Party 2. The Vsurper intruded and his Confederates And both sides will plead a just Title to the Crown The Lawfull Heir Excluded will urge and that most truly his Right thereunto by virtue of his Primogeniture according to the Law of God of Natural Reason and of Magna Charta And therefore to be sure He will Fight and that undauntedly for the Crown On the other hand the Vsurper will plead and that not without Reason his Title to the Crown by virtue of the New Law of the Nation to wit the New Statute of Exclusion which has setled the Royal Diadem upon his Head and therefore He will not easily part with it Wherefore no man need doubt but that the Vsurper will fight and that stoutly to keep what by Law he has got Thus any Man that has but half an eye may if he will plainly see That if the Bill of Exclusion should pass into a Law as the Anti-Yorkists so hotly desired that then War and Sedition will be established and continued by Law And now suppose this should ever happen to be which God forbid Then the Great Query and Case of Conscience will be scil Qu. What Party or Side ought the Pious and Dutifull Subject to take and follow Ans To deal plainly and faithfully in this Case where Conscience and Religion I mean Christianity are so deeply concerned We humbly conceive it to be the honest Subject's Duty in this case rather to Obey God and his Law and so to fight More Romano Couragiously for the Right and Lawfull Heir by Primogeniture unjustly Excluded This we ought to doe rather than to Obey Man and his New Law of Exclusion and so to engage for the Vsurper who Reigns and Governs not by Divine but onely by Humane Law and Appointment And we will Appeal to Conscience and Reason Whether it be not safer to follow God and his Law which cannot err than Man who may err and his Law of Exclusion which does grosly err in the very Sanction of it in that it manifestly opposes the above-mentioned Law of God which Commands That the Right Heir by Primogeniture should Reign and Govern although He hateth Right Object If it be as it is by all Anti-Yorkists and Common wealths Men objected That the Law of the Realm is above the King for that the Law made him King And therefore say they the Law has a power to Depose the King and to take away that Regal Authority which it gave him As that Great but to our thinking Factious Lawyer (a) Ipse autem Rex non debet esse sub homine sed sub Deo sub Lege quia Lex facit Regem Non est enim Rex ubi dominatur Volumas non Lex c. Bract. l. 1. c. 8. Bracton argues And as is so often quoted from him and seditiously urged by the Authour of Julian Apostate p. 83. And the very same Argument was pleaded by all the late Regicides particularly by that Grand Regicide Bradshaw the Lawyer who had the Impudence to sit as Judge upon the Bench and to pronounce that Diabolical Sentence of Condemnation upon his own Dread Sovereign King Charles the First of Blessed Memory and he palliated over his and their Horrid Treason with this colour of argument to wit That the Law was above the King Ans It is hoped that all the Gentlemen of the Long-Robe will go on as they already have worthily begun to repair the Honour of their Noble Order and that none of them will any more advise or plead for Treason nor ever again deceive and seduce the silly ignorant People with their specious and fallacious Arguments But that they who have been disloyal will suffer themselves and their Youth to be better Disciplined in the Doctrine of the Church of England The neglect of which has too apparently caused some of that Honourable and most necessary Function and their Clients so grosly to err in point of Obedience But as for the above mentioned Objection it is already pithily Answered by the King 's Learned Sergeants at Law in Hilary-Term 1683 in their truly Loyal Motto A DEO REX A REGE LEX God made the King the King made the Law And therefore very false and Antiscriptural are the forementioned Positions scil 1. That the Law made the King 2. That the Law is above the King For although the Law of God indeed is above all Kings and if they wilfully transgress the same they are all accountable unto God and unto God onely for the same Yet in this Kingdom of England no statute-Statute-Law is or can be above the King And that because It was the King who first gave Life and Being to the Law of the Land The King by his Royal Assent made the Law Salvâ Regiâ Praerogativâ to be what it is to wit a Law But the Law of the Land did not make the King to be what he is to wit a King For the King was King before the Law And so he became the principal efficient Cause of the Law And therefore the King was before the Law inasmuch as the Cause is ever before the Effect And it is to be noted That although the Law may by Repeal or other ways be abolished and dye Yet in England the King never does nor can dye as long as there is alive any Lawfull Heir by Primogeniture though never so Remote Object But most if not all the Anti-Yorkists did and still do urge in favour of their Bill of Exclusion the Statute of 13 Qu Eliz. c. 1. When a Law was made to this purpose scil That it should be High-Treason for any to affirm the Right in Succession of the Crown to be in some other than the Queen Or to affirm that the Laws and Statutes do not bind the Right of the Crown and the Descent Limitation Inheritance and Governance thereof Whosoever shall during the Queens Life by book or work written or printed expresly affirm before the same be established by Parliament that any one particular person is or ought to be Heir and Successour to the Queen except the same be the natural issue of her body c. shall for the first offence be a whole year Imprisoned and forfeit half his Goods and for the second offence shall incur the penalty of Praemunire Polt Qu. El. 13. c. 1. This is the Act and these are the words of that Act which the Authour of Julian the Apostate and all the Factious Associatours have so stiffly pleaded in Justification of their Bill of Exclusion Ans But a little to undeceive the deluded People and to tell the Truth as far as we apprehend it First There was an Occasion if not a Necessity for such an Act in Queen Elizabeth's days but there is none in these of ours And the Reason for it is this scil Because in Her days many both Papists and Fanaticks disputed Queen Elizabeth's Right and Title to the Crown Nor was it certainly known who by Birth
noted That although oft-times God did use his own Prerogative and did among the Jews set up and pull down Kings at his pleasure which no Creature though nver so great ought to doe Yet this is to be observed that after God had once setled the Succession of the Crown of Israel in King David's Family and particularly on King Solomon's Issue by Primogeniture That then it was High Treason for any to put by the Lawfull Heir and Successour although the said Heir was an Idolater and never so bad as to either Faith or Manners Nor may we forget the Chronologer's Observation scil Allen Script Chronol p. 154. That All who reigned in Judah after King Solomon they all were the Right Heirs to the Crown except onely Queen Athaliah who was of the House of Omri and of the Tribe of Issachar She onely by Usurpation Fraud and Violence stepped up into the Throne that did not belong to her and she paid dear for it for the Divine Vengeance soon overtook her and rendred to her the just wages of her Treason which was Death for 2 Chron. 23.15 they laid hold on her and slew her and set up Joash the Right Heir and then all the people rejoiced and the City was quiet v. 21 after that they had slain Athaliah the Usurper with the Sword and had restored Joash the Right Heir by Primogeniture unto the Crown And although for the sins of Solomon Almighty God did rend away from the House and Lineage of King Solomon ten Tribes and erected a distinct King over those said ten Tribes to shew 1. His own Justice against impenitent sinners 2. To exert his own Prerogative and to let the World know that it is in his power alone to set up and to Depose Kings Yet God did not dis-inherit for ever the Right Heir of King Solomon For although God did set up a New Kingdom and a New Succession in Israel for the Reasons above mentioned Yet it was onely for a certain term of years And by limiting the Succession in Israel to a term of years the Allwise God did clearly hint to all men this Truth to wit That notwithstanding the Inter-Regnum's of Jeroboam and of all the other Kings of Israel that however still the Right of Inheritance and of Succession to the Imperial Crown over all Israel as well as over all Judah still belonged to the Line and House of Solomon And it so happened that after God had sufficiently punished the House of Solomon for their Rebellions against his Divine Majesty That then according to his own Law of Inheritance he restored the whole Kingdom back again to the Right Heir of the Line and House of King Solomon For 2 Kings 23.24 Josias the Right Heir of King Solomon by Primogeniture Reigned over all Israel as well as over all Judah Nor may we pass over in silence this Remark scil That whenever any Rebellious Subjects did depose and kill any King whether in Judah as did the Mutinous Subjects destroy Amon King of Judah 2 Kings 21.23 upon the pretence of his being an Idolater 1 Kings 16.9 Or in Israel as did Treacherous Zimri Murther his Lord Elah King of Israel Now whenever any did thus disloyally attempt to depose and kill their Lawfull Prince and did endeavour to prevent the Right Heir from enjoying the Crown Then did God by his wise and just Providence so order Matters as that the said Treacherous Attempters were ever Prosecuted for Traitors and were deservedly Executed for their Treason And if any scrupulous person shall desire to be farther informed ☞ for what Reason it is not Lawfull for any People to Depose and Kill their Lawfull King nor to Exclude the Right Heir by Primogeniture from succeeding in the Throne because of his Immorality Tyranny Idolatry or becaused of any other pretended wickedness whatever The Reason is Because Kings are accountable onely unto God for their Faith and Manners for their Principles and Practices and not unto the People their Subjects For it is God and not the People who sets up Hererditary Kings and Princes And therefore They are to give an Account of their Stewardship onely unto Him of whom they received it pa Hence it is That although God may in his wrath Depose Kings for their Sins committed against Himself Yet the People may not Depose any King for any Irregularities or Outrages committed against Themselves whether upon their Persons or their Estates For ☜ the King is therefore accountable unto God because He is though a King Inferiour to God being his Vicegerent But the King is therefore unaccountable to his Subjects the Peopple because He is their Superiour being their King And it is ever adjudged a thing preposterous and absurd for the Head to be accountable unto the Inferiour Members for its Government It is very true That both Reason and Interest speaks it to be the Duty and Concern of the Head to Govern and Manage the whole Body well reguarly and judiciously for fear of a severe check and punishment from an higher Hand to wit from the Superme Head and Governour of Heaven and Earth and for fear the whole Body should miscarry and be ruined thorough his ill Government But however if the Head will not doe his Duty and Govern well yet the Inferiour Members may not take up Arms and Rebell and in their zeal for Reformation cut off the Head as a Delinquent But in such a case It is the Inferiurs Duty humbly to kiss the Rod partiently to submit to Divine Providence and pray saying O Heavenly Father Thy will and not Ours be done And this by the way is worthy every Man's observation scil That although God doth oft-times raise up certain Rebels to be as his scourges to punish irregular Princes and although it be just in God so to doe Yet it is High Treason for those Rebels to execute God's Decrees and Judgments upon such their Lawfull Princes unless they have as had Jehu as special Warrant immediately from God himself so to doe which Warrant not Man since Christ's Advent ever had or can have in the days of the Gospel And therefore ☜ it is Treason for any Subjects upon the specious pretence of executing God's Decree and Vengeance to raise War make Sedition to Depose and Kill their Lawfull Prince Thus Absalom was guilty of High Treason in making War andi n raising Sedition against his Father King David and He Died for it And yet Absalom did onely execute God's Decree of Judgment against King David his Father In like manner God raised up Zimri to execute his Decree against the House of Baasha and permitted Him to destroy his Master King Elah the Son of Baasha which Action of Zimri's killing his Master King Elah is Condemned for an Act of High Treason and was by the Loyal People punished as such 1 Kings 16.20 And no better was Shallum's killing Zachariah the King For although Shallum had done no other in
killing his said Sovereign King Zachariah than what God aforehand had decreed should be done to the House of Jehu for his and their Hypocrisie and Wickedness Yet notwithstanding Shallum's executing God's Decree He was deservedly Condemned for a Traytor and at length Vengeance seized upon him By these and other Instances which might be alledged it is evident That Treason and Rebellion although Commenced upon never so Religious a pretence very seldom if ever went unpunished And therefore we Christians may pertinently urge in this case of Treason and Rebellion what Christ alledged in that of Offences Matth. 18.7 Woe to the World because of Offences for Offences will come but Woe to them by whom the Offence cometh So here Woe to the World because of Treasons and Rebellions for Treasons and Rebellions will happen as long as Youth are not duely Catechised and men are not better and more Loyally Principled But Woe to those Men by whom Seditions Treasons and Rebellions do come For the Divine Nemesis will undoubtedly pursue and over-take them either in this World or in that to come SECT IV. The Proposition proved by Reason and the Common Sentiments of Religion REason and Religion dictate it to be a thing absolutely sinfull and unlawfull for any Subjects whatever High or Low if they be Subjects in Parliament or out of Parliament to Depose their Lawfull Prince And that it is also unlawfull for any Subjects The Bill of Exclusion unlawfull by a Bill of Exclusion or by any other Means to put by the Lawfull Heir from the Crown for fear as was lately pretended He should alter Religion and so bring many Evils upon the Nation Now that it is utterly unlawfull and sinfull for any Subjects to doe thus Reason dictates Because to preclude a Lawfull Heir from the Crown for fear of future Evils which may happen in his Reign and Government is truly 1. Malitious To suppose a fault in the Right Heir before there is one and to Act upon such a Supposal savours of the height of Malice and Dis-ingenuity In truth so to doe in our apprehension is no better than to Hang a Man first and then to Try him afterward 2. Atheistical So to doe is to trust more to Man's Policy than to God's Wisedom more to Man's Care than to God's Providence for the prevention of suture Evils The Holy Scriptures assure us that the Heart of the King and of his Right Heir is in the hand of the Lord Prov. 21.1 and as the Rivers of Water he turneth it whither soever he will But this late Fanatical Doctrine of Deposing Kings and of Excluding the Right Heir from the Crown for want of Grace and for fear of future Evils that may possibly be done by Him speaks the contrary For this their Doctrine avouches for a Truth that the Heart of the King and of his Successour is not in the hand of the Lord Or if it be that then God will not turn it so as to doe any Good to the People And therefore the People especially in Parliament for the Good of the Common-wealth ought to Usurp God's Prerogative and take the Heart of the King and of his Lawfull Heir into their own hands and dispose of it as they the People shall judge best Now What is all this but in effect not onely to Depose and Dethrone an Earthly Prince and his Lawfull Heir but also to Depose and Dethrone Almighty God himself Nay What is it in plain English but for the People to take the Reins of Government out of God's hand into their own and to Rule the World according to their own exuberant fancies Nay What is it at the best but to doe an apparent Evil that a Contingent Good may come on it Which Principle is Antichristian and Condemned for such by Saint Paul who assures us That they who maintain such an irreligious Tenet scil Let us doe Evil Rom. 3.8 that Good may come Their Damnation is just And here it is to be farther noted That if it be as has been proved to be a sin for the Subjects upon any pretence whatever to Depose their King and to Exclude his Lawfull Heir from the Throne for fear of any Evil that may happen through his ill Government Now if this be a sin Then to be sure much more is it a sin for any Subjects to endeavour That a Law might be made to Disinherit the Lawfull Heir of the Crown upon the pretences aforesaid For 1. To make such a Law is truly to make a Law directly to oppose and contradict the unalterable Law of Inheritance which says that the Right Heir by Primogeniture shall Inherit and the other known Law of God That He who hateth Right shall Govern And therefore it was a notorious Sin Opposite to God's Law of Inheritance an Antichristian Act in the late Shaftsburian-Associators to move for a Bill of Exclusion of his present Royal Highness James Duke of YORK from Succeeding in the Throne notwith-standing his undoubted Right thereunto by Primogeniture upon a presumptive jealousie that He would not be a Friend to the true Episcopal-Protestant Religion of the Church of England as now by Law Established For by this Attempt they endeavoured to have set up a New Law of Man against the Ancient Law of God which Commands as we have heard already that the Right Heir shall Govern although he hate Righteousness and although he be a Belial an Idolater And the Law of God is so far from either Deposing a Lawfull King or Precluding the Right Heir as that it will not suffer any Subjects whatever to say Their King is Wicked or that their Princes are Vngodly 2. The Cause of Civil Wars and Sedition To make a Law for the Exclusion of the Lawfull Heir from the Crown is to establish Sedition and Faction by Law And it is not onely to cause but also to perpetuate an Intestine and Civil War by Law as our present most Wise and most Gratious King prudently and too truly urged in his late Declaration giving that for one Reason why neither in Honour nor in Conscience could He give his Royal Fiat unto that unnatural and irreligious Bill of Exclusion For if such a Bill should pass into a Law then there must inevitably follow a Bloudy Civil War Which can please none but them who delight in Bloud and love to sish in troubled waters And which will be worse The said War will in all likelihood continue untill the longest Sword shall have carried all before it And who knows but that Might may once again overcome Right as it did at Worcester Fight and in the late Cruel Rebellion Now Reason assures us That upon passing the Bill of Exclusion into a Law there most certainly will follow a Civil War and that because There will be in the Kingdom two Opposite irreconcilable Abettors for the Crown and their Adherers such as 1. The Right Heir by Primogeniture Excluded and his
and Primogeniture was the Lawfull Heir of the Crown after Queen Elizabeth's Decease in case she should dye without Issue of her own Body And therefore an Act passed Declaring two things scil 1. That Queen Elizabeth was by Birth and Primogeniture the Lawfull Heir of the Crown 2. That whomsoever the said Queen and the Laws of the Realm should declare to be by Descent and Primogeniture her Lawfull Heir and Successour That then He or She so declared should be acknowledged and owned for the Right Heir of the Crown it being declared as was said before that He or She was the Right and proper Heir by virtue of Birth Descent and Primogeniture So that the aforementioned Act of Queen Elizabeth does confirm the Right of Succession to the Imperial Crown of Great Britain to be onely by Lawfull Descent and Primogeniture Secondly But farther If the meaning of that Act of Queen Eliz. 13. c. 1. were otherwise than we apprehend it to be Yet it is well known that That Act of Queen Eliz. 13. c. 1. is Obsoleted and out of Date and was made onely for Queen Elizabeth's Reign and therefore is of no force or validity in these our days And that because in this our day the Right Heir to the Crown by Descent and Primogeniture is well known For if he were not well known then pray what need is there of a Bill of Exclusion to barr and preclude the Right Heir from succeeding in the Throne and that onely as is pretended for fear the supposed Right Heir when once got into the Throne should not Govern well From these Arguings it is evident That the above-mentioned Act of Queen Elizabeth is out of Date and does no ways affect these our times in which there is at least there need be no dispute who at present is the Right Heir by Primogeniture And therefore it cannot be ignorance but as we fear right down Prejudice not to call it Malice in them who are knowing in the Law to urge from that Act of Queen Elizabeth's a Lawfulness to hinder by a Bill of Exclusion the Right Heir from Inheriting the Imperial Crown of England which is his undoubted Right by virtue of his lineal Descent and Primogeniture It will not be impertinent here to add the Observation of some judicious Men How that God never blessed either that Family or that People which have unnaturally dis-inherited the Right Heir And it has been observed by many That although the Law of this Our Kingdom does permit Parents to cut off the Entails of their Estates from their Eldest Sons when prodigal and vitious or otherwise Yet it has been observed That those Families which have taken that Liberty which the Law of the Land has given them and therefore have dis-inherited the Right Heir That they never prospered or continued long but by some evil Accident or other they have been blasted in their Estates or Reputations and in few years have dwindled away into nothing And as thus the Curse and Wrath of God has pursued private Families which have dis-inherited the Right Heirs to their Estates So much more exemplarily has the Wrath of Almighty God visited in a direfull manner those Nations and People which have Rebelliously Deposed their Lawfull Kings and have Dis-inherited the Right Heirs to the Crown And We the Inhabitants of Great Britain have had wofull experience of this Truth For who does not Remember those sad Judgments which afflicted this Our Nation upon the Deposition and Murther of the late Pious Martyr King Charles the First and upon the Exclusion of the Right Heir to the Crown even our present Dread Sovereign King Charles the Second And what Shall we ever yield again to them who Plot to bring down the same or worse Judgments upon us by Excluding the next Right Heir to the Crown God forbid But rather seeing We of this Nation are made whole and do enjoy Our privileges and immunities our peace and quietness Let us therefore Sin no more by our Rebellion and Sedition Lest a worse thing come unto us For that wholesome Advice which Christ gave to the Impotent Man in the Gospel is very applicable unto England Behold thou art made whole Sin no more by Deposing or Precluding the Right Heir lest a worse thing come unto thee CHAP. IV. That all Subjects ought actively to Obey their Natural and Lawfull Prince in all things which be not positively against some known Law of God although their said Prince be an Heathen an Idolater and Apostate or never so Morally vitious THE Proposition we shall endeavour to prove 1. By the Law of Nature and of Natural Reason which enacts That the Inferiour shall ever be Obsequious and Obedient to his Superiour 2. By the Authority of Sacred Scripture and Divine Reason which Anathematizes all Rebellion and the Authours of it 3. By the Authority and Practice 1. Of honest Loyal Heathens 2. Of Christians Both Primitive and Modern SECT I. The Duty of Obedience to Superiours whether Morally Good or Bad proved by the Law of Nature and of Natural Reason NAtural Reason dictates this Truth to wit That if a King has a Right to Command and Govern then the Subjects have an indispensable Obligation upon them to Obey for Precept and Obedience are naturally concomitant And as Father and Son so Prince and People are Relatu secundum esse not onely Relatives but also Essential Relatives Aristot Polit. l. 1. c. 8. whose very Essence as such consists in a mutual Relation of the one unto the other So that as no man can be said to be a Father who has no Son so no man can be said to be a King who has no Subjects And as all Sons are either Dutifull or Undutifull So all Subjects are either Obedient or Disobedient And as it is a Breach of the Law of Nature for a Son to be undutifull So it is a Breach of the same Law for a Subject to be disobedient For as the non-performance of the Father's Lawfull Commands renders the Son undutifull So the non-performance of the King 's Lawfull Injunctions speaks the Subject Rebellious And whoever denies Obedience to his King does in effect deny him to be King And this is to be noted That by the Law of Nature All Children are strictly obliged to Obey their Parents whether they be Christians or Infidels Good or Bad For in the point of Filial Obedience no Child ought to Dispute the Faith and Religion the Morality or Immorality of his Parents All that he is to consider is that near that essential Relation in which they stand unto him to wit that they are his Natural Parents And therefore without farther dispute They are to be obeyed And as thus the Son So also the Subject in point of Obedience to his Prince is not to dispute nor question the Virtues or the Vices the Religion or Principles of his Prince But solely to consider that essential and indissoluble Relation in which his Prince
of all men were most free from Courtship and Flattery they especially the Prophet Daniel did Honour and Worship even Heathen-Kings and frequently saluted them with this Pathetical Option VIV AT REX O King Live for ever Which is all one with God save the King In like manner St. Paul did Honour Noble Festus the Roman Governour and King Agrippa who were no Christians And the same Apostle exhorts Titus Bishop of Crete Tit. 3.1 to put All Men in mind of being subject to Principalities and Powers to obey Magistrates whether Christians or Heathens good or bad and to be ready to every good work And in Hebr. 13.17 the Jews are Commanded to obey all that had Rule over them Which Rulers over them in the State were the Roman Emperours and Deputies who were at that time inveterate Enemies to Christianity Our Blessed Saviour himself Commands all Men Christians especially to give unto Caesar what is Caesar's as well as to God what is God's And the Law of God and of Man tells us that Honour and Obedience is Caesar's due therefore it must be paid And St. Paul writing to the New-converted Romans at Rome charges them to be subject to Caesar and the Higher Powers And he gives this Reason for the necessity of their Obedience to wit Because there is no power but of God and that Rom. 13.1 2. Whosoever resisteth the Powers resisteth the Ordinance of God and he that risisteth shall receive to himself Damnation And the very same pious Doctrine of Loyalty does St. Peter teach 1 Pet. 2.13 Submit your selves to every Ordinance of Man for the Lord's sake whether it be to the King as Supreme or to Governours as unto them which are sent by him And v. 18. St. Peter adds as the Whole Duty of Man this Injunction Fear God Honour the King Thereby according to Beaufrons plainly intimating unto us this excellent Truth scil That if we will not peaceably submit to every Ordinance of the King * Beaufrons c. 8. p. 89. as to things Lawfull but become Mutinous and Rebellious then notwithstanding our high profession of Religion and of fearing God we neither Fear God nor Honour the King for as God is ever to be Feared so the King is ever to be Honoured Unto these Instances of Holy Writ pleading for Obedience to Kings and to the Supreme Magistrates we may add that Loyal Decree which the Reubenites and Gadites and the half Tribe of Manasseh made For they all were so zealous for Obedience unto Joshua their Supreme Magistrate as that they Decreed Josh 1.18 That whosoever Disobeyed Joshuah's Commands and would not hearken unto his words in all that he commanded he should be put to Death The Prophet Samuel terms Rebellion no better than Witchcraft 1 Sam. 15.23 So that according to him Whosoever Rebells has forsaken God and is gone over Volunteer to the Devil and is carrying on his works of Darkness Nor may we pass over in silence that smart check which the Heathen Sanballat gave though most undeservedly unto Loyal Nehemiah saying What is this thing that ye doe Nehem. 2.19 Will ye Rebell against the King Will ye Rebell that is to say in the Negative No surely ye will not offer to Rebell against the King For your Jewish Religion which ye say is the onely true Religion in the World teaches you otherwise and instructs you better to wit That although the King be in your opinion no other than an uncircumcised Heathen and as you believe an Idolater Yet for all this ye ought according to your own Religion not to Rebell against him From these Proofs in Canonical Scriptures we may rationally argue and conclude with the truly Loyal Archbishop Laud and others of the Church of England scil That all the Commands of a King Heyl. in Vit. Archb. Laud. p. 310. which are not upon the first Inference and Illation contrary to some clear passage of the Word of God or to some evident Sun-beam of the Law of Nature are precisely to be obeyed SECT III. The Proposition That All Lawfull Kings whether Morally good or bad ought to be obeyed proved by the Authority and Practice of honest Heathens HItherto we have heard the Divine Oracles amply declaring the Subjects Duty peaceably to Obey their Lawfull Kings and their Successours whether Papists or Protestants Heathens or Christians Good or Bad. The very same Truth and Duty we find urged and confirmed by the Authority and Practice of mere Heathens who were guided onely by the glimmering Light of their Natural Reason even such as they did not onely teach but also practise Loyalty and Obedience to their Lawfull Princes Hesiod discoursing on the Benefits of Kingly Government tells his Reader that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Hesiod Theog c. unto the King the People do all most dutifully look waiting for his Word of Command They being fully assured that seeing their prosperity is his happiness He therefore will order all things right according to the Rules of Justice And when King Jupiter was Dethroned by the Rebellious Titanes then the Loyal Party mustered up their Forces and humbly tendering their Services to him their King They all unanimously entred into a solemn Vow that they would fight his Cause and never sheath their Swords untill 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. they had vanquished all his Enemies and had restored him to his Imperial Crown and Dignity Theocritus enlarging himself on the Praise and high Commendations of King Ptolemaeus says He was 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the most happy of all men not onely in that He being King 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Theocr. c. was the care and charge of the Supreme God But also he was happy in that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 All his Subjects were Obedient and Conformable to his Government and were not factious and tumultuous nor given to Seditious Talk nor to Idleness 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 But every man kept his own Station and peaceably followed his own business And at last he religiously concludes his Panegyrick on the said King with this pathetical Epiphonema 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Theocr. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 17. God save King Ptolemy Phocylides in his Admonitory Poem 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Cautions all men especially Subjects that are under an Oath of Obedience punctually to keep their Faith and Allegiance And that Because 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. God hates a perjured person It is Remarkable That Fabius Maximus after he had been Consul five times became Obedient to his Son Suessa who was promoted to that high Office And when some jealousie arose that He had contemned the Authority of his said Son for that upon his first approach into his Son's Presence He did not bow the Knee nor did him that Honour and lowly Reverence which was due to his Consulary Dignity Fabius presently corrected the mistake assuring his Son the Consul that He did not forbear to give
THE PREROGATIVE OF Primogeniture SHEWING That the Right of SVCCESSION TO AN Hereditary Crown DEPENDS Not upon Grace Religion c. But Onely upon Birth-Right and Primogeniture AND That the Chief Cause of all or most Rebellions in Christendom is a Fanatical Belief That Temporal Dominion is founded in Grace By DAVID JENNER B. D. Prebendary of Sarum and Rector of Great Warley in Essex LONDON Printed for J. Hindmarsh Bookseller to His Royal Highness at the Black Bull in Cornhill 1685. TO THE Most Royal and High-Born PRINCE JAMES DUKE of YORK AND ALBANY EARL of VLSTER LORD High Admiral of ENGLAND IRELAND And all Foreign Plantations Constable of Dover-Castle Lord Warden of the Cinque-Ports Governour of Portsmouth c. Most Royal Sir YOUR Unparallel'd Magnanimity and other Your most Eminent Vertues and Excellencies are so well known to the Christian World as that Envy it self cannot obscure them And whatever English Man does or shall hereafter audaciously presume to deny You his hearty 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and Euge is and ever will be unworthy any longer to be an Inhabitant of Great Britain Whose present Peace and Prosperity next unto Almighty God's Over-ruling Providence and unto Our most Gratious King 's Wise Conduct of Affairs is Owing unto Your Highness's Matchless Valour and Prudence The which You have most signally demonstrated in Vanquishing the King's and the Nation 's Enemies Abroad And in being highly instrumental in Suppressing them at Home So that if Fabius Maximus Deserved the Thanks of the whole Roman-Senate for his prudent Management of their Republick Concerns Then infinitely more has Your Royal Highness Merited not onely the Thanks of Our English Senate but over and above even Statues and Shrines of Gold Gratefully to be erected in perpetual Memory of Your most Glorious Atchievements But Ah ungratefull England That after Your most Illustrious Highness had Jeoparded Your Royal Person in many desperate and bloudy Battels at Sea and at Land onely for the Honour and Welfare of this Your Native Country whose Safety You oft times most Generously preferred before Your Own You should at last be so basely and so inhumanely requited As to have an Vnchristian and Unnatural Bill of Exclusion from Your Undoubted Birth-Right pass against You through the Prevalency of the Anti-Protestant and Factious Associatours in the late House of Commons who over-powering the Loyal Party in the said House Voted Sabbati 6. die Novembris 1680 and on Sabbati a day when surely those Fanatical Persons thought the Holy Jesus was again gone out of this World down into the Grave as to his Body and Descended into Hell as to his Soul doing Penance there for Mankind And so would not on a Saturday be present upon Earth to eye and behold their disloyal and disingenuous Actions and therefore They became Rampant and did what they pleased in spight of God and the King And being a Majority they Voted Nemine Contradicente Sabbati 26 die Martii 1681. Your Royal Highness's Exclusion from the Imperial Crown of England and Ireland c. Printed by the Order of Wi. Williams Speaker A Vote steep'd in so much Gall and Vinegar and attended with so much Disloyalty and Ingratitude As might justly have set All Your Noble and Heroick Passions on fire But God be praised In imitation of the Captain of our Salvation You have perfectly Conquered Your self Which personal Victory according to not onely the Stoical but also Christian Philosophy is more Memorable than All your other most Famous Conquests And Caesar like nay rather Jesu like You have forgot Nothing but to be Revengefull upon Your inveterate Enemies Which is Your Immortal Glory And one thing I most humbly suggest to Your Princely and most Christian Consideration as an undeniable Truth Scil. That Those Your Enemies who have or still do endeavour Your Royal Highness's Exclusion Contrary to the Divine and Natural Law of Your Birth-Right and Primogeniture neither were nor are Protestants nor any true Sons of the Church of England as now established by Law But they were and are onely a Company of Perjured Pseudo-Protestants Who under the specious pretence of being Vogued Protestants did and still do carry on their Diabolical Faction and Treasonable Association For in England onely He is a Protestant Beaufrons c. 1. who heartily believes and as heartily protests for and couragiously defends The King's Supremacy And who Christian-like Cordially declares for the Succession of the King 's Lawfull Heir according to Primogeniture whether He be Papist or Protestant whether Morally Good or Bad For This is the constant and professed Doctrine of the Apostolical-Protestant Church of England As I humbly conceive is sufficiently proved in the following Treatise The which does truly blush to approach Your Royal and most Illustrious Presence in its mean Dress and Country Garb. But forasmuch as it is the lively Draught of a most Loyal Heart towards His Majesty and of a most Faithfull and Devoted one towards Your Highness The Authour therefore most humbly begs Your Candid Acceptance of it Assuring Your Highness That He has no other Ambition in Publishing the same than where he lives to be instrumental in educating and instructing the People in the true Principles of Primitive Piety and Loyalty And whilst He lives be serviceable according to his Capacity unto God the King and the Church And to let the World know that He is Your Royal Highness 's Most Dutifull most Humble and Devoted Servant David Jenner THE CONTENTS CHAP. I. THE Necessity of Government Page 1. CHAP. II. Monarchy the best Form of Government p. 6. CHAP. III. That all Kings and their Lawfull Heirs ought by Right of Primogeniture to Reign and Govern Successively whether they be Morally Good or Bad whether Infidels or Christians Papists or Protestants p. 18. SECT I. The Proposition proved by Humane Authority of Heathens ibid. SECT II. The Proposition That Succession to the Throne ought to be by Primogeniture and not by Grace proved by Divine Authority p. 21. SECT III. The Proposition proved by the Vnalterable Law of Inheritance by Primogeniture p. 25. SECT IV. The Proposition proved by Reason and the Common Sentiments of Religion p. 37. The Bill of Exclusion of the Duke of York proved to be unlawfull and sinfull p. 38. Atheistical and Factious ibid. Opposite to the known Law of God p. 41. The Cause of perpetual Civil Wars and Sedition p. 42. The chief Pleas and Arguments for it Answered p. 43 44 c. CHAP. IV. That all Subjects ought Actively to obey their Lawfull Prince in all things which be not Positively against some known Law of God although their said Prince be an Heathen Idolater and Apostate or never so Morally vitious p. 56. SECT I. The Duty of Obedience to Superiours whetheh Morally Good or Bad proved by the Law of Nature an of Natural Reason p. 57. SECT II. The Duty of Obedience to Superiours whether Christians or Heathens Good or Bad proved by Authority of
Divine Reason and Scripture p. 67. SECT III. The Proposition That all Lawfull Kings whether Morally Good or Bad ought to be obeyed proved by the Authority and Pactice of honest Heathens p. 72. SECT IV. That all Lawfull Kings ought Actively to be obeyed in all things which are not against some positive Law of God although the said Kings be Heathens Idolaters and Apostates or never so vitious proved by the Authority and Practice of the Primitive Christians p. 82. SECT V. Modern Authours for Obedience to Princes Of two sorts 1. Some Conditionally as All Recusants p. 104. 2. Some Absolutely as All Protestants p. 110. CHAP. V. The Doctrine and Practice of Deposing Kings and of Excluding the Right Heir by Primogeniture from succeeding in the Throne for his want of Grace or for being an Heretick Idolater Tyrannical or Wicked is grounded 1. Vpon Popery p. 122. 2. Vpon Fanaticism p. 135. CHAP. VI. A Parallel or a brief and true Account of some Plots and Treasons of Papists and Fanaticks against the Kings and Queens of England since the Reformation and Abrenunciation of Popery p. 155. The Popish Bygot's Covenant p. 163. The Fanaticks Scotch and English Covenant p. 165. CHAP. VII The chief Cause of Rebellion among Christians is a Belief of that false Position to wit That Temporal Dominion is founded in Grace p. 172. SECT I. Arguments proving That Temporal Dominion is not founded in Grace p. 178. SECT II. The evil Effects and Consequences of this Position That Temporal Dominion is founded in Grace Are such as these I. CONVENTICLES p. 185. II. REBELLION p. 187 III. A Confirming Heathen Kings and Princes in their Infidelity and Denial of Christ p. 191. ERRATA PAg. 35. and many other places for onely reade only p. 105. l. 11. without the Pope's Laws r. without the Pope's leave p. 89. in Margin r. in Secessùs abdito p. 149. l. 7. or r. of p. 179. l. 17. r. or for Idolatry In the Epist Ded. ult p. l. 6. add to THE PREROGATIVE OF PRIMOGENITURE CHAP. I. The Necessity of Government GOvernment bears date with if not before the Creation and runs parallel with Time if not with Eternity And is in many respects more necessary than Life or Being it self For it is not necessary that any particular finite Beings should always Exist But it is absolutely necessary they should always be Governed whilst they do Exist The World although made for Man did and still can subsist well enough without him But not without his Obedience And therefore as Orpheus aptly named Harmony the Life of Musick so Plato not improperly styled Order and Government the Life of the Vniverse For Government tanquam Anima even as a Soul Animates all parts of the World with a Political Life and causes every Individual to answer the end of its Existency which is the Conservation of the Whole although it be with the loss of its own particular natural Life For in this Case the Publick Good is ever to be preferred before a Private And it is better not to be at all than not to be usefull Were it not for Government there would be neither Being nor Well-Being for every thing would take up Arms under pretence of Self-preservation and then the Conclusion can be nothing else but Confusion for according to the Jewish Proverb Grot. de Jur. Bell. l. 1. c. 4. Nisi potestas publica esset alter alterum vivum deglutiret c. Unless there were publick Government One would become a prey to the Other even as the (a) Genus beminum agreste sine legibus sine imperio liberum atque solutum c. ibid. Aborigines in the East and the Mohegians in the West Indies who having no Laws nor Government eat and devour one another alive And (b) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. St. Chrysostome writing on the Necessity and Benefit of Government informs us to the same purpose scil That where there is no Government there men soon lose the exercise of their Reason and become more savage and cruel than the irrational Brutes and not onely snarle and bite like Dogs but even devour each other like rapacious Birds and ravenous Beasts of prey And it is most certain that there never happened any Evil either in Heaven among the Angels or on Earth among Men but upon the Breach of Law and good Government The Hebrew word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which we translate to Govern primarily and emphatically signifies to Bind and to Heal a wound by Binding it up tight and close after the manner of Chirurgeons And Codurcus applying the proper signification of the said word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 unto Government tells his Reader Codurc in Job 34. v. 17 18. Quòd Imperium Jura Leges sint velut Vincula Reipublicae c. That Government Laws and Statutes are the sure Bands and Ligaments of the World in general and of every Kingdom in particular which knit and firmly tie all parts together and so prevent a Rupture for Sine imperio Magistratu solvuntur omnes Civilis Societatis Compages c. Without Government there can be no Civil Society but all things must unavoidably run into Anarchy and Confusion which certainly can please none of Mankind but onely Timon of Athens the Man-Hater and such who delight to sport and fish in troubled waters Kings and Governours are very appositely in Hebrew termed 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Heads Because they as Heads do Govern and Order all the inferiour Members of the several Bodies-politick And 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Kings are like the great Jice and Beams of the Building or chief Corner-stones of the House which keep up and support the whole Fabrick and therefore are they most elegantly styled Clavi Reipublicae the main Pins and Studs of the Common-wealth All which sufficiently speaks the indispensable Necessity of Government in general And as to the Original or first Authour of Government it is no other than Almighty God the Supreme Monarch and Governour of the whole World visible and invisible Wherefore whoever Resists Government is truly said in Holy Writ to Resist God himself And he that will turn a perfect Libertine and would live without Government must turn a perfect Atheist and must live without God in the World CHAP. II. Monarchy the best Form of Government THE Moral Philosopher discoursing on the various sorts of Government gives the Precedency unto Monarchy as being Divino Imperio quà m simillima most like the Government of the All-wise God which is the first and the best of all Eupolemus in his Book de Judaeae Regibus makes (a) Deut. 33.5 Moses was King in Jesurun Maimon in Loc. Moses to be an absolute Monarch over the Jews and that he was accountable unto none for his Actions but onely unto God as the Sacred Scriptures in many instances do prove and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. and that he even Moses was the first of the Wise
and yet cannot abide to have their soars touched by any means but would have liberty to pervert all things c. And in his Institutes he speaks more plainly and says That although it be not Lawfull for private men * Si qui nunc sint populares Magistratus ad moderandam Regum libidinem constituti c. Calv. Instit l. 4. c. 20. § 31. p. 331. to rise up against their King yet where there are inferiour Magistrates elected out of the people or where there are three Orders or States there the people ought by their Representatives to moderate their King 's ill Government to punish his Vice and Tyranny and to over-rule him as the Ephori did the Lacedemonian Kings and as the peoples Tribunes did the Roman Consuls whom they Deposed when they thought fit and that they are Traytors to the People and Common-wealth if they do not oppose their Prince's Tyranny Theodore Beza imitates his Master Calvin and writes very unworthily and reproachfully of (a) Cujusmodi vitia sunt impietas avaritia ambitio crudelitas luxus libidines c. Beza de Confes fid c. 5. Kings taxing them generally with Pride and Luxury with Cruelty and Covetousness with Folly and Ignorance And therefore Beza says That Kings ought not to presede nor to be present in Oecumenical or National Councils and Synods And thus he clearly denies the King's Supremacy by virtue of which Constantine preseded in the first Nicene Council Beza's own words are Deinde res ipsa ostendit Bez. Conf. fid de Eccl. c. 5. periculosissimum esse Principum Auctoritate Concilia subjicere multis de causis c. And as for Diocesan Bishops he did not onely utterly deny any such Order but very provokingly calls them Porcorum Asinorum armentum no better than Hogs and Asses And after Beza had excluded Kings from Councils Synods and Church Affairs then he subjugates Kings and all Secular Magistrates to his Consistorian Orders and Discipline Et vicissim nemo est qui verbo Dei ac proinde Ecclesiasticae Disciplinae non subjiciatur c. Which Ecclesiastick Orders and Canons he makes equivalent with the Word of God After all this Beza goes on to inform his Reader as did Calvin and he uses many of Calvin's own words to wit That the Parliament States or Burgesses of the People may and ought to check and restrain wicked Kings and severely to punish (a) Hic igitur quid erit constituendum respondeo Superioribus Potestatibus cujus modi nunc sunt septem viri in Romano imperio quos Electores vocant Regni Status in omnibus ferè Monarchiis hoc onus incumbere ut furentes Tyrannos cohibeant quod ni faciant ipsos ut Patriae Proditores rationem suae perfidiae coram Domino reddituros quod autem attinet ad privatos homines tenere illos oportet plurimum inter se differre injuriam inferre injuriam pati c. Beza Confess fid cap. 5. de Eccles Edit Genev. p. 171 172. them and if they do not then they are Traytours to their Countrey And although it be not lawfull for private men to oppose correct or depose Kings when they govern ill yet the aforesaid Inferiour Magistrates may when their Kings are guilty of the above-mentioned vices And he makes the Septemviri or Burgesses and States of the People to be the Superiour Powers above the King Amandus Polanus Querying Whether the People do sin in Conventicling to hear the Word of God contrary to the King's Edicts (b) An subditi peccent contra interdictum Principis Convenientes ad audiendum Evangelium R. Non peccant He determines it in the Negative scil Non peccant they do not sin And Querying again Whether it be Lawfull to Resist a Tyrannical King He Answers scil (a) Si Rex sen Princeps Monarchiam habeat limitatam adstrictam certis conditionibus in quas juravit seu quas se promisit servaturum penes status aut Primores Regni seu Principatus est coercere Regis seu Principis Tyrannidem immanitatem c. That if a King has taken an Oath to govern by Law but contrary to his Oath He governs Tyrannically then it is in the power of the States the Lords and Princes of the Kingdom to punish and correct such a Prince and by force of Arms to suppress his Tyranny Nay He says farther That it is not onely Lawfull but also Meritorious (b) In Oppressa Republica si quis Tyrannum Occideret huic tanquam de Civitate benè Merito praemium decernitur Amand. Polan Syntag. Theol. l. 10. c. 72. p. 1247 1248. for any private person to kill a Tyrannical King who by his undue courses shall afflict and oppress the Common-wealth and that the City ought amply to Reward the said Regicide Frederic Baldwin a Lutheran and a Professour of Divinity at Witteberg does very Fanatically distinguish between the King's Person and his Office and says That the Honour and Obedience which the Subjects owe is due to the (a) In obedientia non is qui praest sed officium respiciendum est Non Personae Magistratum gerenti sed officio honor debetur Frid. Baldv Analys in Rom. 13.1 King's Office and not to his Person So that Subjects may according to this distinction take up Arms and fight against the King's Person and not against his Kingly Office They may kill the King as in England did the late Rebels and yet preserve his Office and set up another Person in his Office that is in his Throne And the said Baldwin Querying Whether it be Lawfull for Subjects to Resist their King in case he should prove Tyrannical He Answers (b) Quande subditi non omninò privaeti sunt sed in Inferiori Magistratu constituti illi Resistere possunt Superiori Magistratui si degenerat in Tyrannum Nam Inferiores Magistratus debent contra vim injustam subditorum vitam bona defendere ubi tamen hoc notandum inferiori Magistratui omnia prius tentanda quà m ad Arma veniendum ne videatur Rebellare c. Frider. Baldvin in Ro. 13. v. 1. quaest 3. That in those Kingdoms where there are Inferiour States and Magistrates Representing the People as in an House of Commons there the Inferiour Magistrates may lawfully oppose the said Tyrannical King or Supreme Magistrate and may raise an Army against him and may depose and if necessity require kill him as the Jews did Tyrannical Athaliah if he will not yield to the demands of the said Inferiour Magistrates and Representatives of the People Peter Martyr destroys all his former wholesome Doctrine of Obedience unto Kings and the Supreme Magistrates when he affirms That if the Superiour Powers shall suffer Vice and Idolatry to reign then as (a) Atqui superior potestas inquiunt fieri haec imperavit ad hoc jam antea multis respondimus nunc addatur si eadem potestas