And the Subjects are not only warranted but required to enter into Associations and Oaths for that Effect This is an Evidence that by the Ancient Constitution of England there was no such irresistible Authority in our Kings as some have been inclin'd to imagine But after all if there be any who are so possest with their preconceited Opinions that they either cannot lay them down or will not confess that they have been mistaken in their Notions of Politicks these ought to be very sure that they are in the Right before they will adventure as far as in them lies to undermine and shake the present Constitution To conclude I hope you will examine this whole Matter with the Care and Attention that it deserves that you will weigh the Reasons of both Sides without partiality that you will Fast and Pray in order to the preparing your Minds for the finding out of the Truth and that you will hearken to all that can be said of both hands being neither byassed to the Affirmative by your present Interests nor inclined to the Negative as to the received Opinion neither affecting Singularity nor throwing your selves into the Croud but that you will seek to hear Reason and examine what is most agreeable to the Scriptures and be determined by it This is the daily and most earnest Prayer of Reverend and dear Brethren Your most Affectionate Brother and most Humble Servant GIL SARUM May the 15th Books Printed for John Starkey AN Historical and Political Discourse of the Laws and Government of England from the first times to the end of the Reign of Queen Elizabeth with a Vindication of the Ancient way of Parliaments in England Collected from some Manuscript Notes of John Selden Esq by Nathaniel Bacon of Grays-Inn Esq in Folio Price bound 12 s. For Printing this Book John Starkey was Outlaw'd in the year 1682 which is now by him New Published The Journals of all the Parliaments during the Reign of Queen Elizabeth both of the House of Lords and House of Commons Collected by Sir Simmonds D'Ewes of Suffolk Knight and Baronet Revised and Published by Paul Bowes of the Middle-Temple Esq in Folio price bound 20 s. A New Systeme of the Apocalypse or Plain and Methodical Illustrations of all the Visions in the Revelations of St. John Written by a French Minister in the year 1685 and finisht but two days before the Dragoons plunder'd him of all except this Treatise to which is added this Authors Defence of his Illustrations concerning the Non-Effusion of the Vial in answer to Mr. Jurieu faithfully Englished In 120. Price bound 2 s. 6 d. Books Lately Printed for Richard Chiswell DR BURNET'S History of the Reformation of the Church of England in 2 Volumes in Folio His Abridgment of the said History of the Reformation History of the Rights of Princes in disposing of Ecclesiastical Benefices and Church Lands 12o. Life of Dr. William Bedell Bishop of Kilmore in Ireland to which are Annexed the Letters betwixt Him and Wadsworth about Religion His 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. to 1685. To which is added a Letter written to Dr. Burnet giving an Account of Cardinal Pools Secret Powers The History of the Powder Treason with a Vindication of the Proceedings thereupon An Impartial Consideration of the Five Jesuites dying Speeches who were Executed for the Popish Plot 1679. His Account of the Life and Death of the Earl of Rochester 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 Reflexions on the Relation of the English Reformation lately printed at Oxford In two Parts 410. Animadversions on the Reflections upon Dr. BURNET's Travels 80. Reflexions on a Paper intitled his Majesties Reasons for withdrawing himself from Rochester An Enquiry into the present State of Affairs and in particular whethewe owe Allegiance to the King in these Circumstances And wher there we are bound to Treat with Him and call Him back or no A Sermon Preached in St. James's Chappel before the Prince of Orange 23d Decemb. 1688. A Sermon Preached before the House of Commons 31 January 1688. being the Thanksgiving day for the deliverance of this Kingdom from Popery and Arbitrary Power His Eighteen Paper relating to the Affairs of Church and State during the Reign of King James the Second Seventeen whereof were written in Holland and first Printed there the other at Exeter soon after the Prince of Orange's Landing in England A Letter to Mr. Thevenot Containing a Censure of Mr. Grand's History of King Henry the Eighth's Divorce To which is added a Censure of Mr. Meauxâ—s â—s History of the Variations of the Protestant Churches Together with some further Reflections on Mr Le Grand A Sermon Preached at the Coronation of William III. and Mary II. King and Queen of England Scotland France and Ireland At Westminster April 11th 1689. Dr. PATRICKS Parable of the Pilgrim The Sixth Edition corrected A Private Prayer to be used in difficult Times 80. Exposition of the Ten Commandments 80. His Sermon before the Prince of Orange 20. January 1688. His Sermon before the Queen at Whitehall March 1. 1688. The Pillar and Ground of Truth A Treatise shewing that the Roman Church falsly claims to be that Church and the Pillar of that Truth mentioned by St. Paul in his first Epistle to Timothy Chap. â— v.15 His Sermon preached on St. Peters day published with Enlargements His Sermon preâched at St. Pauls Covent Garden on the first Sunday in Lent being a Second part of a Sermon preached before the Prince of Orange newly published Preparation for Death being a Letter sent to a Young Gentlewoman in France in a distemper of which she died By WILLIAM WAKE M. A. Preacher to the Honourable Society of Grays-Inn His Two Discourses of Purgatory and prayers for the Dead 40. His Exposition of the Doctrine of the Church of England in the several Articles proposed by the late BISHOP of CONDOM in his Exposition of the Doctrine of the Catholick Church His Defence of the Exposition of the Doct. of the Church of England against the Exceptions of Mr. de Meaux late B of Condom and his Vindicator A Second Defence of the Exposition of the Doctrine of the Church of England against the new Exceptions of Monsieur de Meaux late Bishop of Condom and his Vindicator The FIRST PART in which the Account that has been given of the Bishop of Meaux's Exposition is fully Vindicated the Distinction of Old and New Popery Historically asserted and the Doctrine of the Church of Rome in point of Image Worship more particularly considered Second Defence of the Exposition of the Doct. of the Church of England against Mr. de Meaux and his Vindication the SECOND PART
distracted with enquiring into Titles but that they ought to acquiesce in the possession even when the Title was visibly and unexceptionably bad In the Jewish Religion as the High-Priest was the first of all the sacred Tribe so the greatest piece of their Religion which was the Annual Expiation was to be perform'd by him by their Law it was provided that the High-Priest's eldest Son should be anointed to serve before the Lord in his Father's stead unless he had any of those Blemishes in his Body that tendred him unfit for it So that the high Priesthood went by inheritance and their Genealogies were so carefully preserved that it was not possible for them to be mistaken in him that of right ought to have been their High Priest yet in our Saviour's time this sacred office was set to sale by the Romans so that Caiaphas had both purchased it with his Mony and had also thrust out him to whom it belonged by the Law of God. Here were all the Nullities that could almost be in a Title Yet Our Saviour owned this Mercenary High Priest he joined in all the parts of the Temple-service and since he fulfilled all righteousness no doubt he obeyed that Law of going thither on the day of the general Atonement for the sins of the whole people though he had no need of it in his own particular he also acknowledged the High-Priest's authority by answering to him when he was brought before him and adjured by him to speak the truth St. Paul not only did the same but when he had been guilty of an indecency to Ananias not knowing him to be the High-Priest he made an apology for it in which as he pleads his ignorance so he plainly acknowledges the respect that was due to him This is yet carried further by St. Iohn who says that Caiaphas as High-Priest for that year prophesied All this shews that even when rules were given by God himself and were notoriously and infamously broken in the offices of the highest nature yet the peace and quiet of mankind were to be preferred to all positive Laws and that all persons were directed by an infallible authority to acknowledge those who were in possession 10. But now I will advance the state of the Question a little further beyond that of a bare possession into that of a Title declared by those who only can be supposed to be the proper Judges of it and in order to the opening this it ought to be considered That there is this difference between all speculative points of opinion and all questions that relate to matters of Fact that in the former every Man must still think according to the sense that he himself has and must not subdue his understanding to any Authority whatsoever nor yield to any pretended infallibility but in matters of Fact if a Man belongs to any body that makes any decision relating to them he must agree to it and acquiesce in it though he thinks it wrong A Member of any Court of Justice in which an unjust Decree is past though he is bound to oppose it while it is in agitation yet when it is past he himself not only acquiesces in it but must afterwards issue out such Orders as are consequent to that Decree as readily as if he himself had concurred in the making of it That this is a certain truth there needs no other proof but this That it is simply and indispensibly necessary to the preserving the Peace of Mankind and to the keeping of all Societies in Union and Order and every Maxim that is of such absolute necessity to Mankind must be true Now with relation to the subject now under consideration there are Two Questions which may be made The First is A Point of speculation how far subjects are bound to obey or submit to the Supreme Power and whether they may resist them in any case and more particularly if that may be done on the account of Religion And as to this there is no Debate at present so that all Men may retain their former Opinions But the Second relates to the History and Policy of England Whether the King derives his Power from God and so is accountable only to him or if he holds it by an Original Contract with his People so that upon his breaking it they likewise may be acquitted from all Obligations to him This depends on our Laws Records and Histories and the resolution of it can only be taken from them so these being all Matters of Fact whatsoever decision was made by those who are the only competent Judges it must oblige all Persons not excepting even those who being of that Body opposed it while it was a making therefore all English Men are bound to act according to that Judgment and by consequence of swear that they will do it And therefore no private Person ought to let his particular Notions of our Government determine him but is bound to resign them up to the decision that has been so publickly made in it Here it were an easie thing to urge all those Topicks which have been made use of with relation to the Dissenters who in the matters of Government have set up their own doubts and scruples in opposition to Laws and established Rules But this Argument might seem invidious and therefore I will not insist upon it 11. But I will in the last place carry this matter further to justifie the present settlement as a thing right and lawful in it self and in order to the stating this aright this must be acknowledged That there are few of those tho' some seem now to be in some doubt concerning this matter who did not think that the King when he was Prince of Orange had a just cause of War when he first undertook this business for even at Common-Law an Heir in Remainder has just cause to sue him that is in possession if he makes wasts on the Inheritance which is his in Reversion It is much more reasonable since the thing is much more important That the Heir of a Crown should interpose when he sees him that is in Possession hurried on blindfold to subject an independent Kingdom to a Foreign Jurisdiction and thereby to rob it both of its Glory and of its security And when it is manifest that this must occasion the greatest Ruine and Miseries possible to that Kingdom And when a pretended Heir was set up in such a manner that the whole Kingdom believed him spurious In such a Case it cannot be denyed even according to the highest principles of Passive Obedience That another Soveraign Prince might make War on a King so abusing his power and that this was the Case in fact will not be called in question by any Protestant So then here was a War begun upon just and lawful grounds and a War being so begun it is the uncontroverted opinion of all Lawyers That the success of a just War gives a lawful title to that which
is acquired in the Progress of it Therefore King Iames having so far sunk in the War that he both abandoned his People and deserted the Government all his Right and Title did accrue to the King in the right of a Conquest over him so that if he had then assumed the Crown the Opinion of all Lawyers must have been on his side But he chose rather to leave the Matter to the Determination of the Peers and People of England chosen and assembled together with all possible freedom who did upon that declare him their King so that with relation to King Iames's Rights he was vested with them by the Successes of a Just War and yet he was willing with relation to the People to receive the Crown by their Declaration rather than to hold it in the Right of his Sword And indeed which way soever that King Iames's deserting the Government is turned this Argument has much weight for if he was forced to it then here was a Conquest and if it was voluntary it was a wilful Desertion the Great Seal's being cast into the Thames is an unaccountable part of it and seems to imply this at least That either he did not think of returning again or that if he should return that he would no more Govern by the shew of Law of which the Great Seal seems always to carry some Prints So that in a word the People of England being left without a Government and in the Hands of one that could and might have assumed it and that stood so near the immediate Succession to the Crown were reduced to the necessity either of continuing in a State of Anarchy for a Regency for Life which was offered by those who except to the Oaths though it was a real divesting of King Iames of our Allegiance and the translating it to another is no better in the construction of the Law it having no legal Security in it to conduct the Government or so much as to indemnify those that should act under it or of returning back to that Misery which they had so much dreaded but a few Months before or of settling themselves upon such a legal Foundation as might secure the Peace and Quiet of the Nation and in all Extremities relating to the Government that is always best which is safest and every Resolution which is necessary to the Peace and Happiness of the Nation is upon that very Account Just and Good because it is necessary And now I have gone over this Argument in all the Branches and different Views in which it may be set and have laid before you the Reasons that make me conclude that the Settlement now made was founded on good Grounds and that tho the Grounds were doubtful yet that all the Subjects ought to be determined by the Decision made by the Representative of the Kingdom And beyond all this that even a Possession without so great a Support ought to quiet all Mens Minds at least so far that they ought to submit and swear to it without any Scruple It remains that I should say somewhat in Answer to these Objections that may arise against all this the chief of which are taken from those Oaths and Engagements by which you were bound to King Iames and his Heirs And from this that Allegiance seems to be a personal Tie which binds you to him during Life and after his Death passes to his Heirs but if it is certain that Allegiance is a Tie to a Prince in consideration of the Protection which he gives then when he can no more protect those who owed him Allegiance they can be no longer bound to him but must give their Allegiance to him that protects them The very Term of Allegiance rises out of the Feudal Law by which the chief Lord of a Fee when he made any Grants to his Vassals took them bound in consideration of these Grants to adhere to him to defend his Person and to assist him in his Wars but all this being done by the Vassals in consideration of the Fee that was granted an Original Contract is plainly implied in it so that if the Lord of the Fee should go to take away the Fee it self or to change the Nature of the Subjection in which the Vassals were put by the first Grant then the Oath which was grounded on it could not be supposed to bind them any longer Nor can any Man be bound to a Man's Heir before he himself is Dead so that the Tie arising from the word Heir can signify nothing till the Inheritance is opened by Death and in that Case we must return to this that Allegiance and Protection being reciprocal there can be no Allegiance due where there can be no Protection given In short the declaring of this Government and the degrees of the Submission which the Subjects owe our Prince and of the Person so whom their Allegiance is due can only be made by the Peers and People of England and when that is done you must rest there and give your selves no further trouble otherways you take to your selves an Authority of judging in a matter relating to your Government after those who are the only competent Judges have decided it This being then the true State of the Question it is now reduced to this that since there is on the one side such clear and apparent Reasons leading us to obey and that on the other side there is nothing but an Opinion that some Men whose Studies have never led them to examine either the Nature of Civil Societies in General according to the Roman Law or the Nature of the English Government from the Laws and History of England with that care that was Necessary have taken up that there is an uncontroulable and Supream Power lodged with our Kings by a Divine Deputation which exempts them from being called to an Account or resisted by their People let their Violations of the Law be never so many or so eminent When I say these two things are weighed the one against the other it seems very plain that the former must far down-weigh the other I will not here enter into this Argument that must carry me very far if I should once undertake it I have done it upon another Occasion and I will only add one thing in this Paper That the Original Articles of the Magna Charta granted by King John is now in my Hands with his Great Seal to it which has been ever since that Time esteemed the Measure of the English Government and by it it is expresly provided That in case the King should violate any Part of it and should refuse to rectify What he had done amiss it should be lawful for the Barons and the whole People of England to distress him by all the ways they could think on such as the seizing on his Castles Lands and Possessions provition being only made for the Safety of the Persons of the King and Ducen and of their Children