themselves have neither Relation or Aspect to our present Circumstances they only enjoyn Obedience to all lawful Commands and prohibit Resistance under the greatest punishment when legally imposed which is so far from our late Transactions at which you scruple that they were only acted to preserve our pure and Apostolick Religion and secure our Fundamental Laws and Ancient Government And 't is most palpably ridiculous and very injurious to the Gospel to wrest places of Scripture peculiarly adapted to the Suffering State of Christianity I mean whil'st 't was under Pagan Princes and without National Laws to support it to blacken and condemn the Actions of Christians whose Religion and Liberties are Entail'd to posterity by Established Lawes and whose only Action for which they are blamed is for Rescuing their Religion from Superstition and Idolatry and their Ancient Liberties from the Vassallage and Slavery of Arbitrary Power Jac. But 't is observable when God chastiz'd the wickedness of the Kings of Israel he never did it by their own People but by a strange Nation shewing by the Conduct of his Justice and Providence that Subjects must not correct the Faults of their Kings but leave that to God to whom they are only Answerable for what they do Will. 'T is true that was the general Method God commonly used in that Nation especially with those he had advanced to the Throne by Vertue of an Extraordinary Commission from himself Yet the Histories of that Kingdom yield us particular Examples of the contrary practice Thus the Cruelty Irreligion and wicked Reign of Jeboram caused Libnah to revolt from under his Government 2 Chron. 21. 10. And the Reason of this Revolt was because Jehoram had forsaken the Lord God of his Fathers And the Maccabees when Antiochus Epiphanes their Lawful King had silenced the Jewish Burnt-Offerings and Sacrifices profaned their Sabbaths and polluted their Sanctuary by opposition and violence in a most hostile manner rescued their Worship from Heathen Idolatry and cleansed their Sanctuary from such Pagan Pollutions And the renowned and thinking Grotius allows the Necessity of things to consecrate the Action And the Learned and Ingenious Thorndike in his Right of the Church in a Christian State affirms God approved of this War And Heb. 11. commends their Faith for that Heroick and Vertuous Action Jac. Were I convinced of all we have hitherto discoursed of there is another Knot so intricate and perplexing that I despair ever of satisfaction The Oath of Allegiance is so express and positive so firm and binding an Obligation that nothing can possibly be a firmer Tie to secure my Obedience to James the Second viz. Not to take up Arms against the King upon any pretence whatsoever And to give this Oath of Fidelity to another is not only a Contradiction in it self but a down-right Violation of that former sacred Obligation Will. The Objection I confess before seriously considered is a very plausible plea and of great importance but when compared with the Rules of Right Reason and the Commands of Scripture the Difficulty doth immediately vanish Yet I deny not but such Oaths are of great advantage in a Publick Society by these Princes are secured of their Subjects Allegiance Generals of their Soldiers Fidelity Subjects assertained their Princes will not degenerate into Tyrants Leagues confirm'd between Nations Peace conserv'd among Men Mutual Commerce and Trading secured Liberties and Properties maintained Controversies and Suits decided And among those the Oath of Allegiance challenges a prime place being really and indeed a very sacred Obligation viz. a calling of God to witness the Reality of our Intenâ—ion to keep inviolable that Faith and Obedience we have promised and sworn to our Superiors the breach of which is a most horrid Crime a superlative Perjury very often severely punished in this World and without a sincere and unfeigned Repentance will inevitably ruin us in the next So that whatever we thus promise we are as firmly obliged to perform as the Wit of Man can contrive to bind us But notwithstanding all this the Oath of Allegiance however solemnly administred or however significant or express in it self adds nothing to the Duty of Obedience incumbent upon us as Subjects without and antecedent to the formal Administration of it it may indeed corroborate and confirm the Obligation by adding Perjury to our Disobedience but it cannot encrease or augment the Duty And the very End and Design of the Oath attests the same for though the Oath do particularly name the Supream Magistrate because he is Head of the whole Society as if 't were design'd only for his Protection and Safety yet we may rationally infer That the Parliament being conven'd for the good of the Publick who invented this Oath took it themselves and imposed it upon others had in this Oath a more General and Notable Intention of a more Excellent and Transcendent Nature viz. to promote the Safety Honour and Happiness of the whole Society This is evident from the Ridiculousness and Injustice of that acceptation for if the Oath of Allegiance be obligatory only in the former sense viz. have respect only to the Protection and Safety of the King's Person without having any Relation to the Peace and Welfare of the Publick By this Obligation our Representatives in Parliament put both themselves and us into the hands of the Supream Power to destroy us at his pleasure binding us by the most solemn Obligations imaginable even the Sacred Ties of the Oath of Allegiance quietly to submit to the Invasions of our Liberties and Properties Confiscation of our Goods Sequestration of our Estates Prophanation of our Holy and Apostolick Religion by Superstitious and Idolatrous Practices and to all other barbarous Outrages that the Pride and Ambition of Man or the Malice and Cruelty of Implacable Enemies could invent which is a Soloecism of so grand a Consequence as we may well think impossible for so Learned Judicious and August a Senate to impose upon themselves Especially if we consider that the Oath of Allegiance taken only in the former Intention confounds and destroys all other Constitutions of Parliament is opposite and destructive to the Fundamental Laws of Nature viz. Self-Preservation and plainly repugnant to the Divine Rules and Precepts which to any Rational Man methinks should be a sufficient Argument to engage him to understand it in the Second and more Excellent Sense since 't is granted by all Men of Reason and Learning That Oaths are only obligatory in the Sense of those Persons who invent and impose them if their Intention may clearly and rationally appear from the words as expressed in the Oath Now the Oath of Allegiance in different Circumstances being capable of a double Construction and both apparently agreeable to the Intention and Design of the Composers I will a little illustrate the Reasonableness of this twofold signification The Royal Authority being the Head of the Body Politick the Life of
of those Established Laws This Power was held in high Estimation by the whole Society and by the setled Constitutions of the Government a proportionable Tribute from the Subject was by Law allowed as a Revenue to support that Royal Office. And for the firmer uniting this Supream Head and his Subjects the former obliges himself by the Sacred Ties and Obligations of an Oath at his Inauguration to govern his People according to the Rule of the Established Laws and the latter as solemnly pays Homage and swears Obedience So that Allegiance in all Subjects whatsoever Government they live under and especially in our own Constitution is a Duty so perpetual and indispensible that a violation of it is an high Offence against God as well as against his Vicegerent Jac. This is my very Sense of the Duty of Allegiance this the Reason I refused to take that New Oath of Allegiance because 't is a plain Violation of the Old which you your self acknowledge perpetually to oblige Will. The Duty of Obedience is an inseparable Accident to every Subject and you may as well divest him of his Being as his Subjection for this Duty like the Royal Authority never dies but immediately descends from one to another But what you talk of is a perfect Frensie of Loyalty makes Allegiance an infinite Duty and exalts a King to the Honour of a God if all his Commands must be obeyed we tacitely acknowledge he can command nothing that is evil for an illegal Mandate must not be obeyed nor an evil Action committed though imperiously enjoyn'd by the greatest of Men. In all Governments whether Monarchy Aristocracy or Democracy the Subjects Duty of Obedience is to be measured by the express and positive Laws of that Government they are Members of and not to be regulated by a fancied Chimaera of obeying no man knows what it being now visibly apparent that Men may be as superstitiously Loyal as Religious and the first prove as fatal and destructive to the Peace and Happiness of the Nation as the last to the Zeal and Fervour of True Religion when in good earnest the utmost limits of Allegiance is but entirely to observe all the lawful Commands and Injunctions of our Superiors Jac. Has the Supream Magistrate no Authority to command our Obedience And is the Extent and Latitude of the Duty of Allegiance limited by declaritory and express Laws Will. 'T is a most certain Truth especially in our own Constitution where the Government is a Monarchy Royal in which the Subjects have as undoubted a Right to their Religion Liberty and Property as the Supream Magistrate has to the Royal Prerogative For as the Inferior Laws limit the Peoples Rights restrain them from invading the Royal Priviledges and from offering violence one to another so the chief design of Magna Charta is to reduce the Regal to a Legal power The Prescriptions and Statutes of this Nation are the impartial Arbitrators of Government and Obedience Jac. At present a plausible Plea may arise from hence but in the beginning 't was not so For Magna Charta was never heard of till King Henry the Third the Eighth King from the Conquest And where were those Liberties then you so much boast of now Will. Right Magna Charta in that particular form of words 't is now express'd was not in being till the time you mention but our Liberties and Properties were as much then the undoubted Birthright and Inheritances of the Subjects as they are now for Magna Charta as the Learn'd and Renown'd Lord Cook observes is for the most part Declaritory informs us what our Rights and Priviledges are instates us into what was lawfully and antecedently our own Right but confers no new Immunities upon us Jac. This is strange indeed when the very first Chapter begins We have granted to God and we have given and granted to the Freemen of this Realm How could King Henry give and grant those things were none of his Will. The Subjects Liberties asserted in this Great Charter are not to be look'd upon as pure Emanations from the Royal Favour or new Bounties to which the People had neither Right or Claim but rather a restoring those Priviledges which by the Usurpation and Encroachments of former Kings were forcibly with-held from the Subjects And the truth of this is evident from the Charter it self which in the words of Conveyance frequently mentions sua jura and suas Libortates Their Rights and their Liberties which shews the People had a former Title to those Immunities that by this Charter they were again put in possession of Jac. This is a pleasant Story indeed Are the Subjects Liberties more Ancient than the Conquest Has not a Conqueror power to impose what Laws he pleases upon those Vassels and Slaves he has conquered Will. However pleasant it be 't is clear and obvious the Liberties and Properties of Englishmen are of greater Antiquity than King William call'd the Conqueror as appears from the Laws that assert them some as Ancient as the Heptarchian Government granted by Ethelberd Ina and Offa others Cotemporary with the Monarchical Regency given and conferr'd upon the Subjects by pious King Alfred Neither were these Laws abolished by the Norman Duke but were of such Force and Vigour as to survive what you call the Conquest and set Bounds and Limits to that pretended Conqueror 'T is not denied but an absolute Conqueror may propose and enact what Laws he pleases to regulate and govern the Conquered by but this was far from King William's Case For though that great Victory over Harold with such a mighty slaughter of the English gave him great encouragement yet the Crown was obtain'd by Bargain and Compact as is plainly evident from those Grants made to Stigand Archbishop of Canterbury and Eglesine Abbot of St. Augustine's in behalf of the Kentish men and also from the Coronation Oath it self where the King swears to maintain and observe the Laws and Customs of the Nation 'T is true he made little esteem of violating this Sacred Obligation and his Successors vehemently encroach'd upon the Liberty and Property of the People but what power forceably snatch'd from them did not invalidate the Subjects Right Neither had King William notwithstanding all his Pretensions to a Conquest power to dispose of the Lands or Inheritances of those Natives he received to Protection This is manifest from that known Case of Sherborn the Saxon who had a Castle and Lands in Norfolk which the pretended Conqueror gave to one Warren a Norman and Sherborn dying the Heir claiming the same by Descent according to the Law it was before the Conqueror adjudged for the Hâ—ir and the Gift made void Jac. The Coronation Oath is nothing to purpose to evince a Paction or an Agreement upon this Account for that was made to God not to Man and if that Oath prove a Compact 't is between God and the King not between the King and the People Will. 'T
full and ample a manner as if you had taken the Oath a Thousand times Neither indeed has the Supream Magistrate Power to absolve you from this Obligation And the Reason of this is manifest for the Daty of Allegiance does so mightily conduce to promote the Advantage and Happiness of the whole Society that the Publick in General of which the Supream Magistrate is but a part challenges so large a Concernment in it that 't is a manifest Wrong an apparent Injustice for a particular person though never so great to dispence with the undoubted Birthright of every Subject So that should the Oath be taken only in the first acceptation as you seem plainly to understand it viz. to have Relation only to the Safety and Preservation of the King's Person without an Eye to the Publick Welfare and Security the Oath in that Sense is not Obligatory but ipso facto void from the very imposing And the Reason of this is plain and obvious because all Oaths or Promissory Obligations that are contrary to our Duty to our God our Neighbour or our selves repugnant to Piety Justice or Charity are invalid and bind not Rei illicitae nulla obligatio is a Maxim so consonant to the Doctrine of the Gospel that no Christian I suppose has a face to deny it And that the Oath of Allegiance in your sense is Res illicita is easily manifested from several Topicks First From its Opposition to Piety and Destructiveness to Religion His Majesty to whom you have given this Oath of Fidelity is by Profession a Roman Catholick and qua talis he is obliged not only by the Principles of his Religion but sub poenâ of Excommunication Deposition yea Damnation to extirpate the Protestant Religion to the utmost of his Power and to propagate Superstition and Idolatry in its room Now your Notion of the Oath of Allegiance is both a License and Encouragement to such a Supream Magistrate actually to free himself from the Tyes of such Powerful and Terrifying Obligations by prosecuting the Business For when his Person and Government is secured under the penalty of Perjury and punishment of Rebellion against all Resistance and Opposition from the Publick what Block can hinder him from working out his Liberty setting up his Superstition Idolatry and approving himself to his Holy Father by subverting our Laws destroying our Religion and by severely punishing those who obstinately oppose his Arbitrary Proceedings Beside if the Oath of Allegiance viz. Not to take up Arms against the King upon any pretence whatsoever but to assist his Majesty with Life Limb and Terrence Honour be to be understood particularly of the King's Person by this Argument if a King degenerate to a Julian his Subjects are by all sacred Obligations bound to assist him with their utmost Abilities in demolishing the Temples and Houses of God exterminating their Religion burning their Bibles and banishing the Gospel from his Territories and by their endeavours to introduce Paganism and establish the Worship of Infidels Secondly The Oath of Allegiance in this Sense is not Obligatory because of its contrariety to Justice and Righteousness Politick Justice commands us to support as well as obey all the wholesom Laws of that Society we are Members of and the Divine Precepts enjoyn us to protect the Innocent relieve the Needy and defend the Oppressed which are Mandates very inconsistent with your Notion of the Oath of Allegiance for according to your Interpretation of that Obligation all Subjects are obliged to support and defend the Supream Magistrate in all his Proceedings as well when he oppresses the Loyal and Innocent as when he punishes the Guilty and Criminal as vigorously in his Encroachments upon the Liberties and Properties of the Subject if he please to invade them as in maintaining his own Just Rights and Prerogatives But Thirdly Whatsoever Plea or Objection may be made against the two former there is in the Oath of Allegiance taken in the aforesaid sense such an evident Repugnancy to that Eminent and Evangelical Duty Charity so frequently inculcated in sacred Scripture that that alone doth sufficiently evidence the Invalidity of the Obligation The Duties of Mercy and Charity are not only the Advice and Counsel of our Saviour but his express and positive Commands viz That we shew Mercy as our Heavenly Father is merciful that we deal by others as we would be dealt with in the like Circumstances Merciful not only to Mens Bodies the perishing part but chiefly to their Souls that are Immortal and must live for ever that we may as much as in us lies promote and set forward the salvation of all men not to detract from or add to the Word of God nor to comply with those that do it but uncorruptedly to teach it to our sons and our sons sons Now the Oath of Allegiance in the aforesaid acceptation can never be reconciled to this Doctrine for that Obligation whenever the Supream Magistrate pleases destroys Christianity confirms the Hobbian Principle opens a door to Popery Turcism Apostacy Atheism or what else that Magistrate shall please to introduce And whatever Objection may be produced against it from our sins viz. that they are as numerous and great as the Transgressions of Sodom unparallel and provoking as the Wickedness of Samaria that our obstinate contempt and voluntary abuse of his Evangelical Mercies cry aloud to Divine Justice at least to obscure and darken his Gospel if not totally to deprive us of it yet these can never justifie our Proceedings to future Ages or yield any pretence to a Plea to free us from our Duty of Christian Charity to the Infants of our Time and the Children yet unborn which doubtless are not criminals upon this account which notwithstanding will by this unparallel stupidity of ours under the Mask or Vizard of Loyalty be as by a fatal and peremptory Decree for ever deprived of the knowledge of the right worship of God and inevitably involve them into such a lamentable condition as will certainly render them either in defiance of God their Creator or in ignorance of a saving knowledge of their blessed Redeemer The Natural Consequence from the whole is That the Oath of Allegiance can only bind in the first sense when 't is in order to effect the second that is it only obliges us to protect and defend the Interest of the Supream Magistrate when his Interest is subservient to the welfare of the whole Society But if bigotted Zeal haughty Ambition or wicked Counsellors be so prevalent with the Prince as to obliterate his Duty to the Publick and upon private Picks and Humors destroy the Laws subvert Religion neglect all the Methods of Government and separate his own Happiness from the Safety and Welfare of the Publick the Oath in the former sense is void and inobligatory And the Reason of this Consequence is very plain because men are under former Obligations to the contrary For in the Baptismal Vow which is