same service what fortune ever fall by chance in the same Battle against the Mind and Will of the Prince as in this Land some time passed hath been seen that it is not reasonable but against all Law Reason and good Conscience that the said Subjects going with their Sovereign Lord in Wars attending upon him in his Person or being in other places by his commandment within this Land or without any thing should lose or forfeit for doing their true Duty and Service of Allegiance c That for the said deed and true Duty of Allegiance he or they be in no wise Convict or Attaint of high Treason ne of other Offences for that cause by Act of Parliament or otherwise by any Process of Law whereby he or any of them shall lose or forfeit Life Lands Tenements c. or any other things but to be for that Deed and Service utterly discharged of any vexation trouble or loss And if any Act or Acts or other Process of the Law hereafter thereupon for the same happen to be made contrary to this Ordinance that then that Act or Acts or other Process of the Law whatsoever they shall be stand and be utterly void 5 Provided always that no Person or Persons shall take any Benefit or Advantage by this Act which shall hereafter decline from his or their said Allegiance Which is to be understood of the King in being as the rest is and against the same King. To this Statute it is alledged That the Title of the Crown was then so ambiguous and uncertain that it was hard to know where the Right lay which is a meer Cavil The Title was as well known then as it is now and is a thing of that Nature that it can never be universally known but the greatest part of Mankind take those that are set over them without further inquiry nor is it reasonable any Man should suffer for obeying them whom he cannot nor ought to resist So that what some have said That every one is bound to take notice of the right Title at his Peril is true if the Person is in Possession but false if he is out of Possession Conquest a voluntary Surrender and a wilful Desertion of a Crown will put an End to the best founded Title in the World as I think is universally agreed so that if the Party pretending has a Title why is he not in Possession too if he is outed by his own Act I am absolved if by the Force and Power of another why then he is conquered and both waies especially if I had no hand in it I am and ought to be absolved before God and Man. But then not only the three Estates of England but all the Princes and Sovereign States in Christendom except the King of France have allowed King William and Queen Mary as the rightful Sovereigns of England which is a kind of giving Judgment against the late King after hearing what has been alledged on both sides So that this Case is determined by all the ways that are possible and must absolve any Man that submits now to that which is the only Supreme Power in England As to the Oaths taken to the late King they create no new Obligation upon us as to the Extent or Duration of our Allegiance I was under the same Obligations of Allegiance before I was sworn as I was afterwards and every Subject of England oweth by the Laws of England a natural Allegiance to his Prince before he is sworn as every Man ows naturally Obedience to God before he entreth into the Baptismal Covenant And so the Primitive Christians were under the same Obligation to their Princes we are tho' I do not find they ever swore any Allegiance to them 2. This Allegiance is no everlasting Obligation as to time Death a voluntary Resignation a wilful Desertion or a lawful Conquest will put an End to it 3. It is no wild unlimited Obedience whilst it lasteth but is plainly limited by the Laws of God and the Laws of the Land and if I obey further actively I am responsible to God and Man for it I come now to the Words of the Oaths which may seem to create any Scruple which in the Oath of Supremacy I suppose may be these I do promise that from henceforth I shall bear Faith and true Allegiance to the King's Highness his Heirs and Lawful Successors and to my Power shall assist and defend all Jurisdictions Priviledges Preheminences and Authorities granted or belonging to the King's Highness his Heirs and Successors or united and annexed to the Imperial Crown of this Realm Where first I observe No Man is bound beyond his Power but that all those who stuck to the late King till he left the Nation and another took Possession of his Place are thereby disabled and freed from attempting any further 2. That the Authorities I am to defend are such only as belong to the Crown of England by the Laws of England which are to limit my Allegiance but by the Law of England my Allegiance is now transferred to another and cannot be due to two in opposition each to other so that if I persist in my Allegiance to James II. I am punishable by these very Laws therefore my Allegiance which was a legal Allegiance is determined That in the Oath of Allegiance which may be objected is this I will bear Faith and true Allegiance to his Majesty his Heirs and Successors and him and them will defend to the uttermost of my Power against all Conspiracies and Attempts whatsoever which shall be made against his or their Persons their Crown and Dignity by reason or colour of any such Sentence or otherwise c. Now this Oath which binds us to the Person as the other did to the Power is capable of the same Limitation and is to be limited both as to its Duration and extent by the Laws of England and the Law of Nations and therefore is determinable the same way the other was The Power and uttermost Power reserved and expressed in these Oaths is a Legal Power and therefore no Man is by these Oaths bound to exert his Natural Power for any Prince when he may by the Laws of England be punished as a Traytor for so doing it being a Legal and not an Illegal Allegiance we promise by them If King James would have been contented with the Preheminences Priviledges Authorities and Jurisdictions granted and annexed or belonging to the Crown of England I believe no Body questions but he had been still King of England but by grasping at others which did not belong to him he cut off his own Succours and hindred those that otherwise would have defended him and them from doing it He would not be content with those that belonged to him and they could not fight for or defend any other and between these two his Power fell to the Ground by his own Default and his withdrawing put an End to his Sovereignty
Religion being contrary to the Established Laws whoever came in to it knew beforehand that at one time or other he might be called to lay down his Life for it and when it happened it was no new or unexpected accident but foreseen and provided for But then they were not so silly as to be fond of their Persecutors or to wish or fight for it We are said Tertullian defamed as Enemies to the Emperour's Majesty tamen nuaquam Alainiani nec Nigriani vel Cassiani inveniri potuerunt Christiani Yet never was any Christian found like Albinus Pescennius Niger or Avidius Cassius Vsurping the Throne and Invading the Government They prayed for the Emperor and performed all the Duties of good Subjects till he persecuted them and endeavoured to destroy the Church of God but then they changed their Notes Quales ergâ— leges ist quas adversus nos soli exequuntur impii injusti turpes truces vani dementes What Laws are these which none ever put in Execution against us but impious unjust base barbarous vain and mad Princes Who ever pleaseth may see enough of this laid together in Jovian pag. 161. and 162. There is not one of those Princes who persecuted the Church but he is represented to the World by the Fathers and Church Historians in the blackest Characters That little Book that was written by Lactantius to shew the dismal Ends and sad Catastrophies of the Persecuting Princes shews how far they were from being fond of Persecution or Persecutors and by what hand soever the enraged Fool fell the deliverance was ascribed to God who makes use of such instruments as he thinks fit to punish bloody and tyrannical Men. And let any Man shew me that the Primitive Christians were discontented when they were delivered if he can So far were some of the Ancient Fathers from fighting for the persecuting Princes when they hapned to be dethroned or invaded that they would not suffer a baptised Person to list himself in the service of a Pagan Prince Tertullian de corona cap. 11. To which purpose he alledgeth that passage of our Saviour He that takes the Sword shall perish by the Sword But then saith he Plane si quos militia praeventos fides posterior invenit alia conditio est Those who were admitted to Baptism after they were listed in the Service of the Emperor were not under the same obligation And we have the Passion of one Maximilian an African who suffered Martyrdom for no other Cause but for that he would not serve the Emperor as a Soldier And the Council of Aâ—les which first admitted baptized Persons to take up Arms limited the Grant to times of Peace which was all one with the saying They would not allow it under Pagan Princes From all which I may reasonably infer They did not think themselves bound to bestir themselves for Pagan or persecuting Princes as if the Church must have perished if they had not had the Honour to preserve every Prince God had set over them till he had ended his Reign and his Life together Yet in all these times the Doctrine of Passive Obedience was at the Highest never call'd in question never doubted of It is as true also The Roman Emperors under whom they lived were absolute Independent Princes whose Will was the Law and the constitution of the Empire differed vastly from that of England So that we are not under the same Obligations they were because our Princes have not the same Legal Powers the Roman Emperors had but then I doubt not but we are as much bound to submit to the Legal Commands of a King of England as the Primitive Christians were to the Legal Commands of their Princes But this was no part of the Controversie under the Reign of James II. who had as little Law as Reason for what he did I could never meet with one single Protestant how discontented soever he was that James II. is not still King of England who would pretend to justifie or excuse any of his Actions no they all grant his Design was certainly to extirpate the Protestant Religion to enslave and consequently to extirpate the English Nation but then say they What of all that no evil is to be done we ought not to rebel to save a Church or a Nation Why what then supposing all this were true What is this to them Have any of them rebelled Yes say they all that have sworn Allegiance to their present Majesties have made defection from James II. who tho' he were never so bad a Man is still our lawful Prince and we are bound to swear Allegiance to no other as long as he is alive To this I reply If the things laid to the Charge of James II. in the Prince of Orange's Declaration are true and I think no body questions that for all the same things in a manner are complained of in the Bishops Proposals but one or two which were too high for any Subject to take notice of why then I say That Prince had a just Cause to make War upon James II. and if he was conquered by him he has as good Right to our Allegiance on that score as ever any conquering Prince had But this is not all It is well known His now Majesty offered to submit all his Controversies to the Decision of an English Parliament which is more perhaps than was ever done by any invading Prince before but James II. was resolved That neither he nor we should have any Right or Redress but rather than submit to that he would go make a Voyage to his most Christian Majesty for his Assistance to make a second Conquest of us There has been much bandying Whether James II. went voluntarily away or were forced and this is a Question not worth one Farthing at the bottom For if he went voluntarily he was forced and if he was forced he went voluntarily I suppose no Man ever said or thought he freely resigned the Crown but that his Mis-government had raised such Jealousies and Discontents in the Minds of his Subject that they neither could nor would fight for him till he had in Parliament done Right first to his People and then to the Prince This he was resolved not to grant be the Event what it would and when he saw himself deserted by all the World still he persisted in his Resolution and after he had promised a Parliament broke his Word with the Prince and the Nation and withdrew his Person and Seals and left us in Anarchy and Confusion Now I say he was not forced to do this he might and as the case stood he was bound to have granted a Parliament and then he might have staid with good safety to his Person and Sovereignty Now if there be nothing asked of a Prince by his Neighbour-Prince upon an Invasion but what he ought to grant and may grant he is forced by no body but himself if
general and it is now confessedly necessary in Turky and all Countries where Christianity is oppressed and by consequence every where except some Body can shew We have one Gospel for the Afflicted and another for the prosperous Daies of the Church or one Remedy viz. that of Patience was prescribed to our Ancestors and another directly contrary to us which if any Man can shew when and where it was done I shall be very thankful But it may be pretended it has been stretched too far and that some of the Church of England have written too much in Favour of Wicked and Tyrannical Princes even to the encouraging them to do worse than otherwise they would To this I say The Heat of Controversie has in other Instances mis-led Men as well as in this and the Doctrine of Non-resistante is nevertheless true tho' their Notions of it should happen to prove too loose or too large Let it then be fairly and truly stated once for all and then let it be as it ever has been The Glory of the Church of England and the Bulwark of all Religious Kings and States against the Rage of Mutinous and Rebellious Spirits who pretend to sight for God's Truth against the Laws and Governments of their Countries If any Man thinks some of the things that were done in the heat of the late Revolution cannot be justified without exploding this Doctrine I say those are the Faults of a few Men and better it is to leave them to their own Master than to set up our selves against the Doctrines of Christianity to excuse them The Men of our Generation have all the Infirmities that have gone along with the former and being so highly provoked by a handful of perfidious ungrateful Miscreants what Wonder is it if the Temptation which was so strong prevailed over the Restraint and made them guilty of some Irregularities which according to the strict Rules of the Gospel cannot be justified such things have happened in the best of the former Ages and will happen again in those that shall follow us But the Rule of Christianity ought to be preserved notwithstanding and delivered down to our Posterity just as we received it Those that have appeared against this Doctrine have done their Majesties Two great Injuries First They have exasperated the Dissatisfied Party in the Nation and made them harder to be won over they concluding that this Revolution was not the Work of God because so many of those who have defended it have made it their business to ridicule or confute the Doctrine of Passive Obedience as if there were no other way than that to justifie it But then they are well assured this is as certain a Principle of the Christian Religion and was ever practised by the Primitive Church in the five first Centuries and from thence they conculde the Men that do this and all other that joyn with them have made a Defection from this Doctrine and from the Church of England and they think themselves bound in Conscience to oppose all those that are thus united lest they should seem betrayers of this Loyal Holy Excellent Doctrine and of the Honour of that Church that hath ever taught it Secondly They have deprived them as much as in them lies of that religious awe and reverence which is due to all Crowned Heads and Sovereign States If they are the Ministers of God if they are the Powers ordained by God then is all resistance of them a sin against God. But these Men write as if it were lawful to resist when they pleased and whom they pleased which if it is true I am very confident it will not be long before they will pretend they have cause or some other for them and so all Princes shall be deprived of their best Safegard the fear of God over-awing their Subjects as the just avenger of such as rebel against their rightful lawful Princes and the Laws of their Country As there must be in every Country a Supreme Power lodged somewhere against which there is no Appeal but to God so that Power must be acknowledged to be Sacred and Irresistable by the Laws of Christianity and this is as true of Commonwealths as Monarchies for wheresoever the Supreme Power is lodged it is the Ordinance of God approved by his Word and settled by his Providence whosoever then resisteth that Power resisteth the Ordinance of God and shall receive to themselves Damnation He then that shall endeavour to destroy this Obligation and to persuade Men they are not bound in Conscience to submit to the Laws and lawful Governors of their Country contradicts this plain Doctrine of the Apostle and exposeth the Supreme Powers in all Countries to the Rage and Fury of the Multitude or any Faction that is potent and thinks it self injured and consequently he is an Enemy to all Government But then though I am bound not to resist I am not equally bound to assist my hands may be tied both ways If I live in a Pagan Country where Christianity is Persecuted by the Supreme Power I must suffer and ought not to resist but then I am not to lend my assistance to that State to encourage or enable it to destroy this Religion but I must be meerly passive in that case And this was the case of England we were persecuted against Law by a handful of Men who expected to ruine us by our own hands and we were bound not to assist them in this wicked and foolish Project and for want of our assistance they could not justifie or carry on the Enterprize and when they came to be called to an Account by a Prince who was no Subject and consequently was not under the Obligation of not resisting their Injustice and Oppression so they fell an easie Victim to his Arms and we were delivered out of their hand not by any resistance we made but by refusing to assist them and they that went no farther than this which it is certain the greatest part of the Nation did not are justifiable by the strictest Rules of Christianity and the Practice of the best Ages To conclude I would advise even those who have no kindness for the Doctrine of Non-resistance to speak modestly of it it has such Characters of Divinity to shew that it will deserve this respect at their hands if they are Christians And as to those that are not those that despise all revealed Religion for they of late have been very witty against it they ought to shew some reverence to it for the sake of Government and to preserve the Peace of the World in which that sort of Men have a greater interest than others for their All lies in this World and they pretend to nothing in the next and if the World be imbroyled let the pretence be what it will their happiness must necessarily be very much abated and perhaps their Machines destroyed and then there is an end of them FINIS LICENS'D August 27. 1689. J. Fraser History of the Desertion p. 48. Ad Scapulam c. 2. Apolog. C. XXXV Fâ—seb H. E. lib. 7. c. 1. lib. 10. c. X. de Vita Const lib. 2. c. 2. Tertul. Apol. cap. 6. Anno Christi 295. Cum Ecclesia pace gauderet proinde in Maximilianum animadvertitur ob spretam Militiam non ob fidem Christiaâ—am Grotius Cap. 2. Tanta hominum multitudo pars pene major Civitatis cujusque Dan. 4. 17. De civitate Dei lib. V. cap. 21. Lactantius de mortibus persecutorum Euseb H. E. lib. VIII c. 13. Euseb l. 7. c. 13. missis literis persecutionem adversus nostros commotam sedavit †Euseb H. E. l. 7. c. 30. p. 231. * Euseb l. 8. c. 13. Lactantius de mortibus persecut †Jaacius chronicon Alexandrinum say he lived to the Year 316. Lib. 1. cap. 1. § 9. Socratis H. Eccl. lib. 2. cap. 12 13 27. ☞ Bishop Ken. Lâ— vrai Interet des Princes Chretiens Pâ— 176. Hist Eccl. lib. III. cap. 41. See the 1. Collect for the 5 th of Novemb. Thuanus Ann. 1559. Rom. 13. 11 H. 7. c. 1 Magna cha c. 29. 2 E. 3. c. 8. Constantini oratio ad sanctorum caetum
he will run away from his People rather than do them and his Neighbour Right But then when we say His retreat was voluntary we do not pretend there was no force made use of but that it was not made use of to that end All that was asked by the Prince or his own Subjects was a free and legal Parliament and all the force that was used was to that End And this he might and ought to have granted but if he would not the Prince is not to be supposed to have brought 14000 Men only to make a vain Shew with all but either to force him to do him Right or force him out of his Kingdom This Prince was no Subject to King James nor to any other Prince and consequently was no Rebel He had as well good Right as a good Cause to invade this injurious Prince who had injured both him and his good Subjects and without a War would do no right either to the Prince or us For the Prince had tried all fair waies before he tried Force as is notoriously known to all the World. But our Jacobites prate of the Force that was used against him by another Sovereign Prince as injurious only because it was Force Why the Prince was no Subject and if James II. would do him no right without Force tho' we that were then his Subjects had no Right to compel him HE might lawfully compel him by Force to do what he ought to have done without it but would not What Stupidity is it to deny a Sovereign Prince may make use of Force against a neighbouring Prince that has done him Wrong Well but say they His Subjects ought to have fought for King James To which I say Why did they not who hindred them from fighting No they would not fight or which is all one they durst not and now he is gone they think to make him amends by a fullen disclaiming of the present King's Sovereignty But tho' they will not swear they will promise to live peaceably under this King That is they will not own him for the lawful King of England but they will submit to him as they did to Oliver Cromwel till they have an Opportunity to dethrone him and deliver him into the Hand of King James and for this they would be allowed the same Condition with those Subjects that have sworn Allegiance to him Is this reasonable will they admit a Servant or a Rival on the same Terms into their own Families Well but some of his Subjects forsook and others of them fought against him and almost all the rest stood still and would not fight for him 1. What is this to them if they have done as much for him as they could or ought they shall answer for no body but themselves 2. What was the Reason and who gave the Cause of this general Desertion 3. It is denied that King James his Subjects were bound to stand by him and fight for him He had notoriously invaded and destroyed all our Civil and Religious Rights and Liberties and designed the Ruine and Destruction both of them and us and would give us no Assurance we could rely on to do otherwise for the future and therefore if it were unlawful to resist him it was also as unlawful to assist and enable him to destroy the true Religion the English Liberties and Immunities nay the very Nation Now Jovian tells us pag. 272. Whosoever acts contrary to Law in this Realm to the Prejudice of any other Person must be subject to make Reparation by Law against which the King himself can protect no Man as long as the Courts of Law are kept open this has been sufficiently confuted so that there can be no Tyranny nor any Persecution but a most exorbitant and illegal Persecution which must presuppose That Justice is obstructed the Laws and Lawyers silenced the Courts of Judicature that up and that the King governs altogether by Arbitrary Power and the Sword. The Courts were indeed open but we know for all that no Man could have any redress but the Consequences were the same as if they had been shut up But to suppose this saith the Doctor is plainly to suppose the utmost possibility which is next to an impossibility a possibility indeed in Theory but scarce to the reduced into Practice For in such a violent Vndertaking all good Men would withdraw from the Service and Assistance of the King mark that and the Bad durst not serve him because if he died or repented of his Vndertaking they must be answerable for all the Wrongs and Illegalities they were guilty of in his Service And a little lower he tells us To shut up the Laws or obstruct and pervert Justice would prove an exceeding difficult and almost impracticable Undertaking because all his good Subjects and all the bad too that tendered their own Safety would desert him nay Foreigners upon this account would make a Difficulty to serve him because he could not protect them against his own Laws Now all this was done and averred in the Face of the Sun this Possibility was brought into act and things driven on to the utmost Extremity and the only Question then was Whether we should intail this arbitrary tyrannical exorbitant Persecution on our Posterity without any Hopes or Possibility of Redress or whether we should withdraw from his Service and secure our Rights and Religion by it And this was done by all but the Irish and Papists both Good and Bad in a manner as the Doctor foretold it would and to me it seems altogether justifiable I know the Doctor means only a Civil Recess but if it was highly punishable and Infamous to have persisted in a co-operation and Assistance of these things it was worse and more punishable to have fought for them And from hence I conclude All that did withdraw from the Service of the late King when they saw he was resolved on these illegal exorbitant Courses are not to be blamed and that the best of the Primitive Christians would have done the same thing if it had been their lot to have fallen under such a Prince Tertullian de corona c. 12. expounds that Place of Scripture Give unto Caesar the things that are Caesar's and unto God the things that are God's Give the Man to God and the Penny to Caesar The Man bore God's Image as the Penny did Caesar's and when God and Caesar were in opposition the whole Man was God's Right So far were they from thinking their Loyalty to their Prince obliged them to be disloyal to their Religion even then when they never thought of Resisting their hands were tyed up neither to assist nor resist a against persecuting Prince they would do neither of these tho' they perished And are not we still under the same Obligations as to the latter as well as to the former For Shame let no Man boast of that Loyalty to his Prince which makes him Disloyal to God and his Church