derived from him it must needs follow from hence that he must be free from all Coercive and Vindicative Power and that no Man can lawfully resist him or his Forces because no Man can lawfully bear the Sword except for private Defence but by Commission from him I would fain be resolved by the Superviser of Julian who can Array the People against their Soveraign and his Armies or who hath Authority for example to make him a Captain or as much as a Drummer of a Company if there should fall out an hopeful Occasion of recovering some lost Bishops-Lands All Commissions of that nature would be unauthoritative and therefore how a man can either give or receive such unauthoritative Commissions or oppose or resist the King and his Armies by vertue of them without sin I desire Mr. H. as a Lawyer and Mr. J. as a Divine to resolve It is true what he (‖) P. 84. saith That a Popish Successor can have no Authority to exercise any illegal Cruelty upon Protestants but then the Question which he puts to the Doctor upon it is Fallacious in desiring him to resolve how far such Inauthoritative Acts in the Soveraign which carry no Obligation at all can oblige men to Obedience I answer for the Doctor If by Obedience he means Active service and obedience no man is bound to serve the King in exercising any illegal Cruelty No! He ought rather to suffer himself but if by Obedience he means Passive Obedience or else his Question is nothing to the Purpose I answer That it is the Christian the English Subjects Duty to suffer patiently such unauthoritative Cruelty from his Soveraign till legal Remedy can be had because to oppose or resist him and his Forces by Force is unauthoritative and against the Imperial Laws of this Realm But because we live in an Age wherein there are great Numbers of Disaffected and Deluded Persons who are deaf to all Reason and Common Law which is nothing but Common Reason when it is urged in defence of the Crown I will now shew that these Essential Rights of Soveraignty which I have been discoursing of are declared to belong to the person of the King by the express Statutes of this Realm First then He is declared to be not accountable to his Subjects or obnoxious to their Coercive Power 12 Car. 2. c. 30. We your Majesties said Dutyful and Loyal Subjects the Lords and Commons in Parliament assembled beseech your most Excellent Majesty that it may be declared and be it hereby declared that by the Undoubted and Fundamental Laws of this Kingdom neither the Peers of this Realm nor the Commons nor both together in Parliament or out of Parliament nor the People Collectively or Representatively nor any other Persons whatsoever ever had have or ought to have any Coercive Power over the Persons of the Kings of this Realm By the 25 Ed. 3. c. 2. it is declared without excepting any manner of Cases or Pretences to the contrary That to levy War against our Lord the King in his Realm or be adherent to the Kings Enemies in his Realm giving them Aid or Comfort in the Realm or elsewhere is Treason And (†) 3 Inst p. 9. Coke upon the place saith That this was High Treason before by the Common Law for no Subject can levy War within the Realm without Authority from the King If any levy War saith he to expulse Strangers to deliver men out of Prisons to remove Counsellors or against any Statute or to any other End pretending Reformation of their own Heads without Warrant this is Levying of War against the King because they take upon them Royal Authority (‖) Sheringhams Kings Suprem c. 3. In the 7th year of Edw. 1. a Statute was made wherein the Kings Power over the Militia is acknowledged and force of Armour to belong to him And saith (†) Jenkinsius Redivivus p. 19. Judge Jenkins All Jurisdictions do and of right ought to belong to the King all Commissions to levy men for War are Awarded by the King the Power of War only belongs to the King it belongs to the King to Defend his People and to provide Arms and Force (‖) 13 Car. 2.1 Since his Majesties Restauration it was also in General Terms declared Treason To levy War against the King within this Realm or without And to cut off all popular pretences of Defensive War it is declared by 13 Car. 2. c. 6. That the sole Supream Government Command and Disposition of the Militia and of all Forces by Sea and Land and of all Forts and places of Strength is and by the Laws of England ever was the Vndoubted Right of his Majesty and his Royal Predecessors and that both or either of the Houses of Parliament cannot or ought to pretend to the same nor can nor lawfully may raise or levy any War Offensive or Defensive against his Majesty his Heirs and Lawful Successor Behold the Doctrine of Non-resistance in its full Amplitude the very Doctrine of the Bow-string declared by Act of Parliament Were the two Houses serious and in earnest when they made this Declaration Would they really have Men prostitute their Lives to Malice and Violence when the Laws of God and the Kingdom Protect them Surely this is too Light for the Parliament and is just such another piece of Drollery as that which was Dedicated to Oliver Cromwel in the Book called Killing no Murder Bating that Dedication there was never any thing like this Passive Aâ—â— of Parliament for wheedling the People out of their Lives Alas Alas This is an Act fit to turn the Nation into a Shambles and enough to tempt and invite Cruelty into the World For let a Prince be either a Papist or an Atheist and his Subjects fettered and manacled with this Slavish Act and then what hinders but the one of them may destroy Millions for their Estates and Heresie together and the other as many to see what Faces and Grimmaces they will make According to this Act the Lives of the best Men in the Kingdom shall be exposed to the Fiery and Ambitious Zeal of a Papist or the Extravagant Vnaccountable Humours of a Wretch and hang at their Girdles as Souls do at the Popes Is it not a sad thing to have the Murdering piece of Passive Obedience planted against the people by an Act of Parliament to leave us nothing to defend our selves but the old Artillery of Prayers and Tears But yet so Wise as Legislators so Religious as Christians and so Loyal as Subjects was that Parliament that they made this Declaration the second time as it may be seen 13 14 Car. 2. cap. 3. And by all these Statutes cited it appears That the King is Accountable to none but God That the Sword is solely his and theirs to whom He commits it That he can be Subject to no Coercive or Vindicative Power nor ought any way to be resisted by Force Indeed our Author (‖) P.
now plainly seen Therefore no marvail why God fought against them They were Hypocrites and under the Cloke of the Gospel would have debarred the Queens Highness of her Right but God would not so Cloke them Religion and so shewed their Hatred to her and how they held her in the lowest degree of Contempt If a Man should set his Wit to give such an Account of the Behaviour of the Protestants towards Queens Mary picking up such Stories as these and concealing their Loyalty in setting her upon the Throne and their Meek and Passive Behaviour under her Persecution he might make just such another Fallacious Book as that of Mr. Js. who hath gleaned 3 or 4 Particular Stories out of the Histories of the Apostate upon which he hath put false Colours and suppressed and concealed as much as he could the Loyalty and Passive Obedience of his Subject and what he could not conceal he hath and I verily believe against his own Conscience resolved into a wrong Cause In the 7th Chapter about Julian's death I omitted one good Argument to prove he was not Treacherously killed by a Christian taken from this Expression in his last (i) Amm. Mar. l. 25. c. 3 Hakewells Scutum Reg. p. 148. Speech Sempiternum veneror Numen quod non clan destinis insidiis nee longá morborum asperitate nee damnatorum fine sed in medio cursu florentium gloriarum hunc merui clarum e mundo digressum I bless the Eternal Deity saith he that I do not dye by secret treachery c. which very Expression seems to prove that he himself did not in the least suspect that he was struck by a Roman much less a Christian Hand as Mr. J. designs his Reader should believe I might also have observed that Mr. J. is the first Writer of the Church of England whose Genius hath led him to follow the Example of (k) His verbis Nobilis Historicus Sozomenus l. 6. c. 2. Militem si quis forte Julianum Imperatorem occidisset uti eo tempore quidam accusabant Jure cum laude fecisse ait Hakewells Scutum Reg. p. 142. Mariana whom Ruteford the Author of Lex Rex accounted an approved Author in citing of Sozomen for Justifying as he saith the Murder of Julian by one of his own Soldiers But as I have observed Soz. did neither justifie nor commend but only extenuat the Crime for which he hath been severely censured by other (l) Sozomenum mendacii arguit Gregorius Magnus stupiditatis incredibils Baronius Ibid. Authors but Mr. J. let him pass without Rebuke though I confess he hath called the Fact a Traiterous Assassination but with what appearance of Integrity let the Impartial Reader judge In the beginning of his Preface he makes a mighty Flourish and in very fallacious Rhetoric against the Loyal Addressers for being contrary to themselves promising to maintain his Majesty and the Religion established with their Lives and Fortunes and a Popish Successor too But though common Readers cannot yet others can look through this Malicious Fallacy for it was not the Popish Successor as popish but the Succession which they promised to maintain and not the Person who shall succeed in his endeavours to overthrow the Protestant Religion there they will desert him as the Suffolk-Protestants did Queen Mary but in all other things they will serve a Popish Successor with their Lives and Fortunes as the Christians did a Pagan and particulary Julian so that he may keep the Horns of Mahomets Angels which were half Fire and half Snow as an Emblem for such Protestants who can sight against the Person of their Prince in Defence of his Authority and who are wont to qualisie their professed Zeal for him with such Cooling Considerations as do perfectly extinguish it as Snow doth Fire Then he goes on to tell us that A Popish Successor will be an Heavy Judgment But then saith he reflecting upon the Addressers Did ever Men pray for a Judgment and make it their Humble Request that they might be sure of it But did any of the Loyal Addressers Pray or Desire that the next Successor might be a Papist or is Mr. J. or any of the Excluders sure that he that is next will succeed to the Crown Nay do not the Truly Loyal Party pray and endeavour to make him a Good Protestant and were they not in Parliament for making of Good Laws for our Security against him And hath not the Author of Julian very much Forehead to say of so considerable a part of the Nation That if they be Protestants yet he thinks them men weary of their Religion who are Undone for a Prince a Great Part of whose Religion is to Persecute and Extirpate theirs But doth he not know That they Love the King and pray for his Preservation and wish that he may live for ever Does he not know that they wish him a Numerous Posterity and that there were a Succession of many Young Princes between him and the Collateral Heir And have they not at least as good Reasons to declare for the Succession as the Excluders have to declare against it who by an Act of Exclusion would likely bring as great a Plague and as Heavy a Judgment upon the Nation as a Popish Prince will do But yet so bent is this Man to Exclusion that he tacitly commends King Edward for Impeaching the Succession of his Sister Mary by the most Vnauthoritative and Vnjust Act that a good Prince could be guilty of Every body knows saith he that King Edward the Sixth to prevent his Popish Sister from Succeeding bequeathed his Kingdom by Will to the Lady Jane and every body knows who put the young Prince upon it and I wish too many of those who were for perswading shall I say or forcing his Majesty to Exclude his only Brother be not such Self-designing Protestants as they And I need not adds he say what Bishops were concerned nor how far they were concerned in that Business This you must know is a Reflection on the Bishops for voting against the Bill of Exclusion but how little this Story makes against them you shall hear from Archbishop Crammer who indeed was more concerned in that Business than our Author is willing the World should know I am saith he in his Letter to the Queen constrained most lamentably and with most penitent and sorrowful Heart to ask Mercy and Pardon for my Hainous Folly and Offence in consenting and following the Testament and last Will of our Sovereign Lord King Edward your Graces Brother which Will God he knoweth I never liked nor never any thing grieved me so much as that your Graces Brother did and if by any means it had been in me to have letted the making of that Will I would have done it and what I said therein as well to his Counsel as himself divers of your Majesties Counsel can report but none so well as the Marquis of Northampton the L.
Gentleman as was reported put this Dilemma in the House of Commons which I never yet heard satisfactiorily Answered Either the Statutes of King H. 8. about Succession were Obligatory or Valid or they were not If not then Acts of Parliament which impeach the Succession are without any more ado Null and Void in Law but if they were by what authority was the House of Suffolk Excluded and King James admitted to the Crown contrary to many Statutes against him notwithstanding all which the (t) Jacob. I. High Court of Parliament declared That the Imperial Crown of this Realm did by Inherent Birthright and lawful and undoubted Succession descend unto his Majesty as being lineally justly and lawfully next and sole Heir of the Royal Blood Here His Succession is owned for Lawful and Vndoubted against the foresaid Acts Lawful not by any Statute but contrary to Statutes by the Common-Law of this Hereditary Kingdom which seems to Reject all Limitations and Exclusions as tending to the Disinberison and Prejudice of the Crown For as the Most Learned and Loyal (u) Third part of The Address to the Freemen c. p. 98. Sir L. J. represented to the House of Commons a Bill of Exclusion if it should pass would change the Essence of the Monarchy and make the Crown Elective or as another (x) Author of the Power of Parliaments p. 39. Ingenious Pen saith It would tend to make a Foot-ball of the Crown and turn an Hereditary Monarchy into Elective For by the same Reason that one Parliament may disinherit one Prince for his Religion other Parliaments may disinherit another upon other Pretences and so consequently by such Exclusions Elect whom they please The next Reason which seems to make an Act of Exclusion unlawful is the Oath of Supremacy which most of the Kings Subjects are called to take upon one Occasion or other and which the Representatives of the Commons of England are bound by Law to take before they can sit in the House By this Oath every one who takes it swears to Assist and Defend all Jurisdictions Priviledges Preheminences and Authorities granted or belonging to the Kings Highness his Heirs and lawful Successors or united and annexed to the Imperial Crown of this Realm And I appeal to every Honest and Loyal English-man whether it be not one of the most undoubted transcendent and Essential Rights Priviledges and Preheminences belonging to the Kings Heirs and united to the Imperial Crown of England that they succeed unto the Crown as it comes to their turn according to Proximity of Blood Secondly I desire to know Whether by Lawful Successors is not to be understood such Heirs as succeed according to the common Rules of Hereditary Succession settled by the Common-Law of England and if so how any Man who is within the Obligation of this Oath can Honestly consent to a Bill of Exclusion which deprives the next Heir and in him virtually the whole Royal Family of the Chief Priviledge and Preheminence which belongs unto him by the Common-Law of this Realm Or how any Man who hath taken this Oath which is so apparently designed for the Preservation of the Rights and Priviledges of the Royal Family can deny Faith and true Allegiance to the next Heir from the Moment of his Predecessors death according to the Common Right of Hereditary Succession which by Common-Law belongs unto Him and is annexed to the Crown What Oath soever is made for te Behoof and Interest of the Kings Heirs and Lawful Successors in general must needs be made for the Behoof and Interest of every one of them but the Oath of Supremacy so made for the Behoof and Interest of the Kings Heirs is apparently in general to secure the Succession unto them and therefore it is undoubtedly made to secure the Succession to every one of them according to the Common Order of Hereditary Succession when it shall come to their turn to succeed I have used this Plain and Honest Way of arguing with many of the Excluders themselves and I could never yet receive a satisfactory Answer unto it Some indeed have said with our Author that the Oath of Supremacy is a Protestant Oath and so could not be understood in a Sense destructive to the Protestant Religion which is a meer Shift and proves nothing because it proves too much For according to this Answer we might dispense with our sworn Faith and Allegiance to a Popish King if any should hereafter turn such because the Oaths of Allegiance and Supremacy are Protestant Oaths and are not to be understood according to them in a sense destructive to the Protestant Religion Secondly Though they are Protestant Oaths yet they respect not the King and his Heirs as Protestants but as lawful and rightful King and Heirs according to the Imperial Law of this Hereditary Kingdom and therefore Moderate Papists will take the Oath of Supremacy as well as of Allegiance as indeed it was for substance taken in the Time of (y) 35 H. 8. ch 1. § 11. H. 8. which they could not do were they made to the King and his Heirs as Protestants But Thirdly As they are Protestant Oaths they bind us the more Emphatically to assist and defend the King against the Vsurpation of the Pope who pretends to a Power of Deposing Kings and of Excluding Hereditary Princes from the Succession Witness Henry the 4th and therefore as all good Protestants are bound by these promissory Oaths to maintain the King in the Throne so are they bound to maintain and defend their Heirs and Successors when their Rights shall fall I have joyned the Oath of Allegiance with the other of Supremacy because in it we also swear to bear Faith and true Allegiance to the Kings Heirs and Successors and Him and them to defend to the utmost of our Power And I here protest to all the World That when I took these Oaths I understood the Words Heirs and Successors for such as hereafter were to be Kings by the Ordinary Course of Hereditary Succession And I appeal to the Conscience of every Honest Protestant if he did not understand them so Other Excluders I have heard maintain that the King and Three Estates in Parliament had a Power by an Act of Exclusion to discharge the People of this part of their Oaths Of bearing Faith and true Allegiance to the Kings Heirs and Lawful Successors but this seems contrary to the following Clause of the Oath of Allegiance which is also to be understood in the other of Supremacy I do believe and in my Conscience am resolved that neither the Pope nor any other person whatsoever hath Power to absolve me of this Oath or any part theoreof And I appeal even to Mr. J. Whether a Man can be absolved from a Promissory Oath by any Power upon Earth but by the Person or Persons to whom and for whose behoof it was made To assert that the King by the Consent of the Parliament
can absolve a Man from the binding Force of an Oath which he hath made for the Interest of a 3 d Person is to give him what his Justice would abhor a Papal Authority over the Consciences of Men which Consideration I suppose as well as the Popish Practise of Exclusion made the great Man above cited say For my part I think there is more of Popery in this Bill than there can possibly be in the Nation without it for none but Papists and Fifth-monarchy-men did ever go about to Disinherit Princes for their Religion But some Men will say Why should not Protestants Disinherit Popish as well as Popish Disinherit Protestant Princes To which the Answer is easie by another Question Why should not Protestants Depose Popish as well as Papists have Deposed Protestant Kings I am not Conscious to my self that I have used the least Sophistry in Arguing as I have done from the Oaths of Allegiance and Supremacy against and Act of Exclusion yet Mr. J. hath the Confidence to call these Arguments taken from those Oaths (z) Preface p. 19. shameful Sophistry and the Conscientious Regard that Honest Protestants have unto them deceitful Prejudice which he saith is occasioned for want of distinguishing betwixt Actual and Possible Heirs But he is very much and I fear very Wilfully mistaken For the Faith and Allegiance in these Oaths is promised to the Possible Heirs when they shall become Actual according to the common Order of Succession or to speak yet more Otherwise thus Those who take the Oaths of Allegiance and Supremacy swear to accept and take the Possible Heirs for their Soveraigns when they shall become Actual according to the Hereditary and Lineal Descent of the Crown plainly our Faith and Allegiance is promised to the possible Heirs and is to be made good and performed unto them and every one of them when by the Providence of God they shall come to be actual according to the known Order of Hereditary Succession and thus for Example to use his own Instance The Excise is granted to the Kings Heirs and Successors i. e. To the Kings Future Heirs and Successors upon whom the Crown shall descend according to the Ordinary Rule of Succession and every one of them will have a Right to the Excise by vertue of that Grant when of a Possible he shall by Gods Providence who determines the days of Kings become an Actual Heir or have the Crown fall upon his Head by Lawful and Vndoubted Succession according to the Fundamental Custom of this Hereditary Realm A Third Reason against the Bill of Exclusion is taken from the Author of this Hereditary Succession to the Crown which is (b) Coke Littleton fol. 1.6 The Inheritance of our Lord the King is a direct Dominion of which none is the Author but God alone And from hence as the Learned Bochart observes the Kings of England have always stiled themselves Dei Gratiâ and the Royal Shield carryes this Motto Dieu mon droit Nay Queen Elizabeth who through the Dubiousness of her Title courted the People so much yet in her Declaration for Assisting the Netherlands printed 1585. speaks as it became such a Soveraign Princess in this manner Although Kings and Soveraign Princes owing their Homage and Service only unto Almighty God the King of all Kings and in that Respect not bound to yield Account or render a Reason of their Actions to any other but God their Soveraign and though among the most Ancient and Christian Monarchs the same Lord God hath committed unto Us the Soveraignty of this Kingdom of England and other Dominions which we hold immediately of the same Almighty God and thereby God alone who hath given it to the Royal Family for a Perpetual Inheritance and hath by his Providence ordained that it should come to one of them after the decease of another according to Birthright and Proximity of Blood From this Principle many good Men who are as Wise and as Learned as any of the Excluders infer this Conclusion That it would be Vsurpation without a manifest Revelation from God to Alienate the Crown from this Family to which he only hath given it or to preclude any Person of it much more the next Heir whether Apparent or Presumptive from succeeding thereunto This Argument is not so slight as perhaps Mr. J. will make it for if the Imperial Crown of England be Subject to none but God who hath given it for an Inheritance to the Royal Family then it is very reasonable to conclude That to endeavour to exclude the Whole Royal Line to prevent Popery would be Opposition to the Will of God This I have heard some of the first Form of Excluders readily grant and from thence I think the Opposers of the Bill of Exclusion may well argue That to Exclude any one Person of the Royal Family but most of all the next Heir upon the Line from the absolute Right or Birthright which God alone hath given him would be also to oppose the Will of God All these Arguments against the Bill of Exclusion are owned by the Ingenious and Loyal Authors of the (c) Third Part. p. 63 64 Address to the Freemen and Freeholders of England and were also own'd by no Vulgar Person and Scholar in the (d) Ib. p. 97 98. House of Commons and it is above a Week since and I am confident they will still own them without being ashamed of them and it will be no Disgrace to Mr. J. though he were a better Man than he is to follow as he speaks their New Light Nay all these Reasons against Excluding the next Heir from the Succession are own'd by the Three Estates of Scotland and would I am confident be owned by them were they to meet again I will set them down as I find them in an Act of Parliament Entituled An Act acknowledging and asserting the Right of Succession to the Imperial Crown of Scotland August 13. 1681. THe Estates of Parliament considering That the Kings of this Realm deriving their Royal Power from God Almighty Alone do succeed lineally thereto according to the known Degrees of Proximity in Blood which cannot be interrupted suspended or diverted by any Act or Statute whatsoever and that none can attempt to alter or divert the said Succession without involving the Subjects of this Kingdom in Perjury and Rebellion and without exposing them to all the fatal and dreadful Consequences of a Civil War Do therefore from an hearty and sincere Sense of their Duty recognise acknowledge and Declare That the Right to the Imperial Crown of this Realm is by Inherent Right and the Nature of the Monarchy as well as by the Fundamental and Unalterable Laws of this Realm transmitted and devolved by a Lineal Succession according to the Proximity of Blood And that upon the death of the King or Queen who actually Reigns the Subjects of this Kingdom are bound by Law Duty and Allegiance to obey the
Senate went out to congratulate their Arrival and the Form of the Procession into the City was thus The two Princes in their Royal Purple went first the Consuls followed after them carrying the Urn wherein were the Ashes of Severus and then in order all that came out to salute the New Emperors They put the Urn in the Temple where the Monuments of the former Princes were and having performed all the Customary Rites the two Princes retire into different Apartments in the Palace and had different Guards After the Apotheosis of their Father they sought one anothers Destruction each seeking to have the Empire alone The greater part was inclined to Geta and their Mother being afraid of the Tragical Effects of their Discord sought but all in vain to make them Friends At length they agree to divide the Empire and the Terms of the Agreement were these Bassian was to have Europe and the Western Parts of Africa Herodian in Caracalla and Geta was to have Asia and the Eastern Parts of Africa and of the Senators as many as were Romans were to stay at Rome with the one and the rest were to go into Asia with the other But their Mother asking them with Tears in her Eyes how they could divide her made them break off the Agreement at which she was glad hoping at length she should reconcile them But all her Endeavours were vain for now they conspire one anothers destruction But Bassian being the more fiery and impatient was resolved to be before-hand with his Brother Geta and therefore coming suddenly upon him he gave him his deaths wound of which he presently died in his Mothers Arms. Upon this he presently flyes out of the Palace to the Camp where telling the Souldiers what dangers he had escaped and how he had killed his Brother in his own defence and promising every one of them two thousand and two hundred Drachmas a man and half as much more Provision as they used to have and likewise giving them leave to plunder the Treasuries and the Temples they presently proclaim him Emperor He remained all that Night in the Camp and the next day marched in the Head of the Army to the Senate and having (†) Spart in Caracalla Herod in Caracalla placed the Souldiers between the Senators Seats he mounts the Imperial Throne and excuses the Murder of his Brother in a Seech After he had reigned with much Cruelty six years his death was conspired by his Praefectus Praetoria Macrinus who killed him by the hands of Martialis the Centurion in Charrae a City of Mesopotamiâ while he was at Stool The Souldiers thinking that Martialis had killed him meerly to revenge his Brothers death whom he had slain pursued him and killed him without enquiring further into the Conspiracy After the death of Caracalla the Army deliberated two days about the Choice of an Emperor and at length agreed in the Choice of one Audentius but he refusing it they chose Macrinus who after he had concluded a Peace with Artabanus King of Persia marched to Antioch (‖) Herodian in Macrino from whence he sent a Letter unto the Senate wherein he apologized for the meaness of his Extraction and promised that his Government should look rather like a Commonwealth than a Kingdom and highly reflected upon Commodus and other Emperors who succeeded their Fathers because looking upon the Empire (†) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as their Due by Inheritance they abused it (‖) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as their own Patrimony whereas those who received it from the Senate were their Debtors and bound to requite their Kindness Upon the reading of this Respectful Letter he was immediately declared Emperor by the Senate and had all the Imperial (*) Such as the Title of Augustus the Consulship the Proconsulship the Tribuneship the Censorship and the Office of Pontifex Maximus Vid. Dion l 53. Honours and Offices conferred upon him Before he sent this Letter as soon as he was Elected Emperor by the Souldiers he declared his Son (‖) Capitol in Macrino Herod in Macrino Diadumenus Caesar and made him his Partner in the Empire But his ill-gotten Empire lasted not long for the Legions coming to understand that he conspired against the Life of the last Emperor began to hate him and the Fates as Profane Authors call Providence made way for their Revolting from him The Story is in short this Moesa a Phaenician Lady Sister to Julia the Wife of Severus and Mother to Caracalla had lived a long time in the Court and heaped up vast Riches She had two Grandsons by two Daughters both Priests of the Sun Bassianus surnamed (†) Or Heliogabalus Heloeagabalus and Alexianus Heliogabalus was a Youth of extraordinary Form and Beauty and much admired and commended by the Souldiers who frequented the Temple of the Sun Moesa finding the young Priest so much in Favour with the Souldiers Capitolin in Macrino Herol in Macrino Heliog Dio Xiph. in Macrino privately gave it out that he was the Son of Caracalla and at the same time gave great Gifts among the Souldiers Uon this the Souldiers revolt from Macrinus and receive Heliogabalus as the Son of Caracalla surname him Antoninus from (†) Antoninus Caracalla his supposed Father put the Royal Purple upon him and declare him Emperor Macrinus hearing this sends Julianus with another part of the Army against the Revolters but as soon as they drew near the City where the New Emperor was the Souldiers shewed him unto them crying out The Son of Antoninus the Son of Antoninus and also shaking Bags of Money in their Hands Upon this the Forces of Julianus cut off his Head and joyn with the Revolters to Heliogabalus This ill News makes Macrinus march with all his Forces against Heliogabalus who met him in the Confines of Syria and Phaenicia where a little after the Battel was begun the Souldiers of Macrinus joyned in great Numbers with the Army of this Pseudo-Antoninus he perceiving the Treachery flyes and was taken and killed in Bithinia after he had reigned about a year Macrinus and his Son Diadumenus Caesar being kill'd the whole Army proclaim Heliogabalus Emperor and when the Senate received the News of it being forced to make a Vertue of (‖) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Herod Necessity they confirmed their Choice Heliogabalus being confirmed in the Empire Adopts his Brother Alexanus but two years younger than himself and declares him Caesar and thereupon makes him Consul with himself and then gets the Senate (†) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Herodian most rediculously to confirm the Adoption of his Brother agaist all Law which (‖) Adoptio enim naturam imitatur debet itaque is qui filium sibi per adoptionem facit plenâ pubertate i.e. decem octo annis precedere Inst l. 1.11 requires that the Adopter should be 18 years older than the person adopted After Alexianus otherwise called Alexander was
of Julian Caesar He would not have made Julian Caesar The Nature of Julian's Elective Succession and the Manner in which Nazianzen hath expressed himself about it obliged our Author so to speak For Naz. in the (‖) Invect 1. p. 50. Place which he cites useth the most emphatical word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to express how Constantius made or created Julian Caesar for as 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 from 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifies to make or ordain a Clergy-man so in Ecclesiastical Writers 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 from 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifies to make create or constitute a King as the Greeks called a Caesar and so it is used by the Septuagint for the making of Saul Ishbosheth Kings because they were Kings purely by (‖) 2 Sam. 8. 22.2 Sam. 2.9 Vid. 1 Sam. 12.1 Is 7.6 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Schol. Election And because Julian was made Caesar as they were made Kings purely by Election therefore Naz. ascribes it wholly to the (†) p. 50. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Invect p. 50. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 p. 64. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 p. 65. Goodness Bounty of his Elector and last of all makes it as free an Act in him to bestow the Caesarship upon Julian as it was in (‖) p. 66. Alexander the Great to give King Porus his Life and Kingdom after he had conquered him If then Constantius made or created Julian Caesar as our Author is forced to confess where was his Birthright Therefore to prevent this cross Question in the Mind of his Reader he tells him in the (†) P. 27. Margent That a Romaen Caesar was somewhat like the Prince of Wales or the King of the Romans That he was more than somewhat like the King of the Romans we will grant him but this somewhat like will appear to be a very piteous somewhat if Caesar be compared with the Prince of Wales For First The Caesarship only made a man a (†) Spartianus in Celonio Commodo Maximianus atque Constantius Caesares dicti sunt qaasi quidam Principum filii viri designati Augustae Majestatis haeredes Candidate and Expectant of the Empire or some part of it 2. It was conferred upon many as well as upon one for Antoninus Pius left two and Constantine four Caesars and in this case they might be all equal Expectants of the Empire either in common Caâ—sabon in locum Ut essent Caesares velut Candidati quidam Imperii designati ejus Haeredes or in several Jurisdictions 3. After the Emperor had freely conferred this Honour upon any man he might as freely without any regard to Birth or Birthright devest him of again as Constantius did Gallus and as (‖) Misit ad milites literas quibus jussit ut abregaretur nomen Caesaris Alexandro Lamprid Vid. Herod l. 5. Heliogabalus designed to do to his Brother Alexander Probus to his Son (†) Pater si vixisset abregare saepius cogitavit filio Caesaris nomen conferre Constantio Pomp. Laet. in Carino Carinus (*) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Zosim l. 3. p. 710. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 p. 711. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Zonar t. 3. p. 18. and Constantius himself to Julian a little before he usurped the Empire 4. The Emperor had free Power to confer this Dignity upon whom he would and to give it to Strangers as Nerva did to Trajan and Maximian Hercideus to Constantius (†) Valentiniano Principi percunctanti quemnam ad Imperii consortium assumeret Dagalaiphus respondet fidentiùs Si tuos amas Imperator optime habes fratrem â—si rempub quaere quem vestigas Amm. Marcell l. 26. postponing their own Blood 5. It gave no proper Right or Title but only a bare Recommendation to the Augustusship and it was in the Power of the Army and Senate whether or no they would choose the person recommended by that Character if there was but one or how many of the Number when there were more These things being evident from Matter of Fact I desire the Author or rather his Superviser the Lawyer to tell me in which of these Particulars Caesar and the Prince of Wales are alike Can the King of England make any man or any but one man Prince of Wales can he confer that Dignity upon many at once can he devest the Prince of it after he has once invested him in it Is it any thing more than a mere state of Honour and greater Liberty or Emancipation Doth it give the Prince any new Right or Expectation to the Crown or is he to be chosen unto it by any Army or Senate after his Fathers death I protest when I consider these things it almost tempts me to believe That these Men like many others are for an Elective and Republican sort of Monarchy and that they heartily wish that Caesar and the Prince of Wales were not only somewhat but altogether alike I hope I have made it as clear to any Impartial Reader that the Roman was an Elective as that the English is an Hereditary Monarchy fixed in one Family and Lineally descending in proximity of Blood and yet as if the Right and Title of Julian were of the same nature with that of his R. H. to the Brittish Throne Saith he (‖) P. 22. The Fathers and yet he mentions but one had the Conscienoe to set aside such a Title as this and 100 more such to secure their Religion If they had not they had been very much to blame and I dare boldly affirm That all the Fathers of our Church would set aside Ten Thousand such Titles to secure theirs I mean 10000 such Titles as Julian or Constantine either had by Birth for upon supposition that God interposed and declared them Emperors that Declaration must pass as it did in Saul's Case for an Elelection and proves that they were not Heirs of Hereditary Monarchies for then it had been needless for God to interpose For what need God for example have declared Constantine Emperor if he must necessarily have succeded his Father as Sons of Hereditary Monarchs do it had been sufficient for him to let him survive him if he would have had him succeed As for that Passage in Eusebius l. 8. c. 13. where after he tells us That Constantine was declared Supream Emperor and Augustus by the Army then he adds 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and long before this by God himself the Supream Emperor of all This Expression if it be not purely (†) Such as that in Pliny's Panegyric to Trajan Principem tamen nestrum liqueret divinitùs constitutum A Jove ipso coram ac palam repertus Quem tandem exorata terris numina dedissent c. And that of Eumen to Constantine Nobis praecipue te principem dii creaverunt Grat. Act. Const Aug. Panegyrical then to expound Eusebius by himself it relates to the special Providence which presided over Constantine and was visible in
them in Prison or lastly to give him the benefit of Theodoret such as they said to the Emperor himself That which they said at Table among other Souldiers by way of Discourse was this They bewailed the Sadness of the Times they lived in and blessed the former days They said it was not worth the while to live to see the Holy Laws trodden under foot the Lord of all put to open shame and to behold all places so full of the Nidor and Smoke of profane Sacrifices that a man could not breath in pure Air. When they were in Prison they exceedingly rejoyced and said They had no further need of Money or Fine Cloathes To the Tempters whom Julian sent to tempt them with hopes of greater Honours and the Example of other Officers who had lapsed they answered thus We are resolved for this Reason to stand out manfully that we may offer up our selves as it were Sacrifices to expiate for their Fall For if we do not dye now we shall dye we are certain shortly after and it is better to dye for the King of Angels than in the Service of such a Wicked Man it is better to lay down our Lives for an Heavenly Kingdom than for an Earthly one which we tread under foot for if a man dye in the Emperors Service he can receive no Reward for his Valour nay perhaps he may not get a Grave but be left to be devoured by Dogs but if we dye for the King of Angels we shall be sure to receive Glorious Bodies and to have Crowns and Rewards greater than our Sufferings can deserve Wherefore let us take up Spiritual Weapons we have no need of Darts and Arrows and other Bodily Armour our Tongues by which we are to confess Christ are sufficient Arms for us and out of our Mouths shall we shoot Arrows against the Devils Head These are the Sayings of these two Captains in St. Chrysost but they sounded so like the Speeches of Mauritius and Exuperius in the Thebaean Legion that our Author durst not recite them lest his Readers should find out such a Famous Instance of Passive Obedience among the Commanders of Julians own Army who were so willing to be put to death by him contrary to Law What they said to the Tyrants Face was this We have been educated in the True Religion we have always been Obedient to the Laws which were made by Constantine and his Sons and now we cannot but lament to see all things filled with Abominations and even Meat and Drink defiled with Impure Sacrifices This we have bewailed in private with Tears and now lament in your presence This is all they said to Julians Face and now all that our Author can get by it to use his own petulant Phrase he may put in his Eye (†) L. 3. c. 16. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Theodoret commends their Zeal and put this Confession wholly upon that Score As for the Souldiers who were trepanned to Sacrifice by Julian this is the short of the Story Julian on a certain day called his Army unto him to receive Donatives according to their Quality and places The Ceremony was ordered as in the time of the Pagan Emperors The Emperor sat in great State there was Gold set before him on one hand and Frankincense on the other and the Souldiers were told that according to Ancient Custom they were to cast a bit of this into the Fire Vid. Sozom lib. 5. c. 17. before they received any of that The (‖) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Nazianz. p. 85. whole Army were ensnared some it is likely through love of the Gold but many of them as it afterwards appeared through mere Ignorance and Simplicity and the specious pretence of Ancient Custom For when the Solemnity was done the Souldiers went to their Quarters where they eat together and as some of them (†) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Ib. looking up to Heaven and signing themselves with the Sign of the Cross gave thanks unto Christ One among the rest asked them how they could call upon Christ after they had denyed him How replyed they half-dead with the Question how have we denyed Christ Insomuch replyed the other as you have Sacrificed Frankincense which is in effect to deny Christ Upon this immediately rising from the Table they became like distracted Men and being heated with Zeal and Indignation they ran about the Market-place crying out and saying We are Christians we are Christians in our Hearts we declare it to all men and before all men unto God to whom we live and for whom we will dye O Saviour Christ we have not betrayed thee we have not denyed the Faith for however we have offended thee with our Hands we are upright in our Hearts the Emperor deceived us and we are not tainted with his Gold we renounce this ungodly Act we will wash it off with our Blood And then running to the Emperor and throwing down their Gold cryed out Sir we have not received Gifts from you but our own Death and Damnation you called us not to Honour us by them but to mark us with Disgrace Now do us who are your Souldiers the Favour as to kill us for Christ to whom alone we are Subject as we are polluted so let us be purged by Fire reduce us into Ashes as we did the Frankincense cut off our Hands which we stretched out in offering of it and our Feet which carried us to the place and give our Gold to others who have not repented of that they have already received Christ is sufficient for us whom we prefer above all things in the World Having said this to the Emperor they informed others of the Cheat he had put upon them and exhorted them to make Satisfaction to their Saviours Honour with their Blood The Emperor was very mad at them but would no kill them because they should not be counted Martyrs but banished them If the Thebaean Legion was an Example of Passive Obedience much more were these Souldiers of Julian who behaved themselves with such Exemplary Modesty and Submission towards an Apostate Emperor who dealt so basely with his Army and persecuted the greater part of his Subjects as Mr. J. saith not only without but against Law One would think upon Mr. J's Principles that they should rather have mutined and formed themselves into a Posture of Resistance against such a Lawless Tyrant but instead of that they speak unto him like Apostles and desire to be killed for the Sake of Christ Mr. J. knew this very well which made him only refer unto the Story which he knew not one of an hundred among his Readers would nor one in ten could examine I am confident neither of his Supervisers neither he who is now with God nor he who is still among Men knew the Truth of these Stories if they did they were very ill-advised not to blot out the Reference which hath caused me to bring them upon the Stage
to submit to the Penalties of the Government under which he lives But then what follows is false This is the only case wherein the Gospel requires Passive Obedience namely when the Politica Laws are against a Man because the Gospel requires our submission to the Imperial as well as the Political Laws but by the Imperial Laws in every perfect Government the Subjects are absolutely forbidden to bear the Sword against the Soveraign or to resist him upon any pretence whatsoever and therefore are bound to suffer death wrongfully rather than resist 4. That the killing of a Man contrary to Law is Murder And if the Soveraign kill a Man contrary to Law he is guilty of Murder but must answer for it to God only 5. That every Man is bound to prevent Murder as far as the Law allows But the Imperial or Prerogative Law allows no Man to prevent his own Murder by rising up against or resisting his Soveraign and therefore the last words are false And ought not to submit to be murdered if he can help it unless by help it he means help it by Prayers and Tears I hope I have already sufficiently enervated the Strength and Force of our Authors Arguments against Passive Obedience or Non-resistance and now after his Example I shall reduce the Strength and Force of what I have hitherto said into these following Propositions I. Every Man but more especially a Christian is bound to submit to the Laws of the Government under which he lives II. The Government consists in the Imperial as well as the Political Laws III. The Imperial Laws of every Government forbid resisting the Soveraign and by consequence require Non-resistance IV. Non-resistance is the same thing with Passive Obedience and by consequence Passive Obedience is required by the Imperial Laws of every Government V. Whatsoever the Imperial Laws of any Government require of its Subjects if it be not contrary to Gods Laws they are bound to perform it VI. Passive Obedience or patient Suffering of Injuries from the Soveraign is not forbid by Gods Laws and therefore Subjects are bound to perform it where it is required by the Imperial Laws And now I shall desire these Men who of late have thundred so much with Julian against the Thebean Legion to consider well what I have said in general about the Common Laws of Soveraignty when they have digested it well they will be convinced how fallaciously the Author of that Pamphlet hath dealt with them in suppressing this Notion and making them believe That there were no Laws belonging to Government but those which I call Political Laws But as I have shewed there are two Tables belonging to every perfect and regular Government one which concerns the Majesty of the Soveraign Gods Vicegerent which I may call the first Table and another which concerns the Good and Safety of the People which may be called the second Table and these two together are the Compleat and Adequate Rule of Civil Obedience and Subjection and Passive Obedience or the Patient bearing of the greatest Injuries when it is not a Duty by This is very often so by That When the Laws are against us then it is our Duty by the second Table and when the Soveraign is against us contrary to the Laws of the second Table then it is our Duty by the Laws of the first which absolutely forbid us to bear the Sword against him or to repel his Forces by Force Wherefore to answer our Authors (†) P. 87. Question I am confident Dr. Hicks was very serious and in earnest when he taught and preached up Passive Obedience for Evangelical in this case It may be seen by the Drs. Sermon and other of his Pieces that he doth not write rashly and I have reason to presume that he asserted Passive Obedience upon the same bottom that I now defend it He is far from having Men to prostitute their Lives to Malice and Violence for he would rather have them to abscond or fly but if they can or will do neither in times of Illegal Persecution he thinks there remains nothing for them to do but patiently to submit to unavoidable Death He had no reason to distinguish betwixt suffering according to and contrary to Law because he knew that neither the Laws of God nor Man allow any Subject the Benefit of forcible defence against the illegal Violence of his Soveraign but that by the Laws Imperial he ought to dye rather than resist And if this (‖) P. 87. was too light for the Pulpit and just such another Piece of Drollery as that in the Dedication to Oliver Cromwel before Killing no Murder I protest I know not what it is to be serious in the Pulpit nor what Apostolical Divinity is The Gospel from one end to the other is full of this kind of Drollery and for my own I seriously protest I had rather be Passive were it possible under a Thousand deaths in an Illegal Persecution than be guilty of such Scurrility not to say Blasphemy against the Doctrine of the Cross Our Author in this and such like Reflections writes more like an Apostate from the Christian Religion than a Minister of it and if any thing in this Answer may contribute to make him sensible of his Sin and bring him to the Humiliation and Repentance of his Elder Brother Ecebolius I shall think my pains well spent But to bring this general Discourse about the Common Laws of Soveraignty to our own Case I shall now proceed to shew That the English Realm is a perfect Soveraignty or Empire and that the King of England by the Imperial Laws of it is a Compleat Imperial and Independent Soveraign to whom the foresaid Rights of Soveraignty do inseparably belong The English Realm is a perfect Soveraignty and (‖) Sir Orl. Bridgmans Speech to the Regicides p. 12 13. Empire and the King a Compleat and Imperial Soveraign (†) Cooks Instit p. 4. c. 74. Thus by the whole Parliament 24 H. 8. c. 12. it was resolved and so declared That by sundry Authentick Histories and Chronicles it is manifestly declared and expressed that his Realm of England is an Empire and so hath been accepted in the World governed by one Supream Head and King having Dignity and Royal Estate of the Imperial Crown of the same So 25 H. 8. c. 21. the Crown of this Kingdom is affirmed to be an Imperial Crown in these words In great Derogation of your Imperial Crown and Authority Royal. So 27 H. 8. c. 24. Most Ancient Prerogatives and Authorities appertaining to the Imperial Crown of this Realm So 1 Eliz. c. 2. Restoring and Vniting to the Imperial Crown of this Realm the Ancient Jurisdictions c. So 1 Jacob. cap. 1. A more Famous and Greater Vnion of two Mighty Famous and Ancient Kingdoms under one Imperial Crown And before the Conquest King (†) Rot. Parl. 1 E 4. parte 6. at large in Cokes Inst part 4 p. 359.
limited in the Exercise of their Legislative Power not being able to make or repeal Laws without the consent of the Three Estates But still if they will turn Tyrants neither fearing God nor the Censures of Good Men they are by the Law of the English Empire as free from Punishment Compulsion or Resistance as the Caesars were But Secondly The foresaid Generall Reason of not resisting the Soveraign because he is Gods Vice-gerent doth imply that he hath all his Power from God This is very Ancient Divinity as appears from what Daniel said unto Nebuchadnezzar c. 2.37 Thou O King art a King of Kings for the God of Heaven hath given thee a Kingdom Power and Strength and Glory and from what he said to his Grandson Belshazzar c. 5.18 19. The Most High God gave Nebuchadnezzar thy Father a Kingdom and Majesty and Glory and Honour and for the Majesty that he gave him all People Nations and Languages trembled and feared before him Whom he would he slew and whom he would he kept alive whom he would he set up and whom he would he pulled down Accordingly it is written of Cyrus the Heathen Emperor Isa 45.1 Thus saith the Lord to his Anointed to Cyrus whose Right Hand I have holden to subdue Nations before him And 2 Chron. 36.23 Thus saith Cyrus King of Persia all the Kingdoms of the Earth hath the Lord God given me So Prov. 8.15 16. By me Kings Reign and Princes decree Justice by me Princes Rule and Nobles even all the Judges of the Earth And God declared by Jeremy c. 27.5 6. I have made the Earth and have given it to whom it seemed meet unto me and now I have given all these Lands into the hand of King Nebuchadnezzar my Servant Now if according to these Express Texts the Soveraign have all his Power from God he must by consequence have the Power of the Sword from him as St. Paul particularly observes He beareth not the Sword in vain for he is the Minister of God And if he have the Power of the Sword from him it must needs follow (‖) Praeterea cum in regno gladii jus nulli competat praeterquam ipsi regi aut iis quibus a rege id concessum est peto quo jure quis audeâ—t in summum animadvertere utrum jure concesso an usurpato Si concesso dixerit rursus petam a quo concesso Utrum a principe vel ab aliquo alio praeter principem Si a principe respondeat hoc ipso â—rit ridiculus quia non est credibile principem ulli indulgere jus gladio in seipsum utendi Quantamcunque in alium transferat princeps potestatem semper manet Superior Sam Bochart Ep p. 90 91. That the People have no Right to bear it neither for Offence nor Defence or Resistance without Commission from him He may indeed abuse this as well as any other Branch of his Power he may bear the Sword not for the Defence but for the Offence and Destruction of his Subjects but if he do they have no Authority to Resist him they cannot without sinful Usurpation oppose their Swords to his as it was written by the Apostle in the time of a (†) Jam nequis haec dici putet de bonis duntaxat regibus cogitandum est Petrum Paulum vel sub Claudio vel sub Nerone scripsisse quorum ille vecors fuit hic monstrum hominis quibus tamen Christianos jubent esse subditos non solum metu paenae sed â—b conscientiam propter Deum Nec multo meliorem fuisse Tiberium cui Christus reddi voluit ea quae â—rant Caesaris Ib. p â—2 Wicked Tyrant He that resisteth the Power resisteth the Ordinance of God and they that resist shall receive to to themselves Damnation And how can a Man be guiltless that draws and uses his Sword without Authority from him to whom the jus gladii belongs much more if he useth it against him who only hath the Authority of the Sword This very Consideration made Grotius condemn all violent defence against unjust Force from Publick Authority Contra vim injustissimam sed publico nomine illatam De Imp. c. 3. n. 6. Our Blessed Saviour never intended to diminish or destroy the Rights of Soveraignty but on the contrary was very tender of them commanding his Disciples to render unto Caesar the things that were Caesars and this was said by him with respect to Tiberius who was a Man excessive in Cruelty Drunkenness and Lust It was said indeed upon the account of paying Tribute but holds as well to all the Rights of Soveraignty and particularly as to this of being the Master of the Sword and therefore when St. Peter drew his Sword in his Masters Defence against the Officers of the Cruel Sanhedrim he sharply rebuked him saying Put up thy Sword for he that useth the Sword shall perish by the Sword This very Text was ever understood by the Primitive Christians as an absolute Prohibition to use any Violence against the Soveraign and was applyed by Maunitius the Commander of the Thebaean Legion when he charged his Souldiers in Christs Name not to Resist under the Specious Pretext of Self-Defence And truly if the Christian Religion had given a Right to the Professors of it to defend themselves and it against the Illegal Violence of the Soveraign it had not been a taking up of the Cross but of the Sword not Evangelical as our Author speaks of Passive Obedience but Mahumetan and truly one who knew no more of the Gospel than what he might learn of it out of Julian would never imagine that Jesus had said If any man will come after me let him deny himself and take up his Cross and follow me And whosoever shall lose his Life for my sake and the Gospels the same shall save it And every one that forsaketh Houses or Brethren or Sisters or Father or Mother or Wife or Children or Lands for my Names sake shall receive an hundred fold and shall inherit Everlasting Life Or that his Beloved Disciple the Prophet of the New Testament had said of the Martyrs of the (†) Dr. Mores Apocalypsis Apocalypseos c. 13.10 c. 14.12 13. Protestant Religion Here is the Patience and Faith of the Saints Here is the Patience of the Saints Blessed are the Dead or the Martyrs that die in the Lord. But the Author of Julian it seems will shew no Faith nor Patience but in a Legal Persecution he will not die a Martyr but when the Laws are against him but if his Soveraign attack him against Law i. e. against the Laws which are made for the Defence of the Subject he will be even with him he will without Authority take up Defensive Arms against him contrary to the Laws which are made for the Defence and Honour of the Soveraign and so commit as Damnable a Sin one way as his Prince doth the other This is plainly as Max. Tyrius speaks of Private
Answer to the Former Question to shew That we have all the Security against the King that the King hath against us even all the Security that any People in the World ever had have or ought to have an For first We have the Care and Providence 〈◊〉 God for our Security who is King of Kings Lord of Lords and the only Ruler of Princes For as Daniel told Nebuchadnezzar the most High ruleth in the Kingdoms of Men and giveth it to whomsoever he will The Wellfare of the Publick is much more the Object of his Fatherly Care than the Wellfare of private persons and he delights to see the Nations of the Earth Happy and will not let them be Afflicted and Oppressed with Tyrants but when Tyranny is necessary for their Punishment or Cure But much more is he concerned for his own Family I mean for any Nation whose People are part of his Houshold which is the Catholick Church He delights to see them Happy and were it not for their Sins he would always set such Princes over them as would be Nursing Fathers to them and the Church But when it is necessary for their Punishment or Reformation then he will suffer their Kings to turn Tyrants and when he doth so the People like the People of Israel must patiently suffer them as they do other Judgments and not rise up against them lest they be found guilty of Rebellion against God On the other hand when a sinful People turn from those Sins by which they provoke God he will set Just and Merciful and Valiant Princes over them who shall Love them and Protect them as their own Children and this he can do both ways either by taking away Good or Bad Princes or by turning of their Hearts For the Hearts of Kings are in his Rule and Governance and he doth dispose and turn them as seemeth best to his Godly Wisdom According to what Solomon said and perhaps upon his own Experience That the Kings Heart is in the Hand of the Lord as the Rivers of Water he turneth it whithersoever he will Jealous and Suspicious Men indeed may have a thousand Contrivances and Phancied Demonstrations to prevent or remove Evil Princes but when God shall see it fit to punish them that way he will in a Moment baffle and defeat them all And on the other side Princes may have a thousand Devises how to oppress or enslave their People but God whose Instruments they are can in a Moment overturn them and their Devices he can resist the Strength of the Strongest Leviathan as he said unto Senaccherib I know thy Abode and thy going out and thy coming in and thy Rage against me and because thy Rage and thy Tumult is come into mine Ears therefore I will put my Hook in thy Nose and my Bridle in thy Lips and I will turn thee back by the way in which thou camest Wherefore as the Princes best Security against the People is the watchful Providence of God So the same watchful Providence is the Peoples best Security against the Prince The same God who stilleth the Noise of the Waves and the Tumult of the People in defence of the King doth likewise still the Thunder and asswage the Fury of the King in defence of the People and neither could be safe one from the other unless God did Watch and Preside and as it were pitch his Tent between them both Wherefore as it is the securest way for a Prince to have Peaceable and Obedient Subjects to serve God whose Vicegerent he is So on the other hand the best Security the People can have for their Property and Liberty against the Prince is to obey God who setteth up one King and pulleth down another and changeth their Hearts as he sees fit I hope Mr. J. will not think me singular in this piece of Divinity because it is taught by the Church in the next best Book to the Bible to which he and the Doctor have both subscribed in The first part of the Sermon against Rebellion God say the Holy Scriptures maketh a Wicked Man to Reign for the Sins of the People Again God giveth a Prince in his Anger meaning an Evil One and taketh away a Prince in his Displeasure meaning especially when he taketh away a Good Prince for the Sins of the People God giveth Wisdom unto Princes and maketh a wise and good King to Reign over that People whom he loveth and who loveth him If therefore we will have a good Prince either to be given us or to continue let us by our Obedience to God and to our Prince move God thereunto If we will have an Evil Prince when God shall send such an one taken away and a Good in his place Let us take away our Wickedness which provoketh God to place such an one over us and God will either displace him or of an Evil Prince make him a Good Prince so that we first will change our Evil into Good For will you hear the Scriptures The Heart of the Prince is in Gods Hand which way soever it shall please him he turneth it Thus say the Scriptures Wherefore let us turn from our Sins unto the Lord with all our Hearts and he will turn the Heart of the Prince unto our Quiet and Wealth Else for Subjects to deserve for their Sins to have an Evil Prince and then to Rebel against him were double and treble evil by provoking God more to plague them Nay let us either deserve to have a good Prince or let us patiently suffer and obey such as we deserve Shall the Subjects both by their Wickedness provoke God for their deserved punishment to give them an Indiscreet and Evil Prince and also Rebel against him and withal against God who for the punishment of their Sins did give them such a Prince I leave Mr. J. to give the Church an Answer to this her Interrogatory and so proceed to the second thing which we have for our Security and that is the Conscience of the Prince For as the Princes Security against the Insurrection of his Subjects consists very much in the Conscience that they have of the Duty which they owe unto him So their Security against his tyrannical abuse of his Power consists as much un the sense of that Duty which he ows unto them He hath the same Principles within him to check his Passions that they have to check and bridle their and hath all the Moral Obligations and the Fear of God who hateth Tyrants to keep him from oppressing them that they have to keep them from Rebelling against him The common Principles of Humanity Justice and Equity are engraven by the Finger of God upon the Minds of Kings as well as upon other Mens and they cannot do wrong to any particular person much less to great numbers of their Subjects without undergoing the same uneasie Remorse that other Men do when they injure one another This hath been found by sad Experience in