Political Aphorisms OR THE TRUE MAXIMS OF GOVERNMENT DISPLAYED Wherein is likewise Proved That Paternal Authority is no Absolute Authority and that Adam had no such Authority That there neither is or can be any Absolute Government De Iure and that all such pretended Government is Void That the Children of Israel did often Resist their evil Princes without any Appointment or soretelling thereof by God in Scripture That the Primitive Christians did often Resist their Tyrannical Emperors and that Bishop Athanasius did approve of Resistance That the Protestants in all Ages did Resist their Evil and Destructive Princes Together with a Historical Account of the Depriving of Kings for their Evil Government in Israel France â—â—â—in Portugal Scotland and in England before and sinâ—â— the Conquest By way of Challenge to Dr. William Sherlock and Ten other New Dissenters and Recommended as proper to be Read by all Protestant Iacobites He that being often Reproved hardneth his Neck shall suddenlâ— be destroyed and that without Remedy Prov. 29. 21. LONDON Printed for Tho. Harrison at the West End of the Royal Exchange in Cornhill 1690. THE PREFACE AFter all the signal Deliverances God hath vouchsafed to these Brittish Islands and the many eminent Appearances of Divine Providence in our late happy Revolution even to this day one would think no Protestant should repine at this happy and advantageous Change from an Arbitrary to a Legal Monarchy but reckon it his Felicity to have lived to this day to see the Imperial Crown of England worn by a Protestant King and Queen an Happiness which our Fathers wished and longed for in King Charles the first 's and second 's time but could not obtain the evil Consequence thereof this Nation hath sufficiently felt therefore I may well say O thrice happy England didst thou know thy Happiness and hadst an Heart to be thankful for it Who could have thought that notwithstanding the visible hand of God in this unparallel'd Revolution we should still have amongst us a Korah a Dathan and an Abiram a murmuring still in our Streets Our Fore-fathers never bought their Liberty at so cheap a rate as we have done now which makes it so much despised and slighted at present as if Liberty could never be good without wading through a Sea of Blood to obtain it We commend our Fore-fathers for standing up for their Rights and Priviledges without which we should have been Slaves to this day and yet that we should Condemn one another for the same thing though our Religion which is infinitely more dear to us than a few worldly Liberties lies at stake is such an intollerable Folly that succeeding Ages will hardly give Credit to But what is more strange is that some Protestants are for the Restauration of the late King James with the young Impostor the consequence whereof can be nothing less than Slavery and the total Subversion of the Protestant Religion in England as well as the endangering it throughout the World But that the World may see what rare Notions of Civil Government our Murmurers have I shall here set down some of the Sayings of one of their mighty Pillars of Passive Obedience Dr. William Sherlock as they are in his Case of Resistance of the Supreme Powers No Man wants Authority says the Dr. pag. 59. to defend his Life against him who has no Authority to take it away but yet he tells you most learnedly p. 113. that The Prince is the Powers or Authority not the Laws and in p. 198. that The King receives not his Sovereign Authority from the Law and in p. 89. he sayes that there could not be greater nor more absolute Tyrants than the Roman Emperors were and yet they had no Power over the meanest Christian but by an express Commission from Heaven And he tells you further p. 116. that When we resist our Prince we resist the Ordinance Constitution and Appointment of God What Invincible Arguments are these for Passive Obedience which makes God the Author of all the Outrages Cruelties Rapinâ—s and Blood-shed that have been committed in the World by Sovereign Princes but I think the Dr. has taken the right way if there be any to establish the Doctrine of Passive Obedience without reserve St. Peter exhorted the Christians to submit to every Ordinance of Man for the Lords sake which plainly signifies sayes the Ingenious Dr. p. 146. that whatever hand Men may have in Modelling Civil Governments yet it is the Ordinance of God and Princes receive their Power from him What a rare Argument is this for Tyranny Oppression and Idolatry c. for according to the Doctor 's Notion if the Legislative Authority of a Nation should abolish the Christian Religion and set up Paganism Mahometanism and Popery and make never such Unjust and Tyrannical Laws yet it would be the Ordinance of God Since I can hardly find throughout all the Doctor 's Book he knows what any part of Civil Government is and least he should take an established Religion to be no part thereof I shall make bold to tell him that when a Religion is established by the Legislative Authority of any Nation it becomes part of the Civil Government and is to be defended and supported by the Administrator of that Government The Dr. hath many more as rare Arguments as these but for brevity sake I omit them these being sufficient to shew upon what rock this sort of Men build their Notions of Passive Obedience I challenge all the New Dissenters in England and all the Conformists who have sworn Allegiance to their Majesties only as King and Queen De Facto but more particularly Dr. Will. Sherlock Shadrach Cook John Leke Dr. Francis Thompson Person Dr. Audley Will. Gefford of Suffolk John Hart of Tanton Wood Cuff John Norris of Cambridge Richard Stafford and the Author of the History of Passive Obedience together with Sir R. Lestrange and all his Pupils to Answer the following Tract I desire these Learned Men to resolve me this Case of Conscience Whether or no those who joyned with or assisted the Prince of Orange upon his Arrival are not guilty of Rebellion and whether or no those Divines and Laicks who invited him over are not more guilty of Rebellion according to the Doctrine of Passive Obedience without reserve as being the first Cause thereof than they that joyned with him upon his first Arrival and whether upon the Bishops refusing to disown their inviting him over it does not follow that they did invite him over and upon their refusing to subscribe to the form of an Abhorrence of the Invitation it did not plainly imply that they disowned the Doctrine of Passive Obedience and allowed the resisting of Arbitrary Power and when they desired the Prince of Orange our present King to take upon him the Administration of the Government it did not imply that King James had deserted the Government and that the Throne was thereby become Vacant The reason why I take this
whatsoever whereas by giving up themselves to the absolute Arbitrary Power of any Man they have disarm'd themselves and armed him to make a Prey of them when he pleases I have been the longer in speaking of the State of Nature and the natural Instinct to Society and Government for that it is the Fountain of all the rest that ensueth in a Common-wealth but if we respect God and Nature as well might all the diversity of Governments which have been and now are in the World have followed one Law as so different but that neither God nor Nature which is from God hath prescribed any of those particular Forms but concurreth or permitteth such which the Common-wealth appoints Can any Man say that God and Nature did not concur as well with Italy when it had but one Prince as now when it hath so many and the like with Germany and also with Switzerland which was once one Common-wealth under the Dukes and Marquesses of Austria and now are divided into thirteen Cantons or Common-wealths under popular Magistrates of their own England also was first a Monarchy under the Britains and then a Province under the Romans and after that divided into seven Kingdoms at once under the Saxons and after them of the Danes and then the Normans and then the French and now a Monarchy again under the English and all this by God's Providence and Permission who suffered his own peculiar People the Jews to be under divers manner of Governments at divers times at first under Patriarchs Abraham Isaac and Jacob then under Captains as Moses Ioshua and the like then under Judges as Othoniel Ehud and Gideon then under High Priests as Eli and Samuel then under Kings as Saul David and the rest then under Captains and High Priests again as Zorobbabel Iudas Maccabeus and his Brethren until the Government was lastly taken from them and they brought under the Power of the Romans And last of all that God does concur with what Magistrate or Magistrates the Community thinks fit to appoint is plain by the Testimony of holy Scripture as when God said to Solomon By me Kings rule and Nobles even all the Iudges of the Earth Prov. 8. 16. that is by his Permission they govern tho chosen by the People and St. Paul to the Romans avoucheth that Authority is not but of God and therefore he that resisteth Authority resisteth God Rom. 13. which is to be understood of Authority Power and Jurisdiction in it self according to the Laws of every Country All Politick Societies began from a voluntary Union and mutual Agreement of Men freely acting in the choice of their Governours and Forms of Government All Kings receive their Royal Dignity from the Community by whom they are made the Superiour Minister and Ruler of the People Aristotle Cicero Augustin Fortescue and all other Politicians agree that Kingdoms and Common-wealths were existent before Kings for there must be a Kingdom and Society of Men to govern before there can be a King elected by them to govern them and those Kingdoms and Societies of Men had for the most part some Common Laws of their own free Choice by which they were governed before they had Kings which Laws they swore their Kings to observe before they would crown or admit them to the Government as is evident by the Coronation-Oaths of all Christian and Pagan Kings continued to this Day The Safety of the People is the Supreamest Law and what they by common Consent have Enacted only for the Publick Safety they may without any Obstacle alter when things require it by the like common Consent The lawful Power of making Laws to command whole Politick Societies of Men belongeth so properly unto the same intire Societies that for any Prince or Potentate of what kind soever upon Earth to exercise the same of himself and not by express Commission immediately and personally received from God or else by Authority derived at first from their Consent upon whose Persons they impose Laws it is no better than meer Tyranny Laws they are not therefore which Publick Approbation hath not made so Hooker 's Eccl. Pol. l. 1. § 10. Whosoever says Aristotle is governed by a Man without a Law is governed by a Man and by a Beast As every Man in the delivery of the Gift of his own Goods may impose what Covenant or Condition he pleases and every Man is Moderator and Disposer of his own Estate So in the voluntary Institution of a King and Royal Power it is lawful for the People submitting themselves to prescribe the King and his Successors what Law they please so as it be not Unreasonable and Unjust and directly against the Rights of a Supream Governour No Man can be born an Absolute King no Man can be a King by himself no King can Reign without the People Whereas on the contrary the People may both be and are by themselves and are in Time before a King By which it appears that all Kings were and are constituted by the People because by the Law of Nature there is no Superiority one above another and God has no where commanded the World or any part thereof to be governed by this or that Form or by this or that Person therefore all Superiority and Authority must and does proceed from the People since by the Law of God and Nature there is no Superiority one above another Aristotle saith That the whole Kingdom City or Family is more excellent and to be preferred before any Part or Member thereof Succession was tolerated and appointed in the World to avoid Competition and Inter-regnum and other Inconveniences of Election 'T is plain from what hath been said that all Government proceeds from the People Now I will prove that they have Authority to put back the next Inheritors to Government when unfit or uncapable to Govern And also to dispossess them that are in lawful Possession if they fulfil not the Laws and Conditions by which and for which their Dignities were given them and when it is done upon just and urgent Causes and by Publick Authority of the whole Body the Justice thereof is plain as when the Prince shall endeavour to establish Idolatry contrary to the Laws of the Land or any Religion which is repugnant to the Scripture as Popery c. or to destroy the People or make them Slaves to his Tyrannical Will and Pleasure For as the whole Body is of more Authority than the Head and may cure it when out of order so may the Weal-Publick cure or purge their Heads when they are pernitious or destructive to the Body Politick seeing that a Body Civil may have divers Heads by Succession or Election and cannot be bound to one as a Body Natural is which Body Natural if it had Ability to cut off its aking or sickly Head and take another I doubt not but it would do it and that all Men would confess it had Authority sufficient and Reason so to
the King and People which whether it be only Civil or Natural tacit or in express Words can be taken away by no Agreements violated by no Law rescinded by no Force A Kingdom is nothing else but the mutual Stipulation between the People and their Kings The supream Authority of a Nation belongs to those who have the Legislative Authority reserved to them but not to those who have only the Executive which is plainly a Trust when it is separated from the Legislative Power and all Trusts by their Nature import That those to whom they are given are accountable though no such Condition is specified If the Subject may in no case resist then there can be no Law but the Will and Pleasure of the Prince for whoever must be opposed in nothing may do every thing then all our Laws signify no more than so many Cyphers And what are the Law-makers but so many Fools or Mad-men who give themselves trouble to no purpose For if the King is not obliged to govern by those Laws that they make to what purpose are the People to obey such Laws Whether another has Right to my Goods or if he demand them I have no Right to keep them is all one If the King sue me by pretence of Law and endeavour to take away my Money my House or my Land I may defend them by the Law but if he comes armed to take away my Liberty Life and Religion which are mine by the Laws of God and Man may I not secure them with a good Conscience Every Man has a Right to preserve himself his Rights and Priviledges against him who has no Authority to invade them And this was the Case of Moses who seeing an Egyptian smiting an Hebrew he slew him And Samson made War upon the Philistines for burning his Wife and her Father who were both but private Persons who knew they could have no other kind of Justice against them but what the Law of Nature gives every Man We ought saith the Learned Junius Brutus in his Discourse of Government to consider that all Princes are born Men. We cannot therefore expect to have only perfect Princes but rather we ought to think it well with us if we have gained but indifferent ones therefore the Prince shall not presently be a Tyrant if he keep not measure in some things if now and then he obey not Reason if he more slowly seek the Publick Good if he be less diligent in administring Justice For seeing a Man is not set over Men as if he were some God as he is over Beasts but as he is a Man born in the same Condition with them as that Prince shall be proud who will abuse Men like Beasts so that People shall be unjust who shall seek a God in a Prince and a Divinity in this frail Nature But truly if he shall wilfully subvert the Republick if he shall wilfully pervert the Laws if he shall have no care of his Faith none of his Promises none of Justice none of Piety if himself become an Enemy of his People or shall use all or the chiefest Notes we have mentioned then verily he may be judged a Tyrant that is an Enemy of God and Men And by how much longer he is tolerated the more intolerable he becomes and they may act against him whatever they may use against a Tyrant either by Law or just Force Tyranny is not only a Crime but the Head and as it were the heap of all Crimes therefore is he so much the more wicked than any Thief Murtherer or sacrilegious Person by how much it is more grievous to offend many and all than particular Persons Now if all these be reputed Enemies if they be capitally punished if they suffer pains of Death can any invent a Punishment worthy so horrid a Crime The Laws are the Nerves and Sinews of Society and as the Magistrate is above the People so is the Law above the Magistrate or else there can be no Civil Society He who makes himself above all Law is no Member of a Common-wealth but a meer Tyrant If a Magistrate notwithstanding all Laws made for the well-governing a Community will act plainly destructive to that Community they are discharged either from Active or Passive Obedience and indispensibly obliged by the Law of Nature to Resistance Is it not reasonable and just I should have a right to destroy him who threatens me with Destruction for by the Fundamental Law of Nature Man being to be preserved as much as possible when all cannot be preserved the Safety of the Innocent is to be preferred I say he who having renounced his Reason the common Rule and Measure God hath given to Mankind by endeavouring to destroy me is thereby become as a Beast of Prey and ought to be treated accordingly The Laws says Tully are above the Magistrates as the Magistrates are above the People He who is destructive to the Being of another hath quitted the Reason which God hath given to be the Rule betwixt Man and Man of Justice and Equity hath put himself into the State of War with the other and is as noxious as any savage Beast that seeks his Destruction No Man in Civil Society can be exempted from the Laws of it for if there be no Appeal on Earth for Redress or Security against any Mischief the Prince may do then every Man in that Society is in a State of Nature with him in respect of him Thucidides l. 2. saith Not only those are Tyrants who reduce other into Servitude but much rather those who when they may repulse that Violence take no care to do it but especially those who will be called the Defenders of Greece and the Common Country but yet help not their oppressed Country If a Man may be a Wolf to a Man nothing forbids but that a Man may be a God to a Man as it is in the Proverb Therefore Antiquity hath enrolled Hercules amongst the number of the Gods because he punished and tamed Procrustes Busyris and other Tyrants the Pests of Mankind and Monstets of the World So also the Roman Empire as long as it stood free was often called the Patrocine against the Robberies of Tyrants because the Senate was the Haven and Refuge of Kings People and Nations It is as lawful and more reasonable to prevent the overthrowing of our Religion Laws Rights and Priviledges froâ— any Man or Men whatsoever amongst our selves as from a foreign Power because one acts contrary to the Laws of God and the Country and the other being not subject to the Laws of the Country can be no ways bound by it It was thought no Injustice in the Ship to call out the Prophet when they found he was likely to prove the Wrack of them all and the Almighty shewed he approved of their Act by quieting the Storm when he was gone The Scripture that hath set us none but good Example tells us That some Princes should not
which they swear Allegiance to him Absolute Monarchy is inconsistent with Civil Society and therefore can be no Form of Civil Government which is to remedy the Inconveniencies of the State of Nature No Man or Society of Men have Power to deliver up their Preservation or the Means of it to the absolute Will of any Man and they will have always a right to preserve what they have not Power to part with No Power can exempt Princes from the Obligation to the Eternal Laws of God and Nature As no Body can transfer to another more Power than he has in himself and no Body has an Absolute Arbitrary Power over himself or over any other to destroy his own Life or take away the Life and Property of another therefore a Man cannot give such Authority to any or subject himself to the Arbitrary Power of another for the Law of Nature is an Eternal Rule to all Men whose Actions must be conformable to that Law which is the Will of God For the Fundamental Law of Nature being the Preservation of Mankind no human Law can be good or valid against it and much less the Will and Pleasure of a Prince against the Law and Custom of the Country which shall be prejudicial to the Subject As the Happiness and Prosperity of Kingdoms depend upon the Conservation of their Laws if the Laws depend upon the Lust of one Man would not the Kingdom fall to ruin in a short space But the Laws are better and greater than Kings who are bound to obey them Then is it not better to obey the Laws rather than the King Who can obey the King violating the Law Who will or can refuse to give Aid to the Law when infringed It is impossible any Body in a Society should have a right to do the Community harm All Kings and Princes are and ought to be bound by the Laws and are not exempted from them and this Doctrine ought to be inculcated into the Minds of Princes from their Infancy Let the Prince be either from God or from Men yet to think that the World was created by God and in it Men that they should serve only for the benefit and use of Princes is an Absurdity as gross as can be spoken since God hath made us free and equal But Princes were ordained only for the Peoples benefit that so they might innocently preserve Human and Civil Society with greater Facility helping one the other with mutual Benefits In all Disputes between Power and Liberty Power must always be proved but Liberty proves it self the one being founded upon positive Law the other upon the Law of Nature With what Ignorance do some assert that Adam was an Absolute Monarch and that Paternal Authority is an Absolute Authority for that the Father of a Family governs by no other Law than by his own Will and the Father is not to be resisted by his Child and that Adam had a Monarchical Absolute Supream Patornal Power and that all Kingly Authority is a Fatherly Authority and therefore irresistable and that no Laws can bind the King or annul this Authority How could Adam be an Absolute Monarch when God gave him the Herbs but in common with the Beasts Gen. 1. 29 30. Can it be thought that God gave him an Absolute Authority of Life and Death over Man who had not Authority to kill any Beast to satisfy his Hunger certainly he had no Absolute Dominion over even the Brutal part of the Creatures much less over Man who could not make that use of them as was permitted to Noah and his Sons Gen. 9. 3. where God says Every moving thing that liveth shall be meat for you even as the green Herbs have I given you all things Is it not as reasonable to believe that God would have cursed Adam if he had killed his Son Abel as Cain for killing him Cain was very sensible every one had by the Law of Nature a right to kill him for being guilty of Blood when he said every one that found him should slay him Gen. 4. 14. God made no exemption to the greatest Man living who should be guilty of innocent Blood when he said He that sheddeth Mans Blood by Man shall his Blood be shed Gen. 9. 6. neither Noah or his Sons were exempted from this great Law and therefore could have no absolute Authority since God has no where given any Man such Authority there can be no such Authority for the Community cannot make themselves Slaves by investing such an Authority in any Man should they do it it is not binding it being against the Law of Nature If Noah was Heir to Adam I ask which of Noah's Sons was Heir to him for if by Right it descended to all his Sons then it must have descended to all their Sons and so on if so then are all Men become equal and independent as being the Off-spring of Adam and Noah If it descended only to the eldest and so on then there can be but one lawful Monarch in the World and who that is is impossible to be found out so that Paternal Monarchical Authority take it which way you will it comes to just nothing at all Where human Institution gives it not the First-born has no right at all above his Brethren No Man has an absolute Authority over the Creatures much less over Mankind because they were given for the use of all Men as occasion should serve should any Man or Men destroy them for their Will and Pleasure beyond what is necessary for the use of Man or for his Preservation it would be a Sin and therefore could be no Authority for God authorizes no Man to commit a Sin tho he often permits it The Law of God and Nature gives the Father no absolute Dominion over the Life Liberty or Estate of his Child and therefore he can have no absolute Authority and where there is no absolute Authority there can be no absolute Subjection due There is an eternal Obligation on Parents to nourish preserve and bring up their Off-spring and under these Circumstances Obedience is due and not otherwise What is a Father to a Child more than another Person when he endeavours to destroy him Nay is he not so much the more odious as the Act is more barbarous for a Father to endeavour to destroy his own Off-spring than for another Person endeavouring it certainly in such a case no Passive Obedience can be due it tending to his Destruction not for his Good which is no Fatherly Act and therefore not to be submitted to He that lets any Person whatsoever destroy him when it is in his power to preserve his Life by defending himself does tacitly consent to his own Death and therefore is guilty of his own Blood as well as he that destroys him Whereas by defending himself there can be but one guilty of Blood which is the Invader in which Defence if he kills the other his Blood lies at his
unusual way of Writing by way of Challenging of particular Men is because in a general Challenge no Man would reckon himself concerned in it for what is every ones business is no body's business and because the Dissenters from the present Government do assert that the late King James is De Jure still and that Obedience is due to him during his Life and that Dr. Sherlock and many others can prove the Doctrine of Passive Obedience without reserve to be a true Doctrine and they hope to hear it Preach'd with as much Zeal as ever These are the Reasons that induced me to Challenge particular Men and to write this Tract that there might be no Plea for the Resurrection of this absurd nonsensical sheepish slavish inhumane Bow-string Doctrine which one sucks in with his Milk another he takes it to be the distinguishing Doctrine of the Church and another believes it because it has been told him from the Pulpit and a fourth because a great many ingenious and learned Men have declared it to be a true Doctrine Thus we become wise by Tradition and Example having an Implicit Faith to believe whatever our Guides declarr to be the Doctrine of the Gospel though it be never so contrary to the Iustice and Goodness of Almighty God and to undenyable Reason If the Church in its Reformation from Popery had retained Transubstantiation no doubt but we should have had as many and as zealous Asserters of that Doctrine as of Passive Obedience without reserve the one being as false as the other is impossible I remember the saying of a Passive Obedience Man If an Angel sayes he came down from Heaven and Preacht any other Doctrine than Passive Obedience as it was lately taught us I would not believe him O what a commendable thing is it to be true to ones Principle though it be never so ridiculous or false or tends never so much to the Inslaving or Destruction of our Countrey I have hitherto says Cato fought for my Countreys Libety and for my own and only that I might live Free among Free-men I wish that every English-man could say that he had either sought or done something else for the good of his Countrey which is the Ambition of T. H. Political Aphorisms OR THE True MAXIMS of Government DISPLAYED IT is evident that no Rule or Form of Government is prescribed by the Law of God and Nature for that then they would be both immutable and the self-same in all Countries For the better proof whereof it is necessary to shew how far Government proceeds from Nature and how far from Man to wit that Man is sociable and inclined to live together in Company which proceeds from Nature and consequently also from God that is Author of Nature from whence do proceed all private Houses then Villages then Towns then Castles then Cities and then Kingdoms and Common-wealths as Aristotle saith in his Book of Politicks Tho Government in like manner and Jurisdiction of Magistrates which does follow necessarily upon this living together in Company be also of Nature yet the particular form or manner of this or that Government in this or that Fashion as to have many Governors few or one and those either Kings Dukes Earls or the like or that they should have this or that Authority more or less for longer or shorter time or be by Succession or Election themselves and their Children or next in Blood All these things I say are not by Law Natural or Divine for then as hath been said they should be all one in all Countries and Nations for God said Gen. 2. 18. It is not good that Man should be alone I will make him an Help-meet or Assistant like unto himself So that as this first Society of our first Parents was of God and for so great purpose as the one to help and assist not destroy or inslave the other So all other Societies as proceeding from this first stand upon the same ground of God's Ordinance for the self-same end of Mans Utility or Happiness all which is confirmed by the Consent and Use of all Nations throughout the World which general Consent Cicero calleth Ipsam vocem Naturae the Voice of Nature her self For there was never yet any Nation found either of ancient times or of later days by the discovery of the Indies or else-where where Men living together had not some kind of Magistrate or Superior to govern them which evidently declareth that Magistracy is also from Nature and from God that created Nature though not in this or that particular Form which Point our Civil Law doth prove in like manner in the beginning of our Digest do origine Iuris civilis omnium Magistratuum of the beginning of the Civil Law and of all Magistrates which beginning is referred to the first Principle of Natural Instinct and God's Institution Though Common-wealths and Government of the same by Magistrates are of Nature yet the particular Forms or manner of Governments are not of Nature but are lest unto every Nation and Country to chuse what Form of Government they like best and think most fit for the Natures and Conditions of the People By the State of Nature we are all equal there being no Superiority or Subordination one above another there can be nothing more rational than that Creatures of the same Species and Rank promiscuously born to all the same Advantages of Nature and the use of the same Faculties should also be equal one amongst another without God by any manifest Declaration of his Will had set one above another and given him Superiority or Soveraignty Were it not for the Corruption and Viciousness of degenerate Men there would be no need of any other State for every one in that State being both Judg and Executioner of the Law of Nature which is to punish according to the Offence committed Men being partial to themselves Passion and Revenge is very apt to carry them too far in their own Cases as well as Negligence and Unconcernedness makes them too remiss in other Mens This makes every one willingly give up his single Power of punishing to one alone or more as they shall think most convenient and by such Rules as the Community or those authorized by them to that purpose shall agree on with intention in every one the better to preserve himself his Liberty and Property What is it but Flattery to the natural Vanity and Ambition of Men too apt of it self to grow and increase with the Possession of any Power who would perswade those Monarchs in Authority that they may do what they please because they have Authority to do more than others since Rational Creatures cannot be supposed when free to put themselves into Subjection to another for their own harm which were to put themselves in a worse Condition than in the State of Nature wherein they had liberty to defend their Lives and Properties against the Invasions of any Man or Men
thee whom the Lord thy God shall choose One from among thy Brethren shalt thou set over thee thou mayst not set a Stranger over thee So God did only reserve to himself the Nomination of their King by which he designed to make his People more happy than they could expect by their own peculiar Choice he knowing the Heart of Man and Corruption of his Nature would be sure to nominate such who was most fit to govern his People God did not require the Jews to accept of him for King whom he should chuse but left it to their own free Will whether they would accept him or no is plain from the following Examples Upon the Death of Saul David was set up by the Appointment of Almighty God yet there was only the Tribe of Judah that followed David and made him King eleven Tribes following Ishbosheth Saul's Son whom they made King and though David had a long War against the House of Saul yet he calls them not Rebels neither do we find that God punished them or sent any Judgment upon them for not accepting of David as King and when Rechab and Banah had slain Ishbosheth and brought his Head to David at Hebron saying Behold the Head of thine Enemy yet David instead of rewarding them caused them to be slain for killing of Ishbosheth whom he calls a righteous Person not a Rebel After whose Death all those Tribes came to David and made a Compact with him for the performance of such Conditions which they thought necessary for the securing of their Liberty before they made him King 2 Sam. Chap. 2 3 4 5. The making of Solomon King by David his Father was not thought sufficient without the Peoples Consent else why did the People anoint Solomon and make him King the second time We read Judg. 8. 21 22 23. that after Gideon had slain Zebah and Zalmunna with the Midianites the Children of Israel said unto Gideon Rule thou over us both thou and thy Sons and thy Sons Son also for thou hast delivered us from the Hand of Midian But he refusing their Offer they afterwards made his Bastard-Son Abimelech King though he had threefoore and ten lawfully-begotten Sons Zimri having slain Baasha King of Israel reigned in his stead but the Children of Israel hearing thereof rejected him and made Omri the Captain of the Host King of Israel 1 Kings 16. 15 16. The Kingdom of Edom appointed a Deputy to rule over them instead of a King and gave him Royal Authority there being then no King in Edom 1 Kings 22. 47. See Macchab. 9. 28 29 30. 13. 8 9. 14. 41 to 49. By which it is further apparent that their Kings and Governours were chosen by the People As propinquity of Blood is a great Preheminence towards the attaining of any Crown yet it doth not bind the Common-wealth to yield thereto and to admit at hap-hazard every one that is next by Succession of Blood as was falsly affirmed by R. L'estrange and many others when the Parliament would have disinherited the Duke of York as unfit to govern this Nation he being a Papist if weighty Reasons require the contrary because she is bound to consider well and maturely the Person that is to enter whether he be like to perform his Duty and Charge to be committed to him For to admit him that is an Enemy or unfit to govern is to consent to the destroying of the Common-wealth See how God dealt in this point with the Children of Israel 1 Sam. 8. after he had granted to them the same Government as the other Nations round about them had whose Kings did ordinarily reign by Succession as ours do at this day and as most of the Kings of the Jews did afterwards yet that this Law of succeeding by Proximity of Birth though for the most part it should prevail yet He shewed plainly that upon just Causes it might be altered as in the case of Saul who left behind him many Children yet not any of them succeeded him except Ishbosheth who was not his eldest Son who was anointed King by Abner the general Captain of that Nation to whom eleven Tribes followed until he was slain and then they chose David And Jonathan Saul's other Son so much praised in holy Scripture being slain in War his Son Mephibosheth did not succeed in the Crown though by Succession he had much greater Right to it than David God promised David that his Seed should reign for ever after him Yet we do not find this performed to any of his elder Sons nor to any of their Offspring but only to Solomon his younger and tenth Son Rehoboam the lawful Son and Heir of King Solomon coming to Shichem where all the People of Israel were assembled together for his Coronation and admission to the Crown for until that time he was not accounted true King who refusing to ease them of some heavy Impositions which they had received from his Father ten Tribes of the twelve refuse to admit him their King and chose Jeroboam his Servant and made him their lawful King and God allowed thereof for when Rehoboam had prepared an hundred and fourscore thousand chosen Men who were Warriours to reduce those ten Tribes to the Obedience of their Natural Prince God commanded them to desist by his Prophet Shemaiah and so they did These and the like Determinations of the People about admitting or refusing of Princes to reign or not to reign over them when their Designments are to good Ends and for just Causes are allowed by God and oftentimes are his own special Drifts and Dispositions though they seem to come from Man He who is set up or made King by the Consent of the People hath a just Title against the next Heir of the Blood and his Issue who are put by the Crown else most of the Princes now reigning in Europe would be Usurpers and want good Titles to their Crowns they or their Ancestors being set up by the People which were not the right Heirs of the Royal Stock The Laws of the Commonwealth is the very Soul of a Politick Body Kings and Emperors always have been are and ought to be subject to the Laws of their Kingdoms not above them to violate break or alter them at their pleasures they being obliged by their Coronation-Oaths in all Ages and Kingdoms inviolably to observe them for St. Paul saith A Prince is the Minister of God for the Peoples Good and Tribute and Custom are paid to him that he may continually attend thereto The Defence and Procuration of the Common-wealth is to be managed to the benefit of those who are committed not of those to whom it is committed A just Governour for the benefit of the People is more careful of the Publick Good and Welfare than of his own private Advantage Allegiance is nothing but Obedience according to Law which when the Prince violates he has no Right to Obedience There is a mutual Obligation between
own door By which it follows that Passive Obedience to unjust Violence is a Sin but resisting such Violence is no Sin but the Duty of every Man The first Duty that I owe is to God the second to my self in preserving my self c. the third to my Parent and Soveraign in obeying them in all things reasonable and lawful By all the Precepts in Scripture which require Obedience to Parents Homage and Obedience is as due to the one as to the other for 't is nowhere said Children obey your Father and no more the Mother is mentioned before the Father in Lev. 19. 3. Ye shall fear every Man his Mother and his Father Sure Solomon was not ignorant what belonged to him as a King or a Father when he said My Son hear the Instructions of thy Father and forsake not the Law of thy Mother And our Saviour says Matth. 15. 4. Honour thy Father and Mother And Ephes. 6. 1. Children obey your Parents c. If Paternal Authority be an absolute Authority I ask Whether it be in the eldest of the Family if so Whether a Grandfather can dispense with his Grand-Child's paying the Honour due to his Parents by the fifth Commandment 'T is evident in common Sense the Grandfather cannot discharge the Grand-Child from the Obedience due to his Parents neither can a Father dispense with his Child's Obedience due to the Laws of the Land therefore the Obedience required to Parents in Scripture is not to an absolute Authority for there can be no absolute Authority where there is an Authority above it With what Folly and Ignorance do some assert That the Kings of England are Absolute as proceeding from William the Conqueror To which I answer That a Conqueror has no right of Dominion much less any Absolute Authority over the Wife and Children of the Conquered or over those who assisted not against him Conquest may claim such a Right as Thieves use over those whom they can master which is a Right of Tenure but no Tenure of Right Conquest may restore a Right Forfeiture may lose a Right but 't is Consent only that can transact or give a Right There is no other Absolute Power than over Captives taken in a just War If the Possession of the whole Earth was in one Person yet he would have no Power over the Life or Liberty of another or over that which another gets by his own Industry for Propriety in Land gives no Man Authority over another William the Conqueror made a League or Compact with the Nobles and Lords of the Land to the performance of which he takes an Oath to observe the ancient Laws of the Realm established by his Predecessors the Kings of England and especially of Edward the Confessor as likewise did Henry the First with the Emendations his Father had made to them Stephen who succeeded Henry made a Compact and promiseth a Meloration of their Laws according to their Minds William Rufus Henry the First and Stephen get the Consent of the People by promising to grant them their usual Laws and ancient Customs Henry the First Richard the First King John and Richard the Second oblige themselves at their Coronations to grant them and then the People consented to own them as their King and Richard the First and King John were conjured by the Arch-bishops not to take upon them the Crown unless they intended to perform their Oaths If any King refused so to do the Nobles thought it their Concern to hinder his Coronation till he had either made or promised this Engagement What can be more absurd than to say That there is an absolute Subjection due to a Prince whom the Laws of God Nature and the Country have not given such Authority as if Men were made as so many Herds of Cattel only for the Use Service and Pleasure of their Princes But some do object That the anointing of Kings at their Coronations makes their Persons Sacred Unquestionable and Irresistable for any Tyrannical or Exorbitant Actions whatsoever To which I answer That every Christian's Baptism is a Sacrament of Christ's Institution a Spiritual Unction and Sanctification which makes a Person as sacred yea more holy than the Anointing of Kings can or doth of it self that being no Sacrament a Truth which no Christian can without Blasphemy deny And yet no Christian is exempted from Resistance Censure or Punishments according to the nature of his Crime and therefore the Anointing of Kings at their Coronations cannot do it it being a Ceremony of the Jews not instituted by Christ or any ways commanded to be continued by the Apostles or their Successors it signifying only the chusing or preserring one before another and so became the Ceremony of consecrating to any special Office and so was ordinarily used in the enstalling Men to Offices of any Eminency The Reign of a good King resembles that of Heaven over which there is but one God for he is no less beloved of the Vertuous than feared of the Bad and if human Frailty could admit a Succession of good Kings there were no comparison Power being ever more glorious in one than when it is divided 'T is not the Title of a King but the Power which is the Laws which is invested in him which makes the difference betwixt him and other Men in the executing of this Power his Person is sacred and not to be resisted he being above every Soul contained in the same Society and therefore cannot be resisted or deprived of his Office by any part or by the whole Community without the greatest Sin of Robbery and Injustice imaginable If a Government say some may be disturbed for any unlawful Proceedings of the Governour or his Ministers how can any Government be safe To which I answer That it is not lawful for every private Man to fly into the Bosom of his Prince for he is no competent Judg be he of never so great a Quality else a King was the most miserable Man living lying at the Mercy of every desperate Fellow's Censure It is impossible for one or a few oppressed Men to disturb the Government where the Body of the People do not think themselves concerned in it and that the Consequences seem not to threaten all yea when it does yet the People are not very forward to disturb the Government as in King Charles the Second's time when the Charters were condemned and seized upon in order to make us Slaves and the Laws perverted to the loss of many innocent Lives and many other Oppressions too many to insert and yet no body offered to disturb the Government I say till the Mischief be grown general and the Designs of the Rulers become notorious then and then only will the People be for righting themselves Whosoever either Ruler or Subject by Force goes about to invade the Rights of either Prince or People and lays the Foundation for overturning the Constitution and Frame of any just Government he is guilty of the greatest Crime I think a Man is capable of being to answer for all those Mischiefs of Blood Rapine and Desolation which the breaking to pieces of Governments brings on a Country and he who does it is justly to be esteemed the Common Enemy and Pest of Mankind and is so to be treated accordingly and how far the late King James was guilty of this I leave the World to judg FINIS The Author's Advertisement JUST as I had finished this Book I received a Reply to my former Book which I thought to have Answered but finding the Arguments to be Frivolous and Weak and my necessary Avocations allowing me but little time therefore I forbore answering it ADVERTISEMENTS THe Doctrine of Passive Obedience and Jure Divino disproved Price 1 d. The Letter which was sent to the Author of the Doctrine of Passive Obedience and Jure Divino disproved c. Answered and Refuted Wherein is proved That Monarchy was not Originally from GOD. That Kings are not by Divine Appointment but that all Government proceeds from the People That the Obedience required in Scripture is to the Laws of the Land and no otherwise That Resisting of Arbitrary Power is Lawful That the Oath of Allegiance to the late King James was dissolved before the Prince of Orange our present King landed That upon the non-performance of an Oath on one side the other becomes void is plainly prov'd from several Examples in Scripture That Protection is the only Cause of Allegiance and that Obedience or Allegiance is due to the present Government is proved from Scripture Law and Reason And those Texts of Scripture which relate to Government or Monarchy are Explained Price stitch'd 6 d. Both written by the same Author and printed for Tho. Harrison