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
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
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