of those Established Laws This Power was held in high Estimation by the whole Society and by the setled Constitutions of the Government a proportionable Tribute from the Subject was by Law allowed as a Revenue to support that Royal Office. And for the firmer uniting this Supream Head and his Subjects the former obliges himself by the Sacred Ties and Obligations of an Oath at his Inauguration to govern his People according to the Rule of the Established Laws and the latter as solemnly pays Homage and swears Obedience So that Allegiance in all Subjects whatsoever Government they live under and especially in our own Constitution is a Duty so perpetual and indispensible that a violation of it is an high Offence against God as well as against his Vicegerent Jac. This is my very Sense of the Duty of Allegiance this the Reason I refused to take that New Oath of Allegiance because 't is a plain Violation of the Old which you your self acknowledge perpetually to oblige Will. The Duty of Obedience is an inseparable Accident to every Subject and you may as well divest him of his Being as his Subjection for this Duty like the Royal Authority never dies but immediately descends from one to another But what you talk of is a perfect Frensie of Loyalty makes Allegiance an infinite Duty and exalts a King to the Honour of a God if all his Commands must be obeyed we tacitely acknowledge he can command nothing that is evil for an illegal Mandate must not be obeyed nor an evil Action committed though imperiously enjoyn'd by the greatest of Men. In all Governments whether Monarchy Aristocracy or Democracy the Subjects Duty of Obedience is to be measured by the express and positive Laws of that Government they are Members of and not to be regulated by a fancied Chimaera of obeying no man knows what it being now visibly apparent that Men may be as superstitiously Loyal as Religious and the first prove as fatal and destructive to the Peace and Happiness of the Nation as the last to the Zeal and Fervour of True Religion when in good earnest the utmost limits of Allegiance is but entirely to observe all the lawful Commands and Injunctions of our Superiors Jac. Has the Supream Magistrate no Authority to command our Obedience And is the Extent and Latitude of the Duty of Allegiance limited by declaritory and express Laws Will. 'T is a most certain Truth especially in our own Constitution where the Government is a Monarchy Royal in which the Subjects have as undoubted a Right to their Religion Liberty and Property as the Supream Magistrate has to the Royal Prerogative For as the Inferior Laws limit the Peoples Rights restrain them from invading the Royal Priviledges and from offering violence one to another so the chief design of Magna Charta is to reduce the Regal to a Legal power The Prescriptions and Statutes of this Nation are the impartial Arbitrators of Government and Obedience Jac. At present a plausible Plea may arise from hence but in the beginning 't was not so For Magna Charta was never heard of till King Henry the Third the Eighth King from the Conquest And where were those Liberties then you so much boast of now Will. Right Magna Charta in that particular form of words 't is now express'd was not in being till the time you mention but our Liberties and Properties were as much then the undoubted Birthright and Inheritances of the Subjects as they are now for Magna Charta as the Learn'd and Renown'd Lord Cook observes is for the most part Declaritory informs us what our Rights and Priviledges are instates us into what was lawfully and antecedently our own Right but confers no new Immunities upon us Jac. This is strange indeed when the very first Chapter begins We have granted to God and we have given and granted to the Freemen of this Realm How could King Henry give and grant those things were none of his Will. The Subjects Liberties asserted in this Great Charter are not to be look'd upon as pure Emanations from the Royal Favour or new Bounties to which the People had neither Right or Claim but rather a restoring those Priviledges which by the Usurpation and Encroachments of former Kings were forcibly with-held from the Subjects And the truth of this is evident from the Charter it self which in the words of Conveyance frequently mentions sua jura and suas Libortates Their Rights and their Liberties which shews the People had a former Title to those Immunities that by this Charter they were again put in possession of Jac. This is a pleasant Story indeed Are the Subjects Liberties more Ancient than the Conquest Has not a Conqueror power to impose what Laws he pleases upon those Vassels and Slaves he has conquered Will. However pleasant it be 't is clear and obvious the Liberties and Properties of Englishmen are of greater Antiquity than King William call'd the Conqueror as appears from the Laws that assert them some as Ancient as the Heptarchian Government granted by Ethelberd Ina and Offa others Cotemporary with the Monarchical Regency given and conferr'd upon the Subjects by pious King Alfred Neither were these Laws abolished by the Norman Duke but were of such Force and Vigour as to survive what you call the Conquest and set Bounds and Limits to that pretended Conqueror 'T is not denied but an absolute Conqueror may propose and enact what Laws he pleases to regulate and govern the Conquered by but this was far from King William's Case For though that great Victory over Harold with such a mighty slaughter of the English gave him great encouragement yet the Crown was obtain'd by Bargain and Compact as is plainly evident from those Grants made to Stigand Archbishop of Canterbury and Eglesine Abbot of St. Augustine's in behalf of the Kentish men and also from the Coronation Oath it self where the King swears to maintain and observe the Laws and Customs of the Nation 'T is true he made little esteem of violating this Sacred Obligation and his Successors vehemently encroach'd upon the Liberty and Property of the People but what power forceably snatch'd from them did not invalidate the Subjects Right Neither had King William notwithstanding all his Pretensions to a Conquest power to dispose of the Lands or Inheritances of those Natives he received to Protection This is manifest from that known Case of Sherborn the Saxon who had a Castle and Lands in Norfolk which the pretended Conqueror gave to one Warren a Norman and Sherborn dying the Heir claiming the same by Descent according to the Law it was before the Conqueror adjudged for the Hâ—ir and the Gift made void Jac. The Coronation Oath is nothing to purpose to evince a Paction or an Agreement upon this Account for that was made to God not to Man and if that Oath prove a Compact 't is between God and the King not between the King and the People Will. 'T
full and ample a manner as if you had taken the Oath a Thousand times Neither indeed has the Supream Magistrate Power to absolve you from this Obligation And the Reason of this is manifest for the Daty of Allegiance does so mightily conduce to promote the Advantage and Happiness of the whole Society that the Publick in General of which the Supream Magistrate is but a part challenges so large a Concernment in it that 't is a manifest Wrong an apparent Injustice for a particular person though never so great to dispence with the undoubted Birthright of every Subject So that should the Oath be taken only in the first acceptation as you seem plainly to understand it viz. to have Relation only to the Safety and Preservation of the King's Person without an Eye to the Publick Welfare and Security the Oath in that Sense is not Obligatory but ipso facto void from the very imposing And the Reason of this is plain and obvious because all Oaths or Promissory Obligations that are contrary to our Duty to our God our Neighbour or our selves repugnant to Piety Justice or Charity are invalid and bind not Rei illicitae nulla obligatio is a Maxim so consonant to the Doctrine of the Gospel that no Christian I suppose has a face to deny it And that the Oath of Allegiance in your sense is Res illicita is easily manifested from several Topicks First From its Opposition to Piety and Destructiveness to Religion His Majesty to whom you have given this Oath of Fidelity is by Profession a Roman Catholick and qua talis he is obliged not only by the Principles of his Religion but sub poenâ of Excommunication Deposition yea Damnation to extirpate the Protestant Religion to the utmost of his Power and to propagate Superstition and Idolatry in its room Now your Notion of the Oath of Allegiance is both a License and Encouragement to such a Supream Magistrate actually to free himself from the Tyes of such Powerful and Terrifying Obligations by prosecuting the Business For when his Person and Government is secured under the penalty of Perjury and punishment of Rebellion against all Resistance and Opposition from the Publick what Block can hinder him from working out his Liberty setting up his Superstition Idolatry and approving himself to his Holy Father by subverting our Laws destroying our Religion and by severely punishing those who obstinately oppose his Arbitrary Proceedings Beside if the Oath of Allegiance viz. Not to take up Arms against the King upon any pretence whatsoever but to assist his Majesty with Life Limb and Terrence Honour be to be understood particularly of the King's Person by this Argument if a King degenerate to a Julian his Subjects are by all sacred Obligations bound to assist him with their utmost Abilities in demolishing the Temples and Houses of God exterminating their Religion burning their Bibles and banishing the Gospel from his Territories and by their endeavours to introduce Paganism and establish the Worship of Infidels Secondly The Oath of Allegiance in this Sense is not Obligatory because of its contrariety to Justice and Righteousness Politick Justice commands us to support as well as obey all the wholesom Laws of that Society we are Members of and the Divine Precepts enjoyn us to protect the Innocent relieve the Needy and defend the Oppressed which are Mandates very inconsistent with your Notion of the Oath of Allegiance for according to your Interpretation of that Obligation all Subjects are obliged to support and defend the Supream Magistrate in all his Proceedings as well when he oppresses the Loyal and Innocent as when he punishes the Guilty and Criminal as vigorously in his Encroachments upon the Liberties and Properties of the Subject if he please to invade them as in maintaining his own Just Rights and Prerogatives But Thirdly Whatsoever Plea or Objection may be made against the two former there is in the Oath of Allegiance taken in the aforesaid sense such an evident Repugnancy to that Eminent and Evangelical Duty Charity so frequently inculcated in sacred Scripture that that alone doth sufficiently evidence the Invalidity of the Obligation The Duties of Mercy and Charity are not only the Advice and Counsel of our Saviour but his express and positive Commands viz That we shew Mercy as our Heavenly Father is merciful that we deal by others as we would be dealt with in the like Circumstances Merciful not only to Mens Bodies the perishing part but chiefly to their Souls that are Immortal and must live for ever that we may as much as in us lies promote and set forward the salvation of all men not to detract from or add to the Word of God nor to comply with those that do it but uncorruptedly to teach it to our sons and our sons sons Now the Oath of Allegiance in the aforesaid acceptation can never be reconciled to this Doctrine for that Obligation whenever the Supream Magistrate pleases destroys Christianity confirms the Hobbian Principle opens a door to Popery Turcism Apostacy Atheism or what else that Magistrate shall please to introduce And whatever Objection may be produced against it from our sins viz. that they are as numerous and great as the Transgressions of Sodom unparallel and provoking as the Wickedness of Samaria that our obstinate contempt and voluntary abuse of his Evangelical Mercies cry aloud to Divine Justice at least to obscure and darken his Gospel if not totally to deprive us of it yet these can never justifie our Proceedings to future Ages or yield any pretence to a Plea to free us from our Duty of Christian Charity to the Infants of our Time and the Children yet unborn which doubtless are not criminals upon this account which notwithstanding will by this unparallel stupidity of ours under the Mask or Vizard of Loyalty be as by a fatal and peremptory Decree for ever deprived of the knowledge of the right worship of God and inevitably involve them into such a lamentable condition as will certainly render them either in defiance of God their Creator or in ignorance of a saving knowledge of their blessed Redeemer The Natural Consequence from the whole is That the Oath of Allegiance can only bind in the first sense when 't is in order to effect the second that is it only obliges us to protect and defend the Interest of the Supream Magistrate when his Interest is subservient to the welfare of the whole Society But if bigotted Zeal haughty Ambition or wicked Counsellors be so prevalent with the Prince as to obliterate his Duty to the Publick and upon private Picks and Humors destroy the Laws subvert Religion neglect all the Methods of Government and separate his own Happiness from the Safety and Welfare of the Publick the Oath in the former sense is void and inobligatory And the Reason of this Consequence is very plain because men are under former Obligations to the contrary For in the Baptismal Vow which is
though a King's Eldest Son be a Prince by Birth and the first legitimate Male Offspring of an Earl a Lord the Day of his Nativity yet those are Birthright Priviledges accruing to them not from Nature but the Laws of the Nation Thus Royal Blood and Descent from Ancient Progenitors are only imputative Qualities and have so little Relation to Nature that they are only Praemia Virtutis Rewards for Heroick and Generous Actions that the persons concern'd or their Forefathers were eminent for Jac. These Commands that are Moral and perpetually to oblige are esteemed as Natural but the Duty of Obedience is Moral and perpetually to oblige if the Fifth Commandment be so which makes me account it Natural Will. As we are Subjects the Duty of Obedience is a perpetual Obligation and after a manner essential to us But our Allegiance has not its Foundation in Nature or her Operations but in the Relation we bear to a Soveraign And more than this the Fifth Commandment doth not evince This Precept is Moral and perpetually to oblige but the Rational part of it is grounded not in Nature but in Gratitude For as Aristotle observes Man is a Sociable Animal and there is nothing more destructive to Society than Ingratitude and Unthankfulness And since Children have not only their very Being but their Well-being also from their Parents no Obligation can be greater or more obligatory to the foresaid Duties So that were our Filial Obedience founded in Nature as you fondly imagine the Obligation to that Duty would not be half so strong and valid Besides Natural Duties have respect to the whole Species and by this Argument the Bonds and Obligations to Obedience are General and every man that is a Parent may challenge as strict a Duty of Obedience from us as our immediate Parents that begat us and the Reason of this is because Nature is equally concern'd for the whole Species as for an Individium But the Doctrine contrary to this is so plain and evident from the general practice of the World that it needs no proof For though we are by Nature equally allied to all being first in the Loins of Adam afterwards in Noah yet this Relation is never term'd more than Common Humanity And how firm or lasting soever we esteem those Ties and Obligations you mention which is really nothing but Friendship the Second or Third Age commonly expunges them if disobliging Carriage distance of Place or want of Converse effect it not in much less time That Paternal Love and Filial Affection is not founded in Nature seems plain and evident from those different Degrees of Love Men generally bear to the Legitimate and Spurious Issue and that 't is cherished by Converse and made firm and solid by process of Time is more than probable from the affectionate Nurse whose Excess of Love to the tender Babe does often transcend the affectionate Mothers Yet 't is clearly manifest Man has a Natural Appetite or Desire to survive in his Posterity as irrational Creatures have of preserving their Species But this proves nothing against the Argument because the Issue of the latter in riper years are not by Nature obliged to the Duties of Gratitude and Obedience That the Fifth Commandment enjoyns us Obedience to our Superiors is beyond all controversie true and the Reason is because in the beginning of Government Soveraighty was part of the Paternal Power but to speak in our common Language if the Duty of Obedience in a Natural Son to a Natural Father be not a Natural Duty much less can this Argument prove Natural Allegiance due to our Civil Parents Jac. The Parliament Conven'd in the Twenty Fourth Year of King Henry the Eighth's Reign stiles England an Empire govern'd by a Soveraign Head to which there is a Body Politick joyn'd composed of all sorts and degrees of People who are bound next under God to render unto their King Natural Allegiance Will. Natural Allegiance in that Act of Parliament is only a Rhetorical Flourish spoken after the largest acceptation of that Word not that Allegiance flows from Nature but because 't is a Duty so proper intrinsical and Essential to a Subject quâ talis For mens very incorporating themselves into a Civil Society without the Obligation of Formal Oaths doth sufficiently evidence a tacit acknowledgment of Allegiance to the Caput Communitatis because without it 't is impossible to defend and preserve the Body Politick Jac. This Discourse I confess is somewhat Rational but I can't suddenly digest a thing so Novel Will. What you term Novelty proceeds from the vulgar Expressions of Men and want of a more serious and weighty Inspection into the Doctrine And this will appear more Rational if we consult the Specimen of Government in general The great and fundamental Law of Nature is Self-Preservation 't is the Magna Charta of all Constitutions and the very End and Design of Government it self 't is a Principle so deeply radicated in Nature that 't is engraven upon every man's heart Had indeed our First Parents maintain'd the Original Beauty and Brightness of their Creation and preserved Nature in her state of Rectitude Justice had been our Director Innocence our Guide But by that Fall of theirs the Nature of Man was so depraved and vitiated his Passions so transporting his Desire so covetous his Revenge so implacable that Meum and Tuum were measured only by Strength and Power the Longest Sword was the best Law a securer Title than Prescription it self Thus the more powerful preyed upon and devoured the weaker so that Nature destroyed her own works And the best course to countermand those Hostile Proceedings and preserve this grand Principle of Nature was mens moulding themselves into Tribes associating into Colonies Thus when a Company of Men whether many or few it matters not for Majus Minus non variant Speciem are unanimously incorporated into one Society for the securer Maintainance of Peace Correction of Vice Reformation of Manners and the more equal Administration of Justice Laws were enacted Constitutions made and Statutes provided to redress all private Grievances among themselves and to protect the Society from the open Hostility of Publick Invaders And since neither Plaintiff or Defendant was fit to be Judge of his own Plea nor the Mobile Vulgus easily induced to a joynt Method a Unanimous Consent in opposing the Common Enemy a single person if Monarchical Government or several in other Constitutions of such Vertue Prudence and Fortitude as the whole Society thought fit to confide in was elected as an Impartial Arbitrator in all Cases whether private or publick And to him or them was committed the sole Executive Power of these Laws in all Differences the Definitive Sentence was according to Law to be expected from his or their mouth And this Supream Authority being both Judge and Protector of the whole Corporation to advance the Grandeur of such Authority and compleatly to capacitate him or them for the Execution
themselves have neither Relation or Aspect to our present Circumstances they only enjoyn Obedience to all lawful Commands and prohibit Resistance under the greatest punishment when legally imposed which is so far from our late Transactions at which you scruple that they were only acted to preserve our pure and Apostolick Religion and secure our Fundamental Laws and Ancient Government And 't is most palpably ridiculous and very injurious to the Gospel to wrest places of Scripture peculiarly adapted to the Suffering State of Christianity I mean whil'st 't was under Pagan Princes and without National Laws to support it to blacken and condemn the Actions of Christians whose Religion and Liberties are Entail'd to posterity by Established Lawes and whose only Action for which they are blamed is for Rescuing their Religion from Superstition and Idolatry and their Ancient Liberties from the Vassallage and Slavery of Arbitrary Power Jac. But 't is observable when God chastiz'd the wickedness of the Kings of Israel he never did it by their own People but by a strange Nation shewing by the Conduct of his Justice and Providence that Subjects must not correct the Faults of their Kings but leave that to God to whom they are only Answerable for what they do Will. 'T is true that was the general Method God commonly used in that Nation especially with those he had advanced to the Throne by Vertue of an Extraordinary Commission from himself Yet the Histories of that Kingdom yield us particular Examples of the contrary practice Thus the Cruelty Irreligion and wicked Reign of Jeboram caused Libnah to revolt from under his Government 2 Chron. 21. 10. And the Reason of this Revolt was because Jehoram had forsaken the Lord God of his Fathers And the Maccabees when Antiochus Epiphanes their Lawful King had silenced the Jewish Burnt-Offerings and Sacrifices profaned their Sabbaths and polluted their Sanctuary by opposition and violence in a most hostile manner rescued their Worship from Heathen Idolatry and cleansed their Sanctuary from such Pagan Pollutions And the renowned and thinking Grotius allows the Necessity of things to consecrate the Action And the Learned and Ingenious Thorndike in his Right of the Church in a Christian State affirms God approved of this War And Heb. 11. commends their Faith for that Heroick and Vertuous Action Jac. Were I convinced of all we have hitherto discoursed of there is another Knot so intricate and perplexing that I despair ever of satisfaction The Oath of Allegiance is so express and positive so firm and binding an Obligation that nothing can possibly be a firmer Tie to secure my Obedience to James the Second viz. Not to take up Arms against the King upon any pretence whatsoever And to give this Oath of Fidelity to another is not only a Contradiction in it self but a down-right Violation of that former sacred Obligation Will. The Objection I confess before seriously considered is a very plausible plea and of great importance but when compared with the Rules of Right Reason and the Commands of Scripture the Difficulty doth immediately vanish Yet I deny not but such Oaths are of great advantage in a Publick Society by these Princes are secured of their Subjects Allegiance Generals of their Soldiers Fidelity Subjects assertained their Princes will not degenerate into Tyrants Leagues confirm'd between Nations Peace conserv'd among Men Mutual Commerce and Trading secured Liberties and Properties maintained Controversies and Suits decided And among those the Oath of Allegiance challenges a prime place being really and indeed a very sacred Obligation viz. a calling of God to witness the Reality of our Intenâ—ion to keep inviolable that Faith and Obedience we have promised and sworn to our Superiors the breach of which is a most horrid Crime a superlative Perjury very often severely punished in this World and without a sincere and unfeigned Repentance will inevitably ruin us in the next So that whatever we thus promise we are as firmly obliged to perform as the Wit of Man can contrive to bind us But notwithstanding all this the Oath of Allegiance however solemnly administred or however significant or express in it self adds nothing to the Duty of Obedience incumbent upon us as Subjects without and antecedent to the formal Administration of it it may indeed corroborate and confirm the Obligation by adding Perjury to our Disobedience but it cannot encrease or augment the Duty And the very End and Design of the Oath attests the same for though the Oath do particularly name the Supream Magistrate because he is Head of the whole Society as if 't were design'd only for his Protection and Safety yet we may rationally infer That the Parliament being conven'd for the good of the Publick who invented this Oath took it themselves and imposed it upon others had in this Oath a more General and Notable Intention of a more Excellent and Transcendent Nature viz. to promote the Safety Honour and Happiness of the whole Society This is evident from the Ridiculousness and Injustice of that acceptation for if the Oath of Allegiance be obligatory only in the former sense viz. have respect only to the Protection and Safety of the King's Person without having any Relation to the Peace and Welfare of the Publick By this Obligation our Representatives in Parliament put both themselves and us into the hands of the Supream Power to destroy us at his pleasure binding us by the most solemn Obligations imaginable even the Sacred Ties of the Oath of Allegiance quietly to submit to the Invasions of our Liberties and Properties Confiscation of our Goods Sequestration of our Estates Prophanation of our Holy and Apostolick Religion by Superstitious and Idolatrous Practices and to all other barbarous Outrages that the Pride and Ambition of Man or the Malice and Cruelty of Implacable Enemies could invent which is a Soloecism of so grand a Consequence as we may well think impossible for so Learned Judicious and August a Senate to impose upon themselves Especially if we consider that the Oath of Allegiance taken only in the former Intention confounds and destroys all other Constitutions of Parliament is opposite and destructive to the Fundamental Laws of Nature viz. Self-Preservation and plainly repugnant to the Divine Rules and Precepts which to any Rational Man methinks should be a sufficient Argument to engage him to understand it in the Second and more Excellent Sense since 't is granted by all Men of Reason and Learning That Oaths are only obligatory in the Sense of those Persons who invent and impose them if their Intention may clearly and rationally appear from the words as expressed in the Oath Now the Oath of Allegiance in different Circumstances being capable of a double Construction and both apparently agreeable to the Intention and Design of the Composers I will a little illustrate the Reasonableness of this twofold signification The Royal Authority being the Head of the Body Politick the Life of
A DIALOGUE BETWEEN TWO FRIENDS LICENSED James Fraser April 22 1689. A DIALOGUE BETWEEN Two Friends Occasioned by the late REVOLUTION OF AFFAIRS And the OATH OF ALLEGIANCE By W. K. A. M. Rom. 14. 22. Happy is he that condemneth not himself in what he alloweth LONDON Printed for Ric. Chiswell at the Rose and Crown in in St. Paul's Church-yard MDCLXXXIX A DIALOGUE BETWEEN TWO FRIENDS A JACOBITE and a WILLIAMITE Jac. MEthinks we live in an Age of Wonders Affrica like every day producing aliquid novi But few Months since Suspension Degradation Imprisonment was too little punishment for refusal to read the King's as 't was stil'd Gracious Declaration for Liberty of Conscience And now I am as much Disaffected to the Protestant Cause for making some Objections against the Oath of Allegiance Will. 'T is true the wonderful Revolution of a few days is so unfathomably Stupendious that an ordinary Capacity may easily be induc'd to believe that Miracles are not yet ceased Such signal Methods compassing such an unthought of Rescue loudly declare they are more than common And your obstinate refusal of a Deliverance written in such legible Characters your voluntary depriving your self of a share in so great and unparallel'd a Blessing is a second wonder to me incomprehensible Jac. 'T is not I protest from an affected singularity or a too high conceitedness of my own Opinion that like Athanasius I oppose the whole World by my self The only reason is that I may keep a Conscience void of offence both toward God and Man. I acknowledge the Prince of Orange has been the great Instrument of our Deliverance from Popery and Arbitrary Power and more highly deserves of the Nation than can be expressed yet I cannot forget those Tyes and Obligations that fix and river our Allegiance to our Dread Sovereign James the Second Will. What are these strong and binding Obligations Jac. In number ten thousand in nature superlatively Obligatory Will. Descend to Particulars and nominate one Jac. The Dictates of Nature bind me to Natural Allegiance being by Birth a Natural Subject to the King of Great Britain my Duty is to pay Homage and Obedience either Active or Passive to all his Commands Will. I readily grant that as you are a Subject to the King of Great Britain his Majesty hath an undoubted Right to challenge your Obedience but the Ground and Reason of this Right does not proceed as an Emanation from Nature as I shall immediately evince when I have gotten a right sence of your Notion of Passive Obedience Jac. By Passive Obedience I understand a submissive and patient suffering the Punishment due to the obstinate refusal of Actively obeying those Commands and Injunctions of my Superiors that are either inconsistent with or opposite to the Laws and Precepts of the Divine Creator Will. Patience under Punishment when Legally inflicted upon us and there is no lawful way to escape it is a Christian Duty as is clear and obvious both from the Doctrine and Example of our Saviour who despised the shame and endured the Cross. But if Passive Obedience as you interpret it be Sence Logicians are much mistaken in affirming ten Predicaments since in your account Actio and Passio are one Obedience in all Histories whether Sacred or Prophane has no relation to suffering but always signifies the doing things commanded Thus Exod. 15. 26. If thou wilt hearkâ—n to the voice of the Lord and do that is right in his sight Exod. 24. 7. After Moses had read the Book of the Law the People promised their Obedience to do all that was there injoyned them And 1 Sam. 28. 19. King Saul for not doing the Command of the Lord was stigmatized with the infamus Character of Disobedience notwithstanding his suffering the punishment of his Transgression Acts 5. 29. the Apostles affirm they ought to obey that is Do the Will of God rather than Man. And all those Express and Positive Commands for Wives Children and Servants to obey their Husbands Parents and Masters only import 't is their Duty to please them well by doing those things enjoin'd by them In opposition to this Passive naturally implies suffering the Penalty for not doing so that should we allow such a contradiction in Speech as Passive Obedience 't would naturally follow that those who have suffered the punishment of the Law are justified by the Law for if Suffering render Men obedient the Penalty being endured they are cleansed from their Guilt and become Immaculate And by virtue of this Argument Rebels Thieves Murtherers or the worst of Villians are after they have receiv'd the Reward of their Transgressions as honest Men as good Neighbours and as Loyal Subjects as your self I know 't is objected that Rebels Thieves c. are actual Transgressors of the Laws both Humane and Divine and so fall as Criminals but the others suffer because they refuse to violate or transgress those Laws But to this 't is replyed that according to your own Position they are Criminals alike for the Doctrine of Passive Obedience especially as by you defined doth sufficiently evidence notwithstanding what you talk of Laws that the Will of the Supreme Magistrate is the chiefest Rule we are to walk by for whatever Command brings with it Authority to require Obedience that very Authority doth plainly impress upon it the Character of a Law. Now Criminals upon the account of Omission are equally guilty with those that have render'd themselves so by Sins of Commission it being equally the same as to matter of Crime not to do those things Commanded and to act or do those things Prohibited So that by parity of Reason if the one be justified so will the other for facinus quos inquinat aequat Jac. I had no design to enter into a Controversie about Passive Obedience I asserted that Nature enjoined me to pay Allegiance to the Supreme Magistrate and my Reason was because I was by Birth a Natural Subject Will. That Nature obliges you to Obedience is a great Mistake for the constitutes no Subordination among Men as we are produced by her we are all Equals she ordains neither King or Peasant Lord or Slave Her Actions are only internal such as respect not those outward Adjuncts or external Qualifications The Laws she designs for our Guide are her own Precepts viz. those Innate Notions of Good and Evil those Common Sentiments of Vertue and Vice that are proper to all men as they are Rational Creatures The Governour she appoints over us is every man 's own Reason the Judge our particular Consciences 'T is indeed by the Force or Energy of Nature we are made Men but we are born free This is evident from that absolute Authority every particular Man hath over himself viz. an independent Power in disposing of his own person Thus by Compact or Bargain any Man I speak of Subjects may become a Covenant-Servant an Apprentice or a Slave without Nature's being concern'd in the Contract For
is neither my design nor pertinent to the business in hand to begin a Discourse of the difference between Vows and Oaths Suppose the Oath were made to God which in propriety of Speech is a Vow how does that weaken or invalidate the force of the Argument It matters not whether it be a Vow to God or an Oath to Man so long as the matter of it is so express and declarative of the King's Duty and the Peoples Rights and Priviledges Jac. The taking the Coronation Oath was the Conquerors Condescention a compliance with the Customs usual at the Inauguration of former Kings and has no tendency to a Compact or Bargain with the People Will. You may stile it what you please but 't was such a Condescention or Compliance without which unless he had first won it by an absolute Conquest he had never possessed the Crown of England And the Ancient Rites of the Coronation it self had some footsteps of this Contract viz. The Presenting the King on the day of his Coronation to the People upon every corner of the Scaffold and asking them if they would have him for their King I do not suppose the People had power to refuse or reject the Person thus exhibited that would have render'd the Kingdom Elective but the Custom being an ancient Ceremony and commonly used till Edward the Sixth's Coronation is in my Judgment a more than plausible Argument of a Contract between the Supreme Power and the Subjects Jac. How can that be the King of England is Invested with all the Rights and Prerogatives of Royalty before he is Crown'd Will. Right The King is before his Coronation as absolute a Monarch as after This the Case of Watson and Clark who Conspir'd against King James before his Coronation and were condemn'd of High Treason puts beyond all Controversie and the Reason of this is clear the Paction and Agreement between King and People is an inseperable Concomitant to the Crown devolves with it to the next Successor and is the tacite Condition and Terms upon which he accepts the Government So that 't is no more necessary or expedient for every Heir as to the Esse of his being King to Declare the Conditions immediately upon his coming to the Crown than 't was requisite for every successive Generation when the Court of Wards was in force to declare he held his Lands by Knights Service the ancient Tenure of the Estate sufficiently evinc'd the former and the very Descent of the Crown to the next of Blood brings with it a tacite implication of all the Immunities and Liberties of the Subjects in as full and ample a manner as if they had been repeated a thousand times over Jac. The Court of Wards is as signal a Badge of a Conquest as undoubted a Character of Vassalage and Slavery as any we can possibly instance in Will. The Court of Wards has so little relation to Slavery that the Law terms it only a Service and all Servants are not Slaves though all Slaves may be called Servants in the most strict sense 't is only a Token of Subjection and comparatively an Ensign of Freedom a lasting Monument of Stipulation and Agreement between the Royal Authority and the People When at such an easie rate as attending the Wars in extraordinary and emergent Occasions a Man has an intire Propriety in so large an Estate so ample an Inheritance And the very Antiquity of these Courts doth sufficiently evidence the nulity of a Conquest These being in force in the Reign of King Alfred and surviv'd your Conquest many Generations Jac. A Paction between the King and the People is a strange Assertion and to say that the People can make a King is very little less than a contradiction Will. Pray explain your self and shew for what Reasons Jac. Because the Royal Authority has a power lodged in it which the Subjects have neither Right or Pretence to confer For Example The power of Life and Death are in the hand of the Supreme Magistrate which 't is impossible he could receive from the People because no Man has power of his own Life much less has he Right or Authority to put it into another Mans disposal Will. Here we must distinguish between Absolute and Conditional No Man has an absolute Power over his own Life so as to lay violent hands upon himself or oblige another to shed his Blood yet every Man hath hath a conditional Power upon this account that is he is capable as he is a Member of the Body Politick to Covenant and agree with the Head and the other Members that conditionally he violate those Laws the Transgression of which the whole Society have by Statute Law Ordain'd to be punished with Death he will submit to the Punishment So that the King has not an Absolute Power of Life and Death the latter is only a Penalty conditionally we break such Established Laws And this Power is rather in the Laws than the Supreme Magistrate for the King himself without manifest Violence and Injustice has no power to put any Man to death contrary to Law or upon a particular Humor Jac. Suppose we grant somewhat of Agreement or Paction between the Conqueror and the English Nobility what Advantage is that to us Did the People indeed and in reality Elect the King as their Governour when once the Act was done and Allegiance sworn the People have no more Reason or Pretence to revoke or annul that Election than a Wife who has chosen a Husband promised him her Obedience join'd her self to him in Marriage has to put away her Husband and to say that the People may Depose their King if there be a Bargain or Contract between them is to affirm the Wife may Divorce the Husband because she chose him Will. If all this be granted you here contend for I cannot imagine how it would weaken or prejudice our present Cause The Wife after Marriage may not put away her Husband that lives with her as an Husband Nay though a very ill Husband turn Nonthirft spend his Estate abuse her Person prove unnatural to her Children notwithstanding all this she is obliged to an entire Obedience But if her Husband prove Tyrannically cruel so far prosecute the wicked Counsels and Designs of her Enemies as to give signal and evident Demonstrations that he intends her Ruine Destruction and Death If he be in himself insufficient as in the Case of the Countess of Essex by her Husband Devereux the Laws allow relief to such a Distressed Wife And can we suppose there is greater care taken for a particular Member than for the whole Body In short though the Wife cannot put away the Husband because she chose him yet the Cruelties Injustice Violence and Irregularities of the Husband may be such as may give just cause of Divorcement Jac. But were it not Grand Impiety by violence to seize upon the Estate or Goods of a private Man and dispose of it to others
commonly the first men make they oblige themselves by that Covenant made with God to perform all Christian Duties which respect either God their Neighbours or themselves and especially to the Works of Piety Justice and Charity Now After-Obligations can never bind such to opposite Duties Obligatio prior praejudicat posteriori as in case of Marriage A Pre-contract with one Party voideth After contracts with any other And if a man convey Lands to several Persons by Deeds of several Dates the first Conveyance stands in force and all the rest are void Thus the Oath of Allegiance though design'd and taken in your sense becomes void and inobligatory because it finds men formerly engaged to contrary Duties FINIS Books lately Printed for Richard Chiswell Dr. PATRICK's Sermon before the Prince of Orange 20 Jan 1688. Sermon before the Queen at Whitehall March. 1. 1688. Sermon at St. Paul's Covent Garden on the first Sunday in Lent being a Second part of a Sermon preached before the Prince of Orange A Letter written by the Emperor to the late King James setting forth the True Occasion of his Fall and the Treachery and Cruelty of the French. King William or King Lewis wherein is set forth the inevitable necessity these Nations lie under of submitting wholly to One or Other of these Kings and the matter in Controversie is not now between K. William and K. James but between K. William and K. Lewis of France for the Government of these Nations Books lately Published A Letter written by a Clergy man to his Neighbour concerning the present Circumstances of the Kingdom and the Allegiance that is due to the King and Queen 4 o. The Case of Allegiance in our present Circumstances considered in a Letter from a Minister in the City to a Minister in the Country 4 o. A Sermon preached at Fulham in the Chappel of the Palace upon Easter-day 1689. at the Consecration of the Right Reverend Father in God Gilbert Lord Bishop of Sarum By Anthony Horneck D. D. 4 o. The Judgments of God upon the Roman Catholick Church from its first Rigid Laws for Universal Conformity to it unto its last End. With a Prospect of these near approaching Revolutions viz. The Revival of the Protestant Profession in an Eminent Kingdom where it was totally suppressed The last End of all Turkish Hostilities The general Mortification of the Power of the Roman Church in all Parts of its Dominions By Drue Cressâ—ner D. D. A Breviate of the State of Scotland in its Government Supreme Courts Officers of State Inferiour Officers Offices and Inferiour Courts Districts Jurisdictions Burroughs Royal and Free Corporations Fol. An Account of the Proceedings of the Convention of the Estates of Scotland from their first sitting down to this time which will be continued Weekly An Account of the Reasons which induced Charles II. King of England to declare War against the States General of the United Provinces in 1672. and of the Private League which he entred into at the same time with the French King to carry it on and to establish Popery in England Scotland and Ireland as they are set down in the History of the Dutch War printed in French at Paris with the privilege of the French King in 1682. Which Book He caused to be immediately suppressed at the Instance of the English Embassador Fol. A Discourse concerning the Worship of Images Preached before the University of Oxford the 24th of May 1686. By George Tallie Sub-Dean of York For which he was suspended 4 o. Some Considerations touching Succession and Allegiance 4 o. Reflections upon the late Great Revolution Written by a Lay hand in the Country for the satisfaction of some Neighbours 4 o. The History of the Desertion or an Account of all the Publick Affairs in England from the beginning of September 1688. to the Twelfth of February following With an Answer to a Piece called The Desertion discussed in a Letter to a Country Gentleman By a Person of Quality 4 o. Scriptorum Ecclesiasticorum Historia Literaria a Christo nato usque ad Saculum XIV Facili Methodo digesta Qua de Vita illorum ac Rebus gestis de Secta Dogmatibus Elegio Stylo de Scriptis genuinis dubiis supposititiis ineditis deperditis Fragmentis deque variis Operum Editionibus perspicue agitur Accedunt Scriptores Gentiles Christianae Religionis Oppugnatores cujusvis Saeculi Breviarium Inseruntur suis locis Veterum aliquot Opuscula Fragmenta tum Gracd tum Latina hactenus inedita Pramissa denique Prolegomena quibus plurima ad Antiquitatis Ecclesiasticae studium spectantia traduntur Opus Indicibus necessariis instructum Autore GVILIELMO CAVE SS Theol. Profes Canonico Windesoriensi Accedit ab Alia Manu Appendix ab ineunte Saculo XIV ad Annum usque MDXVII Fol. 1689. Dr BVRNET now Bishop of Salisbury his Life of Dr. William Bedell Bishop of Kilmore in Ireland to which are annexed the Letters betwixt him and Wadsworth abouâ— Religion Two Letters written upon the Discovery of the Popish Plot together with a Collection of several other Tracts and Discourses Written by him betwixt the years 1678. and 1685. To which is added a Letter written to Dr. Bâ—rnet giving an account of Cardinal Pool's Secret Powers The History of the Powder-Treason with a Vindication of the Proceedings thereupon An Impartial Consideration of the five Jesuits dying Speeches who were Executed for the Popish Plot 1679. A Vindication of the Ordinations of the Church of England In which is demonstrated That all the Essentials of Ordination according to the Practice of the Primitive and Greek Churches are still retained in the Church Reflections on the Relation of the English Reformation lately printed at Oxford In two Parts 4to Animadversions on the Reflections upon Dr BVRNET's Travels 8vo Reflections on a Paper intituled His Majesty's Reasons for withdrawing himself from Rochester Enquiry into the present State of Affairs and in particular Whether we owe Allegiance to the King in these Circumstances And whether we are bound to Treat with him and call him back or no Sermon preached before the Prince of Orange 23d Decemb. 1688. Thanksgiving Sermon before the House of Commons 31. Jan. 1688. Eighteen Papers relating to the Affairs of Church and State during the Reign of King James II. Seventeen whereof were written in Holland and first printed there the other at Exeter soon after the Prince of Orange's Landing in England Letter to Mr. Thevenot containing a Censure of Mr. Le Grand's History of King Henry the Eighths Divorce To which is added A Censure of Mr. De Meaux's History of the Variations of the Protestant Churches Together with some Reflections on Mr. Le Grand 1689. h Regale Servitium quia specialiter pertinet ad Dominum Regem Britton sol 187. * Quod initio vitiosum est non potest tractu temporis convalescere * Contra Constantum Augustum †De Regibus Apostaticis * Lib. 1. de jure Belli cap. 4. †Pag. 306. †Iurare nihil est aliud quam Deum testem invocare Assumere Deum in testem dicitur jurare