Subjection to the Emperour in being however unlawfully he came to the Throne Nay I shall give you an instance to the quite contrary Philippus Bardas was Emperour and if we believe Eusebius was Baptiz'd and a Christian and therefore must certainly be mightily endear'd to the Christians who never before had any Emperour of their Persuasion but Emperours who most of them did persecute them in most cruel manner Now certainly the loss of this Emperour would trouble and offend them and render them if ever disaffected to the Government of the succeeding Emperour Decius who depos'd him and murthered him yet for all this so far were they from disowning the present Emperour who yet came so unworthily to the Throne that they thought it their duty to pray for him and not only for him but afterwards for Gallus who succeeded him and was in every respect as bad as he He chased away saith Dionysius Bishop of Alexandria in his Letter to Hermammon the Holy men which pray'd for Peace and his prosperous state and so together with them he banished the Prayers continually poured unto God for him Eus l. 7. c. 1. And surely we cannot think that those undaunted Champions of Christianity could to save themselves be in the least guilty of any Flattery or idle Complement no sure but this they did being thereunto oblig'd by the Holy Scriptures wherein we are commanded to pray for Kings that we may lead a quiet and godly life under them and surely we have still greater reason to pray thus for the worst of Kings because they are in greatest danger of being disturbed and disturbing other And if indeed the Practice of those primitive Christians had been such as to disown their Authority and seek to disturb them and yet at the same time to pray for their peaceable Reign their Prayers and Practice being so diametrically opposite they would certainly have been lookt upon and that justly too as the worst of men and no way to be trusted And though the blasphemous Complement of Boniface to Phocus was more than Flattery and an espousing of his barbarous way of accession to the Crown yet if he had only been subject to him and pray'd for him when seated upon the Imperial Throne he had done no more than all good Christians then did and might lawfully doe Honest St. Martin did much better who drinking to his Deacon and not to the Emperour let him see though indeed too haughtily tartly and publickly not like a Courtier nay nor a prudent Bishop whose likelier way to work upon the Emperour had been to have reprov'd him deliberately calmly and privately this other being the ready way to have disoblig'd and quite lost him let him see I say that his unjust way of coming to the Crown was displeasing to God and did deserve his Fatherly Correption and Penance Now this was all that he did and this is that which every Ghostly Father of a King ought and may doe to admonish him of his sins and yet at the same time own his Supremacy And I look upon him who in those great Debates here in England betwixt the Houses of Lancaster and York about the Crown did live peaceably under that King that was possest of the Throne to have been far the better Subject and better Christian than he whose turbulent Spirit was still for Change and was the occasion of so much War and Bloudshed And thus I have made it out that not only a Conquerour but an Usurper is to be owned as Supreme and to be set up by God when possest of the Throne But then the Query is how far he must be possest of the Throne that we may acknowledge him set up by God and desist from any farther opposition It 's true we have no such Revelations now as were in the times of the old Testament and therefore may still be at a stand when such Kings are fully set up by God yet if I may spend my weak judgment upon it I look upon a King to be thus set up when the former King and his Heirs being either banish'd kill'd or imprison'd the other is seated upon the Throne and so far either for fear or favour own'd by the Nation that there is wholly a Cessation of Arms or a very inconsiderable Opposition made And if God hath the same Power still which to question were Blasphemy to pull down and set up Kings when he pleases and yet since we cannot expect any Revelation from him when he does it either this Rule which I have here mentioned is the only way to know it or else I would gladly know what other Rule we have to know it by But here it will be objected That if Possession gives Right the Law must be quite laid aside and he that hath the strongest Arm will have the greatest Right and so this Doctrine will be an Inlet to all Oppression and Violence To this I answer That grant a King cannot be punish'd and dispossest by due course of Law and that therefore God if I may say so is forc'd for the punishing and dispossessing of Kings to use extraordinary means which may tantamount to a Law yet sure the Law is sufficient to take cognisance of Subjects to punish them and redress their Grievances one to another and therefore they need not and ought not to take these extraordinary means which God sees often fit only and necessary for the punishing and dispossessing of Kings But of so intricate a nature is the Matter in hand that I have scarce unravelled one doubt when presently there arises another At this rate say you even a good King instance King Charles the Martyr may be destroyed by an Usurper and yet the Usurper is not to be questioned but own'd as Supreme Certainly God never intended to destroy a good King so and therefore if an Usurper destroy such a King he cannot be of God's setting up and therefore is not to be owned as Supreme To this I answer That I cannot without sorrow reflect upon the horrid Murther of that gracious Monarch a Prince of unspotted Integrity who was certainly the best of Kings who for his Piety of Life might rid with the strictest Votaries and for the manner of his Death with the most famed Martyrs and so far was he from bringing a Curse either upon the Nation or himself by any Sin of his own that if ever the Goodness of a King could attone for the Sins of his People his certainly could have done it But it is not allways the sin of a King which is the cause of such Overturnings but very often indeed the sins of the People though God knows we are too apt to lay the blame off our selves and slander the Lord 's anointed And this happens according to Samuel's Menace to the People that if they should doe wickedly they should be destroy'd both they and their King. God is many times pleased for the Punishment of a sinfull People to remove good Kings from
A DISCOURSE SHEWING That it is Lawfull and our Duty To swear OBEDIENCE to KING William Notwithstanding the Oath of ALLEGIANCE taken to the LATE KING By a Divine in the North. LONDON Printed for Joseph Hall Bookseller in Newcastle upon Tyne 1689. TO THE Renownedly Learned and Reverend GILBERT BVRNET D D. Lord BISHOP of SARVM Reverend Sir MY Zeal for this present Government the happiest Change that ever Nation was blest with and my Trouble to see some remaining Scruples which in despight of all God's manifestations to us seem yet to disturb our Israel have so far transported me beyond the bounds of Modesty and made me forget my own Weakness as to thrust upon you this unworthy Pamphlet My Forwardness for the Cause had wellnigh put me upon the printing of it without farther consultation but upon second thoughts I judg'd it safer in a matter of this weight to consult some of greater Learning And whilst my thoughts were roving to find out some proper persons of which upon several accounts there are but few in this quarter of our World attracted with the fame of Your Worth and Learning and the sense of Your great Actings in our happy Change it self they seemed to bend to You-wards And though a person of less Business and less Note might very well have served to examine so pitifull a Piece yet promising my self better usage from You whose Candour must be answerable to Your Greatness than perhaps I might meet with from some of lesser note I resolved however bold it might appear in me to take this way Accept therefore Reverend Sir this poor Piece which however rude it be if it be but sound I care not And though it was very fond of the journey to come and present it self to You yet it will upon the approach of so grave a Censure methinks begin to tremble And if I be prevented by any other who questionless may doe it better I am very well pleased with the Service which may be done â—o my Sovereigns by it and think my self sufficiently rewarded for my poor Endeavours that I had the Honour of expressing to You my readiness in them God preserve You Reverend Sir and enrich his Church more and more with such noble Patriots A DISCOURSE SHEWING That it is Lawfull and our Duty To swear OBEDIENCE to KING William Notwithstanding the Oath of ALLEGIANCE taken to the late King. AMong the many Scruples of Conscience which have risen from this turn of Times the greatest in my opinion and I hope the last is this Whether or no it be lawfull for those who have sworn Allegiance to the late King to take this new Oath of Allegiance to King William This is the great Scruple which I find cannot easily be shaken off by men even of greatest Learning and greatest Integrity and if men could but once clear themselves of this I hope there will remain no farther cause of Scruple And although I do not pretend to prescribe Rules to others who are wiser and better than my self yet what I here write for my own satisfaction may perhaps be somewhat satisfactory too to such whose want of leasure or other lets may hinder them from making enquiry into the thing themselves First then There are two preliminary Questions necessary to be considered in order to the resolving this present Scruple The first is Whether or no I can be any longer obliged to a man by Oath or otherwise when he himself is divested of that Power in consideration of which I was by Oath or otherwise obliged to him And it is certain I cannot The thing is so common and clear that it needs not much proving there being daily instances of the thing For though a man is obliged to a Lord of a Manour a Magistrate or Master so long as they are such yet when they once cease to be such and are superseded by Oaths my Obligation how strong soever doth then cease and I may a-new be obliged to the Succeeder The next Question is Who is to be owned as supreme He who was once our lawfull King or he who by Force or otherwise hath dethroned this King and is himself seated upon the Throne And in my opionion the last is supreme for the bearing of the Sword is so inseparable from the supreme Power that the very Life of Supremacy consists in it and it is as improper to call him King who wants Power as to call him a man who wants Reason A King is set over a People by God as his Vice-gerent and endued with Power sufficient to endourage and defend the righteous and punish the wicked but when God takes from him all Power so that he can neither doe the one nor the other How can he be called God's Vice-gerent and Supreme Is not he rather to be called so and to be look'd upon to be such upon whom God hath transferr'd this Power And as he who is lawfully ejected can no longer lay any Claim to that Estate out of which he is ejected but he is to be owned as Lord who is lawfully possest of it so when God who hath the sole Disposal of Crowns and may give them to whom he pleases doth dispossess a King of a Crown and puts another in his place we are then to acquiesce It 's true whilst the thing is in dispute it is the part of every honest man to stand up for his King as much as he can but when once the business is ended and actuall possession given which could never be without God's Fiat who himself is the Judg of Kings and putteth down one and setteth up another there is then no farther Appeal to be made or Writ of Errour brought unless we think we are higher than God and have a better Right to dispose of Crowns then he we are therefore to own him as supreme whom God hath set up and not obstinately to stand but for him who is actually dispossest Again Since the Tribute and Revenues of a Crown are the Stipend of God if I may call it so appropriated by God to the supreme Powers as his Ministers it being necessary for the support of their Grandeur and Carrying on of their Business and therefore St. Paul saith They are God's Ministers attending continually upon this very thing When then this Tribute is quite taken from one and given to another so that it is impossible for him from whom it is taken to appear any longer as the Minister of God and carry on his Business God then seems to me to have actually discharged such an one from his Service and to have pitcht upon the other to be his Minister to whom the Tribute is paid And therefore it seems clear to me that he is to be owned as Supreme and God's Minister who actually possesseth the Throne and the Appurtenances thereof and not he who was once King but is now dispossest As for that nice Distinction of a King de jure and a King de facto I
them and to set Tyrants in their Place and then even those Tyrants are of God's setting up and are therefore to be owned as Supreme and obey'd as long as God pleases to continue them over us But here I am afresh assaulted with another Objection so hard it is to struggle through this difficult Case What! say you God is pleased to work by Means Miracles are now ceased and therefore if we ourselves put not to our Hands to pull down such Usurpers but fondly own them still to be Supreme and therefore not to be resisted we may long look before we be delivered and perhaps may offend God by slipping those Opportunities which may seem for that purpose to be put into our Hands But to this I answer That God who hath the Power of Life and Death is not so unprepar'd of Instruments of Death as for want of others to make allways use of one He hath a store house as I may say of Accidents and Diseases out of which he may chuse any one sufficient to put a Period to the days of the greatest Monarch he can kill a King as soon by a Fever as suffer a Rebel to kill him And therefore though David knew that Saul was to be unking'd nay and that he too was to succeed yet so far was he from being of Abishai's Opinion that then was the opportunity to kill him and that then God had delivered him into his hands when they found him asleep with the Spear at his Head so far I say was he from being of his Opinion and taking this opportunity that he would neither doe it himself nor suffer him to doe it but piously and prudently told Abishai that God had means of his own to doe it by and needed not to be beholden to them to doe it by such illegal Means and therefore they were to expect his leasure As the Lord liveth saith he the Lord shall smite him or his day shall come to dye or he shall descend into the Battel and perish The Lord forbid that I should stretch forth my hand against the Lord 's Anointed and therefore let no Rebel think that because God hath a mind to put down a King that yet he shall be the less guilty who stretcheth forth his Hand to doe it And now I have with what scrutiny I can discust these two Preliminary Queries In the answering the first of which there was little difficulty it being a generally receiv'd Maxim and Warrantable by the daily Practice of all sorts of People The main Difficulty lies in the Second which I think I have removed to my own if not to the satisfaction of others and have made it out both by Reasons and Examples and at the sametime remov'd all the Objections that might make against it that he is not King and Supreme who was once King but is depos'd but he is Supreme who is actually in Power and possest of the Throne And now let us take an estimate of our present Affairs by what hath been here said It is certain never Prince had juster Grounds of War than this Prince had First In respect of the true Religion which was groaning under the growing Tyranny of the Church of Rome We had a King so bigotted to Popery that for it's Propagation he question'd not to break all that was most binding all Promises of his own and the Laws of the Land which he swore to maintain so that he may very well be rank'd amongst those Kings whose saying is Let us break their bands asunder and cast away their Cords from us But let me not Reflect too much upon a Person who is yet upon several accounts to be respected by us let us rather admire the Goodness of God who hath sent this Prince as another Constantine to deliver us from these impending ruines for we may well say If the Lord had not sent us this Deliverer they had swallowed us up alive when they were so wrathfully displeased at us Secondly He had just Cause of War to defend his own Right which the adverse Party laboured to debar him of There was little good intended him when Strangers Papists and Jesuits his profest Enemies were set to manage Affairs and were acquainted with all the Intrigues of Court and yet neither he nor any for him were in the least concerned or taken any notice of And when their young Prince was to be born they did so industriously conceal all things from him that they might as well have sent him word that they intended to cheat him He had just Cause therefore to vindicate himself and his Right from the abuses of such insolent Court-Parasites and Impostors And though it is true he could claim no right by way of Succession as long as his Father liv'd yet as a Foreign Prince he might seek satisfaction for the Affront which was put upon him by such underhand and illegal Dealings Thirdly As the Cause of his War was just so the Success was thereunto answerable Never Prince was in an Undertaking more apparently favour'd by Heaven But it were needless for me to enlarge upon all the happy Occurences of this Expedition since the Learned Dr. Burnet who was an Eye-Witness of them all hath allready done it in his Sermon which is allmost in every man's hand and therefore I refer you to it This I will only say That never King came to a Crown with less Bloud-shed with greater Applause and Satisfaction of the People And therefore since as I have made it appear even those who come illegally to a Crown are yet when fully possest of it to be own'd as Supreme certainly King William whose Cause of War was so just and so miraculously victorious and whose Proclamation over the whole Kingdom was so joyous to all that in all Places where it was read it may very well be said The shout of a King was among them certainly I say he is Supreme he is of God's setting up And then it must needs follow that if he be Supreme the late King is not for there cannot be two Supremes And then it will follow again that the Oath of Allegiance and Supremacy which we took to the other King is now quite out of doors all Supremacy which was the ground of these Oaths being now quite lost in the late King. And then lastly it will follow That since King William is Supreme we are in duty bound to pay him all that Honour and Service which is due to a Supreme and then since swearing of Allegiance hath allways been own'd as due to the Supreme Power from the Subject it is our Duty when put upon it to swear Allegiance to him too And therefore if I may be so bold to say so I look upon it as an Errour in any to say no worse of it who refuse to doe it As for my own part as I have allways been Obedient to my Supreme so I shall allways be Obedient to to King William and Queen Mary whose Supremacy over us I pray God long to continue FINIS