Law He blames those that have not taken the Oaths Page 2. because they go wholly upon this Principle That Allegiance is due only to Legal Right and take away says he that and you remove all the difficulties they labour under and I suppose it is for their sakes that he has as far as in him lay taken away the Legal Right from their Majesties that so he might remove all the difficulties which the Non-swearers labour under But he seems not to care what becomes of their Majesties nor what difficulties he throws them into And he blames likewise many of those that have writ in defence of the new Oaths because they suppose that a Legal Right is necessary to make Allegiance due Page 1. and have therefore endeavoured to justify the Legal Right of their present Majesties This it seems is become a Crime to justify the Legal Right of Their present Majesties which yet if we do not justify we condemn our selves But why should we not justify the Legal Right of Their present Majesties Why should we for the sake of a few Non-swearees betray our Cause and tacitly own that we believe King William and Queen Mary to be Usurpers He gives two reasons for this and I think he is a very bold Man that will venture to give reasons for so unreasonable a thing Now his Reasons are 1st Because it is unfit to dispute the Rights of Princes 2d Because it is unnecessary 1. Because 't is unfit to dispute the Rights of Princes But though it may not be fit to dispute the Right of a Prince Page 1. when settled on the Throne yet it might have been fit to assert it though no Government can permit it to be a Question yet it might have been his declared Opinion one would think that he out of gratitude to his Royal Patron should have own'd him to be Rightful King nay methinks his interest should have prompted him to it For I must tell him there is this in the case which he little thought of That if K. William have not a legal Right to the Crown Dr. W. Sherlock can have no legal Right to the Mastership of the Temple For 't is the Law alone that invests King William with a Power to bestow these Preferments and therefore if the King be only King de facto that is in his sense an Usurper I know not how the Doctor will be able to make out that he is any more than de facto Master of the Temple without a Legal Right to his Place A froward Prince would hardly bear such ill treatment as this I 'm sure his Legal King would not and a mild King does not deserve it from him I doubt not but he has done a great deal of mischief though I do not say he design'd it by refusing to take the Oaths And did it become him to publish such a Book to the World and by implication declare to all his fellow Subjects That he for his part does not look upon King William and Queen Mary to whom he has sworn Allegiance to be any more than a King and Queen de facto that is according to him Usurpers 2. He says 'T is unnecessary to defend the Legal Right of King William and Queen Mary For whom is it unnecessary For him it may be because he does not believe it but 't is not unnecessary for those that own their Legal Right Nay there is nothing more necessary than this and therefore two Parliaments this and the last have recogniz'd their Title But it seems those Parliaments did a very needless thing and wanted this Doctor to give them better Advice for he that can sit in his Study and there make and unmake Kings at his pleasure may surely be fit to give Counsel to Parliaments The Doctor and I are in one thing agreed That Allegiance is due to King William and Queen Mary but we differ about the foundation and reason of our Allegiance He thinks that we ought not to take the consideration of Right into the Settlement of Government Page 18. for he says A Prince may be settled in his Throne without Legal Right and when he is so God has made him our King and requires our Obedience and I cannot be of his Opinion He says That his Allegiance may be due to one who has no Legal Right to Govern him I say that I owe Allegiance to none but him who has the Legal Right I shall therefore do these two things 1. I shall give my own Opinion with the Grounds and Reasons of it 2. I shall examine his I. I shall give my Opinion with the Grounds and Reasons of it which I shall do in these following Propositions 1. Allegiance is Obedience according to Law 2. No Man can have any Right to my Allegiance who is not my Lawful King These Propositions are I think in themselves evident and need no proof And therefore 3. King William and Queen Mary are Lawful and Rightful King and Queen of England and the Dominions thereunto belonging This appears plainly from that Declaration which the Lords and Commons Assembled at Westminster presented to their Highnesses the Prince and Princess of Orange Feb. 13. 1688. wherein they set forth Declaration of Lords and Commons presented to the Prince and Princess of Orange That King James by the assistance of divers evil Counsellors Judges and Ministers employ'd by him had endeavoured to extirpate the Protestant Religion and the Laws and Liberties of this Kingdom and many instances they give of his misgovernment and that he had Abdicated the Government and the Throne was become Vacant And then they assert the several Rights of the Subject which the late King had notoriously violated and last of all Having an entire confidence that his Highness the Prince of Orange would preserve them from the violation of their Rights and from all attempts upon their Religion Laws and Liberties they resolve That William and Mary Prince and Princess of Orange be and be declared King and Queen of England France and Ireland and the Dominions thereunto belonging And the Prince and Princess of Orange at the Request and by the Advice of the Lords and Commons 1o. Willielam Mariae c. 1. did accept the Crown and Royal Dignity of King and Queen of England France and Ireland and the Dominions and Territories thereto belonging They did accept the Crown they did not snatch it by force and violence They were no Conquerors no Usurpers And afterwards in an Act past December 16. 1689. the same Parliament recogniz'd their Title in these words The Lords Spiritual and Temporal and Commons seriously considering how it hath pleas'd Almighty God in his marvellous Providence and merciful Goodness to this Nation to provide and preserve Their said Majesties Royal Persons most happily to reign over us upon the Throne of Their Ancestors for which they render unto him from the bottom of their hearts their humblest thanks and praises do truly
into the Propositions following Prop. 1. That all Civil Power and Authority is from God c. This is loosly expressed and in general terms and may be allow'd to be in some sense true and therefore I will let it pass and will desire him to consider that so is every thing from God except Sin so are Riches and Honours from God tho Men bestow them so is the Doctor himself from God tho his Father begat him and so is his Book from God for God gave him Power to write it though I do not think God gave him any Authority Prop. 2. Civil Power and Authority is no otherwise from God than as God gives this Power and Authority to particular persons c. A great discovery this That God does in some sense give whatever may be said in any sense to come from him as if a creature could snatch any thing from his Creator against his will But how is Civil Power and Authority from God And how does he give Civil Power and Authority to particular persons He tells us Prop. 3. There are but three ways whereby God gives this Power and Authority to any persons either 1. By Nature Thus Parents have a natural superiority over their Children but by what bounds this Paternal and Patriarchal Authority was limited we cannot tell 't is in vain to enquire after it now And so he has taken his leave of Sir Robert Filmer's Patriarcha 2. By a particular nomination Thus God made Kings only in Jewry but this does not at all concern us 3. By the disposals of his Providence That God Governs the World I am very sure for his Word assures me of it and 't is the greatest comfort of my Life to consider that there is a Wise Just and Good God who Rules the World But how does he Rule the World How does he set up and pull down Kings and bring about the great Revolutions and Changes of Governments Does God prescribe to any people a form of Government Does he appoint or dictate the particular Laws of each Country Does he nominate the Supreme Magistrate Does he set bounds to the Supreme Governor's Power No he does none of these things but leaves them to the Reason and Prudence of Men. But yet God is not altogether unconcern'd he does not sit on his Throne in Heaven a mere Spectator of human Affairs without ever intermedling in them But he interposes as becomes a Wise Governor of the World by directing and guiding the minds by moving and inclining by checking and restraining the wills of his creatures in an unknown manner How or in what manner he directs the greater and the lesser Wheels of Providence we cannot tell but that he does direct them is not to be doubted In the general I think we ought to lay down this Rule Never to ascribe to God any thing that is unworthy of him that is disagreeable to his Wisdom or Jushice or Equity or Goodness and therefore since his Divine Laws are full of Wisdom Equity Justice and Goodness we ought never to think that he who has oblig'd Mankind by such excellent Laws does by any secret influence move them to a violation of them He indeed sees the unruly Wills and Affections of Men and knows that they will abuse the Power they have and unjustly catch at more to oppress their Brethren and he in his Wisdom permits sometimes that they should attain their wicked ends but when ever he does so we must not take it for a mark of his approbation nor argue thus That because they prosper therefore God is pleased with their doings for he will certainly sooner or later punish them for what they do But you 'll say when an Usurper prospers and ascends the Throne and is setled in it Does not God then make him a King and invest him with his Authority No such matter he is still a private Man without Right to Kingly Government unless an Unjust action can create a Right But though an unjust action cannot create a Right yet God can give him a Right True But how shall I know that he does so That says the Doctor you may know by the event if you see him able to crush whom he pleases and seated upon the Royal Throne assure your self that God has set him up and made him a King for the most high ruleth in the Kingdom of men and giveth it to whomsoever he will and setteth up over it the basest of Men. Now in answer to this Dan. 4.17 I allow the Doctor that God does in some sense set up a Tyrant but then I desire him to consider that Satan likewise sets him up and wicked Men set him up and he sets up himself He sets up himself by abusing the Power he has by encreasing it more and more through his restless Ambition and by raising of Forces to gain the Sovereign Power And wicked Men set him up by giving him assistance for the accomplishing of his wicked designs not that they love to be Slaves but they are willing to enslave others and tyrannize over them And Satan sets him up by tempting him to get the Sovereign Power and make himself a God upon Earth And lastly God sets him up But how does God set him up Why God gives him those natural powers and faculties both of Mind and Body which fit him for great Undertakings and moreover he in his Providence gives him many favourable opportunities for encreasing his Wealth and enlarging his Power and strengthning his Interest amongst his Fellow Subjects And these are a Ladder by which he may possibly climb to the Sovereignty And though God has in his Word forbidden him to invade the Rights of others and advance himself to the Throne by unjust means yet he permits him to do so though he who sets bounds to the raging Sea And says Hitherto shalt thou come but no further Job 38 11. and here shall thy proud waves be stay'd could easily restrain an Ambitious Usurper and stop him from ascending the Royal Throne yet he for wise ends suffers him to go on and prosper in his unjust Enterprizes Thus God sets up a Tyrant but gives him no Authority and the Devil sets him up and wicked Men set him up and he sets up himself And this is agreeable to the Style and Language of Scripture which tells us in one place That Satan stood up against Israel and provoked David to number Israel 1 Chron. 21.1 2 Sam. 24.1 And in another place That the anger of the Lord was kindled against Israel and he moved David against them to say Go number Israel and Judah So that here the same sinful Action is in words ascrib'd to God and Satan for both are here said to have mov'd David to number Israel and the word in the Original is in both places the same it is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which signifies to Seduce Entice or Persuade and who will think that God does persuade or
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