one another in doing any wickedness that is serviceable to their cause as the Jesuits do yet who but they the true Protestants we dare not be dishonest unless we will be Hypocrites nor be Rebels P. 54. unless we will be damn'd Some in Solomon's time were given to change out of 〈◊〉 strange kind of levity and inconsistency of mind Id. Serm. on Prov 24.21 1632. p. 25. and therefore some Expositors render the place thus cum inconstantibus with Men that are fickle and unsteady in their Loyalty would we not think it strange that Men who have shewed their fidelity all along Men who have acted taught suffered and ventur'd their Lives for the sake of Majesty should such I say start aside and suffer themselves to be wheadled into Faction at last Truly we might wonder at it the less when we consider that it was the case of several Men in the Reign of David and especially two very eminent Persons Abiathar the Priest and Joab that brave Commander the former had been David's secret and sure Friend and the later had not turn'd after Absalom both of them had been faithful hitherto but when Adonijah usurp'd the Kingdom both of them were concern'd in that Plot the Priest turn'd an Apâ—state and the General a Renegado upon what provocations I do not know nor can I gather any reason thereof unless it be that I now have mention'd a strange inconstancy of Spirit in Men who in David's Old Age thought it their best cunning to take up the Persian custom and worship the Rising Sun. Thus the Letter to a dissenter on occasion of the Declaration of Indulgence We are
not to be laught out of our Passive Obedience and the Doctrin of Non-Resistance tho even those who perhaps owe the best part of their security to that Principle are apt to make a jest of it SECT XVII Dr. C. 26. §. 1 2 6 8. Pierce Dean of Salisbury in his body of Orthodox Divinity avers that the Church of God consists of a Civil as well as an Ecclesiastical Hierarchy that Magistrates are constituted by a Divine right as well as Priests that he who resists the Magistrate so constituted by God wounds his Conscience deeply in this World and shall be damn'd in the next after which he smartly censures both the Fanaticks and the Jesuits the scandals of Christianity as he calls them condemning the Doctrins of both sorts of them and shewing the unreasonableness of that proposition that Inferior Magistrates may controul a Prince if he does not do his duty since by the Laws of the Land as well as the Laws of God a King can do no harm i.e. that the King is unaccountable inferior only to God and obnoxious only to his Tribunal so that no Mortal much less his Subjects can have any Authority over him Id. exceeding sinfulness of Schism §. 5 6 7 11. v. Ser. on 1 Pet. 2.13 §. 4 5 7 8. Obedience to Magistrates being of Divine Right strongly founded upon the Will and the Word of God and even a part of the Obedience to God himself whilst it is paid to that Authority which God hath commanded us to pay an Obedience to cannot possibly be due to the Men as Men or to the good as they are good but to the Magistrates as they are such 't is due to the Governors as they are Governors and as the Ordinance of God let their Practices and Opinions be what they will. When God and his Deputies do stand in competition for our Obedience God must have our whole active and his Deputies our Passive Obedience only Saving the dignity and priority of the first and great commandment as the ground and foundation of all the rest our Obedience to our Governors and Humane Laws in force among us is as really an Essential and Fundamental of Christianity ☞ and of as absolute necessity to our Salvation as the belief of one God or any other that can be named it being as rigidly commanded by God in Scripture under the very same promises of reward if we obey and under the very same threats of endless punishments if we rebel Dr. Serm. on Tit. 3.1 p. 4 5. c. D. Whitby Chantor of the same Church in the time of the D. of Monmouth Rebelbelliâ—n laid down this position That Christians must be subject to their Civil Magistrates and in no cases are allowed or authorized forcibly to resist or bear Arms against them and this he proves at large from the expressions of the Holy Scriptures from the deportment of David to King Saul that Jeroboam's revolt is by God himself called Rebellion 1 King. 12.19 p. 8 9. for as a Father doth not forfeit his Authority over his Children nor are they freed from that Obedience which they owe him because he deals severely with them so neither can the King i. e. the Father of his Country lose his Authority over his Subjects because he governs them severely or lays afflicting burthens on them the Scriptures of the New Testament expresly call for our subjection Let every Soul be subject saith St. Paul so let him yield subjection to them as never to resist on any provocation temptation or specious pretence whatsoever whence it is clear ☜ p 10. Serm. 〈…〉 13.1 p. 24 26 27 2â— 29 30 31. that by the Christian Doctrin it is unlawful to resist the Higher Powers upon pretence of Male-administration Tyranny Injustice or to rebel for the defence of our Religion against the worst of persecuting Princes for if Resistance in the forementioned cases was a damning sin when can it be excusable after this he answers the common objections from the Coronation Oath and Self-Preservation c. Mr. Long 's Sermon called the causes of Rebellion Preach'd Jan. 13. 1683. on Jâ—â— 4.1 P. 14 15. was Printed by the joint desires of the Bishop of Exon and the Justices of the County of Devon and the Dedication gives an account of an order of theirs that concurs with the Doctrin of the Sermon nor can any complaint of Tyranny or Oppression justifie a War among us did we suffer under some miscarriages in Government some passions and excesses in our Governors neither Scripture nor reason will warrant any resistance Obj. But the Primitive Christians had no Laws to confirm their Religion P. 16. and therefore it was not so lawful for them to defend their Religion by Arms as it is for us Answ It is strange that our Laws should be made a pretence for Resistance which declare that it is not lawful to resist upon any pretence whatsoever then the Subjects are made Judges of the Actions and Conduct of their Governors P. 22 23. I take those and only those who do agree with the Jesuits in Preaching ☜ and propagating Seditious and Traiterous Principles and Practices such as the lawfulness of Resistance and taking up Arms in defence of Religion against the Supreme Magistrate that the Original of the Magistrate's Power is in the People who may call them to an account and Depose and Murder them as they see cause those who have Murdered one King already and use the same Methods to destroy another in a word V. p. 23 26. all such as will not declare that it is unlawful to take up Arms against the King on any pretence whatsoever or that they will not endeavour any alteration of the establish'd Government for such false Prophets as our Saviour bids us to beware of This also is the Doctrin of his Sermon on July 26. 1685. and his Vindication of the Primitive Christians c. Dr. Fuller Chancellor of Lincoln those Men have but little sense of the honor of Christian Religion that abuse its Name Ser. bef the King June 25. 1682. p. 56 c. and pervert its obligations to justifie Sedition and Rebellion who with great pretences and zeal for Christianity forsake her in her more principal commands of meekness patience and submission and defend the Doctrin of Resistance and Disobedience from those Holy Scriptures that have forbidden them under the penalty of Damnation that those Men do little deserve the Character of Reformed who have forsaken our Reformation in its Principal and Fundamental Doctrin of the King's Supremacy and renounced the Protestant Church of England in all her Principles of Christian Loyalty and indeed all the Enemies of the Church of England how distant soever in other points are perfectly united in the Doctrin of disobedience all agreeing in one conclusion against the express commands of Holy Scripture that it is lawful to resist the Higher Powers c. Dr.