her for Schismatical on this for Antichristian By those she is twitted with Novelty by these with Antiquity as high up as the first working of the mystery of Iniquity whensoever it was But the misery is and 't is really pittyable that all her protesting renouncing and abjuring Popery will not suffice to clear her of it Not all her Vindications and repeated Victories by her invincible Champions over all her Adversaries of the Roman Communion can either convince or satisfie or at least silence her domestick Opposers but still she is exclaim'd against as Popish plainly Popish in her Government in her Liturgies and in her Ceremonies Yea her Ministers how formidable soever as Adversaries to the Church of Rome or Bulwark to their own and by the ingenuous of that Church reputed rather not Catholicks than Hereticks as the rest style them are yet at home by her true Protestant sticklers loudly represented as Papists in Masquerade if not plainly and openly Popish As for her Doctrine it is as Reform'd wholly oppos'd to Popery and therefore sure by no means censurable as Popish Well I meddle not with other points of her Doctrine now but I am very sure it can never be thought either Popish or Phanatical in the point of Obedience to the Higher Powers which is the subject of my Text For this she as clearly asserts as firmly establishes and faithfully and constantly practised as ever was done in any of the purest and best Ages of Christianity And to give some little hints of her opposition both to Popery and Phanaticism in this point She does not derive her Sovereign's Authority either from the Pope immediately or from the People She does not subject him to a Conclave or a Consistory or a High Court of Justice She does not allow him to be sentenc'd and depos'd by a General Council or a General Assembly To be cut off by a Knife nor yet by an Axe To be posted out of the World by Powder in Barrels or Powder and somewhat else in Blunderbusses Nay she does not allow him to be so much as resisted upon any pretence whatsoever without danger of Damnation in the saddest sense I need not tell you at this time of day that there have been Doctrines currently vented and practises set on foot exactly agreeing to them but both as directly opposite to the Doctrine of our Church yea and of the whole Church of Christ too for a thousand years at least as any thing can possibly be It may therefore seem very seasonable upon such an occasional meeting as this to enquire what the Scripture asserts in the Case and see whether it does not fully authorise the Doctrine of our Church and condemn the contrary Accordingly I have chosen a Text the clearest and severest against Resisting of any in the whole Bible They that resist shall receive to themselves Damnation It has been observed from sundry of the Antients that in the Infancy of Christianity there was a rumour spread which is suppos'd to have taken its rise from Judas of Galilee mention'd Act. 5.37 that the Gospel was design'd to undermine Kingdoms and Common-wealths as if indeed the design of our Saviours first coming were the same with that which is reserv'd for his second * 1 Cor. 15.24 To put down all rule and all authority and power And that for this reason our Saviour himself and his Apostles did so frequently and so earnestly inculcate the Doctrine of Obedience to the Higher Powers that the Religion might not incur an odium I say nothing now to the reason alledged but that both our Saviour himself and his Apostles did actually inculcate so the said Doctrine is obvious to all that are never so little conversant in the Sacred Writings and were there no other Instances to be produced thence yet this place of Sr. Paul from whence I have my Text is so plain and pregnant so full and comprehensive as there needs no more to inform and satisfie the consciences of those who are willing to know their Duty and do not seek for cavil or subterfuge rather than satisfaction And so fully has this place been canvas'd and discuss'd the Point so amply debated and the Case so câ—early stated from hence that there can be no pretence of ignorance but what is more or less wilful and let us take a cursory view of the context which begins thus Let every soul be subject to the Higher Powers that is to the supream Authority of a Nation in whomsoever vested as is unanimously agreed on by all unprejudic'd men of sense and learning and clearly determin'd by the context following the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Powers being afterwards explained by 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Rulers Ver. 3. and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Ministers of God Ver. 4. and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 being ordinarily us'd both by Classic Authors and by St. Peter himself for supream and so render'd by our Translators 1 Pet. 2.13 To these Higher or Supream Powers the Apostle requires expresly that every soul be subject And here 't is pertinently remark'd by Origen that the Apostle has put his injunction in a term the most general and comprehensive that could be and yet particularly applicable to every individual let every soul be subject as obliging all that have but a common soul or spirit And our Church Homilies are very particular too and no less pertinent in their remark upon this place * Homily of Obedience pag. 64. Ed. 1673. We ought diligently to obey St. Paul that dear and chosen Apostle of Christ even as we would obey our Saviour Christ himself if he were here present and let us learn of him that all persons having souls he excepteth none nor exempteth none neither Priest Apostle nor Prophet saith St. Chrysostom †And he saith it indeed yet more particularly And to the same purpose Theodoret and long after both St. Bernard do owe of bounden Duty and even in conscience Obedience Submission and Subjection to the Higher Powers which be set in Authority by God Forasmuch as they be God's Lieutenants God's Presidents God's Commissioners God's Judges ordained of God himself of whom alone they have all their Power and all their Authority and the same St. Paul threatneth no less pain than everlasting damnation to all disobedient Persons to all resisters against this general and common Authority Forasmuch as they resist not man but God not man's device and invention but God's Wisdom God's Order Power and Authority This is sufficiently plain and this must be granted the standing sense of the Church of England touching this place of the Apostle because these Homilies and the Doctrine contained in them are establish'd by publick Authority And the same in substance was the current sense of the whole Church of Christ in the first and purest Ages of it and generally of the Churches of the Reformation But to proceed the Apostle adds as the ground or reason of this universal
be no less than to incur his final displeasure and consequently Damnation in the saddest sense without Repentance still 3. Seeing we must needs be subject and by consequence not resist not only for wrath or for fear of Temporal Punishment it must be for some other reason or on some further account and that is plainly for fear of wounding our Consciences which will certainly expose us to the wrath eternal without Repentance 4. And lastly Seeing it were exceedingly below the Apostle to argue against Resisting from so poor a Topick as fear of Temporal Punishment only which all the World knows will certainly attend the Crime of Resisting if not some way or other prevented and which might as well be urged against any other instance of offending the Laws I shall not make my own reference but leave it as before to be consider'd whether the Apostle can reasonably be suppos'd to intend by the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in this place any thing less that eternal Damnation without Repentance as the punishment of Resisting And so I proceed to my second medium by which I proposed to prove this and that is the current sense of the most approved Expositors And here I might urge what I find asserted to my hand that not one Writer for a thousand years of any credit in the Church did ever doubt or question the Doctrine of Obedience to the Higher Powers as 't is maintained by the Church of England or the unlawfulness of resisting them upon any pretence whatever And why but because the Holy Scripture so frequently and particularly St. Paul here in this Chapter has so plainly stated it made it so clear and manifest and so formidably threatned the oppugners of it And for the practice of the Primitive Christians in all parts of the Word which is incomparably the best Comment upon the Scriptures of the New Testament 't is very certain they were universally subject to their Governors in omnibus licitis and never resisted them whatever ground or pretence they might have for it and this indeed is almost as universally acknowledg'd that they did not actually resist Their Reasons we shall after enquire into But take we this by the way in St. Austin's words Their Demeanour was perpetually and invincibly Loyal towards their Temporal Governors without any the least Resistance propter Dominum eternum for fear of offending their great and eternal Sovereign the Lord of Heaven and Earth and thereby incurring his final displeasure the effects whereof are intolerable and eternal and altogether unavoidable but only by Repentance But to be more particular with reference to the Argument in hand Among the Antients St. Chrysostom and those who follow'd by way of expounding the Scriptures nearest the Letter for the rest almost all before him were mostly given to Allegorical Expositions St. Chrysostom I say and his followers as Theophylact and Oecumenius I may add Photius too for so much as remains of his Comments are generally accounted the best Commentators St. Chrysostom says a * Dr. Cave his Life St. Chrystom Learned Man of our own Church had so happy a Talent in expounding the Scripture in the most obvious and litteral sense that as an Antient Writer assures us his judgment herein was accounted the common standard of the Church and out-weigh'd the Expositions of all the other Fathers Now he and his followers with one consent declare plainly if not expresly too for the sadder sense of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in this place St. Chrysostom's 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 no light but very severe vengeance and that from God who is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a severe avenger of all such as contemn these Higher Powers and thereby 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 exceedingly provoke God is sufficiently clear for my purpose and so Theophylact 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 he that resists shall be punish'd by God himself And to the same purpose Photius in Oecumenius whom I may therefore cite as one expresly interprets the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 here by 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Condemnation from God I deny not but all these how much soever they are for the sadder sense of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 here do withal include the other sense too of Temporal Punishment from the Magistrate which I know none that offers to exclude though I think it not very necessary to be urgent for it or lay any great stress upon it because so likely to follow in all cases of Resisting that are improsperous and do not prevail upon the Legal establish'd Authoity But be it that the Apostle implied in the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 here a Temporal Punishment from the Magistrate so it be granted as 't is by these Antients expresly that he meant by it and that chiefly too eternal Damnation from God And with these of the Greek Church agree St. Ambrose and St. Austin for the Latin St. Ambrose upon those words Ye must needs be subject not only for wrath id est ultionem presentem that is says he for fear of present or temporal vengeance sed propter futurum judicium but also for fear of the judgment to come quia si hic evascerint illic eos poena expectat ubi ipsa accusante conscientia punientur For however says he they escape here yet there their own conscience will be their accuser and God himself their avenger And St. Austin says * Ep. 1◠concerning Resisters that besides what they may suffer from men apud Deum fortem non habebunt they shall have no part with God and elsewhere he reckons it very clear and manifest Patet says he mortale peccatum esse potestati civili resistere 't is evident that to resist the Civil Power is a Mortal Sin And by Mortal we know he means a Sin of a damning nature that fearfully exposes to the wrath and indignation of Almighty God And with these consents St. Bernard too though living in an Age when the Papal Power had not a little encroach'd upon the Imperial but much corrupted the Christian Doctrine in point of Obedience to the Higher Power Yet he even in that Age asserted it damnable in the saddest sense to resist and that from this place of the Apostle in my Text †Ep. 1◠221. Ludovic Regem And to come down to those of the Reformation the generality of them are clear if not for the sadder sense of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 here yet which is all one for the damning nature of Resistance even Paraeus who has been censur'd for some unadvised expressions in the Case is very clear and right with others in his Comment upon my Text not only affiring that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 here may be taken in either sense of Temporal or Eternal Punishment But that however Resisters may escape the hands of Men yet Certe a Deo from God they are sure of a severe award And to Contract the most eminent Divines of the Reformation though
were endless to cite particular Writers of our Church to this purpose but by what has been said so clear is the Doctrine of our Church in the point as some have made this remark upon it That since the Reformation it is now again current Episcopal Doctrine as it was always Apostolical That Subjects ought by no means to resist nor can be disobliged from their Obedience to their Sovereigns upon any pretence whatsoever It being then so clearly the Doctrine of the Church of England and that confirm'd or back'd by the Civil Sanction and so the avowed sense of all the Authority of the Nation is it not prodigiously strange to hear it excepted against not only by English-men but what is much more by pretended Members of the Church of England as we have had some few years past sufficient evidence Well! but does the Church of England agree in the point with the Church of Christ in the primitive and purest ages of it or with other Churches of the Reformation That it does perfectly agree with the primitive Church in the point has been so frequently so plainly and so convincingly proved that the Oppugners of it have been forced to have recourse either to downright Slandering and Lying or else to Enthusiasm To the first affirming contrary to the faith of antient and approved Histories and all accounts of those times that the Doctrine of Non-resistance then generally maintain'd and the practice of Christians exactly suited thereto was grounded upon nothing else but weakness or want of strength they did not resist quia deerant vires as Bellarmine leads the Dance and 't is incredible how he is followed But in answer to it 1. admitting but by no means granting that want of strength or forces was one ground of their constant Loyalty without the least attempt of resisting yet what an abominable slander is it to say which yet is said that it was the only ground of it when their Apologists and other eminent Writers lay down unalterable reasons why they would not did not durst not resist even because they thought themselves obliged to suffer any thing from the Government rather than resist by the most sacred and indispensable Laws of their Religion as hath been very often and of late abundantly made appear Want of strength then was not the only ground of their not resisting as some have shamefully slander'd them And no wonder when others have not stuck to speak as slanderously of the Apostles themselves as if their end in prescribing Subjection and Obedience at first were only to flatter the Emperours and curry favour with them as Salmeron had the impudence to affirm But 2. that want of strength or forces was any ground or reason at all of their not resisting is so far from truth that there never was a more silly groundless falsity invented as hath been invincibly made appear to the meanest capacities and therefore I shall the less need to insist upon it But I beg leave to urge two things with reference to it The one is an instance not so commonly taken notice of and that is this In the Reign of Adrian the Jews almost universally but especially about Egypt and Cyrene rebell'd against the Emperour and appeared in Arms under Barchochebas their Leader to the number of some hundred thousands and much about the same time as may be gather'd from Eusebius there was a Persecution on foot against the Christians which might have prompted them to joyn with those Jewish Rebels and that they might have joyned with them if they would is too certain when they were used with at least as much cruelty and savageness by the Rebels meerly because they would not joyn with them as ever they had been by any of their Persecutors and yet they could never be drawn by arts or arguments by persuasion or force to associate with the Rebels And this instance seems to me so plain and home to the purpose that I shall only make this remark upon it That those of the Church of England in the late Times were not the first Martyrs or Confessors purely for Loyalty these primitive Christians being their Precedents and leading them the way The other thing I have to urge in the case is this Bellarmine and his followers in very great numbers affirm That the primitive Christians wanted strength or forces to resist but Tertullian who lived in those times says They filled all places but the Temples and were of all the standing Offices almost in the whole Empire And St. Cyprian not long after him affirms That they were vastly numerous and copious that is as the word seems to import they were of the Militia or Souldiery too And 't is undeniably evident that almost all Julian's Army when he died were Christians as the Ecclesiastical Historians all with one mouth assert Now whether you will believe Tertullian and St. Cyprian and so many antient Historians or Bellarmine and his followers is left to your choice But the prettiest that has been said upon this case of resistance and St. Paul's Doctrine about it is this that Paul intended his Doctrine of Non-resistance purely with respect to the men he wrote to of that Age 't is meant and no otherwise than as if a man should write to the Christians at present under the Turks Dominion confessedly poor and unable indeed to resist him would he not write as Paul did No question but this learned Author fully knew the Apostle's mind nay and had consulted him personally upon the point when he so confidently adds That if Paul were alive and saw wicked Kings reigning in Christian Commonwealths he would leave them to their Subjects to be punished by them without blame Whither are we rapt now into the third Heavens there to consult Paul But I told you recourse was to be had of necessity either to downright standering and lying or else to Enthusiasm and here seems to be somewhat of both But this was the familiar mode of the late Times to pretend Revelation So John Goodwin Now that Antichrist is apparently come to his full Power and Authority that which was not known before but kept conceal'd from the Churches of Christ is fully manifest that Christians may lawfully in a lawful way that is when they may lawfully stand up to defend themselves in case they be able against any unlawful assaults by what assailants or by what pretended Authority soever made upon them And another The lawfulness of Rebellion is now discovered to God's Church as the necessary means to ruin Antichrist So Burroughs cants after Goodwin But a more blunt Enthusiast has told us roundly That â—t was God's will the primitive Christians should confirm the truth by sufferings but now that it is confirm'd his will is that we should defend the truth by action in destroying Tyrants Boldly said indeed and methinks this Gentleman seems more intimately acquainted with God himself than the former was with St. Paul as knowing God's secret will
subjection to the Higher Powers that there is no Power but of God The Powers that be or the Powers then in being for so some understand 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and so Nero's Power who was then regnant are ordained of God Can any thing possibly be more plain than this for the Divine Institution of Sovereignty a thing so plain indeed not only from this and sundry other places of Holy Writ but from natural reason too that one of the Antients affirms Orosius they who have not read the Scriptures do think it as very many Learned Heathens have declar'd they did and they who have read them do know it And in no one point of Christian Doctrine have the Antient Sages of our Religion the Primitive Fathers more unanimously agreed as the Unlearned as well as the Learned know at this time of day And all the Churches of the Reformation are clear for it as appears from their Confessions And for our own Church yea and State too for I may safely joyn them together in this they are as express for it as the plainest words can shew them to be The Common Lawyers agreeing in it with the Casuists and the Statutes as plainly and fully asserting it as the Canons But if there were nothing else to prove it yet the Power of the Sword or the Power of Life and Death which is an essential branch of Sovereignty undeniably evinces it to be originally from God who alone could give the said Power and I would fain see it prov'd that the King-creating People ever had this Power And if they never had it themselves how they could impart it is somewhat mysterious But notwithstanding so general and unanimous a consent both of Churches and Persons as well Antient as Modern in a point so very plain from the Apostle and in a manner self-evident great numbers in the Church of Rome and the Jesuits especially assert the contrary and therein are followed by the generality of our Seperatists That all supream Power is originally and radically seated in the People and that if Kings fail of their Duty the People may supply it at least in some Cases may do it of themselves That Kings are accountable to the People as their Superiors and not only censurable and punishable but as they are pleas'd to express it Dethronable I shall not stand to dispute the Point with them now but bating the invincible evidence to the contrary of this from the Power of the Sword wherewith Sovereign Princes are invested I shall only put this Query Whether more deference in point of credit and authority be due to St. Paul and the most eminent Divines of the Church of Christ in all Ages and these back'd with the concurrent sense of all sober Heathens or to the Romish and Protestant Jesuits in this point and without more ado I shall leave it to you I have hitherto insisted upon the Context and shewn how it has been as St. Peter signifi'd of old concerning some other passages of our Apostle wrested by the unlearned and unstable shall I say yea rather by the malitious and seditious to their own destruction eternal 't is to be fear'd and how justly to be fear'd will appear by enquirng into the Words I have chosen for my Text which are as plain and express against resisting as the Context for obeying the Higher Powers They that resist shall receive to themselves Damnation Which Words as they stand in our Translation are plain indeed but as they are in the Original they are more liable to cavil and exception and then 't is not to be expected they should escape it when there have been in sundry Ages so many whose Interest it was to make it in order to the success I mean of their wicked Attempts To the Term of resisting there is not much exception made for tho' it may sometimes signifie no more than to act contrary to the Command of the Higher Powers yet it cannot bear that signification in my Text because the Higher Powers may possibly command that which we are oblig'd by a Power Superiour to theirs to act contrary to as if they Command any thing repugnant to the express Word of God then as St. Peter has determin'd the case and as 't is universally agreed on we ought to obey God and not Man not any Human Power whatsoever but to act contrary to their Command And that for certain is not to incur Damnation in the saddest sense of which the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 here is confessedly capable But to resist as the very Words used by the Apostle here plainly import is to use hostile violence or forcibly to withstand and that is to incur Damnation according to our rendring the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which the Apostle uses in the Text but whether the word does really import here Damnation in the saddest sense that is eternal Condemnation from God or only some Temporal Mulct or Punishment from the Magistrate Whether it be unto Death or to Banishment or to Confiscation of Goods or to Imprisonment hath been and still is made a Question And truly I have not seen any determination of it so clear Author Anonymus as it seems to me capable of A learned man of the late times hath told us indeed That the Analogy of the place will sufficiently evince the Point that this word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is like a sword with two edges fitted not only to kill the Body but to destroy the Soul also that it threatens punishment from the Magistrate is very true but not all Ye must needs be subject not only for Wrath but also for Conscience sake You are exhorted not to Rebel because you may be Hang'd But lest confidence in Numbers should answer this Objection a stronger motive is us'd You shall certainly be Damn'd It is probable you may take the Gallows in your way but however Hell will be the end Yea though you escape a shameful Death yet you have forfeited eternal Life It may be so as this Author says and indeed it is too probable but he has not clearly evinced it Some have gone further and said much more but I conceive not all that might be said upon it And of late in popular Discourses it has been rather taken for granted than designedly proved I humbly offer therefore the result of my Meditations upon the Point and upon the Text and I shall do it in this method 1. I shall endeavour to prove that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in this place does really signifie Damnation in the saddest sense that is eternal Condemnation from God tho' not excluding the other more gentle sense of Temporal Punishment from the Magistrate 2. I shall shew that there is nothing to take off the force of this intermination no just case of exception against the rule of my Text no pretence allowable but for Subjects to resist I mean forcibly to resist their Lawful Sovereign is absolutely
ever happen again yet that it did so once is enough to assure us of God's eternal detestation of the Crime And in the next remarkable instance I mean that of Absalom so strangely infatuating the Counsels of the most politick and so amazingly bringing the miserable Ring-leader to his end by making the Hair of his Head instrumental to his ruin and cutting him off thus in the very act of his Crime notwithstanding all the care his Royal Father took to prevent it Sure if we reflect seriously upon God's severe displeasure so signally evinced by such astonishing instances of it we cannot with any shadow of reason imagine that Resisting should be so light and trivial a matter as some would fain have it from their fancied importance of the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in my Text. And now I would fain persuade my self I have made it seem very probable at least that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in this place of my Text does really signifie Damnation in the saddest sense by what I have urged 1. From the Context which I am sure very strongly inclines to it if I must not say absolutely clears it From the concurrent sense of the most approved Expositors as well Antient as Modern And 3. From parallel places of Holy Writ which very plainly shew that Resisting is a sin exceedingly displeasing or rather detestable in the sight of God and consequently I may say of a damning nature I am sure our Church is very clear for the damning nature of it â—omily aâ—ainst Reâ—ellion â—ag 379. declaring in express terms that eternal Damnation is prepared for all impenitent Rebels in Hell with Satan the first founder of Rebellion and grand Captain of all Rebels And 't is plain that all Resisters with Her are Rebels And the first Council that ever made any Canons against Resisting was the fourth Council of Toledo in Spain Anno 633. for there never was any occasion for the Churches provision against it before that say some For certain there was not for the first three hundred and forty years if not much longer But that Council is very severe against the Authors and Abettors of the Crime not only Excommunicating and Anathematizing them but adjudging them to be damned in God's future Judgment and to have their part with Judas Iscariot And this Sentence was confirmed in the Fifth Council that followed there and the same was done in the Council of Calcuth But after all supposing it could not be made so clear as it may seem to be that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifies in this place of my Text eternal Damnation without Repentance yet what assurance can be given to any Christian that makes the least doubt or scruple whether it does not when it cannot be deny'd but the word is capable of that sense I cannot conceive any other way of satisfying the doubt or silencing the scruple but one of these two either a plain Demonstration or a new Revelation to the contrary As for the former of these the matter is not capable of it For who can pretend to Demonstrate or to use a term of greater Latitude undeniably convince any man living that the Apostle in this place and by this word did not mean Damnation in the saddest sense And for the other way of a new Revelation however the Person pretending to it may satisfie himself he cannot another of the truth of his Revelation without a Miracle or somewhat equivalent to attest it And without that what security can he give that he does not incur that Anathema of the Apostle against Angel or Man that should Preach another Gospel or the contrary to that he had Preached Gal. 1.8 9. And without such Conviction as either that of Demonstration or a new Revelation sufficiently attested what infinite hazard is it for a Christian to venture upon the guilt of Resisting which 't is more than possible for certain may be attended with Damnation in the saddest sense I am pretty sure there is no absolute security against it in case of actual Resisting but Repentance only And that must be granted infinitely hazardous in a War especially if the War be sinful And for a Person to be taken away suddenly by death in the very act of Resisting as 't is possible yea probable nay let me add 't is very great odds but he may if engaged in it and at his first appearance before the grand Tribunal hear the Holy Spirit or his Amanuensis St. Paul avouch that by 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in this place was truly meant Damnation in the saddest sense is infinitely astonishing and much too dreadful in Theory ever to be hazarded in Practice by rational Christians that does indeed believe and has any tolerable apprehension of Damnation Well! but supposing the worst Is there nothing to take off the force of this intermination No lawful ground of resisting the Higher Powers No not any as I come to shew according to my second Proposal namely that there is no just case of exception against the rule of my Text no pretence allowable But for Subjects to resist I mean forcibly to resist their Lawful Sovereign is absolutely and universally to incur Damnation and nothing to atone for the crime in the sight of God or to prevent the Punishment threatned here but Repentance I confess this assertion cannot but seem a little strange when there have been so many cases of exception made against this general Rule so many pretences set on foot and reckon'd allowable so many starting holes found out But I am sure I have very good Authority for what I say our Laws and Statutes as well as Canons and the declared Doctrine of our Church being clear on my side And this methinks should seem in all reason abundantly sufficient to any professed Member of our Church who must necessarily renounce such his Membership and cease to be of the Church of England before he can allow himself the liberty of resisting As for our Laws that of the 25 of Edw. 3. and those of the 13 14 of Charles the second declare it universally unlawful to make or levy any war against the King without the allowance of any case or pretence whatsoever and the same is expresly required to be acknowledged by all the Clergy in the Act of Vniformity and the same in substance is required of all Civil and Military Officers Our Canons declare expresly against all taking up of Arms whether offensive or defensive without the Royal Authority much more against it upon any pretence whatsoever under pain of Damnation for which they cite the words of my Text as very plain in their sense * The first of the Canons of 1640. Our Homilies teach us God hath shewn that he 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 move Rebellion against their Princes * Homily against Rebellion p. 368. It
for we know of nothing he has revealed but the contrary to this as his will in the case But to leave Enthusiasts as past conviction and to have as little regard to those others who have the impudence to oppose a known certain truth as clear as any thing of that nature can possibly be with meer shams I say the Doctrine of the Primitive Church is plain and manifest against all Resisting upon any pretence whatsoever so plain and clear that as was before observ'd not one writer for a thousand years of any Credit in the Church did ever question it And Sigebert reckon'd the contrary doctrine a novelty at least if not a plain Heresie and justly imputes the original of it to Pope Hildebrand as not crept into the World before him As for the Churches of the Reformation they are no less plain and clear against all resisting as any man may satisfie himself from their general confessions and from the writings of particular members of them I shall only urge the Authority of Erasmus who though he liv'd and dy'd in the Communion of the Church of Rome yet was for a Reformation and according to some the occasion of it and I the rather insist upon his Authority because his Comments are recommended by our own Reformers and ordered to be had in all our Churches Now he in his Comment upon St. Luke 22. affirms there is no Heresie more pernitious than this of the lawfulness of resisting the Precepts of Christ decrying it his whole life being opposite to it the Apostolical Doctrine testifying against it it being rejected also by so many thousand Martyrs and contradicted by the Antient Interpreters I may add by all impartial writers of the Reformation And this sure cannot but seem abundantly sufficient to all unprejudic'd minds that sincerely desire to know the truth and are willing to be convinced of it Let me have leave to add this as which makes very much for my Assertion of the absolute unlawfulness of resisting that the Cases of Exception are so very wild and extravagant and but two of them are worth taking notice of As for the Additional ones of Grotius 't is said he was young when he made them and 't is plain he was to serve an argument having his Country-men to defend As for that of Religion which some insist on as not only a reasonable but the very best ground of resisting 't is the most senseless imposition upon the common reason of mankind that can well be imagin'd to pretend it for who knows not that our Religion can never be lost or taken from us by all the Powers of Earth and Hell combin'd together against us without our own consent But what do I talk of Religion in the Case that 's commonly no more than the surface or shell 't is Ambition or Interest or Revenge is the Kernel or Substance for without such mixtures Religion as a Learned Gentleman observes * Sir William Temple p. 57. works no violent effects but produces rather examples of constant suffering than of desperate actions To pretend Religion therefore as a ground of resisting is only to make appear our hypocrisie which Harry Martin honestly disclaim'd when he cry'd out in the house against snivelling for Religion as the ground of resisting the King We have fought says he all this while for Liberty and are we now whining about Religion And one Colonel Purefoy like another Peribonius was much more ingenious declaring plainly after the King was beheaded that it was no more than what he had desir'd and designed to contribute to forty years before But still as I said there are two cases of exception insisted on as of some validity 1. If a Prince shall undertake to alienate his Kingdom or sell it or give it up into the hands of another Sovereign against the mind of his Subjects A very pritty supposition but only that it is so very unreasonable as not to be supposed by all the rules of commom prudence or charity besides that it may be always pretended if once suffered to pass and where are we then Why then we are at the old pass of undermining the Thames that is of having any the most ridiculous and incredible stories obtruded upon us and we must believe them for the good of the Common-wealth which otherwise would be in mighty danger Well! but there is another case of exception rather more unreasonable than the former and yet at the least as likely to be always pretended and that is If a Prince shall undertake to destroy his whole Kingdom or any considerable part of it The former of these besides that it very reverendly supposes the Prince either a fool or a madman is little better than non-sense and next to impossible at least But the latter that a Prince should destroy a considerable part of his Subjects was plainly the case of the Primitive Christians who were certainly both for number and quality but especially for number a very considerable part of the Roman Empire pars major Civitatis cujusque saith Tertullian the greater part of every City and according to Grotius metuenda plane multitudo in plain English formidable for their numbers yet they were not only design'd to utter destruction but actually destroy'd in vast infinite numbers by the express order of their several Emperours and that with the utmost cruelty and savageness contrary to all the rules of nature reason and humanity And yet still among these qui ipsorum saevitiae arma opponeret inventus est nemo says Grotius and it has been sufficiently shewed already not one was found that wou'd oppose their Cruelty by force of Arms. Not one Yes says Blondel I have found two instances to the contrary And the truth is he has two instances but they are both wondrous odd As that of a company of drunken Villagers very probably Pagans too rescuing Dionysius Bishop of Alexandria from the hands of his Prosecutors who were but private Souldiers neither and the Armenians resisting Maximin who was not their Sovereign Which only shew the good mans earnest desire to have them pertinent whether they will be so or no. But after all there are Scripture instances produced to the contrary of this Assertion that it is absolutely unlawful to resist And 't is true there are Scripture instances alledged but no otherwise than as Texts of Scripture are by some quoted only to make a flourish withall and fill up a margin or to seem proofs though hardly the shadow of them And as for these instances out of Scripture they have been considered and sufficiently prov'd to be either impertinent as some or extraordinary as others or lastly wicked and so not to be brought into example And they do but only shew how hard the Oppugners of this Doctrine are put to it when they can produce no better for their purpose And now to come home to our selves and very briefly to apply what has been said The charge here
and universally to incur Damnation and nothing to atone for the Crime in the sight of God or to prevent the Punishment threatned here but Repentance And this is all I can think necessary to insist upon from the Words saving only some little matter by way of Application I begin with the first that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in this place does realy signifie Damnation in the saddest sense Now 't is granted the Word does signifie in Scripture sometimes Human Judgment sometimes Capital Punishment or the Sentence of Death inflicted upon Malefactors But then it must be granted too that in many more places of Scripture it signifies Divine and Eternal Punishment or Damnation in the saddest sense And that not only where it is joyned with other words that plainly point and direct to that sense but where it stands by it self alone without any additional note or point of direction And this hath been shewed at large by learned men * Particularly Dr. Hammond in loc alibi and Dr. Falkener Christian Loyalty Part 2. and so need not be stood upon now But this being taken for granted that more generally the Scripture uses the Word for Damnation in the saddest sense the only question is Whether so here in my Text or no I do not say excluding but implying the other sense too of Temporal Punishment from the Magistrate There is indeed another remarkable place where the Word is used but in what sense is alike question'd and that is 1 Cor. 11.29 where it is applied to Vnworthy Communicants He that eateth and drinketh unworthily eateth and drinketh 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 we read Damnation to himself But whatever the real sense of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 be there it has been very pertinently observ'd that in the late unhappy times when the question was most stifly canvass'd about the sense of my Text most of those who were hottest for the gentler sense in the place of my Text as making for their Interest who were actually in Arms against their Sovereign and little fear'd any Temporal Punishment were as hot for the sadder sense of the same Word in that other place to the Corinthians And the result was that effectual care was taken men should not incur Damnation for Communicating unworthily by keeping them from Communicating at all for several years together But then that men might not be as much deterr'd from resisting or taking up Arms against the King or continuing in them by any fear or apprehension of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifying Damnation indeed in this place of my Text it was eagerly contended for the gentler sense to be affix'd to this place that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 here should signifie only some Temporal Punishment which the King might inflict if he happened to Conquer his Rebels up in Arms against him And if it should come to that once then men were to look to themselves and scape as well as they could Then resisting or taking up Arms * Against the King would be plain down-right Rebellion and of a most horrid nature but not 'till then according to Cromwel's Doctrine who in the midst of the late War declar'd it seems That if he and his Party prevail'd their opposers would be accounted the grandest Traytors to the State that ever were But if the King should prevail their undertaking would be judged the most horrid and black Rebellion that ever the Sun beheld Then have a care of Attainders and Executions of Gibbets or Axes Confiscations or Imprisonments but no beware of Damnation all this while No that was no part of their care or fear and indeed Why should it If taking up Arms against their Sovereign were neither threatned nor like to be attended with any worse consequence than only some Temporal Mulct or Punishment which were certain to be avoided by Conquest if that were the issue Or if the worst should happen it were more than possible to be avoided by flight or concealment or perhaps by the clemency of the Conqueror or at least the number of Resisters would secure the far greatest part from the utmost severities And when there was so many starting holes so many possible shall I say nay probable ways of escaping this 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of the Apostle in their sense of it who would needs have it import only some Temporal Punishment from the Magistrate Why should they fear resisting or taking up Arms or continuing in them and not rather go on to fight manfully the Lords Battels and help him against the mighty when they were so far from incurring Damnation for it that they were plainly accursed if they did not as they were frequently and roundly told from that Jer. 48 10. place of the Prophet wretchedly mis-applied Cursed is he that doth the work of the Lord deceitfully or negligently and cursed is he that keepeth back his sword from blood But to recollect my self though what has been now said cannot favour much of digression because the Tenets and Practises specifi'd are plain natural results from the premises laid down For if to resist be not to incur Damnation in the saddest sense but barely and simply some Temporal Mulct or Punishment from the Magistrate and that too not certain not inevitable and far from that What should hinder resisting at any time upon a prospect of Conquest or at least a considerable advantage But God be thanked the case is not altogether so clear for them for 't is certainly possible that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in this place may signifie Damnation in the saddest sense as it does confessedly in sundry other places of Holy Writ and if it were only so Resisters cannot be altogether secure But not to rest here I shall forthwith betake me to the clearing my first Proposition that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in this place of my Text does really signifie Damnation in the saddest sense And this I shall shew 1. From the Context or the Analogy of the place 2. From the current sense of the most approved Expositors and 3. From parallel places of Holy-Writ which represent Resisting as a Crime of a most gross horrid Nature and consequently damning in the sight God 1. I shall shew it from the Context or the Analogy of the place And here 1. Let every soul be subject to the Higher Powers is plainly the Precept establish'd upon this Penalty whatever it be that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 imports and we are pretty well agreed about the Notion of the Higher Powers However I have prov'd already that it signifies the supream Authority of a Nation in whomsoever vested That we be subject to this Authority is an Apostolical Precept and our Blessed Saviour has expresly given the same Authority to his Apostles Doctrine as to his own delivered by himself and commanded them to be received with the same deference of belief and submission as what they deliver in point of Doctrine or Precept as himself He that receiveth you receiveth me and
he that receiveth me receiveth him that sent me St. Matt. 10.40 And as it was intimated before as the sense of the Church of England we ought to obey St. Paul even as we would obey Christ himself And sure from what has been said 't is plain we ought Whatever then the Apostles deliver as the Doctrine of Christ is Gospel as much as any thing Recorded by the four Evangelists And the Apostle is very plain for this That all who obey not the Gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ shall be punish'd with everlasting destruction 2 Thess 1.8 9. Subjection to the Higher Powers is here expresly injoyned by the Apostle and consequently is a Gospel Precept And notwithstanding Mr. Baxter's nicety of a Resistance not contrary to subjection certainly all forcible Resistance which is plainly the Apostles meaning here is sufficiently contrary to subjection Now whether to resist the Higher Powers and consequently to disobey the Gospel be not to incur everlasting Destruction or Damnation in the saddest sense I leave to be consider'd Again 2. All Power and by a necessary consequence the Higher Powers are of Divine Institution This is expresly asserted by the Apostle here There is no Power but of God the Powers that be are ordained of God And thence he infers That whosoever resisteth the Power resisteth the Ordinance of God Now whether to resist a plain Ordinance of God an institution founded and established by Divine Authority if we will take the Apostles word for it be not to offer contempt to the sacred Authority of God himself and so to incur his final dispeasure and consequently Damnation in the saddest sense without Repentance I leave again to be consider'd 3. The Apostle adds here Vers 5. of this Chap. Ye must be subject not only for wrath but also for conscience-sake Here by wrath all the World understands Temporal Punishment And as Dr. Hammond hereupon urges if that were all that is meant by 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the Text it could not be true much less concluded thence that men must be subject not only for wrath but if we must needs be subject and by at least an equal necessity not resist not only for wrath or for fear of Temporal Punishment then he that does actually resist shall receive or incur more than a Temporal Punishment even all the consequence of a mounded grieved conscience which when it accuses binds over to eternal wrath or Damnation in the saddest sense without repentance as no man doubts that pretends any acquaintance with the Christian Doctrine If therefore we will allow the Apostle to speak sense here we must grant there lies on us from these words a necessity of subjection and consequently of not resisting for some higher and further reason than only a fear of temporal punishment and what that can be other than eternal or Damnation in the saddest sense I leave again to be consider'd But here it is urged bo way of Objection and that from the Context too that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in this place must signifie only some Temporal Punishment from the Higher Powers because it follows immediately Rulers are not a terror to good Works but to the evil By the way their Objection plainly implies that to resist is an evil Work or else it were not punishable by the Magistrate and as such it is as all other evil Works are not only a ground of Temporal Punishment but exposes Men to Eternal without Repentance But to answer directly to the Objection 1. It is not deny'd but Resistance is a matter which the Magistrate is concern'd to punish and they that actually resist him may secure themselves he will punish them for it if it be in his power and he be not some way appeas'd or otherwise prevented But who can persuade himself that the Blessed Apostle by the Spirit of God directing him should threaten so great a Crime as Resisting which is no better than Rebellion and that is as the sin of witchcraft with an award which is common to it with the meanest offences in the World nay that the Great and Learned Apostle should argue against resisting from so poor a Topick as fear of Temporal Punishment only seems to me so jejune and flat as is infinitely below his Character as the great Doctor of the Gentiles He needed not his Education at the feet of Gamaliel much less his Infallibility as an Apostle to dictate this for certainly Nokes or a Styles a Cade or a Kett or any of the Rabble of Resisters need not be told that they incur a Temporal Punishment from the Magistrate if they be subdued and taken in the Act of Resisting or deprehended in the Attempt or Design of it But if they happen to subdue or awe the Magistrate or some way or other to escape as 't is odds but they may at least the more inconsiderable among them What signifies the intermination of the Magistrates Anger and the consequence of it some Temporal Punishment to deter them from resisting 2. Again If fear of Temporal Punishment were the sum of the Apostles Argument in this place Why should he particularly apply it to the instance of resisting the supream Magistrate might be said indeed not to bear the sword altogether in vain if he did bear it only against Treason Rebellion and such like violations of Majesty as immediately concern his own Person But certainly he could not be said to bear it to any great purposes of advantage to the Commonwealth or Community of his Subjects if he did not bear it against other Criminals and Malefactors as well as against Resisters or Traytors and if equally against all Why the Apostle should alledg the fear or danger of it against Resisters only if that were all he meant I am very much to seek and therefore methinks for the honour of the Apostle Christians should not presume to father so trifling an Argument upon him as that if any resist the Higher Powers they shall receive a Temporal Punishment If we understand the merit here and not the event that resisters deserve a Temporal Punishment 't is very true indeed but to no great purpose of deterring them If the event it will not always hold for certain it will not in the caâ—e of a prosperous Rebellion or flight or concealment or some other way of avoidance And now to sum up what has been said upon this first Argument taken from the Context Seeing 1. It is an Apostolical and consequently a Gospel Precept That we be subject to the Higher Powers and to resist them in the plain sense of my Text must be granted not to be subject and not to be subject is not to obey the Gospel and not to obey the Gospel is to incur everlasting Destruction without Repentance Seeing in the second place that to resist the Higher Powers is evidently to resist the Ordinance of God and that is to offer contempt to the sacred Authority of God himself and that can