☜ and bear all the ill administration that might be in the Government but never to rise in Arms upon that account * Id. third Letter to the E. of Middl. p. 168. I will do that which I think fit for me to do to day though I were sure to be assassinated for it to morrow but to the last moment of my life I will pay all duty and fidelity to his Majesty * Ans to the New Test c. p. 48 49. The Church of England may justly expostulate when she is treated as seditious after she hath rendred the highest Services to the Civil Authority that any Church now on Earth hath done she hath beaten down all the principles of Rebellion with more force and learning ☜ than any body of Men hath ever yet done and hath run the hazards of enraging her Enemies and losing her Friends even for those from whom the most learned of her Members knew what they might expect We are the only Church in the World that carries these principles to the highest We acknowledg that some of our Clergy miscarried in it upon King Edward's death yet at the same time others of our Communion adhered more steadily to their Loyalty in favour of Queen Mary than she did to the promises that she made to them The Laws of Nature are perpetual P. 51. and can never be cancell'd by any special Law so that if these Gent. own so freely that this is a Law of Nature that every individual might fight in his own defence they had best take care not to provoke Nature too much P. 52. As we cannot be charg'd for having preach'd any seditious Doctrine so we are not wanting in the preaching of the duties of Loyalty P. 55. even when we see what they are like to cost us Of all the Maximes in the World there is none hurtful to the Government in our present circumstances than the saying That the King's promises and the people's fidelity ought to be reciprocal and that a failure in the one cuts off the other for by a very natural consequence the Subject may likewise say that their Oaths of Allegiance being founded on the assurance of his Majesty's protection the one binds no longer than the other is observed and the Inferences that may be drawn from hence will be very terrible if the Loyalty of the so much decryed Church of England does not put a stop to them But for that we may cite the Testimony of the Right Reverend Bishop of S. Asaph in his Seasonable Discourse c. We are Members of a Church Pag. 4. which above all other Constitutions in the Christian World enforces the great Duties of Obedience and Submission to the Magistrate and teaches to be subject not only for Truth but Conscience sake And among other Motives which he mentions in the behalf of the Established Religion The fourth says he is this The Safety of the King's Person and the Prerogative of the Crown which hath no higher or more necessary Appendent than his Supremacy in his Dominion in all Causes Ecclesiastical and Secular according to the Powers invested in the Jewish Kings under the Law ☞ and exercised by the first Christian Emperors To whom we may add the Right Reverend Doctor Sprat in his Sermon before the House of Commons Jan. 30. 1677 / 8. by them ordered to be Printed Where speaking of King Chalres the Martyr Who saith he not only by his Birth had a Successive Right to the Crown which he could not forfeit but also by his Personal Vittues might have deserved another Title to it if his Crown had been elective and as his Murderers impudently pretended at the Disposal of his Subjects pag. 3. So that he terms him the Vicegerent of God's Power ibid. pag. 44. He pleaded and prayed for his Enemies at the Bar of Heaven which only was above him And pag. 47. May all of us be most industriously watchful that the same Schismatical Designs and Antimonarchical Principles which then inspired so many ill Men misled some good Men and cost our good King so dear may not once more revive and insinuate themselves again under the same or newer and craftier Disguises and find an opportunity to attempt the like mischiefs And in another Sermon of his at White-Hall Pag. 44 45. December 22. 1678. Let us withdraw our thoughts and lift up our minds to the imitation of the most Christian Examples As of our Saviour himself so of his Apostles and Disciples in the first and therefore the best Ages How were they zealous for the Glory of God Not by violence or malice or revenge against any not eve nagainst their Oppressors but only by their own Labors and Prayers and Patience and Magnanimity in suffering How were they zealous in respect to their Temporal Governors Not to resist for conscience sake but rather to be subject for that very reason not by open Rebellion not by private Machinations but in blessing and serving and submitting to their Emperors tho they were Idolaters and obeying them in all things except their Idolatry Whom to imitate is our Duty SECT XXIII Mr. Thorndyke * Apud Falkner's Christian Loyalty p. 429. from the Instance of the Maccabees avers that it was lawful for Subjects to take Arms in Defence of their Religion under the Jewish State tho in that he be mistaken but expresly condemns taking Arms upon that or any other pretext under the Christian State. Dr. Spencer †Serm. at S. Mary's Cambr. Jun. 28. 1660 p. 4. the now Dean of Ely The Gospel doth very sparingly meddle with State matters but when it doth it engageth to Obedience by as obliging Principles as it doth to Religion even a Principle of Conscience we must be subject for conscience-sake not barely for safety's sake and a principle of highest fear They that resist shall receive to themselves damnation A Doctrine taught the World in the Type long before by that Fire and Earthquake which destroyed the Opposers of lawful Authority Numb xvi 33 34. P. 11 12. God hath attested unto Sovereignty by suffering none of his Servants in Scripture few or none in story to be guilty of willful opposing lawful Authority We find many a wicked Man guilty of this Sin but as Reverence to other Divine Commands wore off in time as the power that exalteth it self above all that is called God obtained in the world so to this among the rest of Obedience to lawful Authority P. 14. The Heathens used to reproach the Gospel on this account but the Pulpit was never intended to be a Circle in which to raise up the evil Spirits of Sedition and State-Commotions no Religion in the Doctrine of it so greatly secures the Power of Kings and the Peace of States ☜ as the Christian doth we are bound by the Gospel to be obedient 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 1 Pet. ii 18. to the crookedest and frowardest Masters
great sin This perhaps he spoke like a Stoick but it was also spoken like a great Lawyer for the Roman Lawyers were great followers of that Sect of Philosophers Rom. 13. the Power of a Prince is by Divine Right not by the sole Constitution of Men. Suppose a Prince going about to destroy his own Country p. 103. as Nero did even Tyranny is more tolerable than Anarchy 〈◊〉 what happened when Nero was slain In the Reigns of the three following Princes p. 105 106 107. which lasted but a few Months more blood was spilt than in the 14 years of Nero 's Government When it is objected that we owe more to our Country than our Prince he flatly denies it affirming that the very Heathens knew that God sent evil Princes and that to reclaim Men from their sins and that God hath left us remedies for such evils such as repentance of our Vices obedience to our Sovereign ☞ thereby to encline them to be kind and gentle patience to take off the edge of their fury p. 112. and sighs and tears If the case of the Low Countries be objected and that our excellent Queen Elizabeth both praised and defended them the same answer must serve for this as for all examples that we must judge not according to examples but according to Laws or the case of the Men of Libnah who rebelled against Jehoram 2 Chron. 21.10 be insisted on we must answer says Drusius and so we have another witness to this truth the Learned Drusius that every action that is related in Holy Scripture is not praised nor was the cause good that because the Prince had deserted the true Religion therefore they might desert him for the Christians did not desert the Apostate Julian ☞ and that action is not to be made a pattern that is done contrary to reason and law nor does our defence of the Dutch confirm the Justice of their cause for we may justly defend those who themselves are engaged in an unjust War p. 116. as I have in more than one place proved as to this fact of Queen Elizabeth If Equals have no power one over another how much less hath an inferior power ove◠his superior a Subject over his Prince he shall be restrain'd by his superior who is God is it not in every Mans mouth that a Prince hath no other Judge but God Shame and conscience p. 118. p. 121 122 123. and honour may check them but not their Subjects Obj. But do not Aquinas Luther Peter Martyr and Beza allow of resistance Answ the book de regimine Principis is not Aquinas 's says Sigonius lib. 17. de regn Ital. Luther was deceived by the German Lawyers and brought to alter his opinion for the worse and what he spoke he said only of feudataries and of a Defensive War. Martyr was swayed by examples not reason as if because the Jews resisted the Macedonians and Romans whose Subjects they were not therefore Subjects may resist their lawful Sovereigns the example of St. Ambrose does not reach this case for he used no force nor had he any right to deny the temple to the Emperor which was his and Beza says only p. 12◠c. that the Laws must authorize such resistance But there are cogent reasons to encline to the practice of Passive Obedience 1. It is a rule that we must not speak evil of the Prince 2. Force towards a Father is unlawful therefore towards a Prince 3. A less evil is not to be removed if a greater will follow 4. If a Man in defence of his Mother ought not to resist his Father neither ought he to resist his Prince in defence of his Country 5. No one can depose a Prince but he who made him but the People did not make him c. 6. No evil is to be done that good may come of it 7. How can a King have absolute Power when he hath so many Ephori over him as he hath Subjects 8. The Authority of the Ancients Plato and Tully If it be objected that Plato says that Parents when they grow mad must be restrain'd and that others say that a Tyrant is a Madman I answer we constitute a Guardian over a mad Prince ☜ but we deny that a cruel Tyrannical Prince is to be reckoned a Madman Plato and Tully and Bartolus are of the opinion p. 132. that there can be no just cause of rebelling against or resisting a Prince The sentence of Mr. l'Hospital is observable that the Faction of the League was very potent the defence the Hugonets made seem'd necessary but that only the King's cause was just that both the Hugonots and Leaguers were guilty of waging War against their King but the Hugonots in a lesser degree because the necessity of self defence is more excusable than the Ambition of a Crown bu◠no Cause was just but the King 's for there cannot be any just cause of resisting a lawful Prince SECT VII The treasonable Design of Garnet and his Accomplices gave occasion to the making and imposing the Oath of Allegiance as good Laws generally owe their Rise and Original to men's ungoverable Passions and irregular Manners but no sooner did the Oath appear but out came two Breves of Pope Paul the Fifth to forbid the taking of it and Cardinal Bellarmine's Letter to the Archpriest Blackwel upon the same Account To these Adversaries that Learned King wrote an Answer Tripici nodo triplex cuneus and immediately Books multiplied on both sides to a great number Bellarmine Gretser Suarez Eudaemon Johannes Scioppius Becanus Parsons and others attempting to relieve the baffled Papacy while Bishop Andrews Bishop Barlow Bishop Buckeridge Bishopt Abbot Bishop Moreton Bishop Prideaux Isaac Casaubon Burhil Thompson Collins and others stoutly defended their King as they ought And tho their Arguments seem particularly levelled against the Papists yet by parity of reason they condemn all such for the like Opinions and Practices whoever asserts or is guilty of them It were a Subject worth a wise man's pains who had abilities and leisure to give an accurate Account of that Controversie but I shall only cite the Authors as they occur and make for the present purpose The King's Opinion we need not doubt of since the severest Enemies of this Doctrin confess that it hath been a commendable policy in Princes to popagate such Opinions nor have the Atheistical Politicians spared even Solomon himself as he served his own and not the interest of Truth when he said By me Kings reign Bishop Andrews's Sentiments have been published in the first part of this History to which may be added other Passages in the Writings of the same Author * Vol. of Serm. p. 803 804. Upon misconceiving this point some have fallen into a fancy that his anointed may forfeit their Tenure and so cease to be his If after he is anointed he grow defective prove a Tyrant fall to favor
nevertheless he sat up and dictated his sense of it but the Earl was on a sudden by reason of the fight hurried away and whether the King had the Paper or no I cannot learn but the original or a Copy of it was by some zealous Man supprest no doubt because it condemn'd taking up Arms on the specious pretences of Religion and Liberty And according to his Sentiments was his usage he being plundred by the Parliament Army as well as the other so called Malignants SECT XI There was no little Clash between Arch-Bishop Laud and Bishop Davenant about other points but in this they agreed * Davenant deter qu. 4. p. 22. He that taketh the sword shall perish by the sword i. e. He that usurps the Sword he that uses it without permission from the King who by God's Ordinance bears the Sword now who can believe that a Prince will give leave to draw his own Sword against himself all others ought to abstain from laying hands on him whose punishment God hath by a certain special priviledg reserv'd to himself the antient Christians being harass'd with most grievous persecutions never fled to these indirect means Pag. 23. but defended the Church by those means which God hath appointed viz. by the tears of her Christians the preachings of her Priests and the sufferings of her Martyrs and what Suarez say * V. p. 24. That there is no need of a Superiour Power to keep the Pope in order because Christ will in an especial manner in this case provide for his Church may be with much greater reason said of Kings Christ himself will in a more Eminent manner defend his Church not onely against the cruelty of persecutors but also against the gates of Hell. Resistance is unlawful and contrary to God's Ordinance for St. Paul says it is a sin and worthy of eternal damnation to resist the Powers ordained of God. Put the case that Princes will not only not purge the Church of Heresies and false worship but what is worse * Id. qu. 12. p. 58. will defend those corruptions by their Authority yet in this case the people ought not to reform 1. Because God requires from Subjects to suffer whatsoever the Magistrate can inflict rather than desert the true Religion but not to compel the Magistrate for Religion is to be defended not by killing others but by dying for it our selves not by cruelty but by patience not by wickedness but by fidelity says Lactantius 2. When the people undertake such an action without the Prince's consent it is Rebellion now evil is not to be done that good may come thereof let such Men take to themselves whatever Names they please they are Traytors not Christians L. there will be great danger in so doing for should they get the Power they cannot make Laws * Qu. 17. What shall be able to keep a Man within the duty of a good Subject who will not be bound by Oaths †Qu. 30. Criminals of the Superiour Order i.e. Kings c. God hath reserv'd to his own Court and Judgment SECT XII I will not quote Arch-Bishop Laud because the Adversaries to this Doctrine aver that it was of his inventing but instead of him I will call for an unquestionable witness Arch-Bishop Usher who expresly order'd * Clavi Trabales p. 52. That Loyalty should according to the Canon be four times every year preach'd to the people while his actions were a plain Comment upon his Opinions I need not mention the regard the forein Protestant Divines had to him and the Romanists too especially Cardinal Richelieu as well as those of our own Country * Apud eund Sanders pref to the Bishop's Book While I inform the Reader that in the beginning of our most unhappy Commotions the Lord Deputy of Ireland Strafford desired the Primate Usher to declare his judgment publickly concerning those Tumults which he did in two Sermons at Christ-Church in Dublin on Eccles 7.2 Whereupon the Deputy signified it would be acceptable to the King to print the Sermons or to write a Treatise on the Subject the latter the Arch-Bishop made choice of and sent it into England with an intent to have it printed as the Martyr Charles design'd that his Subjects might receive the satisfaction from the same as himself had done In the time of the Usurper Cromwel it was not thought fit to be printed lest it might have been perverted to the support of his Power For by this time the flatterers of that great Tyrant had learn'd by a new device upon the bare account of Providence without respect to the justice of the Title the only right and proper foundation to interpret and apply to his advantage whatsoever they found either in the Scriptures or in other Writings concerning the Power of Princes or the duty of Subjects profanely and sacrilegiously taking the Name of that holy Providence of God in vain and using it onely as a stalking Horse to serve the lusts and interests of ambitious Men. In the first part of that learned Treatise the Bishop proves that the Power of the Prince is from God and that * Part. 1. §. vi p. vi Our Government is a free Monarchy because the Authority resteth solely in the person of the King whereupon it is declar'd that the King is the onely Supreme Governour of these Realms in all Causes whatsoever which could not stand if either the Court of Parliament it self or any other power upon Earth might in any cause over-rule him I say any Power whither forein or domestick and then * §. 28. He discourses at large as of the original of Regal power from Heaven so of the Law of the King proceeding in the second part to treat of the Obedience of the Subject * V. p. 109. 111 134 c. In which he plainly shews that whither the Power be good or bad whosoever does resist it by withdrawing his service from it or denying Tribute or not giving that honour to it which he ought to give resisteth the Ordinance and disposition of God by whose appointment they bear Rule * P. 145. 146. Quest But how are Subjects to carry themselves when such things are enjoined as cannot or ought not to be done R. surely not to accuse the Commander but humbly to avoid the command and when nothing else will serve the turn as in things that may be done we are to express our subjection by active so in things that cannot be done we are to declare the same by passive obedience without resistance and repugnancy such a kind of suffering being as sure a sign of subjection as any thing else whatsoever He P. 147 c. that consults with flesh and bloud will hardly be induc'd to admit this Doctrine of passive Obedience and therefore if he will learn this Lesson he must make choice of better Masters and listen in the first place to Solomon Prov. 3.5
God the things that are God ' s. Dr. Fowler There is nothing more certain than that for any of us to be false Dâ—sign of Christianity p. 243 251 252. and perfidious to be ungovernable rebellious or seditious upon the account of Religion it self is most unsufferable and inexcusable For if it be lawful to behave our selves after this manner upon any account whatever Religion would be the most useless thing in the World and if this were lawful upon the account of Religion only ☜ I will not stick to say that it will not be more useless and unprofitable than mischievous and hurtful Nor would the Christion Religion it self be worthy our profession if it would give us leave upon any design to allow our selves in the forementioned Immoralities or in any one whatsoever Thus to do is no other than to be irreligious to promote Religion to be unchristian to do service to Christianity and therefore to go the directest way to destroy it by the means we use for its preservation Thus to do is to oppose the Interests of our Religion to that of our Souls Id. Discour of Christian Liberty p. 175. â—ee his Discourse of Offences p. 9 10 11. and to cast these away in the defence of that It is come to that sad pass that preaching Obedience to Authority is as unacceptable Doctrin as can be to even many great Pretenders to Christianity altho it be done never so prudently and agreeably to the express Doctrin of our Saviour and his Apostles And the Notion of Obedience for Conscience sake seems almost lost among not a few which is one of the great Sins for which we have too great reason to fear there is a heavy Scourge near us Mr. Evans A moderate Man when the Honor of God or the King when Religion Sermon of Moderat 1682. p. 12. and the Welfare of his Country lye at stake then thinks it a most worthy and weighty occasion of imploying his Zeal and Activity in their Service of defending them with Courage and Resolution with his Life and Fortunes He never breaks the second Table to preserve the first nor make use of any ways to secure Religion that are contrary to or destructive of its Principles What Men esteem great Falshoods pag. 23. and call Toryism and Popery are really as true as Gospel pag. 34. I will conclude all with this Remark We may and shall if we do not timely take up bring in Popery by a heady and extravagant Zeal against it ☜ and ruin and enslave our selves by our fierce and passionate Contentions for Liberty Property and Safety p. 48. Give me the Man that is honest and constant to his Principles and to what he professes whatsoever Party or Perswasion he is of he is much more valuable to me than he that plights his Faith to the Church and gives all the Security that can be taken for his Conformity to it and then after he hath wound himself into its Communion and Preferments plays booty and acts like a Non-Conformist These are the treacherous Friends that like Vipers prey upon the Bowels of their Mother and betray her as Judas did our Lord with a Kiss Dr. Comber in his Religion and Loyalty Sec. Edit 1683. p. 8 3. v. pag. 12 13 c. If the Church of England did make worldly Interest the sole measure of her Actions they would never consider what was honest but only what was expedient and never stick at ill means to accomplish that which they account good Ends. We of this Church are perhaps the only Christians since the Primitive Ages who never dispens'd with our Loyalty to serve our worldly Ends. And if this do not commend our Policy I am sure it declares our Honesty and Integrity and must needs recommend us to all good Men as those who prefer our Duty and our Conscience before all earthly Advantages p. 39. No Religion in the World teaches and practises more Loyalty than that which is truly called Protestant and we doubt not but that if ever his R. H. should attain the Crown he will not blame our Church for that which was the Opinion of those who endeavoured to subvert it after they had renounc'd all Communion with it pag. 52. especially when it is further considered how constantly the true Protestants of the Church of England have loved and how faithfully they have served the Royal Family in all Fortunes how closely they have adher'd to the Interests thereof upon all Occasions so that whoever were true Sons of this Church our Kings have always reckon'd them their certain and undoubted Friends And when a Rebellion was designed against the blessed Father of his Royal Highness the Contrivers of it found it necessary first to seduce Men from the Church of England before they could engage them in so wicked an Action p 〈…〉 And since the happy Restoration they have incurr'd the Hatred of the bigotted Fanaticks for their perpetual standing for the King's Prerogative and their zealous promoting his and his Royal Highness's Interest The Pamphlets written in defence of the Bill of Exclusion p. 57. â—â— frequently transcribe whole Passages out of Doleman's Book Take some of their accursed Principles The Commonwealth hath Power to chuse their own fashion of Government as also to change it upon reasonable Causes The Commonwealth hath Power not only to put back the next Inheritors upon lawful occasions but also to dispossess them that have been lawfully put in possession if they fulfil not the Laws and Conditions by which and for which their Dignity was given them The Republick may cure or cut off their Heads if they infest the rest Princes are subject to Law and Order and the Commonwealth which gave them their Authority for the good of all may also restrain or take the same away again if they abuse it to the common evil The whole Body to superior to the Prince neither so giveth the Common-wealth her Authority and Power up to any Prince that she depriveth herself utterly of the same when need shall require to use it for her defence for which she gave it The Prince's Power is not absolute but delegate from the Commonwealth and is given with such Conditions and Oaths on both Parties as if the same be not kept by either Party the other is not bound With many other such Popish Positions So also the Apost Prâ—â— p. 4 5. and it is very observable that this wicked Libel of Doleman was in part reprinted Anno 1648. under the feigned Title of Several Speeches deliver'd at a Conference concerning the Power of Parliaments to proceed against their King's form of Government pag. 61. But the Protestant Church of England is not only better in all other accounts but doth hold teach and practise Loyalty above all others in the World the Divines thereof generally holding Monarchy to be of divine Right and Allegiance to be an Obligation on
first brought from another Country and is no way natural to our own tho the Infection hath been taken by too many who had an ill Temper prepared for it Cons Dr. Jackson's Works Tom. 3. l. 12. ch 8. p. 978. their Loyalty and Peaceableness may be the Fruits of their Education or their good temper but not of their Faith or as Dr. Sherlock says they may be loyal as Englishmen but they cannot be so as Papists Would we therefore judge of the Doctrine of our Church we must consult her Articles Canons publick Homilies publick Offices of Devotion General Orders of her Bishops Censures of her Universities and Writings of her greatest Men who have vindicated her Doctrine and explained her Belief and this Method I shall use to discover what hath been owned by the Church of England as to the Doctrine of Non-resistance or Passive Obedience CHAP. I. The Doctrine of the Thirty nine Articles THE Articles of our Church have been always looked upon as the stated Doctrine of our whole Church to which all her Priests are obliged to make their Subscriptions they are allowed a place in the Body of the Confessions of the Protestant Churches and are highly commended by Foreigners as well as by our own Writers for * Bishop Ridley's Farewel Letter apud Fox tom 3. p. 506. this Church hath in matters of Controversie Articles so penned and framed after the Holy Scriptures and grounded upon the true understanding of God's Word that in short time if they had been universally received says Bishop Ridley the Martyr they should have been able to have set in Christ's Church much concord and unity in Christ's true Religion and to have expelled many false Errors and Heresies wherewith this Church alas was almost overgone Nor is this that excellent Prelate's peculiar Opinion but of the whole Church which ordains †Can. 3. an 1604. That whosoever shall affirm that the Church of England by Law establish'd under the King's Majesty is not a true and Apostolical Church teaching and maintaining the Doctrine of the Apostles let him be excommunicated ipso facto And Can. 5. Whosoever shall affirm that any of the thirty nine Articles agreed in the Synod 1562 are in any part superstitious or erroneous let him be excommunicate ipso facto Anno 1552. In the Convocation held at London Articles of Religion were agreed upon of which the Thirty sixth runs thus The Civil Magistrate is ordained and allowed of God and therefore is to be obeyed not only for wrath but also for Conscience sake And expresly asserts That the Bishop of Rome hath no Jurisdiction in this Realm of England In the Articles of our Church under Queen Elisabeth anno 1562. it runs thus and so continues to this day The Queens Majesty hath the chief Power in this Realm of England and other her Dominions unto whom the chief Government of all Estates of this Realm whether they be Ecclesiastical or Civil in all Cases doth appertain and is not nor ought to be subject to any Foreign Jurisdiction And it is remarkable ‖ Rogers's Praef. to the 39th Artic. that these Articles of 1562. were published in the same year in which the Massacre at Vassey in France was committed by the Duke of Guise and when all the Protestants in the Country were sentenced to Death by the Parliament of Paris It is true this Doctrine is not limited to the particular Case of Subjects taking up Arms but it seems to me by two necessary Consequences to be deduc'd from it 1. Because if the Pope who pretended by a Divine Right had no power over Kings much less have the People any power who pretend to an inferior Right that of Compact 2. Because the Article makes no distinction but excludes all other Power as well as that of the Pope And in truth the Plea is the same on either side the Pope says as long as the Prince governs according to the Laws of God and the Church of which he is the Interpreter so long the Censures of the Church do not reach him and say the People as long as the Prince governs according to the Laws of the Land and of the meaning of those Laws themselves are the Interpreters so long are they bound to be obedient but as soon as the King doth any thing that may contradict the Pope then he is deservedly say the Romanists excommunicate deposed and murdered and when he usurps upon the Peoples Liberties then he ought to be deposed by the Peoples the Arguments on either side are the same and for the most part the Authorities for as * Moderat of the Church of England ann 17. §. 19. p. 481. Dr. Puller well observes both Papists and Dissenters deny the Supremacy of the King one attributes it to the Pope originally the other to the People and the same Arguments that the Pope useth for his Supremacy over Kings the Disciplinarians use for establishing their Sovereignty CHAP. II. The Doctrine of the Injunctions and Canons IN the Infancy of the Reformation under Henry the Eighth for there I begin the Restoration of Religion to her Purity in this Kingdom as Dr. Burnet does †Burnet hist Reform l. 3. p. 226. tom 1. And Fox tom 2. p. 387. Anno 1536. Injunctions were issued out the first of which is That every Man that hath Cure of Souls shall for the Establishment and Confirmation of the King's Authority and Jurisdiction sincerely declare manifest and open for the space of one quarter of a year next ensuing once every Sunday and after that at the least wise twice every Quarter in their Sermons and other Collations that the Bishop of Rome 's usurp'd Power and Jurisdiction having no Establishment or Ground in the Law of God was of most just Causes taken away and abolish'd and that the King's Power is in his Dominions the highest Power and Potentate under God to whom all men within the same Dominions by God's Commandment owe most Loyalty and Obedience afore and above all other Potentates in Earth Now if a King be above all other Powers then he cannot be accountable to any other Power and so ought not to be resisted Anno * Burnet's Collect. of Records p. 181. 1538. came out the Lord Cromwel's Injunctions as they were called wherein the same Duty is injoyned in the same Words This also is the first of the Injunctions of Edw. the Sixth †Sparr Collect. p. 1 2. An. 1547. the Preface to which Injunctions acknowledges that part of them were formerly set out by Henry the Eighth and the rest added by King Edward the Sixth This also was the first of the Injunctions of Queen Elizabeth with a very little variation and accordingly in the Articles of Enquiry of Archbishop Cranmer in the Diocess of Canterbury under Edward the Sixth the first is Whether all Persons c. have preach'd against the usurp'd Power of the Bishop of Rome Secondly Whether they have preach'd and
necessary Erudition of a Christian Man in which the Commentary on the fifth Commandment thus instructs us Subjects be bound not to withdraw their Fealty Truth Love and Obedience towards their Prince for any Cause whatsoever it be nor for any cause they may conspire against his person nor do any thing towards the hinderance or hurt thereof or of his Estate And this they prove out of Rom. 13. Whosoever resists the power resists the ordinance of God and they that resist the ordinance of God shall get to themselves damnation And â—n the sixth Commandment No Subjects may draw their Swords against their Prince for any Cause whatsoever it be So that hereby we see that the Declaration made in the Reign of Charles the Second That it is not lawful upon any pretence whatsoever c. is no Novel Doctrine but the old Doctrine of the Church of England even in the infancy of its Reformation And again Although Princes which be the Supreme Heads of their Realm do otherwise than they ought to do yet God hath assigned no Judges over them in this World but will have the Judgment of them reserved to himself and will punish them when he sees his time And Ann. 1542. ‖ Id. Coll. of Record n. 26. p. 252. V. Fox to 2 p. 346 347. it is expresly injoin'd by the Bishop of London to his Clergy Item That every of you do procure and provide of your own a Book called The Institution of a Christian Man otherwise called the Bishop's Book and that you and every of you do exercise your selves in the same according to such Precepts as hath been given heretofore or hereafter to be given So that I suppose the Book to have been the whole duty of Man of those days SECT I. The Popish Bishops Tonstal and Stokesly in their Letter to Cardinal Pool * Apud Fox to 2. p. 351 352. prove out of St. Austin St. Chrysostom and other Fathers That a King is accountable to God only for his Faults that he hath no Peer upon Earth being greater than all Men and inferior but to God alone c. and from hence they shew That the Pope's Power and by parity of Argument the Power of the People to depose Kings is a Doctrine that will be to his own Damnation if he repent not whereas he ought to obey his Prince according to the Doctrine of St. Peter and St. Paul nay Bonner himself Ap. eund p. 673. as he wrote the Preface to the Book of true Obedience so in his Sermon at Paul's Cross Ann. 1549. in the beginning of the Reign of Edward the Sixth declares That all such as rebel against their Prince get to themselves Damnation and those that resist the higher Power resist the Ordinance of God and he that dieth in Rebellion is utterly damn'd and so loseth both Body and Soul what pretences soever they have as Corah Dathan and Abiram for Rebellion against Moses were swallowed down alive into Hell although they pretended to sacrifice to God. So much of the Doctrine of the Reformation did even Bonner himself at that time own and this also was the Opinion of the Protestants of that Age for †Ap. eund to 2. p. 592 among the Heresies and Errors collected by the Popish Bishops out of the Martyr Tyndal's Book called the Obedience of a Christian Man this is the fourth he faith fol. 113. that a Christian Man may not resist a Prince being an Infidel and an Ethnick and that this takes away free will or as it is in the ‖ Inter addend Latin Non licere Christiano resistere Principi Infideli Ethnico Tollit libertatem arbitrii Where observe that the Papists look'd upon it as if Tindal had said that it was impossible to do so whereas he only means that a Christian ought not to resist c. for the Words are thus explained ‡ Ibid. St. Peter willeth us to be subject to our Princes 1 Pet. ii St. Paul also doth the like Rom. xiii who was also himself subject to the Power of Nero and altho every Commandment of Nero against God he did not follow yet he never made resistance against the Authority and State of Nero as the Pope useth to do against the State not only of Infidels but also of Christian Princes SECT II. In the Reign of Edward the Sixth the true Religion began to flourish and at that time old Father Latimer was famous for a plain and honest Preacher * Fol. 56. he in his fourth Sermon before the King telling the Audience what Conference he had with my Lord Darsey in the Tower subjoins that when that Lord pleaded that he had been always faithful and had he seen the King in the Field he would have yielded his Sword to him on his Knees he replyed Marry but in the mean season you played not the part of a faithful Subject in holding with the People in a Commotion and Disturbance it hath been the cast of all Traitors to pretend nothing against the King's Person they never pretend the matter to the King but to others Subjects may not resist any Magistrates nor ought to do any thing contrary to the King's Laws And to put the matter out of all doubt in his Afternoon †Matth. xxii 21. Sermon at Stamford he says If the King should require of thee an unjust Request yet art thou bound to pay it and not to resist nor rebel against the King. The King indeed is in peril of his Soul for asking an unjust Request and God will in his due time reckon with him for it but thou must obey the King and not take upon thee to judge him for God is the King's Judge c. and know this that whensoever there is an unjust Exaction laid upon thee it is a plague and punishment for thy Sin. We marvel that we are plagued as we be and I think verily this unjust and unfaithful dealing with our Princes is one great cause of our plague look therefore every Man upon his Conscience ye shall not be judged by worldly Policy at the latter day Archbishop Cranmer in his Letter to Queen Mary whatever his fear might otherwise betray him to do confesses Ap. Fox to 3. p. 672. That the Imperial Crown and Jurisdiction of this Realm is taken immediately from God to be used under him only and is subject unto none but God alone ‖ p. 674. and afterward averrs That as the Pope taketh upon him to give the Temporal Sword to Kings and Princes so doth he likewise take upon him to depose them from their imperial States if they be disobedient to him and commandeth the Subjects to disobey their Princes assoiling the Subjects as well of their Obedience as of their lawful Oaths made unto their true Kings and Princes contrary to God's Commandment who commandeth all Subjects to obey their Kings or their Rulers over them It is not to be denied that this great
as much as to say do what they would have him * Id. on v. 4. p. 221. Who may say unto the King What dost thou i. e. first who hath any Authority to call him to an Account As much as to say none hath but God alone according to that of an eminent Rabbi No Creature may judge the King but the holy and blessed God alone To allow the People either collective or representative to have Power to do it is to make them Accusers Judges and Executioners also in their own Cause and that against their Sovereign nor secondly can any Man safely attempt it but he shall meet with Punishment either here or hereafter which is no new Doctrine but the same with that of S. Paul as Luther here honestly notes They that resist shall receive to themselves Damnation which none shall be able to avoid Thus much the Author of Nature's Dowry is forced to acknowledge from the evident Light he saw in this place It is Wisdom saith he out of Elisha Gallico an Hebrew Interpreter in a private man when the Magistrate enjoins what is repugnant to God's Will to remove out of his Dominions rather than contest with him †Id. p. 223. The wisest thing we can do when Princes require any thing grievous unto us is not to rebel but to watch the fittest opportunities to petition for redress and that after such a manner as may not give offence V. 7. P. 224. Luther refers wholly to the miserable Condition of a Rebel in this manner He desires various things and hopes for mighty matters by his Disobedience but is mightily deceiv'd for of the very impunity which he promis'd himself he cannot be secure c. ‖ Id. in Eccles x. 20. Paraph. p. 277. Curse not the King c. but notwithstanding all this viz. consuming the publick Treasure c. as I advised thee before not to rise in Rebellion against thy Sovereign so now let me add that it is very foolish as well as wicked to be provoked by this ill management so much as to speak an opprobrious Word of him or his Ministers c. ‡ Annot. in loc p. 302. But whatsoever negligence or profuseness and waste there be it should not provoke any wise or good man to speak contemptuously of his Sovereign or of his Ministers * P. 306. It will not be unuseful much less unseasonable in such an unruly Age as this to let the Reader understand how deeply the first Reformers of Religion laid this Precept to heart by transcribing some of Luther's Admonitions in his Annotations on this Verse The worse and the more malignant says he the World is the more studious and laborious Solomon teaches us to be in the doing of our duty particularly in honoring Magistracy because it is a divine Ordinance and the better part of the World by which God manages all things under the Sun. But the Ungodly begin their Wickedness chiefly in the Contempt of Magistrates when they hear how God blames and reproves them in the holy Scriptures but it belongs to the divine Office to find fault with Magistrates and to rebuke them and therefore tho thou hearest it yet do not imitate it for thou art not God nor the Ordainer no nor the Reformer nor the Restorer of the divine Ordinance but as God reproves them so thee also in the holy Scriptures that thou may'st do thy duty and not meddle with what belongs to them The meaning therefore of Solomon is I have spoken much of Princes how they undo the World but do thou reverence them notwithstanding that for they are not an humane Ordinance but a divine St. Peter indeed calls the King an Humane Creature because he is assumed from among men but his Authority is divine and tho Princes be bad they are to be honored because of this Ordinance of God. Why then wilt thou speak evil of those who are vexed with so many and great cares and labours for thy Peace if they be good And if they be bad and foolish their own Impiety is mischief enough to them and brings them into sufficient danger Bear with them then and compassionate them rather than rail upon them and revile them c. Dr. Towerson on the fifth Commandment Those Powers are to be look'd upon as ordained by God which came to that Power they have as without any fraud or violence so by the ordinary Course of God's Providence Upon which account all those Powers must be look'd upon as ordain'd by God that either come to the Throne by a lineal Descent from former Kings where the Kingdom is Hereditary or by a free and unconstrained choice where it is Elective Part 5. p. 241. Pag. 251. There is no doubt it is in the Power of the Subject who conceives himself not to have deserv'd it so by flight to avoid if he can the falling under the Power of it the Sword Our Saviour having expresly given leave that if we be persecuted in one City we should to save our selves flee from that to another As little difficulty should I find if that were the thing in question to license the avoiding the Prince's Severity by appealing to his own Courts of Judicature where that is by Law so allowed as it is in several Cases here that being not to be looked upon as a Resistance much less an injurious one which is with the leave of him against whom it is directed But if the Question be concerning resisting by force of Arms and so avoiding the severity of the Prince so it is as certain both from the Scripture and Reason that we ought not to avoid it but rather with all readiness submit to the strokes of it Pag. 253. For tho it be true that a Prince hath no Authority to inflict an unjust Punishment yet he is privileg'd by the place he holds under God from being subjected unto Man and ought not therefore by any force to be brought into Subjection to him Pag. 254. Whosoever resisteth evil Powers must be thought in a particular manner to fight against God. What a disappointment must needs have been to the Counsels of the Almighty if it had been permitted Christians to resist Part 7. An Answer to several Pleas which are made in behalf of Resistance c. Pag. 257 258. That which generally draws Princes to the persecuting of those that are of a different Religion from themselves being not so much any hatred of their Religion as the Jealousie they have lest under the Pretences of that and the Assemblies which are made for it some secret Design against the State should lurk which Jealousie must needs be taken away when it appears to them from undoubted Experiments that they who do profess it will not attempt any thing against them how severely soever they may be handled by them To all which if we add the story of primitive Times too we shall not need to doubt of Religion's being more than
careful our blessed Saviour was to pay all due respects to any person invested with Authority and that St. Peter recommends a meek behaviour even towards them from whom we receive hard measure P. 94. That such a continued respect and practice of duty to Governours even under hard usage is that which Conscience to God will oblige to perform This duty of respectful submission is not founded upon the good temper of our Superiours but upon the Authority they receive from God and the Precepts which God hath thereupon given to us P. 97. Obj. But if Religion be concern'd and in danger doth it not behove every good Man to be zealous c. Ans 1. It is requisite he should be zealous in the diligent exercise of a holy Life and in frequent and devout prayer c. But he must not be active as an evil doer in giving himself the liberty to behave himself undutifully towards his Superiours 2. Religion can never be so in danger that God can need any sinful practices of Men to uphold his interest his Kingdom is not so weak that it cannot stand without the affistance of the works of the Devil P. 99. 3. Religion can never be opposed with greater enmity and malicious designs than it was when our Saviour suffered and yet then he reviled not P. 100. nor allow'd St. Peter's rashness The Jews aimed utterly to root out the Christian Name and there were great oppositions against Religion even fiery Tryals 1 Pet. 4.12 When yet Saint Peter requires Christians to follow the Example of our Lord's patience and meekness and to reverence Superiours 4. True zeal for Religion consists in pious and holy living not in passionate and sinful speaking To Dr. Falkner I should join his Pupil Dr. Sherlock but his Book of Non resistance is so strong and his arguments from Scripture so cogent that it is needless to make any extracts out of it and till his Adversary writes both a more becoming and a more demonstrative Answer it will be still by all wise Men look'd upon as unanswerable SECT XXIX Among the unanswerable Treatises I also reckon Dr. Hicks the Dean of Worcester's Jovian for unless scurrility confidence and a desertion of the main Argument may pass for an Answer the Reply that is yet extant deserves no Rejoinder Out of that Elaborate Commentary on the Doctrine of Passive Obedience I shall only quote one passage because it is a History of the Author's Principles and Resolution I had rather dye a Martyr than a Rebel P. 259 and I resolve by God's assistance neither to turn Papist nor Resist but if I cannot escape I will suffer according to the Gospel and the Church of England and I will Preach and Practise Passive Obedience after the example of the Prophets and Martyrs who suffered against Law and in my most melancholy prospect of things I can comfort my self with the hopes of a reward for dying at a Stake which he shall never have for dying in the Field To this purpose also the Sermon at Bow-Church Jan. 30. 1681 / 2. Together with the same Author's Artillery Sermon are worth the perusing Dr. South I have read heretofore of some Serm. 2. p. 80 81. that having conceived an irreconcileable hatred of the Civil Magistrate prevailed with Men so far that they went to resist him even out of Conscience and a full perswasion and dread upon their spirits ☜ that not to do it were to desert God and consequently to incur Damnation Now when Mens rage is both heightened and sanctified by Conscience the War will be fierce for what is done out of Conscience is done with the utmost activity and then Campanella 's Speech to the King of Spain will be found true Religio semper vicit praesertim armata which sentence deserves seriously to be considered by all Governors and timely understood lest it come to be felt P. 212. P. 236. We have seen Rebellion commented out of Rom. xiii He that makes his Prince despised and undervalued blows a Trumpet against him in Mens Hearts c. * See Dr. Freeman's Ser. before the L. Mayor 1682. p. 8. P. 242 243. To imagine a King without Majesty a Supreme without Sovereignty is a Paradox and direct contradiction The Church of England glories in nothing more than that she is the truest friend to Kings and to Kingly Government of any other Church in the World. It is the happiness of some Professions and Callings that they can equally square themselves to and thrive under all Revolutions of Government but the Clergy of England neither know nor affect that happiness and are willing to be despised for not doing so And so far is our Church from encroaching upon the Civil Power as some who are back-friends to both would maliciously insinuate that were it stript of the very remainder of its privileges and made as like the Primitive Church for its bareness as it is already for its Purity it could chearfully and what is more Loyally want all such Privileges and in the want of them pray that the Civil Power may flourish as much and stand as secure from the assaults of Fanatick Anti-Monarchical Principles grown to such a dreadful height during the Churches late confusions as it stood while the Church enjoyed those Privileges Dr. Serm. on Heb x. 36. p. 2. John Moor. Our Saviour was the first that did effectually recommend this Passive Virtue to the World and furnished Men with such true Arguments to bear their Cross as made the most afflicted state not only supportable but to be preferred before the happiness of this life P. 16 17. A good Man when he is persecuted for his Religion neither deserts it nor by any unlawful means defends it He will not renounce his Faith to escape Persecution and yet he dreads by resisting of Authority to promote the cause of Religion P. 19. it being a blasphemy against the Divine Wisdom and Power to suppose God can stand in need of our sins to bring to pass his most glorious designs and this he says of those who under pretence of defending their Rights or Religion resist lawful Authority He then in whom this virtue of Patience dwells keeps a due regard to the commands laid upon him to submit himself to the Supreme Powers and he dares not lift up his Hand against the Lords Anointed ☞ nor Levy War upon the most plausible account whatsoever nay to him it cannot but seem a wonder that the Doctrin of Resistance should have gone down so glibly with any who have read the New Testament and are baptised into the Christian Faith. All Resistance to the Supreme Authority is unlawful The Popes of Rome being the first pretenders from Scripture to a right to resist the Civil Power P. 20 21. c. And it is most certain that by the same Argument they would take off their obligation to this plain Christian Duty they
he be never so true a Subject and all unlikely to make any resistance or to think any evil unto your Grace P. 184. Whereas it is they that go about to make Insurrection to the maintaining of their worldly pomp and pride and not the true Preacher Who is he that would be a Traitor or maintain a Traitor against your most excellent and noble Grace I think no Man yea and I know surely that no Man can do it without the great displeasure of the eternal God. For S. Paul commandeth straitly unto all Christians to be obedient in all things Rom. 13. on this manner Let every man submit himself to the authority of the higher power for whosoever resisteth the power resisteth the ordinance of God and they that resist shall receive to themselves damnation 1 Pet. 2. Also S. Peter confirmeth this saying Submit your selves unto all manner of ordinance of man c. Wherefore if every man had the Scriptures as I would to God they had to judge every Man's Doctrine ☞ then were it out of question that the Preachers thereof either would or could make or cause to be made any Insurrection against their Prince seeing the self same Scripture straitly commandeth all Subjects to be obedient unto their Princes as Paul witnesseth saying Warn them saith he that they submit themselves to princes and to powers and to obey the officers Now how can they that preach and exhort all Men to this Doctrine cause any Insurrection or Disobedience against their Prince Call to mind the old Prophets and with a single eye judge if any of them either privily or apertly stirred up the People against their Princes P. 185. Look on Christ if he submitted not himself to the high powers paid he not Tribute for all he was free and caused Peter likewise to pay Suffered not he with all patience the punishments of the Princes Yea Death most cruel altho they did him open wrong and could find him guilty in no Cause Look also on the Apostles and if ever they stirred by any occasion the People against their Princes yea if they themselves obeyed not to all Princes altho the most part of them were Tyrants and Infidels Consider likewise those Doctors which purely and sincerely have handled the Word of God either in Preaching or Writing if ever by their means any Insurrection or Disobedience rise among the People against their Princes but you shall rather find that they have been rather ready to lay down their own Heads to suffer with all patience whatsoever Tyranny any Power would minister unto them giving all People example to do the same Now to conclude if neither the Scripture neither the Practice of the Preachers thereof teacheth nor affirmeth that the People may disobey their Princes or their Ordinances but contrariwise teacheth all Obedience to be done unto them it is plain that those Bishops or rather Papists do falsly accuse those true Preachers and Subjects which thing would appear in every Man's sight if by their violence the Word of God were not kept under Now is this the Doctrin that I do Preach and Teach ☜ and none other as concerning this matter God I take to record and all my Books and Writings that ever I wrote or made and only I allow and favor them which further this Doctrine of Christ and of this I am sure mine Adversaries or rather Adversaries to Christ's Doctrin must bear me witness After this he proceeds to demonstrate that the Pope and the Papistical Bishops are they who Preach to the People the contrary Doctrin as that St. Peter exempts himself and his Successors from being subject to Superiors that Subjects may be disobedient to their own Lords and that the Pope may Depose Kings that he hath autority to break all Oaths Bonds and Obligations and other such like positions and then adds there is no Officer that hath need to be afraid of Christ's Gospel nor yet of the Preachers thereof ☜ but of those privy Traitors can no Man be too wary the Scripture commandeth us to obey to wicked Princes and giveth us none autority to Depose them who was more wicked than Herod and yet St. John suffer'd Death under him Who was wickeder than Pilate and yet Christ did not put him down but was Crucified under him Briefly which of all the Princes were good in the Apostles days and yet they deposed none So that God's word and their own learning and the Practice of our Master Christ and his Holy Apostles are openly against them p. 190. there is no People under Heaven that more abhors and with earnester heart resisteth and more diligently doth Preach against Disobedience than we do Yea I dare say boldly let all your Books be search'd that were written this 500 Years and all they shall not declare the autority of a Prince and the true obedience toward him as one of our little Books shall do that be condemn'd by you for Heresie p. 202. 204. And then he impeacheth them of denying that the King's Power is immediatly of God while it can never be proved that ever we spake against God or our King. The same Learned and Holy Martyr in his Discourse that Mens Constitutions not grounded in Scripture bind not the Conscience is of the same mind If the power command any thing of Tyranny against Right and Law always provided that it repugn not against the Gospel p. 292. 293. 294. nor destroy our Faith our Charity must needs suffer it for as St. Paul saith Charity suffereth all things also our Master Christ If a man strike thee on the one Cheek turn him the other For if he doth exercise Tyranny if he command thee any thing against right or do thee any wrong as for an example cast thee in Prison wrongfully if thou canst by any reasonable and quiet means without Sedition Insurrection or breaking of the common Peace save thy self or avoid his Tyranny thou may'st do it with a good Conscience but in no wise ☞ be it right or wrong may'st thou make any resistance with a Sword or with Hand but obey except thou canst avoid as I have shewed thee but if the Cause be right lawful or profitable to the Common-wealth thou must obey and thou must not sly without sin But suppose the King should condemn the New Testament in England and command that none of his Subjects should have it is he to be obeyed or not this will be a great Scourge and an intolerable plague My Lords the Popish Bishops would depose him with short deliberation and make no Conscience of it they have Deposed Princes for lesser Causes than this is a great deal But against them will I always lay Christ's Fact and his Holy Apostles and the Word of God. If the King forbid the New Testament c. under a temporal pain or else under the pain of Death Men shall first make faithful Prayers to God and then diligent
gave that Prince no reason to repent of his favors to him vindicating on all occasions both the interests of the Church and the Person Power and Writings of the King nor were his Books and his Actions dissonant one to the other for he never sided with never encouraged the Commonwealth of Rochel as it was called and in his works Orthodoxly States the Catholick Doctrine of Government and confutes the objections of its adversaries thus in his Buckler of Faith c. Buckler of Faith. He lays down briefly but fully ‖ Lib. 2. Sect. ult p. 556 557. Lon. 1623 in Engl. first the Opinion of the Romanists and then the Doctrine of the Reformed Churches as to the right of Kings Thomas the chief Schoolman says he avers that the Power of Princes and Sovereign Lords is but a humane constitution and proceedeth not from God and with him agree Bellarmin and Arnoux their reasons are 1. That the first King that was in the World Nimrod made himself King by force 2. That the greatest part of Empires were erected by Conquest 3. That Kings are established by humane means whether they attain to the Crown by Hereditary Succession or by Election since there is no rule in the Word of God that bindeth to follow an Hereditary Succession more than an Election 4. That there is no express command set down to obey Henry or Lewis or to acknowledge this or that Man more than another to be King. 5. That for these reasons St. Peter calls the Obedience to Kings an Humane Order while we on the contrary maintain that Obedience due to Kings proceedeth from the Divine Law and is grounded upon the Ordinance of God and whom no Man may resist without resisting God. Rom. 13.1 2. and St. Peter in the same place which they object against us will have us yield Obedience to the King for the Lord's sake and altho Nebuchadnezzar was an ungodly King a scourge used by God to destroy Nations nevertheless God speaks thus unto him by his Prophet Dan. 2.37 Thou O King art a King of Kings c. as to their reasons 1. It is false that Nimrod was the first King in the World for the Fathers and Heads of Families were Kings Priests and Sovereign Princes of their Families Men living after the Flood Five or Six hundred Years long enough to see a multitude of their own Children over whom they were to exercise their paternal Power 2. As to the establishment of Government in Conquest I say that those whose Countries a strange Prince seeketh to invade do well to defend themselves and if in that defensive War the Usurper chance to be slain he is justly punished but if he get the upper hand if the Race of the Ancient Possessors of the same Country be clean extinguished if the States of the Country assembled together do agree upon a new form of Government and if all the Officers throughout the Country have taken their Oaths of Fidelity to the New King then we must believe that God hath established such a Prince in that Kingdom then I say that the People ought to yield to the will of God who for the sins of Kings and of their People transposeth Kingdoms and disposeth of the Issues of Battels at his will and pleasure as to the third it belongs not to the Question whether a King succeed by Inheritance or by Election but whether by the Ordinance of God we ought to obey him when he is established therein while our Adversaries will have the Power of Popes to proceed from the Ordinance of God tho they enter into the Papacy by Election and too often by indirect means c. 4. Tho there be no command to obey Henry or Lewis it sufficeth there is a commandment to obey the King and to keep our Oaths of Fidelity made to the King and by consequence to be faithful to that King to whom we swear Obedience and Loyalty nay by this argument no King of this age were to be obeyed because we do not find his name expresly set down in Holy Writ nay no Man were bound to fear God or to believe in Jesus Christ because the Scripture doth not particularly ordain that Thomas Anthony or William should fear God or believe in Jesus Christ it sufficeth that the Word of God containeth general rules which bind particular Persons without naming them 5. St. Peter calls the Obedience that Men owe to Kings an humane Order either because Kings command divers things which by their own nature are not derived from the Divine Law as suppose to forbid to go by night without a Candle or because they attain to that Power by humane means which hinders not but that their Power is grounded upon the Word of God after they are once established for the Question is not touching the means whereby a Prince attains his Kingdom i. e. whether by Hereditary Succession or Election but what Obedience is due to him after he hath attained thereunto whosoever buildeth the Authority of Kings upon Man's Institution and not upon the Ordinance of God cuts off three parts of their Authority and bereaveth them of that which assureth their Lives and their Crowns more than the guards of their Bodies or puissant Armies which put terror into Subjects instead of framing them to Obedience then the Fidelity of Subjects will be firm and sure when it shall be incorporated into piety and esteemed to be a part of Religion and of the service which we owe unto God. The same excellent Person in his rejoinder to de Balzac after he had asserted that the Jesuits teach the Murder of Princes ‖ Letter 2d ed. Lon 1636. Eng p. 73 94 95. and that their Schools have produced many King-killers he proceeds to vindicate the French Church from de Balzac's imputation who professes himself incens'd against the Authors of the troubles in France tho he acquits du Moulin's Person as one who made the subjection due to Sovereignty a part of the Religion which he taught affirming that Obedience to our Sovereigns is a thing just and necessary that to find out an occasion of Rebellion either in a Man 's own Religion or in that of his King is to make insurrections to defend Religion by courses condemn'd by the same Religion such as these being perplext in their own particular Affairs hope to find ease in troubled waters and to save themselves amidst a confusion never yet did the cause of God advance it self that way Moses had power to inflict grievous punishments on Aegypt and her King notwithstanding he would never deliver the Children of Israel out of Aegypt without the permission of the King. SECT XVI And tho this famous Man Peter du Moulin had one Son Lewis who applauded the Regicides translated Milton and bespatter'd the best Church in Christendom yet God blest him with another of his own Name and Principles who in his Letter as he calls it of a French Protestant to a Scotchman of
Doctrin of the Church and would fain defend it as the uniform belief of the Reformed much more to the same purpose may be found in the same Book which I recommend to the Reader 's perusal the Learned Author of which wrote after his Father's Copy and therefore I have joyned them together tho according to the exact rules of Chronology I should have given the junior du Moulin a place in the next Reign CHAP. VI. The History of Passive Obedience during the Reign of King Charles the Martyr SECT I. WEre we to judge of the righteousness of any Cause and of its being acceptable to God by the prosperity of its outward circumstances and to intitle Heaven to the owning of all the designs which providence promotes as some Divines both then and since have argued more consonant to the Doctrin of the Alcoran than the Holy Gospel then the most Excellent Prince Charles I. was a vile Malefactor and fell justly a sacrifice to the rage of his rebel Subjects but the true Sons of the Church were of a more Orthodox belief and chose rather to suffer with their Master the Lord 's Anointed than to enjoy the ease and preferments which then were the rewards of perfidiousness and disloyalty as the first part of this History hath amply proved And though Dr. Sybthorp's Sermon called Apostolical Obedience was severely censured nor is it fit to defend every Proposition in it yet the then Bishop of London Dr. George Mountain approved it publickly in Print as a Sermon learnedly and discreetly Preached Testim ante concion and agreeable to the Ancient Doctrin of the Primitive Church both for faith and good manners and to the Doctrin established in the Church of England and therefore under his hand gave authority for the Printing of it Ma. 8. 1627. Mr. Hayes Could any thing privilege Loyalty toward Kings Serm. at St. Mary's Oxon. on Esth 1.15 1624. p. 3 21. Eminence and Alliance might be fair pretences but neither of these could yield Queen Vasthi advantage but what shall any dare to limit Sovereignty and prescribe Majesty it's duty shall he that enjoys the subjection of others by the Law be subject himself to the Law no in no other sense than that of Aquinas not that the Law should lead him by compulsion but lead him by directive persuasion if he conform his actions to the prescript of the Laws it is of his own accord if he do not is he lyable to account Yes but it is only to God against thee only have I sinned says King David Ps 51. those modest times had not the face to capitulate with their Sovereigns the pride of Faction had not yet hatch'd this rebellious Doctrin ☜ that if Kings obey not Laws Subjects have leave to disobey their Kings no let it glory in no Ancienter Author than New Rome and in no better success than confusion and seeing it owes it self to Jesuited Patrons let it be banish'd this Land together with their Persons Mr. Adams When Saul was in David 's hands In 2d ep of Peter pr. 1633. p. 755. his Men alledge God's promise and the advantage concurring and what was David 's charm to allay the fury of those raging Spirits he is the Lord 's Anointed Saul did not lend David so impenetrable an Armour when he ran to encounter Goliah as David lent him in the plea of his Unction not one of the discontented Out-laws durst put forth a hand of violence against him the image and impress of that Divine Ordinance strikes such an awe into the hearts of Men that it makes even Traytors cowards so that instead of smiting they tremble like those whose Office it is to suffer not to do fear God honour the King there was never Man that feared God but he also honored the Prince But let us hear P. 759 c what the Synod of Hell can plead for disobedience how if the Prince be bad an Enemy to truth and goodness a Ravisher a Persecutor raising powers for the extirpation of the Gospel here if ever a Subject may renounce all Allegiance for here is power against power Man against God and the Subject of both left to follow either Answ in this streight some for fear of the King Shipwrack their faith and these are Traytors to God others by a defensive sword in their hand Rebels to the King ☞ there is no question but God must be obeyed even against the King when the King commands things against God. what then shall we resist him with violence no God never Warrants that practice no not against a Prince that denies him there is an active Obedience and a passive I may not execute his impious commands I must suffer his unjust punishments the vices of Men cannot frustrate the institution of God peruse Mat. 5.44 and Rom 12.17 this will tye the Hands of Christian Subjects Samuel offer'd not to depose Saul though the express Sentence of God had cast him off and he was Excommunicated by a higher power than ever came from Rome Saul lived and dyed a King this he illustrates by the examples of the Jews and Primitive Christians and adds what resistance did those Primitive Christians make to those barbarous outrages but praying for the Emperor's life when under the Emperor's command they were bleeding to death neither did they suffer because they were not able to resist but it was their Doctrin c. Christians never prove losers but when they unjustly sight for their own preservation provide we the buckler of patience not a sword when the decree was gone out by Ahasuerus this was their refuge preces lacrymae the Apostles could work miracles yet they resisted not the ordinate powers this charge St. Paul gives the Romans even while Nero was their Emperor a Monster whom divers held to be Antichrist that Religion then cannot be right that pulls down Princes seeing neither Moses in the Old Testament nor Christ in the New nor Levite nor Prophet Apostle nor Disciple either counsell'd or practised against Government which should decide the point that hath cost the Lives of so many Christians and still threatens more Tragedies P. 763. there was never Prince to whom some Belialist took not some exceptions it were ill with Princes if their state depended on the good liking of their Subjects Subjects unfaithful at the heart may be without the suspicion of their Prince but they beheld Rebels in the Court of Heaven we be bound to be subject not only for wrath but for conscience sake In all the time of David 's prosperity there was no news of Shimei he looks like a fair Subject but he that smiles on David in his Throne P. 821. curs'd him in his Flight there is no security in that Subjects Allegiance that hath not God in his Conscience he that poysons the People with the male opinion of their Prince is the most dangerous Traytor to rip up the faults of Kings is bold
who can lift up his hand against the Lord 's Anointed and be innocent 1 Sam. 26.9 or do they consider his commands in the Proverbs of Solomon 24.21 my Son fear God and the King and meddle not with them that are given to change or his counsel in the Book of Ecclesiastes 8.1 I counsel thee to keep the King's commandment and that in regard of the oath of God or because they possibly may pretend that they are exempted from or unconcern'd in the commands of Obedience delivered in the Old Testament do they know and remember the Precept given to all Christians by St. Peter submit your selves to every Ordinance of Man for the Lord's sake c. or that terrible Sanction of the same command they that resist shall receive to themselves damnation left by St. Paul in his Epistle to the Romans who then were the miserable Subjects of the worst King the worst Man nay I think I may add truly the worst Beast in the World that so all Rebels mouths might be stopt for ever ☜ and left without all colour and pretence whatsoever to justifie resistance of Sovereign Power Undoubtedly if they did know and consider and lay to heart these places of Scripture or the fearful judgment which befel Corah Dathan and Abiram for this very sin which they now commit and with a high hand still proceed in it would be impossible but their hearts would smite them as David 's did upon an infinitely less occasion and affright them out of these ways of present confusion and eternal damnation SECT III. Dr. 10 Serm. Prâ—at Lon. 16 â— P. 10â— Arthur Lake Bishop of Bath and Wells Magistrates are from God and he resides among them Magistrates must proceed like God God can and will redress the evils that spring from them because he is Sovereign in and over those places and persons which are misgoverned by them P. 131. what is our lesson truly first as Nazianzen advises as near as we can though we cannot as constantly as God not to have a heart and not a heart but to say with King David I have sworn and am stedfastly purposed it were to be wish'd there were such a constancy in our Oaths so many would not retract the Oath of that Allegiance which they owe without an Oath Dr. Sermon at St. Mary's Cambr on Judg. 21.25 1642. p. 27 28 29. Stephens The King's Commission is signed from Heaven by me Kings Reign his Authority is conferr'd by Heaven he is the Anointed of the Lord his power descends from Heaven obedience to him is required from Heaven 1 Pet. 2. it is the will of God that you submit your selves to the Government of your Kings I have heard the Prophet David suspected by some as partial in his own cause just like the Northern Borderers who conceived the Eighth Commandment thou shalt not steal to be none of God's making but foisted in by Henry the Eighth to shackle their thievish fingers but I dare oppose the 13th Chapter of the Epistle to the Romans against the power of Men or Devils which would trample upon the necks of Kings suppose thy King very wicked he hath more need of thy Prayers to make him better suppose him to be a Tyrant he will give thee the fairer occasions to exercise thy virtue of patience suppose him to be a Persecutor he 'll do thee a courtesie he 'll send thee to Heaven by violence Saul was an unnatural Tyrant against his own Son Jonathan P. 30 31. ☞ a bloody Persecutor of the Priest's of God a Sacrilegious Usurper of their Holy Offices a demoniacal furious Man possest with a Devil and on David 's part his life was sought for and by sparing Saul he should undo himself he had all the opportunity that might and security could administer unto him he was Saul 's adopted Son by Michal 's Marriage he was a Successor to the Kingdom by the Prophet's Unction and yet for all this who can lift up his hand c. are we Christians do we know the virtue of an Oath What think we then of the Solemn Oath of our Allegiance an Oath which can receive no dispensation no absolution from any power whatsoever contrary to the assertions of Bellarmine and Parsons is the establish'd Doctrin of the Church of England in the 37 Article the King's Majesty hath the chief Power in this Realm of England and his other Dominions and is not nor ought to be Subject to any jurisdiction whatsoever the six parts of the Homily against Rebellion are so full and apposite that we must either disclaim them from being the Interpreters of the Doctrin of our Church or sit down convinc'd in the manifest truth of this assertion c. Consider seriously against whom would you take up Arms Id. Serm. on Judg. 4.23 p. 78. is it not against the Power against the Ordinance of God they are Men before God but they are Gods before Men. the whole earth combining could not make St. Bernard willingly offend his King and shall the fear of a threatned plundering make us oppose our King shall the common rout persuade me to go to Hell for company 'T is true God sometimes refines his Church in the Furnace of Persecution neither then does he leave it naked and disarm it but what are the Churches weapons St. Ambrose had his dolere potero potero flere his sighs and groans against the Gothish Soldiers St. Bernard fought to death against Lewis of France non scutis aut gladiis sed precibus fletibus prayers and tears were his Sword and Buckler Nazianzen overcame Julian but it was lacrymis ubertim effusis by softning his Adamantine Heart with salt drops from their eyes thence flows the only Sea we can overthrow Pharaoh 's Host in SECT IV. P. H. Corah of the tribe of Levi joyn'd with Dathan c. Sermon at Cambr. 1640. on Numb 16. 3. p. 5 6. of the tribe of Reuben the Levite or Clergy alone would have wanted power and strength the Laity or Reubenite alone could not have had so fair a colour and cloak of Religion to cover their rebellious practices but both join'd together make a strong Faction and a fair show our surest course is to judge Mens Persons by their actions if their actions be unsound and irregular P. 10. 2. p. 11 c. if they gather themselves together against God's express word and commandment against their Prince and Sovereign be their outward appearance never so specious we may assure our selves that they neither fear God nor regard Man but only to serve their own turns if God in absolute and unlimited terms pronounce ☜ whosoever resisteth the Power resisteth the Ordinance of God I cannot see how the goodness of the end be it Religion or Reformation or the common good can warrant any such resistance from the transgression of God's Ordinance P. 15. cons the place unless these and the like limitations
Ceremony of Religion is abolish'd P. 48 49. if righteousness consists in blaspheming God contempt of his Ordinances and scorning the Doctrin and practice of his Saints these Men may lay some claim to it are they greater practisers of self-denyal who Preach War and Blood rather than obey than those who Preach Passive Obedience and Suffering rather than violence P. 55. Milton is very industrious to find out causes why so many would not be Traytors why could he not fall into the consideration of the Oaths of Allegiance and Supremacy that all Members of parliament take at their entrance ☜ how did he forget the commands of Obedience from God P. 59. repentance is a great reproach among those Rebels the Preaching of that Doctrin is worse to them P. 64. than Passive Obedience It is ridiculous to any judgment uninthral'd that such as Rebel against their King should pretend P. 66. they are not Rebels to God. Christians never thought that any sword drawn against their King did not violate their Loyalty and Allegiance much less that their profess'd Loyalty and Allegiance led them to direct Arms against the King's Person There are many such Passages in the Book Medit. on death p. 257 258. but I shall only quote one more towards the end of it Kings have their Power from God and God gives the Sword yea even to wicked Kings and because the Power is given them for justice it is called the Sword of Justice tho they use it oftentimes to injustice the Scripture forbids us to judge another Man's Servant but this Man will have the Father punish'd by the Child the Master by the Servant the Prince by the People Kings are unaccountable to Men for their actions for if Kings be accountable to Men are not they to whom he is accountable by the Libellers argument not only stronger than the King but stronger than Justice P. 260. divine law forbad all Men to take the Arms of justice without or against the King who is referred to God's justice and justice hath no Arms but his power the Law was above the Emperor Theodosius P. 262 v. loc p. 263. in regard it was his rule but could not make any Person or Society above him it were a profane Oath as well as vain that should be void at the will of the Father this last Age hath brought forth a generation that do God service when they scorn all his Laws and Religion c. SECT II. Bishop Sanderson in his censure of Ascham's Book Printed at London 1650. Upon perusal of Mr. Ascham 's Book you left with me I find not my self in my understanding thereby convinc'd of the necessity or lawfulness of conforming unto or complying with an unjust prevailing Power further than I was before perswaded it might be lawful or necessary so to do viz. As paying Taxes and submitting to some other things in themselves not unlawful by them imposed or required such as I had a lawful Liberty to have done in the same manner tho they had not been so commanded and seem to me in the conjuncture of present circumstances prudentially necessary to preserve my self or my Neighbour from the injuries of those that would be willing to make use of my Non-submission to mine or his ruin so as it be done with these Cautions 1. Without violation either of duty to God or any other just obligation that lies upon me by Oath Law or otherwise 2. Only in the case of necessity otherwise not to be avoided 3. Without any explicite or implicite acknowledgment of the Justice and Legality of their Power I may submit to the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to the Force but not acknowledge the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Authority or by any voluntary Act give strength assistance or countenance thereunto 4. Without any prejudice unto the claim of the oppressed Party that hath a right Title or casting my self into an incapacity of lending him my due and bounden Assistance If in time to come it may be useful to him towards the recovery of his Right 5. Where I may reasonably and Bonâ Fide presume the Oppressed Power to whom my Obedience is justly due if he perfectly knew the present condition I am in together with the exigency and necessity of the present case and all the circumstances thereof would give his willing consent to such my conformity and compliance So that upon the whole matter and in short I conceive I may so far submit unto the Impositions or comply with the Persons of a prevailing Usurped Power unjustly commanding things not in themselves unlawful or make use of their Power to protect me from others Injuries As I may submit unto comply with or make use of an High way Thief or Robber when I am fallen into his hands and lie at his mercy As for Mr. Ascham's Discourse tho it be handsomly framed yet all the strength of it to my seeming if he would speak out would be in plain English this 1. That Self preservation is the first and chiefest obligation in the World to which all other Bonds and Relations at least between Man and Man must give place 2. That no Oath at least no imposed Oath in what Terms soever express'd binds the Taker further than he intended to bind himself thereby and it is presumed that no Man intended to bind himself to the prejudice of his own safety Two dangerous and desperate Principles which evidently tend first to the taking away of all Christian Fortitude and Suffering in a Righteous Cause 2. To the encouraging of Daring and Ambitious Spirits to attempt continual Innovations with this confidence that if they can by any ways how unjust soever possess themselves of the Supreme Power they ought to be submitted unto 3. To the obstructing unto the Oppressed Party all possible ways and means without a Miracle of ever recovering that just Right of which he shall have been unjustly dispossessed And to omit further instancing 4. To the bringing in of Atheism with the contempt of God and all Religion whilst every Man by making his own Preservation the Measure of all his Duties and Actions maketh himself thereby his own Idol The same excellent Casuist is of this mind in his Case of the engagement the bond of Allegiance whether sworn Vid. loc or not sworn is in the nature of it perpetual and indispensible c. and his Fifth Lecture of the Obligation of Conscience Sect. 11 13 14 16 17 20 21. to which for the sake of brevity I refer the Reader SECT III. To this Eminent Bishop Jenkins Redivivus Lon. 1681 p. 20 21. I shall joyn the Eminent Judge Jenkins To depose the King or take him by force or Imprison him until he hath yielded to certain demands is adjudged Treason in the Lord Cobham 's Case the Law makes not the Servant greater than the Master nor the Subject greater than the King P. 81. for that
chains up his fury lest for our sins he permit him to return once more with seven other Spirits more wicked than himself and so our last Estate prove worse than the former Dr. Pr. 1661. P. 34. v. p. 14 19 21. Morley Bishop of Winchester's Sermon at the Coronation of King Charles II. is full to this purpose as no Man can take upon himself the Honor or Office of a Priest so much less can any Man take to himself the Honor or Office of a King but he must have it from God himself either by God's own immediate designation as Moses and the Judges had for the Judges were Kings and as Saul and David had or by God's ordinary way of Dispensation which was by Succession of Children unto their Fathers according unto which method as Families grew into Nations so Paternal Government grew into Regal and consequently an Usurper as he hath no claim to Divine Institution so he hath no title to Divine Benediction or Protection and besides because what is gotten by the Sword must be maintained by the Sword an Usurper must be a Tyrant whether he will or no. Lastly a Monarchy by Usurpation is res sine titulo a possession without a title which seldom lasts long or ends well for he that takes the Sword shall perish by the Sword says Our Saviour Mat. 26.52 Again as Monarchy by Usurpation is res sine titulo so Monarchy by Election is titulus sine re for Elective Kings are but conditional Kings and conditional Kings are no Kings besides P. 35. a King is to have the power of life and death which none that have it not themselves can give unto him and therefore how he that is Elected by those that have not the power of life and death comes to have the power of life and death and consequently how he comes to be a King is I conceive not easie to imagine the best and surest way for Prince P. 38. State and People is to protect cherish and allow of that Religion and that only which allows of no rising up against or resisting Sovereign Power no not in its own defence nor upon any other pretence whatsoever but tho Princes are called Gods yet they shall die like Men P. 46. says one that was a Prince himself Ps 82.7 and tho they be accountable to no Tribunal here yet they are to be judged hereafter by one who is no respecter of Persons a Prince therefore is to take care to govern himself not according to that licence which his exemption from the penalty of humane Laws may prompt him to but according to that strictness which the severity of the Divine Justice doth require of him The same Prelate in his Vindication of himself against Baxter P. 29 c. among Baxter's Maxims of Treason Sedition and Rebellion reckons these That unlimited Governors are Tyrants and have no right to that unlimited Government If God permits Princes to turn so wicked as to be uncapable of Governing so as is consistent with the ends of Government he permits them to depose themselves If Providence disableth a Prince from protecting the just c. it deposeth him if any Army of Neighbours Inhabitants P. 31. or whoever do tho injuriously expel the Sovereign and resolve to ruin the Commonwealth rather than he shall be restored and if the Commonwealth may prosper without his Restoration it is the duty of such an injured Prince for the Common good to resign his Government and if he will not the People ought to judge him as made uncapable by Providence and not to seek his restitution to the apparent ruin of the Commonwealth If a People that by Oath and Duty are obliged to a Sovereign P. 33. shall sinfully dispossess him and contrary to their Covenants chuse and covenant with another they may be obliged by their later Covenant notwithstanding their former and particular Subjects that consented not in the breaking of their former Covenants yet may be obliged by occasion of their later choice to the Person whom they chuse with many more such Rebellious Treses all which the Bishop with great reason censures and to the Book it self I must refer the Reader where he will find ample satisfaction in a Manly confutation of the abovecited and other such popular errors And among these venerable Fathers of the Church I must beg leave to introduce a Lay-man concern'd in the same controversie for when Baxter had publish'd his Key for Catholicks and in it p. 321. treated of the King's murder of which he says Providence had so order'd it that it could not be laid on the Protestants with much more to that purpose John Nanfan Esq in those worst of times writes a censure of the Passage P. 3. and in it avers that all War taken up by Subjects upon any pretence whatsoever or by whatsoever caution or limitation evermore in the nature of it intends the destroying of King and Kingdom P. 4. that all the bringing the People into a body by Covenant is unlawful because Government merely consists in having no contracts of the People acting of themselves that in such Covenants Men swear things contradictory as to fight against the King and to be true to him there is no such thing in nature as a defensive War against the King by Subjects to subdue a King and deprive him of his Power P. 5. is the same thing as killing it stays but the acting I should be very glad P. 7. that the World should be satisfied that Supreme Power should be unquestionable I would trust God and Man and Humane casual events with my share out of it because I see pretended Reformations never countervail the mischief of Rebellions nothing in nature can go higher than its first cause P. 9. a Power derived out of the King cannot be understood to be against the King for no Power can create a Power against it self P. 10 11. all attempts to bring a King under the Power of his People are the same as to destroy him and this was resolved in the case of the Earl of ‖ Cambd. Annal. p. 547 548. Essex and it never came into the conceit of any Person to except a Parliament for committing Treason the nature of Man is to think any thing that hath been done P. 12. may be done and so never finds end of wickedness but to make it infinite any extraordinary or transcendent acting upon Government tho never so unlawful and violent yet if it become powerful it commonly creates somthing to others to derive from it thus the Long Parliament declared long before that execrable murder was committed that in case they should act to the highest president they should not fail in duty or trust ☞ having their eye and aim upon the deposing of Kings Edw. 2. and Ric. 2. and the last actors that completed the Tragedy conclude power of Parliaments from former destroying Kings and
Emperor while the good Bishop in his Embasly to Maximus carried himself as the Father or Guardian of his Prince ☞ tho he had been provok'd in the most tender part by his Prince's endeavors for the introducing of Arianism others perhaps if they had been in his condition would have look'd upon this Tyrant's Maximus declaring for the truth as such an opportunity that Providence had offer'd for the Preservation of the Faith and since the Empress was of a false Religion and the Emperor was govern'd by her why should they not set up this Maximus as the Protector of the true Faith But Ambrose and the Bishops were of another mind they knew what it was to dye for their Religion p. 346. but did not understand what it was to brigue or to resist and I pray how did the Bishops comply with the Usurper Maximus were any of them instrumental to his advancement did they Preach up his cause and the lawfulness of his revolt did they ever press the People to bring in their Plate and contributions or after his successes and the Murther of Gratian did any of the Bishops justifie the Usurper's Proceedings and Preach and Print in defence of that barbarous Regicide did they flatter him as the preserver of Religion the David the Champion of Israel with much more to the same purpose Dr. Williams Printed his Sermon Preach'd July 26. 1685. Seâ—â—ful 26. 1685. on Rom. 3â—7 8. p. 11. being on the day of publick thanksgiving for the late victory over the Rebels to vindicate the City Clergy and particularly himself who was censured as if the Sermon was not to the purpose of the day and occasion as he says in his Epistle Dedicatory to the Bishop of London Grant this that evil becomes lawful by a good end and when we think our selves secure we make all compacts broken Oaths dissolved all difference betwixt Superiors and Inferiors confounded it exposes the Church and State to every pretender and any one that hath a mind P. 20 21. will never want a reason for Insurrection and Rebellion as no Religion hath more discountenanc'd such Principles and Proceedings than the Christian so no Nations nor Persons have more discountenanc'd the thing than those who have profess'd it it is too notorious to be dissembled for that there have been Rebellions against and depositions of Princes dissolutions of Governments taking and breaking of Oaths and other things apparently evil of that and the like kind done to serve a Cause a Party or a Church is no Mystery now a days Christian Religion teaches the wholsom Doctrin of being subject to the Higher Powers and that they that resist p. 22. shall receive to themselves damnation from the confessions of Faith in all the â—rotestant and Reformed Churches nothing can be drawn p. 23. that will justifie Opposition or Rebellion against Civil Authority but they expresly declare against it when Queen Mary was a known Member of the Roman Church yet the Protestants first joyned with her against the Lady Jane Grey who was invested with the title of Queen and was a Protestant And this particularly is the avowed Doctrin of the Church of England in all its Articles and Homilies at large three of which are against Rebellion Do they find in the Sermons of the Ministers of the Church of England Id. Apol. for the Pulpits p. 3 4. the Doctrines of the Peoples Power over Princes of the lawfulness of resisting their Sovereigns or rather where have the Rights of Princes and the Subjection and Obedience of the People in all lawful Cases and the Non-resistance in any Case ☜ been so much asserted That Loyalty which concerns all of all Perswasions is taught in the Pulpits of the Church of England which obliges them to be as loyal when the Prince is of a different Religion as when he is of the same with them The same Author also in his Difference between the Church of England and the Church of Rome having cited our Articles Homilies c. to prove the chief Power of the King and that he ought not to be resisted and shewn how contrary to this Doctrin the Decrees of the Church of Rome are he subjoins pag. â—1 The Church of England teacheth the King in all his Realms hath Supream Power in all Causes whether Ecclesiastical or Civil For God alloweth neither the Dignity of any Person ☜ nor the Multitude of any People nor the Weight of any Cause as sufficient for the which Subjects may rebel So Dr. Grove in his Examination of Bell. 15th Note viz. Temporal Felicity pag. 393. Since the Power of Deposing Princes hath been openly assumed and frequently practised and never yet condemned by any either Pope or Council since the Doctrin of Equivoeation and many other absurd and Impious Opinions are taught by their Casuists and made use of by their Confessors in directing the Consciences of their Penitents and since these and many more very dangerous Errors do not only escape without a Censure but are approved of and encouraged by their Governors I cannot see how they and their Church can possibly be excused from the Guilt of them Mr. Thomas Stainoe B. D. and Archdeacon of Brecknock preach'd Sept. 6. Ann. 1686. Seem on Rom. 13.5 Epist Ded. before the Lord Mayor and says that he publish'd it That it might be instrumental to convince the People of their Duty to their King because it was for that very reason that he preach'd it That there is no Man so much a ravening Wolf inwardly pag. 3. but he will put on Sheeps Cloathing and tho his Resolutions are bent upon Rebellion yet his Discretion and Prudence will prompt him to pretend Religion The least that can be inferr'd from the words will be a Subjection to lawful Authority and by consequence also to our own Prince For the truth of all which I shall urge no more at present than the tacit Confession of his most avowed and professed Enemies who after all their contrivance of Wit Anger and Malice could at length pitch upon no better expedient to prevent his Right of Accession than a Bill of Exclusion Now such a Bill either presupposes an antecedent Right or it does not if it does not then it must be confess'd that they did most elaborately trifle whilst they took a great deal of pains to bring that about that was already done to their hands If it does then we have what we look for and that is that the Injustice of their Actions does make good the Justice of his Title and affords us a tacit Confession that there was no other way to overthrow that Title but by overturning the very Foundations of the Government it self pag. 7. We are therefore obliged in Conscience to be in subjection to the Superior Powers because God himself commands us so to be God hath given the lawful Magistrate a Title to that Authority pag. 12. to which we
are obliged in point of Conscience to be subject and therefore we are obliged in Conscience to be subject to our own Prince because he is the Minister of God. There are a sort of Men in the World who tho they do always complain that we do not quote Scripture enough when we discourse upon any other subject yet when we discourse about Subjection to Government do always complain that we quote too much ☜ and therefore they are by no means willing that the Case of Subjection should be measured by that Rule tho Government is the Ordinance of God if the Scripture had never acquainted us with any such thing I would have it consider'd pag. 14. that neither the Laws of Nature Reason nor Justice will ever allow us to endeavour to strip the lawful Governours of any Places either where we live or where we are born Subjects of their Authority any more than they will allow us to take away any other Man's lawful Right or just Possessions For for that very reason that Supremacy is a Right that belongs to them Subjection is a Duty that belongs to us These Laws of Nature Reason and Religion are the Laws of God. If therefore the Law of God does command our Subjection to the Higher Powers tho the Scripture had never told us any such thing pag. 15. then let the Government have been formed when it will ☞ and by whom it will yet in such a Case because the Governors have a just and undoubted Title to and Possession of their Supremacy we cannot withdraw our Subjection from them unless we break the Law of God. The only Objection that I can foresee against this is this When the Actions of the Higher Powers without any regard to the Laws of Justice or the Government do manifestly tend to the Subversion of Justice and Right and instead thereof do load our Necks with Injuries and Oppressions pag. 16. then we may fairly and honestly renounce our Subjection Before I speak directly to the Objection I must premise 1. That that Design is justly suspâ—cious which measures our Duty by our temporal Interest And 2. That it is as well an act of Subjection peaceably and quietly to submit to the Penalty as it is actually to obey the Command Now if our Adversaries do not allow the Obligation to this disjunctive Subjection it is apparent that when they tell us we are not to be subject in the Case objected their meaning is we may defend our Disobedience by Resistance and then the Objection put into plain English amounts to thus much That whenever the Prince does not govern us according to the Laws of Justice and those of the Land pag. 17. there it is lawful for us to resist and rebel against him This Doctrine is seditious and treasonable and likewise absurd and false for if a Subject does resist his Prince tho it be in such a Case in which it is supposed that his Prince does him an Injury he does by so doing stand guilty of these following Acts of Injustice 1. He takes upon him to be Judg in his own Case Now because he that does so may be rationally supposed to be biassed in his Judgment by Self-Love by Malice Revenge Covetousness and the like train of Lusts and Passions and over and above in the present Case by Pride and Ambition Therefore all those wise Men who have made it their business to instruct us in the Laws of Justice and Equity have with one consent condemned the practice of it Nay the Rebel is both Judg and Executioner too in his own Case 2. pag. 18. He that resists his Prince upon supposition that his Government is unjust is therefore so himself not only in that he undertakes to be a Judg in his own Cause but in that also he does by so doing usurp to himself that Jurisdiction which of right does belong to another For there is no doubt but that the Title to the Sword is of right lodged in the Prince's Power and there can be as little doubt that the Subject can acquire no Right from the Injustice of the Prince to force it thence For by the same Law that the Injustice of a Prince does entitle his Subjects to wrest the Power of the Sword out of his hand against himself pag. 19. I say by the same Law the Injustice of any private Man would give the injured Person a Title to the Estate and Life of the injurious And so new Titles would continually start up with new Injuries and in a little time the Right to the whole World would tho perhaps the possession might not belong to injur'd Persons as such 3. pag. 20. He that resists his Prince upon supposition that his Government is unjust is so himself not only in that he usurps to himself that Jurisdiction which of right belongs to the Prince alone but in that he invades the Rights of his Fellow-Subjects for tho it should prove true that the Prince by his Injury to the Rebel does forfeit his Title to his Government over him yet there is another Enquiry behind Whether or no by such his Injury he forfeits his Title over the rest of his Subjects if he does then he may forfeit his Title as well where he has not done an Injury as where he has if he does not then the resistance of the Rebel is unjust ' There are several Conclusions that offer themselves from the Doctrin already delivered pag. 23. the first is this 1. Ought we to be subject for Conscience sake and is therefore our Obligation to Subjection bound upon us by the hand of God himself Then we may very fairly infer that both the Doctrin and Practice of Resistance comes from the Devil For most undoubtedly any Practice or Doctrin does so that stands in Diametrical Opposition to any Duty that is laid upon us by God. When People resist their Prince and at the same time pretend to fear God such their Pretensions are not only false but blasphemous too 2. If we are bound in Conscience to be subject to the Higher Powers pag. 27 and if such Obligation comes only from God then we do infer that no lawful Authority can be founded in mere outward Force The reason is because our Duty of Subjection to lawful Authority arises from an Obligation of Conscience Now tho a long Sword may have terror enough in it in many Cases at least to awe our outward Actions yet it can never have Power enough to oblige our Consciences And tho it may upon the account of our Interest engage us to a Compliance yet it will never be able upon the account of our Consciences to engage us to an Obedience For if mere Power can instate a Man in a just Title to the Supremacy then it will follow that whoever has Power enough to invade the Throne has Right enough to possess it and his Usurpation will therefore become lawful because his
Serm. called Subjection for Conscience sake p. 16. Must the free-born Subject break in upon the Birthrights and Liberties of the Crown and reduce it to Submission and Slavery that the humersom Christian may enjoy what he is pleased to call his Christian Liberty Christ gave not his Blood for this end nor did he make a purchase of a disobedient and gainsaying People Be confident no man can be God's Servant unless he be also a good Subject P. 22. Some mens Opinions and other mens Interests is the Conscience they so much talk of and then it is no wonder at all they cannot for their hearts obey when they themselves are setting up for Superiority Id. Pass Ob. stated and asserted pag. 3. P. 15. Passive Obedience is a patient and mild Suffering the hard and unjust Usages of Kings being both the Christian's Duty and Profession But this meek and Christian Principle was of late called to an account and with Arguments of Railery and Contempt endeavour'd to be hooted out of the World. Under the old Law when the King should usurp upon their Lands and Wives and Children 1 Sam. 8.11.18 all their Remedy was Ye shall cry out unto the Lord in that day c. They that resist shall receive to themselves damnation p. 17 18 19 21. It is in vain to say more being so plain to any Man to understand that seriously thinks of a day of Judgment when all the dawbing of Liberty and Property and Religion shall be wiped off and no pretence nor distinction satisfie against the evidence of Truth and so plain Expressions Mr. Nicolas Claget Disloyal Principles dispose Men to be unquiet Subjects Serm. on 1 Thes 4.11 p. 27. p. 22 23 38 39 40. such as these That all Power is from the People and is put into the King's hands upon trust that it is lawful for Subjects to enter into Covenants and Associations for the defence of themselves and their Religion against the Command of the Prince c. which are the Doctrins of Jesuits and Fanaticks See also Wilson's Disourse of Monarchy p. 15. 22 70 72.81 82. 106. 198. 207. 209. 248. 258 259. Mr. John Cook Serm. before the L. Mayor May 13. 1683. pag. 8 9. it 24 25. Dr. Jo. Price Seem Sept. 9. 1683. pag. 2. 12. 15. 18. Mr. Will. Bolton Coreh Redivivus pag. 9. 14. 29. Mr. Higham on Prov. 24.21 pag. 45 c. 86. 108. 123. 137. 157. 160. 175. c. Mr. Whitfield's Sermon before the L. Mayor Jul. 30. 1632. on Jude 8. Mr. Gifferd's Assize Sermon p. 12. Mr. Hyrick's Sermon July 26. 1685. p. 6 10 23 26. Mr. Brown's Sermon at the Visitation Apr. 12. 1681. p. 27 34. Dr. Smith Prebendary of Norwich Assize Serm. Sept. 13. 1668. p. 8 9. c. Id. Assize Serm. Feb. 27. 1672. p. 28. B. Rively's Sermon at Norwich July 19. 1679. on Rom. 13.4 p. 6 7. Dr. Thompson Dean of Bristol Serm. June 21. 1685. on Tit. 3.1 p. 3 5 6 14. 16 17 18 c. Mr. Bura's Serm. May 29. 1684. p. 25 27 c. Mr. Ethorowe's Scriptural Catechism p. 59. Mr. Alsop's Serm. on Exod. 20.12 p. 9 10 12 13 15 c. 24 25 30. Dr. Fr. Gregory's Serm. Nov. 5. 1679 p. 6 9 25. Mr. Will. Godman's Sermon May 24. 1660. p. 21 22 c. Mr. Luce's Serm. on 1 Pet. 2.16 p. 14 17 18. Mr. Fisher's Serm. Jan. 30. 1672. p. 11 13. Mr. Sayer's Assize Serm. Feb. 25. 1672. p. 38 40. Dr. Barnes's Serm. before the Univers of Cambr. p. 10 19 20 Mr. Crisp's Visir Serm. 1686. And very many other such Discourses and I have reason to suppose that if the Sermons of all the Divines of the Ch. of England on this subject were in Print the very Catalogue would swell to a very great bulk Doctrines of so pernicious a consequence to the publick Peace that it is enough to make us reject them as false without examining them further Such impious Doctrins and Principles as are destructive of the State and do leave Governments and Governors insecure * P. 44. And is Religion and God's Cause a Pretext for Treason and Rebellion This is next to Blasphemy and is an impious Reflection on the Wisdom and Power of God as if to bring about his own Designs he stood in need of our Devilish Devices I shall close this Chapter with the Testimony of Dr. Carswell Vicar of Bray Serm. at she Assize Mar. 3. 1683 / â— p. 25. in his State Reformer enquir'd into Designing Men still cunningly hide the disloyal Treachery in their Hearts their ambitious Designs their Disgusts and Disgraces at Court their Discontents for missng Places of Trust Command Profit or Honor under the Vizard or fair-fac'd Pretences of Religion or Justice P. 3â— they are only concern'd as Patriots of their Religion and Country c. If our Judges are unjust or the King had deputed none to hear p. 44. or none that would do Justice it were not then lawful to oppose or revile Be wise now therefore O ye Kings c. Tho the People may not daâ—e to revile p. 41. or presume to call you to an account yet the King of Kings whose Deputies you are will exact an account of your Stewardship God made not the People Judg of Moses's Actions but him of theirs The End of the Second Part. Some grosser ERRATA of the First Part. IN the Catal. of Authors read B. Montague p. 7. for primitive r. more early p. 18. for subscribed v. assented to for An. 1684. r. the same Year p. 32. r. Ficlerus p. 35. r. Al Kum p. 43. after or better him add the Paragraph in p. 46. And according to this Doctrin unto Malignants p. 54. r. Goodwin p. 74. for L. r. lastly p. 88. r. irreligious ERRATA of the Second Part. PAg. 1. for ought to read would willingly p. 5. l. 12. r. do deserve p. 9. r. an 1542 / 3. p. 11. marg r. Barnes p. 14. l. 18. r. as they p. 20. r. a Friend p. 32. l. 24. r. as he p. 36. must p. 53. how much p. 57. l. 1. the state dele after the words to following p. 59. l. 26. they could p. 70. l. 31. p. rend c. p. 79. l. 27. r. then p. 82. l. 36. for which r. and. p. 84. r. or Merode p. 88â— as if he p. 91. r. sorer p. 94. Abbadon p. 95. l. 2. r. whom p. 96. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 p. 101. r. then only B. p. 104. marg Bowsin p. 105. l. 28. r. was the first p. 109. dele the Cicero of the Fr. Church dele Buckler of Faith. p. 112. l. 37. r. that Book is p. 127. r. 1661. p. 138. r. Theses p. 144. after B. Fell should be placed D. Allestry who is placed p. 147. and instead of Dr. Allestry should be placed p. 147. B. Thomas p. 149. r. wickedly The rest the Reader is desired to correct ADVERTISEMENT The Power communicated by God to the Prince ☞ and the Obedience required of the Subject Briefly laid down and confirmed out of the Holy Scriptures the Testimony of the Primitive Church the Dictates of right Reason and the Opinion of the wisest among Heathen Writers By the most Reverend Father in God James late Lord Archbishop of Armagh and Primate of all Ireland Faithfully published out of the Original Copy written with his own hand by the Reverend Father in God Robert Saunderson L. Bishop of Lincoln with his Lordships Preface thereunto Sold by the Booksellers in London