believe them to have as good a Title to the Crown of England as any of their Royal Ancestors ever had so I hope they are so firmly settled in the Throne that all the Powers on Earth will not be able to remove them But I think Dr. Sherlock does by his Principles undermine their Throne for though he invests them with God's Authority because they have the Sovereign Power are able to crush whom they please and are settled in the Throne yet he will not own them to have a legal Right to sit thereon whereas it is most certain that there is nothing can secure to a Prince his Sovereign Power but that which sets bounds to it the Law SECT IV. Wherein is shew'd how little value we ought to have for the Acts and Canons of the Convocation begun in the first Year of King James I. 1603. FOR to the Authority of the Convocation begun in the first Year of King James I I may oppose the Authority of several Convocations in the Reign of Queen Elizabeth wherein the Bishops and Clergy were of a contrary Opinion I shall instance in two only the one in the 35th and the other in the 39th Year of that Queen's Reign 1. In the 35th of Q. Elizabeth the Clergy were of Opinion that an Usurper though settled in the Throne had not God's Authority and no Allegiance was due to him as appears plainly from their granting the Queen two Subsidies of four Shillings in the Pound to assist the Dutch in shaking off their Obedience to their once Sovereign the King of Spain 35 Eliz. c. 12. The Prelates and Clergy of the Province of Canterbury have for certain Considerations lovingly and liberally given and granted to the Queen 's most excellent Majesty two Subsidies of Four Shillings in the Pound What were those Considerations Amongst others this was one The consideration of her Majesty's great Charges in the provident and needful prevention of such intended Attempts as manifestly tended to the utter overthrow of the present happy state of her Highness's Realm to the miserable ruin of divers other Princes and Countries associate and near adjoining and to the extirpation and rooting out of the sincere profession of the Gospel both here and elsewhere The Temporalities Subsidy-Act explains this to us in these Reasons for their Tax Cap. 13. Besides the great and perpetual Honour which it has pleased God to give your Majesty abroad in making You the principal Support of all just and religious Causes against Vsurpers So that this Island has in your Majesty's Days been as a Stay and Sanctuary to distressed States and Kingdoms and as a Bulwark against the Tyranny of mighty and usurping Potentates Besides the great Succours in France and Flanders which we do conceive to be most Honourable in regard of the Ancient Leagues the Justice and Equity of their Causes c. These were the chief Reasons that moved the Clergy to give four Shillings in the Pound to the Queen This was read a third time Mar. 30.1593 in the Lords House these following Bishops being present and no Dissentientes among them as appears from the Journals of the Lords House Cantuariensis Londinensis Godwin de Praesulibus Asaphensis Roffensis Exoniensis Cicestrensis Licolniensis Petroburgensis Herefordensis Bangorensis Wigorniensis Landavensis Sarisburiensis Bathonens Wellensis Johames Whitgift Johan Elmer Gulielmus Hughes Johannes Young Johannes Woolton Thomas Bickley Gulielmus Wickham Richardus Howland Herbert Westfaling Hugo Bellott Richardus Fletcher Gervasius Babington Richardus Coldwell Johannes Still Now I think it is plain from hence that the Bishops and Clergy in the 35th of Queen Elizabeth did believe that an Usurper though he be settled in the Throne has not God's Authority and that those who are oppress'd by him may lawfully resist him and free themselves from his Yoke for had they been of Opinion that it was a Sin in the Dutch to resist Philip the 2d King of Spain as having God's Authority would they not have directed her Majesty's Conscience better in this Matter would they not have humbly represented to her Highness that though Philip the 2d was an Usurper yet he had God's Authority and therefore neither ought his Subjects to resist him nor she to assist them in making resistance Would they not have given her Sacred Majesty good Advice rather than Mony Would they not have admonished the Dutch to lay down their Arms and fly to their Prayers and Tears Who can think they would have been so uncharitable to their Protestant Neighbours as to set forward their Damnation or so foolish as to buy their own at the rate of Four Shillings in the Pound Such Actions as these do plainly shew what Opinion Arch-Bishop Whitgift Bishop Elmer and the rest of Queen Elizabeth's Bishops and Clergy had concerning this Matter and that as plainly as the Acts and Canons of a Convocation It may here be very proper to consider that the King of Spain had once a Legal Right to govern the Dutch who were his Subjects and ow'd him Allegiance but the Prelats and Clergy of the Church of England did verily believe he had forfeited and lost it by usurping upon them for it seems they were of Opinion that a Prince might usurp upon his Subjects as well as Subjects upon their Prince and this I believe was our Case King James the 2d having been that to us which Philip the 2d was to the Dutch That which I gather from hence is this That Queen Elizabeth's Bishops either did not think that an Usurper was invested with God's Authority or if they did they believed it lawful in some Cases to resist a Prince though invested with God's Authority Now let Dr. Sherlock chuse which of the two he will grant me for I think it cannot be avoided but one of the two must be allow'd 2. In the 39th of Elizabeth Chap. 26. The Clergy think themselves bound c to offer unto her Highness as a Testimony and Token of their good Wills and dutiful Affections some such Aid and Contribution towards the supportation of her Majesties Charges as they are perswaded the greatness of the same most justly may require And the Temporalities Subsidy-Act 39 Eliz. c. 27. has these words This Land is become since your Majesti's happy Days both a Port and a Haven of Refuge for distressed States and Kingdoms and a Rock and Bulwark of Opposition against the Tyrannies and ambitious Attempts of mighty and usurping Potentates This pass'd the House of Lords Dec. 19. 1596 fourteen Bishops being present and agreeing to it one of which was Arch-Bishop Whitgift c. The conclusion from hence is easy that in the 39th of Queen Elizabeth's reign the Prelates and Clergy own'd not this Doctrine that Vsurpers when settled in the Throne are invested with God's Authority and must be obey'd by all those who live within their Territories and Dominions as well Priests as People Besides it ought to be consider'd that the
not give some Authority and yet we find that he in the course of his Providence does intrust less than Sovereign Power in the hands of those to whom he gives no Authority As the Power that every Oppressor has is from God but God surely gives him no Authority to oppress IV. But let us suppose now that whoever has Sovereign Power has also Sovereign Authority and must not be resisted and then I will prove that the Sovereign Authority is always in the People for bare Sovereign Power is only Sovereign Force and Sovereign Force is the greatest natural Strength and surely the greatest strength is in the People if the Doctor will allow me that five or six Millions of Men have more strength than one single Man who is seated on the Throne Nay according to this Principle Sovereign Authority can never be any where else but in the People because the People cannot part with their strength nor confer it on the Supream Magistrate it is so their own that they cannot give it away But you 'l say they may promise that they will not use their natural strength otherwise than the Supream Magistrate or than the Law shall direct True but though they promise that they will not use their natural strength otherwise than the Law directs yet still they retain it nor are they upon their making of such a Promise weaker than they were before there being not the least abatement of their natural strength So that if they had Sovereign Power before they made such a Promise it follows that they have it still And therefore if as he says Power be a certain sign to us that where God has plac'd the Power he has given the Authority It is infallibly true that the Authority is in the People and can be no where else because there God has plac'd the Power Hence I observe 1. That the Doctor is really no Friend to crowned Heads for he has unking'd them all he has taken away from them their Sovereign Authority and given it to the People Now suppose that an oppressed People should be sensible that they have the superior Strength and should be so cunning as from thence to conclude with the Doctor that they have God's Authority to deliver themselves from the Yoke of the Oppressor I think according to his Principles he ought to allow they have Authority to free themselves from Oppression because they have Power Supream Power or strength lodg'd in them and God never intrusts Sovereign Power in any Man's or Mens hands to whom he does not give Sovereign Authority Besides it may be consider'd that though when they see an Usurper on the Throne they should with the Doctor conclude it to be God's Will that he should reign for some time longer or shorter as God pleases Yet they are taught by the Doctor That this does not prove it to be God's Will it should be always so And therefore when they find they have strength to resist the Tyrant and can agree together to make use of it they will presently conclude that it is not God's Will that they should be Slaves one Week or Day longer And thus the Doctor 's Tyrant is on a sudden tumbled down from his Royal Throne by that very Argument that he made use of to set him up 2. That the Doctor is fallen out with the University of Oxford who condemn'd this Principle That all Civil Authority is deriv'd originally from the People and if the Fires be still continued there his Book will be in some danger Nay he is all on a sudden fallen out with himself and from being a mighty Assertor of the Prerogatives and Rights of Kings is become a Republican And who can doubt but for the future Lex Rex Vindiciae contra Tyrannos Milton's Defensio populi Anglicani and such-like Books will be in great esteem with him But this is only a slip of the Doctor he still means well to Kings especially if they be such as he sets up Now England behold the King that Doctor Sherlock gives thee he is an absolute Lord and some will call him Tyrant For V. He that is a Sovereign Prince and has God's Authority but no Legal Right is an absolute and unlimited Monarch and consequently such a King as England never yet own'd for it is Law that sets bounds to Regal Power and therefore he that is our King but not by Law is an absolute and unlimited Monarch And I am sure whatever Notions some Men who understand little of our Laws have concerning the boundless Power and uncontroulable Authority of Kings yet the Laws do really bound the Regal Power this the Lawyers teach us This is the Doctrine of Westminster-Hall And I think in a matter of this nature it is more reasonable to take the Judgment of Lawyers than of Divines VI. He that has God's Authority without any Legal Right cannot be limited by Laws For God's Authority cannot be limited by Men and therefore if it be true that he who has no legal Right to govern has God's Authority when he is settled in the Throne then it follows that he has an Authority that cannot be bounded by humane Laws For a Power that God gives none can set bounds to besides God and if he has made no limitations of the Regal Power as 't is plain he has not just as plain as it is that he has said nothing about it then no limitations can be made such a King cannot yield that any limits should be set to God's Authority which he is invested with unless he should have a new Authority from Heaven impowring him to do so And the People cannot set bounds to it neither with nor without his Consent not without the King's Consent for that would be rebelling against God's Vicegerent and trampling on Divine Authority that would be no less than a robbing of God a stealing of God's Authority and the worst of Sacriledges nor can they set bounds to his Power with his Consent for if he cannot part with any of his Power they cannot take it for that would be like receiving of stollen Goods Besides it may be considered that surely God gives a Prince no more of his Authority than is fit and necessary to serve the Ends of Government and therefore he cannot part with any of it or if he should he would not have enough left him to serve the Ends of Government at least he could not be sure that he should have enough unless he were also sure of this that God at first gave him more than enough which he cannot be certain of He may indeed know that he has more than he needs for his present Occasions but he does not know how soon the Scene of Affairs may change and then all God's Authority even the whole Imperial Law may be little enough for him I have as much Zeal and dutiful Affection for their Sacred Majesties King William and Queen Mary as any of my fellow-Subjects and as I
Acts and Canons of this Convocation wherein Dr. Overall was Prolocutor were never ratified in Parliament But you will say They however give us the Judgment of the then Church of England To this I answer 1. That here is Church against Church and Convocation against Convocation nay two Convocations and I might have said four in Queen Elizabeth's Reign against one in the Reign of her immediate Successor K. James Now methinks the Authority of two or more Convocations in Queen Elizabeth's Reign should outweigh the Authority of one single Convocation in the reign of King James unless it can be made out that the Church grows wiser and better every Age and every Year than other which I make some doubt of 2. That in the Reign of Queen Elizabeth the Head of the Church agreed with the Members for both the Queen and her Convocations were of Opinion that 't was lawful for the Hollanders to shake off their Obedience to their once Sovereign King Philip but in the following reign of King James the Head of the Church and the Members differ'd about this Point and the King was on the Hollander's side as appears from a Letter which that King wrote to Dr. Abbot Part of which I have thought fit to transcribe Good Dr. Abbot I Cannot abstain to give you my Judgment of your Proceedings in your Convocation New Obs Vol. 3. Numb 22. as you call it You know all of you as I think that my Reason of calling you together was to give your Judgments how far a Christian and a Protestant King may concur to assist his Neighbours to shake off their Obedience to their once Sovereign upon the Account of Oppression Tyranny or what else you like to name it In the late Queen 's time this Kingdom was very free in assisting the Hollanders both with Arms and Advice And none of your Coat ever told me that any scrupled about it in her Reign Upon my coming to England you may know that it came from some of your selves to raise Scruples about this Matter Yet I never took any notice of these Scruples till the Affairs of Spain and Holland forc'd me to it All my Neighbours call on me to concur in the Treaty between Holland and Spain and the Honour of the Nation will not suffer the Hollanders to be abandoned especially after so much Money and Men spent in their Quarrel Therefore I was of the Mind to call my Clergy together to satisfy not so much me as the World about us of the Justness of my owning the Hollanders at this time This I needed not have done and you have forced me to say I wish I had not You have dipp'd too deep in what all Kings reserve among the Arcana Imperii And whatever Aversion you may profess against God's being the Author of Sin you have stumbled upon the Threshold of that Opinion in saying upon the Matter that even Tyranny is God's Authority and should be reverenc'd as such If the King of Spain should return to claim his old Pontifical Right to my Kingdom you leave me to seek for others to fight for it For you tell us upon the Matter beforehand his Authority is God's Authority if he prevail Mr. Doctor I have no time to express my Mind farther in this thorny business I shall give you my Orders about it by Mr. Solicitor and until then meddle no more in it for they are Edge-Tools or rather like that Weapon that 's said to cut with the one edge and cure with the other I commit you to God's Protection good Doctor Abbot and rest Your good Friend James R. And this I think lessens the Authority of Dr. Overall's Convocation very much that it is the Authority of a Church without a Head for it is plain that the Head of the Church is on my side And I lay some weight on this that King James who was a Sovereign Prince and as fond of Power as any other plainly told Dr. Abbot that he scrupled not about the Lawfulness of what the Hollanders did in shaking off their Obedience to their once Sovereign the King of Spain upon the account of his Oppression and Tyranny Hence we may gather that were K. James I. to judg between the late King his Grand-Son and the People of England he would surely give Judgment on the Peoples side for he cannot condemn the People of England without condemning the Dutch And his Judgment in this Case I think we ought to value more than the Opinions of an hundred Doctors that differ from him But 't is time now to draw to a conclusion The Cause I am engaged in is God's Cause and the King 's and Queen's Cause and the Peoples Cause it is God's Cause whom Dr. Sherlock seems by his Principles to make the Author of Sin for whatever aversion he may profess against God's being the Author of Sin he has stumbled upon the threshold of that Opinion in saying upon the Matter that even Tyranny is God's Authority and should be reverenc'd as such And it is the King 's and Queen's Cause whom the Doctor supposes to be Usurpers though I do not say he has call'd them so I know no necessity there was for his writing on this Argument and much less for his reasoning on the supposition of unjust Usurpations for here was no such thing as Usurpation unless to defend our Civil Rights and Liberties and Religion establish'd by Law must be call'd Usurpation and unless he will call an excellent Prince who came to deliver us from Popery and Slavery an Usurper And though it may be allowable to put the Case Preface as he says at the worst yet methinks he ought not to have left it at the worst he should not have let his Reader run away with this Opinion that King William and Queen Mary have not a Legal Title to the Crown And though he forbids his Reader to charge him with reflecting on the present Government yet there is no intelligent Reader but must take his whole Book to be a Reflection upon it and will conclude from his not declaring King William and Queen Mary to have a Legal Right to the Crown that he does not believe it For a wise Man I think would have declar'd it had he believ'd it and Dr. Sherlock never gave any just occasion to the World to mark him out for a Fool. And it is the Peoples Cause I mean it is the Cause of all those that are the King 's and Queen's Loyal Subjects for since he says That all Sovereign Princes who are settled in their Thrones are plac'd there by God and invested with his Authority and therefore must be obey'd even though they turn Usurpers and oppress their Subjects and destroy the Fundamental Constitutions of the Government it is plain that he charges all those who assisted his Highness the Prince of Orange and were the subordinate Instruments of our Deliverance with down-right Rebellion against the late King And these were the Reasons that mov'd me to engage my self in this Controversy Whether I have detected the Doctor 's Errors and defended the Truth as I ought I leave the Reader to judg God be thanked we have a Prince who wants not courage to defend his Legal Right with his Sword and I believe he will never want Writer's to justify it with their Pens and to prove that neither was he an Usurper not were they that assisted him Rebels FINIS