whole Royal Family shall be extinct and there be no Lineal Heirs to the Crown if the right Heir be dubious or there be a reasonable ground to believe a suppositious Child put in the place of the right Heir In these and such like Cases there is no ordinary Provision made by our Law nor indeed can there well or possibly be in all of them but when they do happen the plain Necessity and Reason of the thing must direct to some provision or other and it is very unreasonable to quarrel with that because it is not in every thing agreeable with ordinary and standing Rules and the exact Measures that the Laws do at other times require but cannot then be observed This Sir answers all that is objected in the latter part of your Letter which is the most considerable thing in it concerning the Convention and House of Commons whither they had as you say any Authority to Act as an House of Parliament in imposing these Oaths pag. 4. Let. Because First Our Law owns no Parliaments but what are called by the Kings Writs Secondly Nor doth it know any Member of the lower House but who are chosen for a Parliament Thirdly Nor doth it give right to any to Act in the House till they have taken the Test Fourthly And if any one enter and take their place there before they have taken the Oath of Supremacy their Place is void and they are not at Liberty to take it afterwards new Election is to be made 5 Eliz. cap. 1. Fifthly and Lastly The former Oaths of Allegiance and Supremacy have bin so imposed by divers Statutes and are so expresly required of all Members of Parliament that none could possibly have a power of Substituting others in their stead till they had taken those and had swore if not that they believed King James yet at least that they believed King William to be rightful King of this Land i. e. The Members of Parliament were before their Sitting to take the Oaths of Allegiance and Supremacy to the King Now because this is true in all ordinary Cases must it be so in all extraordinary ones too Were all these things observed by the Convention in 1660 which brought in King Charles the Second And are we therefore to be dissatisfied about the Laws they made and the proceedings done by them because some of you may think that by our Constitution a Convention hath no power at all in Law And because they observed not all the ordinary Rules required at other times by our Laws If we do we shall call in question the Legality at least of that Revolution and that Convention as well as of this The Truth is Positive Laws cannot always be observed but must give way to the greater Law of Necessity and of notorious greater good and even the Laws of God himself have often done so as we find in Scripture When therefore you urge on your side some particular Laws of the Kingdom which you cannot wholly reconcile with the present Government and this I believe is the great Difficulty that sticks with you we on the other side think it such an extraordinary Case as dispenses with those and that the plainness and notoriety of the thing may satisfie any mans Conscience about it and did so when the Prince of Orange came even these who now dissent not only wisht well to the Prince and went over to him in their Hearts and Affections but denied their Assistance to King James and did several other things which the Law would not warrant them in had it not bin an extraordinary Case and most if not all of you have to my knowledge owned you did go in with the Prince so far as his Declaration which was not altogether strictly Legal I suppose by any of our Laws in bringing a King by such a manner to good Terms so that we must leave God to judge whither it was not in the whole such an extraordinary and extralegal Case as justifies whatever was done though not altogether according to express Laws and whither we have not acted sincerely in thinking so all along and you unreasonably and perversly in thinking otherwise at one time though not at another As to what you urge out of the Statute of 1. James 1. which declares the Right to the Monarchy to have lineally descended to the Prince and by Proximity of Blood and that hereupon he was recognized and submitted to by the whole Nation and not upon any Choice or Election of the People Who will not own this to be a common and rightful way of coming to the Crown in such an Hereditary Monarchy as ours is But does that Statute say that no other King of England who-ever came to the Crown or ever should without such a Lineal Descent and Proximity of Bloud was rightful King Or does it say that King and Parliament have not a power to limit and settle the descent of the Crown according to the Thirteenth of Elizabeth Does it take away that Act by express Words without which I think our Lawyers say no former Act is nulled or abrogated What is it then to the purpose Have not King William and Queen Mary a right of Blood and Lineal Descent if King James his Right be ceased Do they or the Kingdom ever own or declare that they hold the Crown by the Choice or Election of the People Have not half of the Kings of England before the Conquest and after bin as much or more chosen by the people according to all our Historians Is there not a great difference between the Peoples Choosing and Electing of a King and the States and Representatives of a Kingdom Recognizing and Declaring them to be King and Queen by whatever unnamed Right When you have satisfied me in these Questions you will fully satisfie your self about that Matter You tell me there is another Statute of the same King that enjoyns the Oath of Allegiance to him as the true and Rightful King and which deserves well to be considered makes it Treason to go about to perswade one to take the Oath to any else Now is it any wonder or does it deserve any mighty Consideration that the Law should make it Treason to go about to perswade one to take the Oath of Allegiance to him that is not King this sure if any thing tends to the Kings Disherison and Destruction and Parsons I suppose and some of the Popish Party in the beginning of King James I. Reign had such a design against which that Statute is levelled but that which you bring it for is upon the account of the Rightful King so that you would have it meant against those who are for a King de facto only that is not Rightful Now though this does not in the least concern me but those who are of that Opinion to answer yet I believe this Statute had no Eye to any such thing nor is any way concerned about it nor does it
be any way serviceable to K. James if he be not This is the great Point which you have not hit but may if you please make it the Subject of the next loving Letter between us All that is in this I have answered with that kindness and openness that becomes a Friend and with that seriousness that becomes a point of Conscience and such as I fear not to be ashamed of at the last day And I am still Sir Yours and Non-Resistances Faithful Friend and Humble Servant W. P. POSTSCRIPT SInce the Writing but before I had the opportunity of sending this to you a few Scrupulous Quaeries came into my Thoughts which seem to me to have more weight in them to incline a Conscientious Man to take the Oaths and come in to the Government then the Doctrine of Passive Obedience and Non-Resistance can have to keep him out and make him forbear and therefore with the same Freedom and Civility you have used to me in desiring an Answer to those Scruples on the one side I beg the favour of you to give a fair and plain Resolution of the other First then I would ask whether it be or were a full judgment and perswasion of the downright Sinfulness and Unlawfulness of taking the Oathes or only some doubts and scruples and dissatisfaction in your Minds about it that does or did hinder you I have reason to think it is or was only the latter because several of you have expresly owned this and have therefore judged more charitably of your Brethren than to believe so many ventured upon an action that carried a downright Sinfulness and Unlawfulness in it but if others could satisfie themselves about it and could do it you thought they might and did no way blame or condemn them for it This I am sure was the judgment and the words too of many of you nay the best and greatest of your Dissenting Brethren did not say any thing to their Friends or so much as admonish their young Chaplains and others who were under their immediate care against taking the Oathes when they knew they were inclined and disposed so to do Now if they instead of some lesser doubts and private scruples had made a full judgment about the Sinfulness and Unlawfulness of this how could they be excused for thus suffering sin upon others who were under their Charge and not giving warning as Watchmen to those who belonged to their inspection who dwelt in your houses and were within your gates whose Souls they were to take care of lest their bloud should be required at their hands and their Sin should be charged upon their neglect Nay how could any of the Bishops satisfie themselves in not doing this to their whole Diocesses and immediate Cures whatever Worldly Perils and Inconveniencies they had hereby ran that so at least they might have delivered their own Souls I take it therefore for granted that it was not a full judgment and perswasion of the downright Sinfulness and Unlawfulness of taking the Oaths but only some lesser doubts and private scruples which hindered them and many of you from so doing if any of you have since come to a greater Plerophory and your Convictions have risen with your Resentments God and your own Consciencies must judge of that but whilst ye were only under those Doubts and so thought it safer not to do the thing than do it whilst ye thus doubted about it and had some Scruples concerning it remaining in your Minds I ask whether these doubts and scruples of yours should not have bin over-ruled by the many Reasons on the other side by the great and evident Mischiefs of your standing out both to the Church and Kingdom and the no less great good to the Protestant Religion both at home and abroad by this Revolution And whether it were not or had not bin Lawful in this Case to have Acted even with a Doubting Conscience I am sure we have often told the other Dissenters so in the Case of Church-Conformity and I question not but it is a true Principle that a man may and often ought to act with a doubting Conscience where there are only some scruples and dissatisfactions that he cannot perfectly get rid off on one side and such great Reasons as the Peace and Unity of the Church or Kingdom on the other tho' never against an Erronious one where he has formed a full and complete tho' wrong judgment of the sinfulness and unlawfulness of an Action and here by the way I would recommend to you to consider over again and apply to your selves what ye have formerly said and written against those Dissenters in the matter of Schisme and in the Matter of a Doubting Conscience Secondly I Query Whether most if not all of the Dissenting Clergy were not once well satisfied in their Consciences about the Prince of Orange 's coming over and rejoiced in it as their only Deliverance under God from their Ruin they saw coming upon the Church and Nation when they wish'd well to him and pray'd for him and went over to him with their Hearts and Affections if not more overtly by Addresses and other Applications Why should they then think themselves now so indispensably obliged to King James and so inseparably bound to him by their Oathes of Allegiance which they then thought they were in great measure discharged and released from For who then thought himself bound in Conscience to defend King James in all his Rights Priviledges and Preheminencies whatsoever according to the Oath of Allegiance and to assist him to the utmost of their power against one who seemed and was declared by him to be an open Enemy and Invader What Minister of the Church of England encouraged the Souldiers to Fight against him and did not rather declare it unlawful so to do when it was so plainly fighting against their Religion and their Country which were then thought sufficient Considerations to supersede an otherwise necessary Duty I ask therefore whither the same reasons which then satisfied us all and which ye then thought released you from part of your Oath of Allegiance and from giving King James that Assistance which had bin otherwise due to him had it not manifestly tended to the utter Ruin of your selves and your Religion and the whole Kingdom may not as well and much better discharge you now from that Allegiance which ye pretend is still owing to him and why they who were for taking away his Authority and Dispossessing him of his Government by a Regency during his Life and without his Consent as the only expedient to secure the Church and Nation from Ruin under him should think they were under such a strict and unalterable Obligation to him by their former Oaths and the Laws of the Land Whither those were not more irreconcilable with such a method than with a New King Farther Whether those who sate in the Convention and in the Parliament too when it was made such
by the Authority of King William till they went off upon the Act for taking the Oathes did not own the present Government and shake off that of King James I would there-therefore beg leave to ask those and all of you why you did so many ways leave King James then and adhere so closely to him now Whether ye have changed your Minds and altered your Opinions and repent of the Zeal which most of you showed for the Prince Whether ye would not do the same things again ye did then if ye were in the same Circumstances If so if ye can alter your judgments in so little a time why should ye so much wonder at others and object it to them as an instance of their mutability and sudden change of their Opinions in the Case of Non-Resistance and Passive Obedience tho' ye have no reason for it when so far as I see ye have as much Power over your own Minds and have as suddenly changed your own Opinions and acted some of you as inconsistently and contradictorily to your selves as ye suppose others have done Thirdly I would ask you Whether ye can produce any Examples of Christian Bishops or Priests or any other Christians since the times of our Saviour who ever suffered on such an Account or for such a Cause as ye now do viz. for not submitting to the Civil Government that was Establisht amongst them and owned and acknowledged by the States and Representatives of a Kingdom and for such a Cause as those who are honest and sincere cannot heartily wish Success to or pray to God that it should thrive and prosper for we have a better Opinion of most of you than to believe ye would have King James Conquer King William with the French Fleet and Irish Army and that it was as far from you as from us to desire this a few Months ago and that ye cannot in your Hearts wish that K. James should come back again in his present circumstances unless so miraculously changed and in such a wonderful manner that we may almost as reasonably hope that God should raise his Father and send him to live again and reign over us Bating then such a Miracle as that what would ye have no Government to which we should pay Allegiance and from which we should expect Protection but rather that all things should run into Anarchy and Confusion as King James left them till he shall please to return again Alass a Kingdom cannot like a Woman deserted by her former Husband or Divorced from him live single and not Marry again but must have some Government immediately and some other Ruler besides the Mob When therefore in such a Case a Government is setled in a way ye may not like but cannot help in the best and only way it could then be for either the longest Sword or most Votes must carry it which were then both of a side nay when it is establisht in a way most agreeable to our old Constitution must private Persons lose all they have rather then come into it They must leave the World and live in very few Governments long if they do this Did any of the Primitive Christians do so who had as much reason to be dissatisfied with several Governments they lived under and especially to question the Rightful Title of many of their Supreme Governors as you can have and yet never that I know of did they suffer on such an account much less for such an untoward Cause as ye now do Fourthly I would ask you If you believed the matter of Fact true that King James had put a suppositious Child upon the Kingdom to exclude the Right Heirs and had made a League with France to overturn the Legal Government and Constitution and had resolved to use the utmost Force and violence to bring in Popery by French Dragooning and Irish Massacring and were endeavoring and likely to accomplish all this whether in such a case ye could think your selves discharged of your Allegiance to him and that ye were no longer bound to him as your Rightful King If ye could then ye must grant this Principle that a King may cease to be King and lose his Right to your Allegiance without a Natural Death or voluntary Resignation and then you will have as much to answer for Passive Obedience and Non-Resistance as you think others now have when you shall send me word that you will give me this Principle and put the Issue upon the matter of Fact I 'le give you a further account of that If you will not own this but still hold to indissoluble Allegiance and Passive Obedience let the King destroy all his People and all the Laws and Rights of the Kingdom and the Inheritance of the Crown too and that in such a Notorious Case his Right and your Allegiance still continue in full force then ye stand to such Principles as will make Government a great Curse very often instead of a Blessing to Mankind and such a Yoke as neither we nor our Fathers were able to bear who did in vain settle any Legal Rights and establish any Legal Constitution if their Posterity are bound in Conscience to let go their claim to all this and give it all up when a rash and resolute Prince will be contented with nothing less than destroying the Government by which he is King I cannot believe that any of you can soberly and in good earnest believe such a Principle or carry it so high but only as it is necessary for you to defend your selves and your Case at present and though you are then driven as far as we can follow you yet like the Irish your Refuge is in a Bog and in the grossest absurdity however I am of Opinion if ye search your own Hearts ye do not believe this nor believe your selves bound to such an Allegiance still to King James as ye pretend for if ye were ye were bound to do all ye can to bring him in again to defend him in all his Rights Titles Preheminencies and Authorities according to your Oath of Allegiance to him if that still oblige you and to oppose all the Enemies to his just and rightful Claim and Authority and to use some other Weapons for him than those of Prayers and Tears and to live no longer peaceably under this Government than ye have a power and opportunity to destroy it and yet I dare say the best and most conscientious among you are not of this Mind so that if you will give me leave to request the same favor of you which you have done of me to return such a serious and sincere answer to these Queries as you will not be ashamed of at the last day you will find you are more apt to contradict your selves and your own Principles in several things then any of us are in the business of Non-Resistance and Passive Obedience Fifthly I would seriously ask you one Question more Whether if it be lawful to take the Oathes and come in to the Government it be not a Sin to refuse them and stand out This I ask because I am apt to believe that most of you consider only the loss of your Preferments and Worldly Interests as the only danger and hazard on one side whereas there is a sin and all the Consequencies of that on the other and therefore ye look upon it as much safer and better to venture the penalty than the crime Now if this were all I confess it is so to a very good man who has lively Thoughts of Religion upon his Mind and near Thoughts of Death and mean Thoughts of this World as a Wise Man cannot but have who has lived long in it and enjoyed it and even a Man of no great Goodness may be easily brought to do this when the Worldly loss and danger is not so certain but he has hopes by many ways to Escape it and especially at a time when 't is very uncertain which side is like to be the looser or the Gainer as to this World But This is by no means putting the case right nor using a just Ballance to weigh the difficulties on both sides but 't is leaving out the heaviest weight on one side which should turn the scale against all the rest Worldly Interest alone is easily weighed down with Peace of Mind and a mans Eternal Interest and sometimes with the mere Glory and Opinion of Suffering Persecution for Conscience sake and the enjoying and gratifying a stiff and obstinate Humour that is not humble enough to yield or to retract a mistake but the Consideration of that Mischief which a man does to Religion to the Church whose Service he deserts to the Kingdom whose Peace he disturbs to his Parish and Flock whom he forsakes to his Family whom he ruins and undoes and how much he becomes an Instrument though against his Will to serve Popery and the worst Interest i' the World this should open his eyes and make him see a greater danger and evil on the other side then the mere loss of his Worldly Interest and that it must be one of the greatest sins that can be and the most big with evil Consequences to stand out if it be not utterly sinful and unlawful in it self to come in and therefore if any man does the former out of any humour perverseness or revenge because he is not pleased or things are not carried to his Mind or because he will not be thought to Change his Opinion or sneakingly come in to save his Preferment and be laughed at for so doing if it be from a point of Honour or any other reason but a Point of Conscience such an one commits a greater Sin than can be committed on the other side and runs the Hazard of losing somthing greater than the best Dignity and Promotion in this World This I would therefore have ye all seriously consider and answer it if not to me yet to God and your own Consciences Farewel and remember you were the Aggressor FINIS