To the extent possible under law, the Text Creation Partnership has waived all copyright and related or neighboring rights to this keyboarded and encoded edition of the work described above, according to the terms of the CC0 1.0 Public Domain Dedication Creative Commons 0 1.0 Universal. This waiver does not extend to any page images or other supplementary files associated with this work, which may be protected by copyright or other license restrictions. Please go to http://www.textcreationpartnership.org/ for more information.
Created by converting TCP files to TEI P5 using tcp2tei.xsl, TEI @ Oxford.
EEBO-TCP is a partnership between the Universities of Michigan and Oxford and the publisher ProQuest to create accurately transcribed and encoded texts based on the image sets published by ProQuest via their Early English Books Online (EEBO) database (http://eebo.chadwyck.com). The general aim of EEBO-TCP is to encode one copy (usually the first edition) of every monographic English-language title published between 1473 and 1700 available in EEBO.
EEBO-TCP aimed to produce large quantities of textual data within the usual project restraints of time and funding, and therefore chose to create diplomatic transcriptions (as opposed to critical editions) with light-touch, mainly structural encoding based on the Text Encoding Initiative (http://www.tei-c.org).
The EEBO-TCP project was divided into two phases. The 25,363 texts created during Phase 1 of the project have been released into the public domain as of 1 January 2015. Anyone can now take and use these texts for their own purposes, but we respectfully request that due credit and attribution is given to their original source.
Users should be aware of the process of creating the TCP texts, and therefore of any assumptions that can be made about the data.
Text selection was based on the New Cambridge Bibliography of English Literature (NCBEL). If an author (or for an anonymous work, the title) appears in NCBEL, then their works are eligible for inclusion. Selection was intended to range over a wide variety of subject areas, to reflect the true nature of the print record of the period. In general, first editions of a works in English were prioritized, although there are a number of works in other languages, notably Latin and Welsh, included and sometimes a second or later edition of a work was chosen if there was a compelling reason to do so.
Image sets were sent to external keying companies for transcription and basic encoding. Quality assurance was then carried out by editorial teams in Oxford and Michigan. 5% (or 5 pages, whichever is the greater) of each text was proofread for accuracy and those which did not meet QA standards were returned to the keyers to be redone. After proofreading, the encoding was enhanced and/or corrected and characters marked as illegible were corrected where possible up to a limit of 100 instances per text. Any remaining illegibles were encoded as <gap>s. Understanding these processes should make clear that, while the overall quality of TCP data is very good, some errors will remain and some readable characters will be marked as illegible. Users should bear in mind that in all likelihood such instances will never have been looked at by a TCP editor.
The texts were encoded and linked to page images in accordance with level 4 of the TEI in Libraries guidelines.
Copies of the texts have been issued variously as SGML (TCP schema; ASCII text with mnemonic sdata character entities); displayable XML (TCP schema; characters represented either as UTF-8 Unicode or text strings within braces); or lossless XML (TEI P5, characters represented either as UTF-8 Unicode or TEI g elements).
Keying and markup guidelines are available at the Text Creation Partnership web site.
THeſe Papers were ſent me by a very Worthy Divine of the Church of England: Upon the peruſal of which I found (with ſubmiſſion to bet
I know indeed, ſeveral Treatiſes have been pubEngland, and repreſented them in their true CoFriendly Debate, to the great ſatisfaction of all that are truly ſenſiDeliverer (our preſent King William) but now very ungratefully reject that Deliverance, of which God hath made him a Glori
A Friendly Debate BETWEEN Dr. Kingſman, a Diſſatisfied Clergy-man, AND Gratianus Trimmer, a Neighbour Miniſter, CONCERNING The late Thankſgiving-Day; the Prince's DeEngland; the Nobility and Gentries joining with him; the Acts of the HonouFrance; the Oaths of Allegiance and Supre&c.
With ſome Conſiderations on Biſhop Sanderſon, and Dr. Falkner, about Monarchy, Oaths, &c.
Written for the Satisfaction of ſome of the Clergy, and others that yet labour under Scruples.
By a Miniſter of the Church of England.
LONDON; Printed for Ionathan Robinſon, at the Golden Lion in St. Paul's Church-Yard. MDCLXXXIX.
GOod Morrow to you Sir, I am come to ſee you this Monday Morning, to Recreate my ſelf with you, ho
Sir I am glad to ſee you here, a Sign that the Times are come about, or elſe I ſhould not have thought of ſuch a Favour from you. And I am glad to hear you uſe the Word ReThankſgiving-Day.
Had you any Legal Notice of it, or Orders from the Biſhop?
No Sir, but I hear there is a Book come to Mr.—of— and tho they care not for the Service, I look'd for one from the Ap
And did you give notice of it in the Church?
Yes.
And what Text have you thought on?
I have thought of thoſe Words, Judges 5.9. My Heart is toward the Governours of Iſrael, that offered themſelves willingly among
the People: Bleſs ye the Lord. But I may pitch upon another.
Is not that in the ſame Chapter, with that Rebellious Text? Curſe ye Meroz.
Yea, it is. But I thought there had been never a Rebellious Text in Scripture.
No, And therefore it will be hard for you to find one for a Thankſgiving, on this Occaſion.
Why ſo? Do you think Rebellion to be the occaſion of this Thankſgiving? But if there were ſuch a bad Text in the Word of God, I would find a better for this Occaſion.
I thought what the Whiggs and Trimmers would at laſt bring us to.
So you ſee indeed, that the Trimmers (the fineſt Nick-name that was ever given to honeſt Men, that were for the ſettlement of Affairs on the trueſt bottom) have brought the Boat to a ſight of Land, and I wiſh it well at Home in the Haven of Reſt and Peace. But do you know whither you were going, in the Royal James, hanging out the Flags of Loyalty; and by an Arbitrary Power, againſt all Law, preſſing all the Veſſels in the River to carry the Pope and Cardinals, to viſit England, with all their Stuff, and Merchandize, and to command all that would not go, paſſively to lower, and ſtrike Flag to you, or elſe to be ſunk?
But you do not blame us for our Loyalty, do ye? The Church of England, and her Friends, have been ever Loyal: And it is her Honour, which ſhe hath never proſtituted yet; whatever other Reformed Churches have done, that Honour of Loyalty is peculiar to our Church.
No, I do not blame you for Loyalty, in the trueſt Notion of it, which the Trimmer underſtands better than any of you. His NoEngland, as it is called, and ſaid to be peculiar to her, I do think her Siſters beyond-Sea are as honeſt as ſhe; and whatever your Mother is, ſome of you her Sons have got no Honour by making Court to the Mother of Harlots. And they who can diſparage their Aunts abroad, or diſown them as no Siſter-Churches, becauſe they have not Lords for their Husbands, and wear not the ſame Dreſſes, do not conſult the Honour of their own Mother. And I doubt they will have but few Friends left 'em, who abandon them as no Friends to the Church, who have appeared
England. And ſo being Loyal to the King, as you call it, you are Diſloyal to Chriſt the Supream Head of the Church, and treacherous to the Souls of many that are liable to Temptation, to yield to its Charms, or be expoſed to its Furies. You muſt chooſe either Holy-Water, or Blood. Had he been driven away by the Flaming Sword of Rebellious Subjects, you might have ſome pretence for your Murmurings, but not daring to truſt his own great Force, nor the Men of his own Religion, and having no Confidence in God, whoſe tremendous Providence hath con
But can you think the Nation innocent in this matter? And if our Deliverance from ſome Miſchiefs be conſiderable, yet if the People have ſinned, we have ſmall cauſe to be thankful. And ſeeAſh-Wedneſday is the Day before; I will keep that, and hope no notice will be taken for my not obſerving the other.
And why not both? I am ſure you have not been ſo nice about other Thankſgivings.
I have no Book.
Wales were commonly called Modeſt Prayers.ſicut olim, as you are commanded to do on Aſh-Wedneſday; or will you omit them?
I will do as the Law requires, and according to my Declaration of Aſſent to all and every thing contained in, &c.
Then you will ſtill pray for the King, tho he deſerted the Kingdom, not as much as leaving a Commiſſion for Adminiſtrators in his Abſence; then you will pray that he may be kept and prein the true worſhipping of God, which he hath not done ſince he became a Papiſt; then you will pray for the Queen and Prince of Wales ſtill, right or wrong; and that God would give the King the victory over all his Enemies. What without fighting? And who are they? Are they reputed his Enemies, or his Friends who ſign'd the Aſſociation at Guild-Hall? and do you pray, he may be in a condition to fight againſt them, and overcome them too? And who will you mean when you denounce him Curſed who removeth his Neighbours Landmark? The King who turn'd out the Preſident, and Fellows of Magdalen-Colledg (which is a little more, than gaining a little Ground by removing the Land-marks:) or the Convention, who labour to find out the ancient Bounds, and Foundations remov'd by Arbitrary Goverment? for my part, I deal truly with you, I cannot pray every Petition, contained in the Book of Common-Prayer, notwithſtanding Aſſent declared, for tho there be no Alterations made in the Book, there is an Alteration made in Things and Perſons that I look upon my ſelf, as ſo far diſ
Then you will preſume to make publick Prayers of your own, without Authority?
Let Prayers, and Supplications, and giving of Thanks be made for all men, for Kings, and ſuch as are in Authority. There are ſome ſtill in Authority, and therefore I am obliged to pray for them, and to give Thanks. And tho I cannot make Verſicles, for a Dialogue between the Miniſter and Clerk, there are Pſalms and Chapters as proper for this ſervice, as for other, and I hope more proper than thoſe for the Prince of Wales, and the Queen's being with Child, and I might name more than thoſe. And I hope to find matter enough for a large Thankſgiving.
But where will you find Precedents in Scripture for the Inſur
I might ask you as many Queſtions on the other ſide: But not to tire my ſelf with talk to Day, I will come home to the Preſent Caſe, and lay all theſe things together.
2. How the King kept his Promiſes to govern by Law, to inEngland, ask the Judges, enquire at Cambridge and Oxford, and the late Chancellor, and Eccleſiaſtical Commiſſioners.
3. Popery was diſſeminated all over the Land, Maſs-Houſes publick, Papiſts put in Offices, Schools opened, and taught by Jeſuits, &c. contrary to Law.
4. The King declared Himſelf abſolute, having an inherent power in Himſelf to diſpence with Statutes. Another Argument, that there was no hold to be taken of his Word or Promiſes. For if he do not keep the Statutes made by his Royal Aſſent and his Pre
James II. chang'd the GoRome. And whether He be any longer King of England, than he is Supreme in his DomiRome by Name, I dare refer it to your ſelf. He hath loſt his legal claim to the MonarEngland, by Subjection to the Roman Pontiff.
But tho he has, yet the Order and Authority of Kings being of the Law of Nature, He is Sovereign ſtill, tho he hath degraded Himſelf from the dignity and Supremacy of the King of England, by the Law of England.
Sir You are miſtaken in that Point; for you cannot ſay that the Superiority of the Pope over Kings, is of the Law of Nature; if not, then that King that is Superior above all in his Dominions by the Law of Nature, and yet doth ſubject himſelf to the Pope, doth give up his Natural Right to one that hath no Natural Right, and doth thereby violate, and change the Conſtitution of Nature, and therefore hath loſt His Claim to a Soveraignty by Nature.
But the Scripture doth eſtabliſh the Order and Superiority of Kings, and therefore he holds his Crown and Scepter, by ScripCan. 1640.
I ask you again, Doctor, Is the Supremacy of the Pope o
But your ſuppoſed Wrong, is a wrong to Himſelf. And our Relation of Subjects to him, is unalterable, and perpetual.
You are out again, by your favour, as I conceive with reſpect to your dignity. For the Wrong is a Publick, and General Wrong to all his Proteſtants Subjects, and not a private Injury to Himſelf onely.Thomas More ſaid, the Lord Chancellor is gone, when his Perſon was there preſent, but out of his Office.
But how then came the Peers and People of England to ac
Sir, I did not at firſt intend to ſpeak of theſe tender points, but you began it, and I hope you will not make an ill uſe of it. I give you my anſwer clearly.
6. As he altered the Government in his own perſonal Dignity, ſo he manifeſtly deſtroy'd the other part of the Conſtitution, the Right and Liberty of the People in free Elections, and frequent Parliaments; and ſo no part of the Government was ſafe.
7. And to entail our Miſeries, there was an Infant ſet up for In
9. Laſtly, There was a Deſtructive Conjunction of Intereſt and Deſign with a Foraign Tyrant to bring us and our deareſt RelatiFrance and Savoy. Were not the French Aſſiſtances expected, to turn beautiful England to an Aceldama? What made the Prieſt in the Lady Cary's Houſe, conclude the Dutch Fleet to be their Friends the French, for whoſe Entertainment great Proviſions were made, and to go to the ChapTe Deum? Sir, We have as great Cauſe to keep every day of November as a Thankſgiving, as we have to keep the 5th, now challenging our Thankſgiving to all Generations, for our Deliverance from the Powder Plot, and League with France, by the moſt Happy, Seaſonable and Succeſsful Arrival of his Highneſs the Prince of Orange, now our Elected King. Whom God long Preſerve, With his Royal Conſort, now our Gracious Queen.
And now, Sir, Be pleas'd to ſpeak, what would you have us do?
The Chriſtian Courſe is well known; Petitions, Prayers, Patience, Tears.
As for Petitions, you know the King ſent the Biſhops to the Tower for an Anſwer, and thence brought them to the Bar. A warning to Petitioners! Prayers were uſed, by ſuch as you know, rather to harden than ſoften the King's Heart. Was he not comInnuendo's they had been Seditious. What! keep an Anniverſary of Joy for his coming to the Throne, and weep too? We had cauſe, more than we knew, of a long time to weep and howl too, for the Miſeries that were coming upon us. Had not God moſt ſeaſonably and powerfully turn'd the Stream of the Proceedings of our Adverſarics, all England, that would not bow the Knee to Baal, had been a Bochim, a Vale of Tears. How uſeful and divine ſoever this Perſuaſion to Prayers and Tears may be, yet when I conſider for whoſe Service theſe Exhortations, were ſo openly made, even for theirs (tho not ſo intended) who have the ſharpeſt Bryars and Thorns to whip Slaves into Tears, and then put an end to their Praying, by cutting their Throats, much of that Preaching might have been ſpared.
You do not know but the King's Heart might be changed. He did a great deal in a little time for the Satisfaction of the Peo
We know theſe Acts of Grace, and when they were made publick. Of theſe ſee the Sence of the Prince of Orange in his Declaration. What if the Counſellors and Tools adviſed theſe Acts, to Caſt us into a ſleep, and to gain time for French Prepa
Rege etiam renitente. That the People of England have an Unqueſtionable Right to ſeek Aſſiſtance from their Royal Highneſſes.England ac&c. See the Memorial. p. 26, &c.
If the Prince and Princeſs have Right to defend,England a Right to ſeek that Defence, wherein doth the IniWales, being not an undoubted Heir.
Orange's part.Fagel's Letter, and Vindication. But the Contrivers of our Ruine, both in Soul and Body, proceeding to obſtruct all healing Methods; His HighEngland. The Reflections upon it are very wordy, and weak. See the Declaration.
3. If the Prince of Orange had no Intereſt by proximity of Blood to ſeek the Preſervation of the Church and Kingdom, Why might not he come over to us, as righteouſly to deliver us, as Our
Elizabeth, have aſſiſted forreign Pro
4. The Miſeries of the Proteſtants in France and Savoy, and the Dangers which threatned all Proteſtant Kingdoms and Sates, by the Power and Blood-thirſtineſs of France, and the Popiſh ConfedeEngland, to reſcue it from its growing Perils, and to ſettle the State of it, as knowing what an Influence its Preſervation or Deſtruction would have upon Countries of the ſame Profeſſion. And his Highneſs the Prince being ſo deeply enDenmark to go over to the Prince of Orange, as he pro
5. The Prince in his Declaration invited All Degrees and Or
Yes, certainly! for they ought not to aſſiſt an Invader a
no other way left for them; and if he have Right and Intereſt in England, which he cannot give up for loſt; and if that which he deſires, is neither Crown, nor Conquest, but the Preſervation of the Government, in a lawful Parliamentary-way, then the Invaſion is not the Invaſion of an Enemy, but the coming in of a Saviour to deliver us. That the People of England have right to defend their Government, they prove in the Memorial, quoted before.
But do not you know that Private Perſons are not fit Judges, whether their Preſent Caſe be ſuch, in which they may lawfully reſiſt or no?
I remember ſomething to that purpoſe in Dr. Falkner,
Chriſtian Loyalty. Book 2. p. 365. p. 373.Grotius (differing from what he had written in his younger Time) upon Mat. 26. But, Are the wiſeſt Noblemen, Gentry and Lawyers of the Land unfit to Judg of this Caſe? Doth their incapacity to judge riſe from the Privacy of their Condition? or what elſe? A private Man well ſtudied in the Laws and Conſtitution, is as able to judge when that is Uiolated, as more Publick Perſons, and a good LawOrange are by far the Majority of the whole Kingdom, and men of as great UnGrotius, is nothing to our Caſe.
And, for a fuller underſtanding of our Caſe, I pray, Sir, re
But He on the Contrary,
Orange, and went off, without Force or Threatning; for what Reaſons, or upon whoſe Advice, is not al
Upon the whole of what I have very briefly exerciſed your PaCaſe is Extraordinary.
Rome.
Plebs, and Vulgus, the private Men, that are judged unfit to judg of their Rights and Dangers) call for Aſſiſtance from the Heirs Expectant; that the Il
I own the Providence is extraordinary, and the Action with
Sir, I will be as brief with you as may be.
Gen. 50.20. and many InſtanEngland ſinned againſt the Perſon, Crown, or Dignity of the King, to neceſſitate him, to prepare Armies againſt them, who were conſtrained to take Arms, or be deſtroyed by Papiſts?
But tho God doth act according to his abſolute Dominion, yet he acts according to his infinite Wiſdom, Righteouſneſs, or Mercy; and tho His infinite Majeſty doth whatſoever pleaſeth him, yet we muſt walk according to Rules, and keep our Places. Now the King of England being a Soveraign Prince, Supreme over All Perſons, and we being bound by ſo many Oaths to maintain his Crown and Dignity, and not to take Arms againſt his Perſon, or thoſe who are Comiſſioned by him, on any Pretence whatſoever, this Action muſt needs be unlawful in it ſelf, and not the leſs ſin
Sir, I will take your Reaſons in Order. And becauſe I can
Come let's then, I can endure the Cold as well as your ſelf.
non Legibus ſolutus, not bound by Laws. One that gives Laws to Others, but is above all Laws, and not tied to any Himſelf. When God did foreſee that his People Iſrael would in time grow weary of the Theocracy, God's Government over them, and deDeut. 17. from the 15th to the 20th Verſe. No one Man ſince the Fall was Wiſe, or Righteous, or Powerful enough, to have the abſolute and Arbitrary Rule of any people. And I ſuppoſe Tyranny is not an Ordinance of God, but a Corruption of Government.
But conſider what the learned, judicious and Excellent Writer of our Church,Saunderſon conſidered.Saunderſon ſaith of this. Preface before Arch-Biſhop Uſher's Treatiſe of Power communicated by God to the Prince. Sect. 12.
I have conſidered it, and have wondred, to read theſe words. True it is that for more eaſe of Governours, and better ſatisfaction of the People, in ſecuring their Properties, preſerving Peace among them, and doing Juſtice, the abſolute and unlimited Soveraignty which Princes have by the Ordinance of God, hath at all Times, and in all Nations been diverſly limitted and bounded in the ordinary Exerciſe thereof, by ſuch Laws and Cuſtoms as the Supreme Governours themſelves have conſented unto and allowed, As with us in England, &c.
Now, Doctor, with all due reſpect to you, and that great Writer, I offer you theſe Reflections.
abſolute and unlimited Soveraignty which Princes have by the Ordi&c. if they have an unlimited Soveraignty (which I acknowledge they muſt needs have, if it be abſolute) by the OrEngland limitAs in England, &c. then I ſay, the Soveraignty of the King of England is bounded by Laws and Cuſtoms, and therefore not abſolute and unlimited.
Sir Orlando Bridgman, afterwards Lord Keeper, in his charge to the Grand-Jury of Middleſex at the Trial of the Regicides, took pains to declare our Government, pag. 10. He opens the Power of our Kings, from the Titles that are given them in Law-Books, and moſt upon the Title Imperial Crown, ſubject to God, and to no other Power.
What is an Imperial Crown? it is that, which as to the Coercive part, is ſubject to no Man under God, humane Tribunal, or Judicature whatſoever,
pag. 11, 12.pag. 68.pag. 12.pag. 13.
But read further, and then you will ſee, that when he ſaith, We have as great Liberties as any People have in Chriſtendom, in
That will not help you to infer, that the Kings of England are abſolute unlimited Soveraigns. There are no People in the world give greater honour to their Kings, than we of England, as the learned Sir Thomas Smith, Privy Councellor to Queen Elizabeth, and Embaſſador in France, when he wrote his Book De Repub. Anglorum, pag. 47. Their way of asking any thing in Parliament, tho they have right to the thing, is by way of Petiti
And all thoſe Conceſſions, as Grants and CharLawſon, a good Civilian and Politician, as well as Divine, in his Anſwer to Hobs, c. 8. That learned and ingenious Gentleman Sir Dudley Diggs, ſpake to the Lords in a Conference, Anno 1628. Be pleaſed to Know then, that it is an undoubted fundamental point of this ſo ancient Common
The Petition ſo much debated in that Parliament, was the Petition of Right. The King in his Anſwer to the whole Parliament, ſpake this Golden Sentence, Caput inter Nubila condit) of England, that the Subject hath a true Property in his Goods and Poſſeſſions, which doth preſerve as ſacred that Meum and Tuum, that is the Nurſe of Induſtry, the Mother of Courage, and withMeum and Tuum is the proper Object. Ephemeris Parliamentaris. pag. 95.And I aſſure you, my Maxim is, That the Peoples Liberties, ſtrengthen the King's Prerogative, and the Kings Prerogative is to defend the Peoples Liberties, pag. 204. Here's e
The People have Rights. But Government being before Property, Property doth proceed from the Soveraign, who grants and determins it. For, as Biſhop
Saunderſon aſſerts, Sect. 18. of the Preface, It is certain that as ſoon as Adam was created, God gave him to be an Univerſal Monarch. —and the Government alſo of all the inferior World, and of all the Men that after ſhould be born ſo long as he lived; ſo as whatſoever Pro&c.
Is the Argument Good from Adam before the Fall, to the Government after the Fall? Is the Argument good from Adam the Common Father, or Noah, a Common Father to the State of the World, diſtinguiſhed and divided in the ſeveral Kingdoms, and Territories? Was Adam's Monarchy Hereditary, to his eldeſt Son next in ſucceſſion? Did Cain ſucceed him in the Univerſal MoCain forfeit,Adam alNod?
And Judgment, which is a Branch of Government or of Civil Power,
Adam or as Noah was, provided they be kind and righteous, as they were.
England is ſupreme.England is the onely ſupreme Governour and Monarch; and if a Monarch, the Supremacy is in Him alone: for a Co-ordination of Power, and a mixt Monarchy, are abſurd contradictory Notions. As you may ſee in the Reverend Biſhop Sanderſon,
Sect 14.We are bound by our Oaths of Supremacy and Allegiance to bear Faith and true Allegiance to the King and his Heirs and Succeſſors, and to aſſiſt and defend all Juriſdictions,
I pray read the Oaths. And then we are bound by the Oath of the 14. of &c. Granted or belonging to him, &c.
Charles the ſecond, not to take Arms againſt the King, &c. upon any pretence whatſoever, &c. And there&c.
Sir, You put me upon a neceſſity of ſpeaking what other
I know Sir. O. Bridgman did urge the Oaths of Allegiance and Supremacy upon the Regicides, and all that took Arms againſt the King, in the Trial of Mr. Scroop, pag. 67, 68. What is the Oath of Allegiance? is it not that you will defend the King, his Crown, &c. againſt all Perſons whatſoever? It was not onely aOr otherwiſe, doth there ſignify, ſome other way or means, not naOtherwiſe. They broke the Oath of Supremacy, which was, that the King was the ſupreme Governour, &c. There is, ſaith he, a difference between ſome Crowns, and Imperial Crowns. An Imof the Abſolute Power of the King, pag. 68. The Reverend Biſhop Sanderſon builds his ſtrong Tower for defence of the King's Soveraignty upon the words of the Oath of Supremacy, That the King's Highneſs is the onely Supreme Gover
1. We acknowledge the King, or Queen of England, to be the onely ſupreme Governour within his Dominions. But the Kings and Queens of England had no more Power given, or attributed to them, by theſe Oaths, or the Statutes enjoyning them, than they had before theſe Declarations. So Queen Elizabeth declared in her Injunction 1559.Sparrow, pag. 81. The Queens Majeſty,
&c. would that all her loving Subjects though underſtand, that nothing was, is, or ſhall be meant or intended by the ſame Oath to have any other Duty, Allegiance, or Bond required by the ſame Oath, than was acknowledged to be due to the moſt Noble Kings of famous Memory King Henry the 8th, or Edward the 6.—For certainly her Majeſty neither doth, nor eHenry the 8th, or Edward the 6th, which is and was of ancient time due to the Imperial Crown of this Realm. That is, under God, to have the Soveraignty and Rule over all manner of Perſons born within theſe her Realms, Dominions and Counſo as no other forreign Power ſhall or ought to have any Superiority over them.
2. You heard, what Sir Orlando Bridgman underſtood by that Great Title, of Imperial Crown. Now take notice of another InElizabeth, in that Admonition, now quoted. Imperial Crown—That under God, (and not under the Pope, or any foreign Prince or Potentate) ſo as no other foreign Power ſhall or ought to have any Superiority over them. And it is rational to conceive, that ſuch as the King, or Monarch is,Bridgman, in the Book quoted.England is not an Abſolute King, but in contradiſtinction to all foreign Princes and Powers, none of whom hath any power over him, he is ſubject to none, therefore the Title of Imperial Crown, adds nothing of Real power to the King, but a glorious Epithet, ſignifying, that he holds not his Crown of any other forreign Prince or Power. So is the Monarchy of England deſcribed by that famous Counſellour Sir Thomas Smith.— At the laſt the Realm of
And when our Writers ſpeak of the IndepenEngland grew into one Monarchy. Neither were any one of thoſe Kings, neither he who firſt had all, took any Inveſtiture at the hand of the Emperor of Rome, or of any other ſuperior or foreign Prince, but held of God to Himſelf, and by
acknowledging no Prince on Earth his ſuperior, and ſo it is kept and holden at this day.
England in oppoſition to the Pope, and his Uſurpation, they ſpeak of the Crown as an Imperial Crown, and the Kingdom as an Empire. So Sir John Davis, in the Caſe of Praemunire, or Conviction of Solar. 4 Jac. upon the Statute of the 16 R. 2. c. 5. publiſhed by Sir John Pettus.— Yet if we look into the Stories and Record of theſe two Imperial King
or rather part of St. Imperial, and of Kingdoms too, and had been long ſince made Tributary Provinces to the Biſhop of Rome,
Peter's Patrimony, or Demeſn, &c. pag. 6, 7, &c.
And L. Ch. Juſtice Cook Rep. of the Eccleſiaſtical Laws, printed with the former, deſcribes the Empire of the Kingdom of England, in theſe words. And therefore by the Ancient Laws of this Realm, this King
Obſerve, he makes not the King to be abſolute Emperor over his Subjects, giving them Edicts for Laws, and ruling them in an Imperial way, but the Kingdom of England is an Abſolute Empire and Monarchy, Conſiſting of One Head, which is the King, and of a Body Politick, compact and compounded of many, and almoſt infinite ſeveral, and yet well-agreeing Members, &c. pag. 46.England, whereof the King is Head, with his Body, is an Empire. So I do, with ſubmiſſion to my Teachers, conclude, that the Crown and Kingdom of England is Imperial, that is, Independent, in reſpect of the Pope, or any other foraign SuEngland, giving them Laws and Edicts according to his own Will; for all our Laws are made with the Conſent of Lords and Commons.
3. The Kings of England are Supreme Governours, next and immediately under God. But let us keep to the word GoverGovernour and Legiſlator.
Supreme Power is lodged there onely, where Legiſlation is. The Legiſlative Power is in the Parliament, the Parliament doth conſiſt of King Lords, and Commons, jointly. Hear what King Charles the Firſt acknowpag. 18. of the firſt Edition, In this Kingdom the Laws are jointly made by a King, by a Houſe of Peers, and by a Houſe of Commons choſen by the People; all having free Votes, and particular Privi
is truſted to the King. The moſt high and abſolute Power of the Realm of England, conſiſteth in the Parliament,—which repre
Tho. Smith, De Repub. Angl. B. 2. c. 1.—Governor doth limit the word Supreme. For being a Governor according to Law, not made by his own Will or Authority, but by the Conſent of the three Eſtates in Parliament, he is limited as Gover
4. Our Supreme Governor is truſted with many Royal Prerogatives, for the Good and Welfare of the Subjects. So K.
Therefore he cannot command what he will, nor change the Government and Religion of the KingCh. I. acknowledged, in his Anſwer to the XIX Prop. 17.p. 19.
5. Our Supreme Governor is ſuch a Governor, that is alſo bound to keep the Law, and is ſubject himſelf to Law. There are many Caſes wherein a Subject, in maintainance of his Right, may wage Law with the King,
And King &c.
Saunderſon, Sect. 12.James the 1ſt, in his Speech in the Star-Chamber, June 20. 1616. ſaid, I was ſworn to maintain the Law of the Land, and therefore I had been perjur'd if I had alter'd it,
What then, if the Laws, and Government, in the Eſſentials of it, come to be chang'd?p. 13.
But there are ſome Ancient Lawyers, of greateſt AuNemo preſumat de faciis ejus (Regis) diſquirere, nedum contra factum ejus venire.
I remember I have read thoſe words, father'd upon Bracton, by your late R. R. Biſhop of Cheſter, in his Speech at Magdalen Colledg. The words of Bracton are theſe, (which either his Lordſhip had not read in the Author, or had forgotten) Nemo quidem de factis ſuis preſumat diſputare, multà fortiùs contra factum ſuum venire, l. 1. c. 8. But if he had conſidered what that venerable Author hath written in the ſame Chapter, before thoſe words, he had rather diſſuaIpſe autem Rex, non debet eſſe ſub homine, ſed ſub Deo, &c ſub Lege, Quia Lex facit Regem. Attribuat igitur Rex Legi, quod Lex attribuit Ei, videlicet Dominationem & poteſtatem. Non enim Rex ubi Dominatur voluntas, & non Lex. Et quidem ſub Lege eſſe debeat, cum ſit Dei Vicarius, &c. The ſame Sentences, miſrepeated by that late Biſhop of Cheſter, are to be ſeen in Fleta, who flouriſhed in the ſame Age with Bracton, and gives to Poſterity the Face which the Law had in the Days of Edw. 1. As Mr. Selden ſaith, in his Diſſertatio ad Fletam, immediately after thoſe words, nec contra factum ſuum venire, theſe words follow? Verum tamen in populo regendo ſuperiores habet, ut Legem per quam factus eſt Rex. Et Curiam ſuam, viz. Comites & Barones: Comites enim à Comitiva dicuntur, qui cum viderint Regem ſine fraeno, fraenum ſibi apponere tenentur, &c. Temperent igitur Reges potentiam ſuam per Legem, quae fraenum eſt potentiae. l. 1. c. 17. p. 17. And Sect. 2. of that Chapter, derives, Rex non à regnando, â bene regendo nomen aſſumitur; Rex verò dum benè regit, Tyrannus verò dum populum ſuâ violatâ opprimitur dominatione. Such a Supreme Governor we acknowledg the King of England to be: And what can you infer from hence?
But the Reverend Biſhop Saunderſon ſpeaks as plainly as can be, That a mixt Monarchy is an errand Bull and Contrain adjecto. And therefore the King hath the ſole So
I do as freely acknowledg the Supremacy of the King of England, according to Law, and ſettled upon him by Law, as
Errand One. That it is ſuch a Monarchy, I prove by a greater Author than that Learned Writer. Look then to the Anſwer of King Charles I. to the XIX Propoſitions, ſent to him from the two Houſes to York, July 1642. The Wiſdom of your Ance
And let me note to you, to what the King did attribute this Conſtitution; the ſaith, p. 18.The Wiſ
But when did the Wiſdom of our Anceſtors meet, and where, to mould and faſhion this Government?
That I may not confound our Diſcourſe, I muſt firſt ſpeak to the Particulars of the former Objection, or Query, and then come to new Matter.
6. We are bound to bear Faith and true Allegiance to the King, his Heirs and Succeſſors; and to defend him and them to the utmoſt of our Power, againſt all Conſpiracies and Attempts whatſoever, that ſhall be made againſt their Perſons, their Crown and Dignity, by reaſon or colour of any ſuch Sentence,
I pray, Sir, let me explain my ſelf to you concerning theſe things.
&c.
Dr. Ferm. Conſe. ſatisfied.Non largimur Regibus poteſtatem illimitatam, & infinitam, ut quamlibet
Religionem poſſint ſubditis pro arbitrio praeſcribere; ſed poteſtatem à Deo delegatam ac proinde Regulis Legis Divinae circumſcriptam. Nam ut in Cauſis Civilibus (quamvis ſint ſuprema poteſtate armati) non poſſunt tamen Leges condere contra aequitatem & naturam, &c. Rev. Dr. Ward. Determin. Regis in Regno ſuo ſuprema eſt ſub Deo poteſtas, p. 105. 3. And if the Power of SoLigantia ſignificat, & inde Ligantia, & Allegiantia, Vinculum arctius inter ſubditum & Regem, utroſ
&c. Sir H. Spellman, Gloſſ.Hen. Spelman, v. Fidelitas, a Law of St. Edward,
That all People ought once a Year to confederate and conſo
By which I ſee the true Intereſt of the King and Kingdom is one and the very ſame; but it was our unhappineſs of late, to find the true and united Intereſt divided, and an Intereſt promoted, as contrary to the Kingdom, as Darkneſs to Light, and SuKingdom againſt Foreigners and Enemies, together with the King.the King in him, and for him, (and no otherwiſe, as it is in the Prayer in the Communion Service.) If the King doth perſiſt to act contrary to God; Who can in Duty folly him, or aſſiſt him? Next to my Fidelity to my Heavenly Lord, I owe my Fidelity to the Community of England, by the Law of God and of Nature, whereof I am a Member; becauſe the Community muſt be governed by righEngland goLawſon, delivers himſelf thus, concifely and rationally; Fidelity to the Community is firſt due: Fidelity to it un
An Anſwer to the Learned Author of the Politica Sacra, & Civilis, c. 15. p. 125.Rights of the Kingdom,
p. 17.the Kingdom, with the King, in the Days of Old.
7. The Oaths of Allegiance were made to the King, as a Proteſtant, in a direct oppoſition to the Pope, and his uſurhow theſe Oaths can be taken under ſuch a King, I do not underſtand; Except I declare what the King ought to be, viz. the only Supreme Governour in his Kingdoms and Dominions, and that the Pope ought not to have any Juriſdiction, Eccleſiaſti
But though you took not the Oaths in the late King's Time, you took them in the Time of Charles the 2d, and were obliged to James the 2d. as his Heir and Succeſſor, and ſo to the Heirs and Succeſſors you owe Allegiance, Subjecti
I do confeſs I do, to Heirs and Succeſſors that are Proteby theſe Oaths, and to no other Heirs or Succeſſors but ſuch as are Proteſtants, or of the Reformed Religion, in opThe Oath of Supremacy was deviſed to put a Difference between Papiſts, and them of our Pro
By taking theſe Oaths, I teſtified my ſelf to be a Proteſtant, and a Loyal Subject; but it was to no other than a Proteſtant King in beJam. I. Apology for the Oath of Allegiance, p. 46, 47.He is, for he hath made himEngland is an Here
But letting this paſs, (tho the taking of God's Name in vain, in any part of an Oath, is a great Sin, and muſt be reHeirs and Succeſſors; if there be an Heir of the Body of the King to ſucceed, or a Succeſſor, in
Will. I. in Sir. H. Spelm. Gloſſary, Ver. Legantia. and to Hen. II. out of Nubrigenſes. And many Inſtances to this purpoſe are brought by the Learned Author of the Rights of the Kingdom, p. 33. &c. And tho, Sir, you will not be pleaſed to hear more of this; If the Crown of England had been Hereditary, there had been no need of ſwearing Subjects to the Heirs and Succeſſors, in the time of the King Regnant. And one Reaſon, (as Rev. Mr. Lawſon thinks) why theſe words, Heirs and Succeſſors, were put into the Oath, was, That ſeeing Election and Succeſſion was uſually in a Line, it was intended to exclude Pretenders, and all Power of the Pope, or any other, to diſpoſe of the Crown, when the former Poſſeſſor was removed, or deceaſed.
Polit. ſacra & Civilis, p. 215.
And I pray, Sir, give me the meaning of thoſe words in the Oath of Supremacy.— And to my Power ſhall Aſſiſt and defend all Juriſdictions, Priviledges, Preheminencies, and Authorities,
By whom were theſe JuriſGranted, or belonging to the King's Highunited and annexed to the Imgranted and AnnexEngland? And if by Parliament then, I leave you to infer.
Do you inſinuate, as tho you thought any Prerogatives were granted by Parliaments? If ſo, then you ſeem to derive the Authority of the Crown from the People originally, which Opinion is to be abhorred; and tends to diſſolve the GovernSaunderſon, doth, by a Chain of ArguPref. Sect. 16.
You put me upon ſearching into many hard things, which I will enquire into, as being deſirous to know the truth, that I may more chearfully perform Obedience. And firſt I deny your Conſequence, that if Power be derived from the People, then will it follow that the People may change the Government? Becauſe the Government being ſettled, we are all obliged to preſerve the Conſtitution, as long as we poſ
1. As I do perceive, the Crown and Soveraignty of the Kingdom of England is Hereditary, by Election. The Power and Authority is from God, who hath diſtinguiſhed Perſons, into Superiors, Inferiors, and Equals, and hath tied them to mutual Duties in the fifth Commandment. But the difCh. I. who was Learned, and Judicious, ſpeaks in praiſe of the GoThe Wiſdom and Experience of our Anceſtors, moulded this Government. And ſo this Government, as far as it was moulded by them, is an Ordinance of Man, or an Humane Creature. It was the Wiſdom of our Anceſtors, and their Wiſdoms could not at firſt find out, or make a perfect Mould; but it ſeems, tried, and mended, and in Time, by Experience and Wiſdom, caſt it into the preſent Mould.
Anſw. to the XIX Propoſ. as before quoted.
2. The Kings of England were Elected, and choſen to the Office and Truſt of Kingly Government. This is clear enough, from the Britiſh, through the Saxon and Daniſh Kings, to William the Firſt, called the Conqueror; and we deSaxons, as I am informed. I will ſhew you what the Ancient and Renowned Fleta hath left as his Judgment and Law, l. 1. c. 17. S. 2, 3. Nec à Regnando dicitur, ſed a benè regendo nomen aſſumitur, Rex verò dum benè regit, Tyrannus dum populum ſuâ violatâ apprimitur dominatione. Ad hoc nam
&c. And, Sect. 14.—Ad haec enim Creatus eſt Rex & Electus, ut juſticiam faciat Ʋniverſis, &c. Florentius Wigornienſis, that old Hiſtorian, relates, That Edgar the Firſt, who united England into one Kingdom, was, Electus ab omni Anglorum Populo, of all the People of England, Edit. 4o
p. 355. as he was before choſen of the Mercians and Northumbrians, who deſerted King Edwin, becauſe he acted fooliſhly in the Government committed to him, p. 354. After the deceaſe of Edgar, there aroſe a great Diſſention among the chief Men of the Kingdom about the Election of a King; for ſome Elected Edward his Son, and others Elected his BroEthelred, p. 361. And to ſave the labour of looking fur
3. Government grew by degrees into Kingdoms, and beHooker thought,
Book I. of Eccleſ. Policy, p. 27, 29.
4. As to the derided Contract and Conſent of the People, where and by whom, and abundance of Queſtions about it, I conceive, the words of the ſame Learned Hooker, may balSaunderſon.
That which we ſpake be
by Right at leaſt originally derived from them; As in ParliaB. 1. p. 28.
The many of Biſhop Saunderſon's Queſtions may eaſily be anſwered, by deſtroying his Suppoſition, That there was a great number of People, as big ſuppoſe as a Kingdom, without Government; and that theſe all muſt, in all re
Whereas, we read in our Hiſtories, that ſometimes the Nobles, ſometimes Nobles and Prelats, ſometimes the Heads of the Commons aFern. Conſc. ſatisfied, p. 9. It is no Mat
5. That there were, and are, Contracts between the Kings of England and the People, or the Community made by their Repreſentatives, is not void of ſufficient Proof. Take a few; The People of England are called the King's Liege People, beLiege King, for the ſame Reaſon, becauſe he is bound, by Contract or Covenant, to them. Dicuntin utri
Spelm. Gloſſ.
Many Inſtances might be produced of Contracts, between our Ancient Kings, and the People of England. Two ſhall ſuffice. When Suanus tyrannized over the Land, he exacted a huge Tribute of St. Edmunds-Bury; threatned to burn it, if he had it not paid him: and giving out opprobious LanEdmund, at Gainsburrough, where he held a General Plea, died there in great Agony, and Fear, upEdmund coming againſt him. The Daniſh Fleet choſe his Son Canutus to be King. At majores
Natu totius Angliae; The Elders, or Eldermen of all England, ſent Meſſengers, with one conſent, to Ethelred King of England, (then in Normandy) ſaying, That they loved, and would love none more than Him, their natural Lord,
Which when he heard, he directed his Son If he would more rightly govern, or more mildly handle them, than he had before.Edward with Embaſſadors to them, and he in moſt friendly manner ſaluted the Greater, and the Leſſer of his Nation, Promiſing, That he would be to them a mild and devoted Lord; that he would conſent to their Will in all Things; acquieſce in their Counſels; that he would pardon what ſo
ſ
if all would unanimouſly, and without treachery agree to reVerbis, & Pacto, both by Words and Contract. Florentius Wigernienſis. p. 381.
The other Inſtance I give out of the ſame Hiſtorian is omni Exceptione major: it is of William the firſt, commonly called the Conqueror. William came to London with his whole Army, ut ibi in Regem ſublimaretur, that he might be advanced to be King, and was Conſecrated in an honourable manner, Promiſing firſt (as Aldred the Archbiſhop of York required, or exacted of him) before the Altar of St. Peter, by Oath, beThat he would defend the Holy Churches of God, and their Rectors, and govern all the People ſubject to Him, juſtly, and with Regal Care, and Providence; Appoint, or ordain and hold Right Law, and forbid Rapines, and unjuſt Judgments utterly, or altoge
But that which goes beyond all particular Inp. 431.
But concerning the Coronation Oath, I am of the OpiFalkner,
Chriſtian Loyalty. B. 2. c. 2. p. 423.The Solemnity of Coronation, when the People acknowledg their King, and the King again gives the People aſſurance, that he will preſerve their Reli
&c.
I diſtinguiſh between the ſolemnity of Coronation, (the Prince appearing in Splendor, doth excite the People to make Acknowledgments, and expreſſion of Affection, with Accla&c. as the Doctor goes on) and the Queſtions propoſed to the King and the Coronation-Oath. The Argument for ConPryn, Epiſt. to the Reader, before his Hiſt. of K. John, Hen. 3. Edw. the I. out of the Records of the Tower, from p. 30, &c. The King is obliged, as Fleta tells you. C. praedict.—Nec poteſt quis judicare in temporalibus, niſi ſolus Rex vel ſub delegatus: Ipſe nam
& ideò Coronâ inſignitur, ut per judicia populum rogat ſibi ſubjectum. I follow the directions of that Learned laborious Writer, and find his Quotation out of Bracton true,
See the Quotations in that l. 3. de Actionibus. c. 9. p. 107. S. 1, 2, 3.
And our Righteous Kings have look'd upon themſelves as bound to do what they promiſed and ſwore to at their Coronation.Ad hoc autem Creatus & Electus eſt; To this End, or Office, he is Created and Choſen.Epiſt. p. 31. And K. James the Firſt,Dr. Fern doth acknowS. 4. p. 19.
He ſhould be perjur'd if he did not obſerve the Laws.
Secondly, I diſtinguiſh between Sole Election, Conſent, and Hereditary Right by Common Law. Our Kings and Queens ſucceed by Hereditary Right, preſuppoſing an Election of the Royal Progenitors, or voluntary Conſent in the Acts of Settlement, and ſtill demanded and declared at every CoroWilliam and Queen Mary, and the Collective Wiſdom and Power of the Kingdom,J. Robinſon in St. Pauls Ch. yard.
Let things be as they were in former Times: Let us, if we be Men of Conſcience, remember our Declaration, and the Oath, ſworn by all Officers, of the Unlawfulneſs of taking Arms againſt the King, or thoſe commiſſionated by him, upon any Pretence whatſoever: Remember your Declaration, and the words, Pretence whatſoever. What-ever Limitation the Author of the Inquiry hath put upon it, by limiting the words in all things, in the Duty of Children to their Parents. And look upon what that Good and Learned Man, Dr. Falkener, hath written at large upon that Oath, in vindication of it, in the 2d Book of Chriſtian Loyalty.
Content, Sir, let us look to the Book; there it is.
In the firſt Section he tells you,Falkener conſidered.There is a two-fold Declaration of Loyalty in deteſtation of ſuch Poſitions as undermine the Security of Kings and Kingdoms, required in this Realm; the one more particular, in the Oath of Alle
Of which he ſpeaks § 2.
We deteſt the Doctrine and Practices of the Pope and Papiſts, as much as you do. And all that the Doctor hath learnedly diſcourſed of it in that Section, doth not at all conJam. II. our Caſe hath been (more briefly than it might be) declared before, to prevent the Accuſation of depoſing him.
1. The King did really depoſe himſelf from being an IndeEngland,
Jam. 2. de
2. He diſpens'd with our taking the Oath of Allegiance, which I think I ſhould not have taken, had I been required, without a plain declaration of my Mind; for it implied a contradiction to take it to a Popiſh King.
3. After he deſerted his puiſſant great Army, and durſt not put his Cauſe upon a Battel, he gave one Branch of his SoveOrange, viz. the Command of his Army and Navy, and then attempted to go beyond Sea; and at laſt went, leaving his Kingdom, without Force, or ComOrange, and the Kingdom, deſired nothing but what was their Right, as much their Right as the Crown was his.
4. In this Caſe what ſhall the Kingdom do? You may be ſatisfied by the Debates about Abdication and Vacancy. Muſt the Kingdom lie open to the Enemies of it? Muſt there be a Juſticium, a ſilence of the Laws, and ſtop to Juſtice and Righteouſneſs, and all things fall into unſettlement and conOrange go back aJames the 2d was not depoſed, nor moleſted, neither for his Religion, as inconſiſtent as it was with the Religion, Government, and Happineſs of the Kingdom. The Accuſation of Depoſing the King, is altogether untrue; He made the Vacancy, and when it was made, it muſt be filled up. Come, Doctor, now let us follow Dr. F. to the next Section.
There you will ſee what he ſaith of the general Decla
So I do,
The firſt Clauſe of which is, that it is not lawful, upon any pretence p. 337, &c.
whatſoever, to take Arms againſt the King, &c. p. 338. The ſenſe of this is, no more than what the Church of England, and Eminent MemHomil. of Obed. part. 2. Can. of 1640. & Judiciam Ʋniverſitat is Oxonienſis. The Doctor goes on to give ſome explication of the Oath,
N. 3.to the King, not indeto any King, can bear no other rational Conſtruction, than to condemn the Engliſh Subjects taking Arms againſt their Natural Sovereign, the King of England. And therethe utter unlawfulneſs of taking Arms, amongſt other Nations, againſt him who hath the Title of King, if he doth not therewith enLacedemonian was, and Tabrobana, &c. we are not concerned, p. 339.
—The true Friends of the Church of
England have been free from diſloyal Actions and Aſſertions, N. 4.&c.
Sir, I am reſolved to be brief with you; Therefore ſhall make ſome ſhort Remarks.
England, becauſe he hath and exerciſeth Soveraign Authority. Why Dr. Falkner ſhould be honoured, who ſaith as much as Calvin did; yet Calvin is commonly branded, and Dr. F. admired and hoCalv. Inſtit. cap. ultimo. L. 4. Sect. 31. doth ſhew us the power of Prejudice.Soveraign Authority. Which really is but a limiCh. I. in his Anſwer. to the xix Prop. confeſſeth, In this Kingdom the Laws are jointly made by a King, by a Houſe of Peers, and by a Houſe of Commons choſen by the Peo
You ſee then, what a Soveraign Prince our King is, only in ſome reſpect.jus Gladii is in the Hand of the King, determined by the Word of God, as Bp Saunderſon affirms, Pref. Sec. 15. and is determined to belong to the Kings of England, as Dr. Falkner pleads, p. 347. Be it ſo; yet this is far alſo from the preſent Caſe truly ſtated. The late Invaſion and Inſurrection was not to take the Power of the Sword from the King, nor to deprive him of that Authority which he had from God, and the Laws. The Power of the Sword and Militia, is not intruſted in the King's Hand for the Deſtruction, but Protection of his Subjects. The Office of the King, and the uſe of the Sword, is declared to be for the puniſhment of Evil-Doers, Rom. 13.4. But what? when the Sword of the Magiſtrate is abuſed againſt a Kingdom's Right
England. That which ſome ſpeak, that the King of England hath Merum Imperium,
What?
Gladius indicat, illos, ut Juriſperiti loqui ſolent, imperium habere merum. What's that?
Ʋlpianus ait, illud eſſe merum imperium quod habet poteſtatem Gladii, ad animadvertendum in Homines facineroſos. Peter Martyr on Rom. ch. 13. If this right uſe of the Sword, or avenging and puniſhJuly 1.42. A Second Remonſtrance, Jan. 16.42. The King's LetLeiceſter.
If the King alone hath the Power of the Sword, the Commons of
And as long as our Kings adviſe with their Parliaments about War and Peace, as they were wont to do, as that Learned Sir England in Parliament have the Power of the Purſe, the Sinews of War and Peace, as King Ch. I. acknowledged,VVhitlock's Memorials. Anno 1642. And at the Treaty at Uxbridg, 1644 p. 124.
Propoſ.
Robert Cotton proves, in his Treatiſe on that Argument, Anno. 1621. it muſt be our Fault, and God's
Grotius and Barclay affirm, that a King may be reſiſted, are with the Doctor but imagiEngland have, for their Liberties and Religion, ſo that they need not fear any Extremities to drive them to take up Arms.p. 517. Firſt, That the Agreement of the whole Body of the Peo
Here are ſome Miſtakes delivered by the worthy Doctor.
whole Community are Subjects, as well as the par
Majeſtas Realis is in the Community, and the Community is one Perſon in Fiction of Law, and is Perſona conjuncta, as the Civilians ſpeak. So Reverend Mr. Lawſon, Anſwer to Hobs, p. 21. & Polit. Sacra & Civilis; A Community is the Matter of a Common-Wealth, c. 15, 206. A Community contains in it virtually all the Forms and Degrees of Governact as meer Subjects, but as one Party in Covenant and Contract with him, who threatneth to bring them to Confuſion, by deſtroying their Government.England are concluded by them in what they do. The Nation was generally ſenſible of approaching Ruin; they knew the King had left his Government, and willingly and freely elected their Repreſentatives, to do the beſt in their Wiſdom for the Kingdom's good. And the Conſtitution and Government is not changed, only the Perſons of our Su
(yet this is packt up among Nop. 542.
That is, at laſt the Doctor conp. 544.If ever any ſuch ſtrange Caſe as is propoſed ſhould happen in the World, I confeſs it would have its great Difficulties; and quotes Grotius, that in this ultimo neceſſitatis praeſidio, as the laſt Reipſo facto, exclude a diſclaiming the governing thoſe Perſons as Subjects, and conſequently of being their Prince or King. And then the Expreſſions of our Publick Declaration and Acknowledgment would ſtill be ſecured, that it is not lawful, upon any Pretence whatſoever, to take Arms againſt the King.
i. e. no LeEngland in the exerciſe of his Power; and that there was no other way left for them to preſerve themſelves, our Laws and Religion.
But this doth ſtill ſtick with me, that we declared, or ſwore, That it was unlawful to take up Arms upon any Pretence whatſoever, therefore not upon this Pretence, or for this Cauſe; or any other real or Imaginary, either this, or any that can be imagined poſſible.
And, laſtly, no word was large ewhatſoever. Do the Pope's Creatures what they they will, we are tied up, by, upon any Pretence whatſoever, to look upon our Miſeries coming on, and paſſively to lie down at the Feet of Popiſh Majeſty, i. e. cruel Tyranny, and there
any Pretence whatſoever, or from any Cauſe, or Reaſon pretended, for Subjects to take Arms againſt the King, my lawful Solegally commiſſioned by him,Oxford; by that wiſe and worthy Man, Mr John Corbet.
England, who is bound to govern accordby any unlawful ways. And more than this, no King that means the good of his SubFalkener, that the King is no King; and by Conſequence, the People which before were SubWhatſoever, is intended in the largeſt ſenſe, and is ſo uſed in the Canons of 1640. and the Writings of ſeveral Men,England are conſiderable, as a Party in a leEalkener. But then, I ask, Whether the King of England may act and do, beyond and contrary to the Laws of his Government, not in ſome partiEngland, as he was, or would be held and reputed to be, if he ruled as a ſworn King of England. And then, Whether the People of England are by the Laws ſubjected to an Arbitrary, Jeſuited King, or to a ReEngland are bound to whatſoever a King pleaſeth to do, ſet up, and command? or to thoſe things only which are commanded them by Law? If the Laws be the Rule and Meaſure of their Obedience, and thoſe Laws no other than what were made by their own implied Conſents, then the Subjects of England have not in this Extraordinary Action, broken the Bonds of their Subjection, but acted for their own Preſervation, as a People that were never bound to an Arbitrary Abſolute King. If the Parliament that enacted that Law that preſcribes this Oath, did intend to bind all thoſe Perſons enjoined to take it, to an unlimited Obedience to all manner of Arbitrary Comwhatſoever, was never intended to ſubject the Kingdom to Arbitrary Do
Ʋſher, in his Treatiſe of the Power of a Prince, and Subjection and Obedience, doth interpret the Note of
Ʋniverſality All, Epheſ. 5.24. Col. 3.20. with a limitation, p. 143, 145.
But thoſe Commands are Affirmative; and this Oath is Negative, It is not lawful upon any Pretence whatſoever, binds at all Times, and to a total univerſal abſtinence from taking Arms. And thoſe Commands require Active Obedience with a limitation; and if we cannot actually obey, we muſt ſuffer, and not rebel, but bear even with a Tyrant; for the Laws have prohibited the Subjects to take up Arms, they have no Law that makes it lawful in any Caſe to take up Arms, there
in reaſon, if the King may defend his Soveraignty from the Inva
To conclude this Head. How many Violations had we been guilty of? even of all the Bonds of Nature and Religi
But we know the Scripture is plain againſt Reſiſtance, and we have many Examples againſt Reſiſtance, and for PaſHomilies condemn it, and the Friends of the Church of England have always been Guiltleſs.
Shew me, if you can, any thing in Scripture, Precept, or Example, that condemns ſuch an Action as this was, in the Circumſtances of Perſons, and Cauſes. The Homilies do inDavid.
David's ExDavid's was. Had Saul brought in Foreign Forces, and turn'd his Strength againſt the Kingdom, and done all after the manner of the King, 1 Sam. 8. it had been utterly unlawful for David, and all the People of Iſrael, to take Arms againſt Saul, or depoſe Him, for there was a Law of God binding them to make him King, whom the Lord ſhould chooſe, as he choſe Saul. See the 17th of Deut. 14, 15. The Caſe of David, and ours, differ as much as the Caſe of a private Subject and a free People, as we were, when the King ſet Himſelf to do as he did. David, though appointed to be King, was but a private and particular Subject under Saul; and Saul was nominated and appointed King by God himſelf, and it was God's expreſs Law, Thou ſhalt in any wiſe ſet him King over thee, whom the Lord thy God ſhall chooſe, Deut. 17.15. And when David gave this Reaſon, why he would not do what his Party would have had him do, he ſaid; God forbid I ſhould do this thing unto my Maſter, the Lord's Annointed, to ſtretch forth mine Hand againſt Him, ſeeing he is the Annointed of the Lord, 1 Sam. 24.6. His autem Verbis David tantùm ſpectabat Inſtitutum Dei. David regarded the Appointment of God.—Ergo injuſſu Dei non debeo eum dejicere, Therefore without God's Command, I ought not depoſe him. Pet. Martyr on the words—And that Learned and Reverend Man anſwering the Reaſons of ſome who thought David might lawfully have killed Saul, gives the Reaſons why he could not. They ſay, David was King. Eſto, be it ſo ſaith P. Martyr; but he was not publickly inVim vi repellere licet, ſay they, Fateor, I confeſs it is lawful to repel Force with Force, ſaith P. Martyr. Sed inculpatâ tutelâ with an innocent or blamleſs Defence, as Civilians ſpeak; that is to ſay, if they cannot fly, nor defend
David ſaw he might defend himſelf another way, David ergo non potuit ullo jure Saulem occidere. David could not kill Saul by any Law or Right, eſpe
David to take Arms, and head a Party for his own DeEngland as one Man? And then how can this Oath be contiDavid, and ours, agree not in any one Circumſtance. If David's Example be imitable by us; then, as all Men I think will confeſs, that it was lawful for him to take Arms to Head a Party to defend himſelf: Then is it not lawful by this Example for the Kingdom of England to take Arms? and if ſo, then how can any Man be bound not to take Arms againſt the King upon any Pretence whatſoever by virtue of a Law, when it is lawful by the Example of David, to take up Arms? But you will ſay, That David fled and ſhifted for Himſelf. Yea, true, But whither can the Kingdom of England (I mean the Proteſtant Subjects, which being the Majority of the Kingdom, may be called the Kingdom) flee? Where could we have Caves or Gariſons to ſhift our Wives and Children into? Yea, more, Our King fled, and was not purſued by the Sword; he was in the Power of the Prince of Orange, and was neither depoſed nor killed, nor as much as the Lap of his Garment cut off, nor threatned if he would not go. Who of all the great Men in Arms did as much as ſugDavid did? 1 Sam. 24.4. Had the King pleaſed to return to his place of Governing by Law, and ſufficient Caution and Security given ſo to do, he might have ſtaid at White-hall in Peace and Honour: but that would not be, and God hath done above all we would ask or think.
But here was a Reſiſtance, and that is determined to be ſinful, and damnable, by the Apoſtle, Rom. 13.2. Whoſoever therefore reſiſteth the Power, reſiſteth the Ordinance of God.
I conceive the Apoſtle doth not, by God's appointment, inſtitute any Form of Government in that place, neither Imperial, nor Monarchical; much leſs doth he ſpeak of AbNero was an Alſolute Twa
What or all theſe Queſtions? What do you mean?
You ſhall have more Queſtions yet. What Authority had the late King to change the Government in the Eſſential parts of it? Had he the Legiſlative Power in Himſelf? SureCharles the Firſt, to be in him by way of Truſt. in his Anſw. to the xix. Propoſ. p. 1. p. 5. lin. ult. p. 18. The Government, according to theſe Laws, is truſted to the King, p. 23. A truſt by God, Nature, and the Laws: true in ſeveral reſpects. He who acted without, beſide, and contrary to the Law, not only touching private particuEngland, and no other.
But he is truſted by God, and Nature, as well as by the Laws; ſuppoſe he broke his Truſt according to Laws he is not deprived of his Truſt according to God and Nature.
But we ought to have ſuffered to the uttermoſt, and not have reſiſted our lawful King, the Lord's Anointed.
1. We deny, that we reſiſted a Lawful King of England.
2. They who preach'd up Paſſive Obedience, ſeemed to preach altogether in deſign upon others. Had we ſeen them lead more mortified Lives, had they denied themſelves more, we might have believed they were in earneſt. But who drank Claret more freely? lived more delicately? or were more covetous, if not ravenous for Preferment after, and upon Preferment for themſelves and their Friends, than the moſt of them?
3. I have not ſeen the Ceremonies of the Coronation, I heard and believe he was Crown'd, but heard not he was anOrdinatio Permiſſionis, & Ordinatio Commiſſionis, as the Reverend Biſhop Morton diſtinguiſheth, in his Sermon on Rom. 13. Before K. Charles I. at York, May 15. 1639. apply it. And it is obſerDavid did, nor ſo much; and God moſt graciouſly interpoſed, and ſuffered no more to be done. And ſo the Great God, the Fountain and Giver of Authority, hath de
Orange, and that State, and turning the Spirits of this great People like one Man, to oppoſe Popery and Slavery.
But Providence is dark, and an uncertain Guide; look to the Rule, the Law of God and Man.
Such apparent Providences are to be adored, as Supreme Deciſions, of Caſes reſerved in the Divine Power.
England, and a Gentleman, uſe all his Power, Wiſdom, and Intereſt in ſuch a Caſe, as well as a Scholar uſe his Reaſon and his Books? The Diſputant is not paſſive, but doth reſiſt in his way; and is it not then unlaw
Is it lawful for me to defend my Inheritance by Law, from the King's Incroachment? You'l ſay, it is. And why is it not lawful for a Kingdom to defend their Inheritance in Religion, and Laws, by the Sword, when there is no other way left? There's a Treaſon againſt a Government, as well as againſt a Governor. Every free-Man of England hath a ſhare in the benefit of the Fundamental Conſtitution, and ought to be aid
But is it fit the people ſhould judg?
That kind of Paſſive-Obedience, ill ſtated, and ill timed alſo, is blind Obedience. The Wiſe, and Great, and Good Men of the Kingdom, are competent Judges of Fact, and Law alſo. And a ſhare is due to them in the Legiſlative alſo, and a ſhare is due to them in the Judicial and Executive Power. And if they clearly ſee through right Mediums, that they are in danger of being denied their Right, I ask you, What Law doth forbid them to vindicate their Right, and defend the GoEngland that doth forbid the Kingdom to preſerve its Legiſlative Power, and Hereditary
Charles the Firſt ſeems to me clearly to aſſert, Anſw. to the XIX Propoſ. p. 12, 13, 18, 19, 21. of the firſt Edit. making himſelf One, and the Houſes of Lords and Commons the other Two; and not as ſome others, who make the Temporal Lords one, the Spithey never gave up, nor was ever taken from them, nor parted with) to preſerve and vindicate their Rights and Liberties, and that by Force, or forcible Attempts, when other ways have been uſed to no purpoſe; and when Arbitrary Power ſtrikes at the Root of the Conſtitution; then if they have no inherent Right to maintain their Right to their Liberties and ReliEngland is a regulated limited Monar
But the Primitive Chriſtians did not reſiſt Tyrants and Perſecutors, though they had Force and Armies; as Tertullian and others declare.
The Caſe of the Primitive Chriſtians in nothing to Ours. Chriſtians as Chriſtians have no Weapons but Chriſtian, no more than Subjects as Subjects have a right to Arms, and to make Reſiſtance. And they were then in the ſtate of meer ChriFalkener arguing againſt Subjects taking Arms a&c. B. 2. p. 378. Had the Condition of the Primitive Chriſtians been like ours, we have no reaſon to think, but they would have vindicated their own Right; as, had our Condition been the ſame with theirs, I hope, through Grace, we ſhould have put on the Crown of ☜ Martyrdom as they did. The Queſtion is not, Whether it be lawful for Subjects to take Arms againſt their King, when they have their Rights and Religion eſtabliſhed by Laws, and thoſe preſerved; but whether a Kingdom, the Peers, Gentry, and Body of it, may not vindicate their Legal Rights, both Sacred and Civil, by open Force, in conjunction with a free Prote
But the Church of England hath been always Loyal, and the Friends of the Church of England.
And may they be ſo now, to our moſt wiſe and gracious King William and Queen Mary. I do not very well know, Doctor, what Church of England you mean; for there have been ſeveral Alterations in it ſince reformed; nor who you take to be the Friends of the Church of England. If you mean ſuch as the Convocation was 1640, as Dr. Falkener ſeems to mean, B. 2. p. 338. or the Compilers of the Homilies, and their Friends, as he alſo ſeems to mean, wit the Judgment of the Univerſity of Oxford, (ſuppoſed to be written by Biſhop Saunderſon) then all theſe Friends will not well agree together.
I do take a great number of the Clergy in 1640, to be of the new faſhion'd Church that ſome had been long a making, an were near to finiſh. Others were true Friends to the ReEngland, of the firſt Edition, have ſaid to theſe Matters in deEngland have wip'd off the Spittle, and clear'd them from it. They have acknowledged the Form of Government to be divers in divers Countries; they have vindicated the pubEngland. Great Aſſiſtances were ſent from England, by Queen Elizabeth, to preſerve the States of the Low Countries. Sir John Forteſcue, in his Speech in Parliament, Anno 35 of the Queen, ſaid, As for the
Sir Low Countries, they ſtood her Majeſty, yearly, ſince ſhe undertook the Defence of them, in one hundred and fifty thouſand Pounds. The Burden of four Kingdoms hath reſted upon her Majeſty.Simon Dew's Journal of the Parliaments in Queen Elizabeth's Reign. And how commonly are thoſe Provinces termed Rebels againſt the King of Spain? King James calls thoſe that revolted from the King of Spain, and that were forced to make Reſiſtance for Religion in France, the Saints of God; Et nonnè jam Commota ſunt ubi
& in Sactos, qui per Galliam & per Belgium ſunt directa? Commentatio de Antichriſto, printed after BiAbbot's B. Demonſtratio Antichriſti, 8o. p. 477. That Learned King had not Sainted them, if he had thought them Rebels. See Biſhop Jewel's Defence of the Apology, p. 16, 17. And what a great Friend was he to the Church of England? See famous Biſhop Bilſon's (another particular Friend of Hers)
True Difference, Edit. 4o. p. 512, 515, 518, 519, 520, 521. Biſhop Robert Abbot, who wrote a Learned Book, De Supremâ Regiâ Majeſtate; and the more to be noted for that, was Regius Profeſſor of Divinity in Oxford, hath a notable Paſſage, Demonſtratio Antichriſti, p. 150, &c. c. 7. §. 6. Biſhop Morton's Treatiſe of Satisfaction, hath one part called, A Juſtification of Proteſtants in Caſe of Rebellion. There are no Seditious Paſſages in any of theſe Reverend Authors. But if theſe were not in them, what would they be call'd in others? I note this out of Jewel; neither doth any of theſe (meaning Luther and Melancthon) teach their People to rebel againſt their Princes, but only to defend themſelves againſt Oppreſſion, by all lawful means, as did David againſt Saul. So do the Nobles in France at this day. Then to take Arms is a lawful Means, by conſequence, (for David took Arms, and the Nobles in France) —They themſelves are beſt acquainted with the Laws and Conſtitutions of their Country, p. 16. Touching the Queen of Scotland, I will ſay nothing. The Kingdoms and States of the World have ſundry Agreements and Compop. 17. See Addition out of Biſhop Bilſon. I obſerve, he vindicates Beza, and the Proteſtant Divines, and to our Caſe of late in England may be applied. That which may be done by the Laws of Kingdoms and States, is lawful, and not rebellious, as in the Civil Wars of France, p. 511. The Princes in Germany may lawfully reſiſt the Emperor, and by Force reduce him to the Ancient and received Form of Gop. 513. We grant it to be true, that if the Laws of the Land, as in ſome places they do, warrant to depoſe their Governor, p. 517. He quotes the Judgment of Luther, when he was inGermany might defend themſelves againſt the Emperor, and diſplace him, p. 518. If a Prince ſhould go about to ſubject his Kingdom to a Foreign ☜ Realm, or change the Form of the Common-Wealth, from Empery to Tyranny; or neglect the Laws eſtabliſhed by Common Conſent of
Prince and People, to execute his own Pleaſure: In theſe and other Caſes which might be named, if the Nobles and Commons join together to defend their ancient and accuſtomed Liberty, they may not well be accounted Rebels, p. 520. In Kingdoms where Princes bear Rule by the Sword, we do not mean the Prince's private Will againſt his Laws, but his Precept derived from his Laws, &c. Ibid. He excuſeth the Germans, and Flemings; and of the Scots he The Scots, what have they done beſides the placing the Right Heir, and her own Son, when the Mother fled and forſook the Realm? Be theſe thoſe furious Attempts and Rebellions you talk of? I grant, he ſaith, our Princes are Hereditary, and that Subjects are abſolutely bound to obey, p. 515, 517. But if we are abſolutely bound to obey, then the King of England is an Abſolute Prince, which he is not over, or in reſpect of his Subjects, becauſe he rules by Laws made by their Conſent, though he be abſolute in reſpect. of any Foreign State.
The Paſſage quoted in Biſhop Rob. Abbot is notable throughHic vero politica res agitur, Quid Principi juris in Subditos per Leges cujuſ
What Power is promiſed to the Prince over Subject
And then defends the Cauſe of the Proteſtants in infinitam) a boundleſs, unlimitBellarmine) doſt mention, have certain Bounds ſet them, which when they exceed, the Nobles think it is lawful for them to repel unHolland and France.
And in this there is a difference between theſe Churches, and the Primitive, which was ſubject to the meer pleaſure of the Emperor, without the leaſt Title to any Law of their own. But when they were armed with publick Right under
— I know there is another ſort of Friends to the Church of Conſtantine, they were not only kill'd, as before, but did kill,
Licinius, and the Tyrants, they eaſed their Necks of the Yoke of Perſecution. And in ſuch a way, or for a like reaſon, hath our Church done, &c.
England, but I think theſe now named as worthy of the Name as they, and more to the Honour of it. And theſe ſhall ſuffice. I do forbear to turn to Foreign Divines, that have been in reputation in the Church of England, becauſe I will not be further troubleſome to you.
As for the Judicium Ʋniverſitatis Oxonienſis, It goes upon thoſe Suppoſitions, and handles thoſe Matters, which are a
But that which ſticks with me, is my Oath of Alle
Why did you not aſſiſt the Perſon of the King to the utmoſt of your Power, to drive out the Invader, and to ruin your Church and Kingdom? Why did you oppoſe him in his Declaration of Indulgence? But I ſpare you. Only a few Queſtions more and adone. It is plain, the King did voluntarily put himſelf out of the Exerciſe of his Authoa Dead King in his natural Life-time; and Allegiance is due to him no longer than he is King. Suppoſe he ſhould put himſelf into a MoRome, or in PilgriFrance, as in any of thoſe places; therefore I ſee no reaſon but to
But! two Kings at a time in being? What! two Suns in One Firmament?
Sir, I know but one King, and one Queen, both joined in the ſame Regality. Your Sun is ſet, he put out his own Light. Be not ſo fond of your late King, as if you had loſt your Miſtreſs, and were reſolved never to have another; for you muſt have another King, and Queen too, as it happens, we have, by the wonderful Providence and Gift of God, to theſe Kingdoms, ſince you and I began our diſcourſe. Come, Sir, let me play a little upon you, I will not hurt you. Were you ſo truly and perfectly Loyal to K. Charles the 2d. as not to wiſh for James, while you look'd upon Him as the Riſing Sun, that was to Crown your Ambition with PreferCharles went out with little Mourning, and James, came up with greateſt Admiration. You were like Perſian Idolaters at his Aſcent. Do not mourn too much at his Ecclipſe? It was his own Free-will; and we had no reaſon to reſiſt his Will in going away, and thereby making room for ſuch a Succeſſion, as is to the hearty Joy of the ſerious part of the Nation, and the univerſal Joy of all Proteſtants in Europe! Four Years ago, a gloomy Look, was by innuendo a ſign of a diſloyal Heart; there was a great deal of diſſembled cheerfulneſ. I hope, Doctor, you will never be preſented nor troubled for a diſcontented Look, nor indicted for a little fit of Sulleneſs. Come, Doctor, ſatisfy your ſelf with St. Paul's wholeſome Doctrine; The Powers that be, are ordained of God, (I believe more than thoſe you hanker after) and hear what a Great Friend of the Church of England, and Advocate for her Ceremonies, I mean, the truly worthy Admirer of Free-Grace, and Calvin's Friend, the old Biſhop Morton of Dureſm ſpeaks; Are they then Once eſtabliſh
Now, Sir, Our Choſen King and Queen are Created by Man, a Convention that had greater Power and Truſt committed to them, than any Parliament before them ſince this Government was firſt moulded,Peter calleth it) becometh (thus St. Paul) York before the King, 1639
And now, Doctor, I come to the end of what, at our firſt meeting we fell upon: As I intended, by the help of God, to obſerve the Thanksgiving, Febr. 14. ſo I have. And canBehold and wonder at what God hath wrought! Salvation belongeth unto the Lord, his Bleſſing is upon his People! The Lord hath anſwered before we called, Iſa. 65.24. Who hath heard ſuch a thing? who hath ſeen ſuch a thing? Shall the Earth be made to bring forth in one day? or ſhall a Nation be born at Once? for as ſoon as Zion travelled, ſhe brought forth Children. Iſa. 66.8. There are three admirable Providences, to be told our Children, that the Generations to come may praiſe the Lord.
As in Savoy, 1686.
2. After a Deliverance, we are come to a Settlement, the moſt hopeful this Nation ever ſaw; in many reſpects it ex
3. That God ſhould make way for it, by taking away the Spirit of the late King, and coveying him away, without re
4. The Lord wonderfully united the Spirit of the Nation in the choice of Repreſentatives; and united their Counſels, without tedious diſtracting Debates, to fill the Throne, to clear and recover their own deſpiſed, and almoſt extinguiſhed Rights, and to do Right to our moſt Gracious King and Queen, and the Royal Line, upon better terms than they were in before.
5. God hath given a King and Queen of our own Religi
6. I rejoice for the joy of the perſecuted, deſolated Pro
7. I rejoice for the Conſolation which this wonderful ProEngland, is like to add Courage and Strength to Proteſtant Princes and States every
8. I rejoice that Popery is put to ſhame and confuſion in our Land. I wiſh the Simple and Deluded may ſee the Hand of God which is lifted up, and not love Darkneſs rather than Light. The Lord hath broken the Head of Popiſh Counſels, diſcloſed their Secrets, and made them fall in their own De
9. I hope the Lord will finiſh his work, and having brought to the Birth, will alſo bring forth, Shall I cauſe to bring forth, and ſhut the Womb? ſaith the Lord. Iſa. 66.9.
10. I hope to ſee Proteſtants united more in the profeſſion of Faith, Love, Worſhip, Communion, and Peace, that there be no Colour from Laws to ſcatter the Flocks; put Lights under Buſhels, and make them a Prey to the worſt of Men.
11. I hope to ſee with admiration, Behold! a King ſhall reign in Righteouſneſs, and Princes ſhall rule in Judgment;—
that the Work of Righteouſneſs ſhall be Peace, and the Effect of Righteouſneſs, Quietneſs, and Aſſurance for ever. Iſa. 32.1, 17, &c.
12. I hope Our gracious King, Queen, and wiſe Parlia
13. I rejoice, that I am in my place to ſerve God, out of which I was preparing my ſelf to be thrown out, for not reading the King's Declaration (as it was a means to advance Popery, and not out of a grudg at the Indulgence of Proteſtants) which had been the means of our ruin, if God had not given him an unexpected Diverſion, to look to his own Kingdom, and found him other Work.
Every day will I praiſe the Lord, and call upon mine own Soul to bleſs the Lord, and not to forget all his Benefits; and I will, by the Grace of God, ſtir up others, with an, O that Men would praiſe the Lord! &c. And as I have, ſince I was capable, kept the 5th of November, ſo now, while I can, upOrange, as a Day which the Lord hath made. My Joys may be grievous to you, which I am ſorry for; and therefore I will pray, that we may not fail as Hezekiah did, to return thanks according to the Mercy received. There are thouſands and ten thouſands of Mercies and Bleſſings in this marvellous Deliverance and Settlement of the Kingdom; nothing can blaſt this hopeful Spring, and ſilence the ſinging of Birds, but our continuance in Prodigious Profaneneſs and Debauchery, brought in at the very Heels of the joyful ReſtoKing in 1660. If the ſenſe of Mercy doth but run through our Hearts, and oblige us to think as well of the Practice of Religion, (as it is deſcribed, Tit. 2.11, 12, 13. and other places) as we think ill of Popery, all your new Sect of Grumblers can only give us ſome exerciſe of our Charity and Moderation; you, and all your Party, under your antiWales, and his Brother in the little Belly of the Queen, cannot hurt us. Therefore, Good Doctor, grumble not againſt God, our Laws, our King, and Queen, and Parliament, the hoped-for ſettlement of the Church upon the Word of God, maintained by unity of Spirit in the Bond of Peace, and commended in a Better Act, than our laſt of Uniformity, or elſe we ſhall go as far back, as that Act caſt the happineſs of this Church and Kingdom. For from that day that Act took place, it hath been ill with the Church of God, and Chriſtianity in England, and a private Apartment was made for Popery, under the Church Walls.
Are you a Conformiſt, and ſay ſo?
You have called us Trimmers; and our Conformity hath been in a great part from the Principle of Paſſive Obedience, and Peace and Love to Souls, reſolving to go as far with you as we could with a good Conſcience. And ſince our Eyes have been opened to ſee the tendency of Affairs, we can think no leſs, and have good Authority for what we ſay. Godlineſs and Honeſty, with Quietneſs and Peace, is the deſire of our Souls. And, Doctor, do not Grumble: Let not your Eye be Evil, becauſe God is Good. What! hate Popery, and op
Conſcience and Allegiance.—
It is well the power of Conſcience is at leaſt acknowledged. Conſcience was Fanaticiſm a great while, and a religious Pretence for Rebellion, and the worſt of Actions. I wiſh you a well-ſetled, enlightned Conſcience. And for your Allegiance pay it where it is now due, by God's Providence to a Wonder; by the Laws of the Land, we have God, the Laws, King, Queen, and Parliament for us. Come down, down Doctor, ſoft and fair, there are a pair of Stairs from your coming down from
Non-Cons were to renounce the Covenant. Preach Peace, and perſwade the Gentlemen of the Swear, and the Sword, to be thankful they came off ſo well, and were not kill'd and damn'd at on Day, according to their Atheiſtical Wiſhes, for God was againſt them; the Prince of Orange, was Ordained of God to be Victor, and now King. But, Sir, I perceive your Colour comes, I will therefore diſmiſs you calmly, Live in Peace and Love; Do the Work and Will of God, and ſo farewel. The God of Peace go with you.
I Am come again to viſit you, and to ſhew you ſomething that's worth your reading and conſideration too. There are ſome things for you to chew upon.
You are very welcome to me at all times, who deſire a fairneſs and friendſhip with you; and if there be a ſcuffle of Notions, let us labour to prevent the drawing of Blood, and bringing in Popery and Miſery about our Ears. There are a new Sect of Seminaries ſculking and haunting up and down, ſowing their Diſcontents and ill Nature, under the Name of Loyalty and Religion; but the beſt is, their Notions are like heated Corn, chitted in their Brains, that I hope they will not grow, nor come up ſo tall, as to hide a Rebel in. Well, but, Sir, what have you to ſhew me?
Here's and ingenious Paper, called, The Deſertion Diſcuſs'd, in a Letter to a Country Gentleman.
I will peruſe it, and deal with it as I find it, or as I am
I think it is all material, and well penn'd.
If it be ſo material, I were beſt leave him to be handled by the Author of the Enquiry into the Preſent State of Affairs, whom he takes into his hands to diſcuſs. And if the Bones of his Subject will bear Diſcuſſion, without breaking or disjoint
1. How ſaith the Gentleman to him? Can the Seat of Government be empty, while the King, who all grant, had an unqueſtionable Title, is ſtill living, and his Abſence forced and involuntary? Here are Suppoſitions imply'd, that ſhould firſt be pro
It was a mixt Action, and the Rea
In Anſwer to the Gentleman's Queſtion drawn up by himThe Gentlemen of the Convention, who de
For now eſpecially ſince the Story of the French League, and the Buſineſs of the Prince of Wales, are paſt over in ſilence, moſt Men believe, that the pretended Breach, of that which they call the Original Contract, was deſign'd for no more than a Popular Flouriſh.
I confeſs to you, Doctor, theſe Lines are very material; of each branch I'le crop a little.
1. The Noblemen and Gentlemen of the Convention, who had the Perſonal Majeſty lodged in them in a high degree; and that as they were a Convention, entruſted to act for the ComEngland, did, doubtleſs, lay a great ſtreſs for their Judgment upon that, which is more than the Opinion of the Gentlemen, as he calls them. But the foregoing Actions of the King, terminated in that firſt Act, had their ſhare in influencing. that Publick Reaſon ſo to judg.
"The Story of the French League is paſt in ſilence. No, Sir, that which you and your Fellow-Rockers of the ſoft-headed Diſciples, call a Story, is not paſt away in ſilence yet. A Story you'd make it, as if all this Action was begotten by a Story, or two or three Fictions. I ſhall not without AuColeman's Letters:
W. Throckmorton, Feb. 1. 74/5.James) come to be Maſter of our Affairs,France.
France will have reaſon to promiſe himſelf all things that he can deſire. For, according to the Mind of the Duke, the Intereſts of the King of England, the King of France, and his own, are ſo cloſe bound up together, that it is impoſſible to ſeparate them the one from the other, without Ruin to all three; but being joined, they muſt, notwithſtanding all oppoſition, become invincible.
Now ordinary Reaſon will hence
Monſ. le Cheeſe;
France eſteemed his Intereſt, and the Intereſt of his R. H. to be the ſame, p. 110. and that if his Royal Highneſs would endeavour to diſſolve the Parliament, his Majeſty (King of France) would aſſiſt him with his Power and Purſe, to have ſuch a new One as would be for their purpoſe. His Royal Highneſs was convinced their Intereſts were both one. A ſecond Letter to Le Cheeſe: We have here a mighty Work upon our Hands, no leſs than the Converſion of the three Kingdoms, and by that perhaps the ſubduing of a Peſtilent Hereſy, which has domineer'd over a great part of the Northern World a long time; there were never ſuch hopes of Succeſs ſince the Death of Queen Mary, as now in our days; when God hath given us a Prince, who is become (may I ſay, a Miracle) zealous of being the Author and Inſtrument of ſo glorious a Work, Collect. of Letters, p. 118.
3. Thè Story of the Prince of Wales, (whoſe Right to the Crown is ſo clear to ſome of your Seminaries, that it is as cerMemorial, and upon the Queen's Progreſs with him. We give credit to the Letter of Father Petre to La Cheſe.
As to the Queen's being with Child, that Great Concern goes on as well as we could with,
A rare Midwife of a Plot, to dig a Baby out of a Meal-Tub): &c. you will agree with me (moſt Reverend Father) that we have done a great thing, by introducing Mrs. Cellier to the Queen, (this Woman is totally devoted to our Society.The zea
But that which is pretty indeed in the Reverend Father, is, That the King's Secret Council think good to wait for the Queen's Delivery that they may ſee a Succeſſor, who may have need of the whole Protection of the moſt Chriſtian King, to ſupport him & maintain his Rights.
Now what was to become of the King of England? Whither was he to be ſent after the Birth of this young Succeſſor? the Queſtion may be asked of the Friends of that little Prince? for was King James to live or not? If he was to live, notwithſtanding the having of a Prince to ſucceed him, then why was not he able to ſupport and protect his Succeſſor, and his Rights? Or, was the King of England to be diſabled from ſupporting his Succeſſor? The Princes of Wales were never wont to have Guardians and Protectors out of the Engliſh Dominions. But this Unfortuand his whole Protection. A skirt of his Protection was not
Petre was a Fortuneteller of the young friendleſs injured Prince, that he muſt be carried to France, when young and tender, and ſtand in need of the whole Protection of a Great King.—
4. You ſay, That which they call the Original Contract, was deſigned for no more than a Popular Flouriſh. Now, Doctor how doth this appear, that it was no more than a Popular Flouriſh? what a kindneſs was the King's withdrawWales was but a Story, which they cared not how ſoon was laid aſleep, or put to ſilence. And what they call an Original Contract, was but a popular Flouriſh. Now, Doctor, becauſe your Author is a Man that leads, becauſe he writes, and againſt a whole Convention alſo, I will make ſome further diſcovery of this Contract, which others of the ſame Genius make ſo light of. And here I will ſhew, what ſome of Eminency of the Church of England have written of it. Theſe Men will not allow the Kingdom of England, to be as much as a Contracted Matron; but a Proſtitute to Abſolute Arbitrary Power.
England.
Saunderſon doth labour to manifeſt the Abſurdity, if not Impoſſibility of any Contract between King and People. But if the People had at any time any Power of Electing their King, it is rational enough to conceive, that they made Conditions and Terms, and would never have conſented to their Hurt and Injury. There are ſeveral ways of acquiring Soveraign Power. Dr. Fern, whoſe appearance was eminent againſt Defenſive Arms, doth yet acknowledg. It is probable indeed that Kings at firſt were by
choice Here, as Elſewhere.
Here is a Covenant and Contract, conp. 19.—in due time, in regard of the ſecurity his People receive by his taking the Oath, and he again muthere is ſomething like a Covenant, all but Forfeiture. The King there promiſes, and binds himſelf by Oath to performance. Could they ſhew us in this Covenant ſuch an Agreement between the King and his People, that in caſe he will not diſcharge his Truſt, that it ſhall be lawful for the States of the Kingdom, by Arms, to reſiſt, and provide for the Safety thereof, it were ſomething, p. 21.ſponſus Regni to the Kingdom; it doth not thereArniſaeus Relectionis politicae, L. 2. c. 2. Sect. 6. And, de facto William the Firſt, (who did not found his Authority upon Conqueſt) after he had waſted Suſſex, Kent, and other Counties, until he came to Boarcham, where Arch-Biſhop Aldred, and Wulſtan of Worceſter, Clito, Edgar, the Earles Edwin and Morcar, and Noblemen out of London, with many others, came to Him, and giving Hoſtaand ſwore Allegiance. Cum quibus et ipſe foedus pepigit. With whom, He himſelf made a CoFloren Wigornienſis.—And when he and his Normans put the State into a Convulſion, by their Oppreſſions, ſeveral of the Saxon chief Nobility took Arms to defend their Anaut Libertatem, aut Mortem, Liberty or Death. Argumentum Antinormanicum,
William and Stigand A. B. of Canterbury, Egelſine Abbot of St. Auſtins Canterb. and the Kentiſh men, who armed themſelves aWilliam: and being ready to engage, a Parley is deſired. The Ambaſſadors of the Kentiſh-men were commanded to tell William to this purpoſe. Moſt Renowned Duke, The Men of Kent do meet thee, they will be thy Friends, and will obey thy Power; if thou grant their juſt Demands, as thoſe that contend to preKent. The King diſturbed with this Speech, and other Difficulties, took Counſel, for many Reanon neceſſitate magis, quàm voluntate, he granted that they ſhould live after their Ancient Laws. Itaque inter Gulielmum & Cantios, initum foedus fuit, & obſides utrinque dat. Antiquitas Britannicae, p. 108. Here's an Original Contract with the Arch-biſhop and Abbot, and Kingdom of Kent. If you ſay, It was lawful for them to reſiſt an Invader, and a Conqueror: ConſiEdward the Confeſſor; as right Heir to the Crown, by Succeſſion, as his Succeſſors and Sons, alſo allArgumentum Antinormanicum, p. 19, &c.
5. The Gentleman goes on to teach us, that a Parliament and a Convention are two different things; the latter for want of the King's Writs, and Concurrence, having no ſhare in the Legiſlative Power. This is as much as to ſay, What have the Convention to do with the Affairs that lay before them? Well, let it be granted, that there is a difference beEngland. The Real MaEngland. The Form of GovernWales: The Order, Limitation, and Settlement of the Succeſſion was in them. And though they had not the Formality of a Parliament, becauſe of the Defect of a King, they wanted not an Original Power to give under God, and for God, Life and Form to the Government it ſelf. The Legiſlative Power is the King, the Houſe of Lords, and Houſe of Commons. The Buſineſs of the Convention was not to make particular Laws, and they did not exerciſe a Legiſlative Power, but they were put upon it how to re-eſtabliſh the Government, as near as poſſibly they could, ac
As great things have been done in the Days of our Fathers, out of the ordinary Rules, that were never thought to be ill done. Inſtance is given, not in Hen. the 7th, but in the NoJames the Firſt. One Anſwer to this Demand may be, That Queen
Our Convention will merit an honourable Memorial of all GeElizabeth's wiſe Council did foreſee, that this was an effectual, if not the only way to prevent greater Miſchiefs and Effuſion of Blood, which in all probability had followed, if this Courſe had not been taken. And in an Extraordinary Caſe, ſome Extraordinary Thing, tending to the Publick Good, may lawfully be done. Lawſon. Pol. S. & Civil. p. 87.—
Sir, I thank you for any thing you communicate to me: Now let me put into your Hand, a Rational, Moderate, and Convincing Paper. The lawfulneſs of taking the New Oaths aſſerted.
I ſhould be glad to be ſatisfied in the Point of AllegiJames the 2d. My Conſcience is not at eaſe, and I am afraid I ſhall offend one way or other.
I am glad Our King, Queen, and Parliament, are ſo moderate and patient with Our new Diſſenters and Seminapleaſing Himſelf, whether you be pleaſed or not. How long ſhall it be before he have your good-will to advance his own Glory? He hath patiently been gratifying you many Years; even to the giving you the King you preferr'd before all things. You have tried him, grew afraid of him, talk'd boldly of him, and acted too to diſpleaſe him, and towards his removal alſo. And now, what's the matter? what would you have? Can you neither be well with him, nor well without him? How many of you acted, as if you be
1. I grant that Allegiance is due to the Perſon of a King; and not only to his Crown and Dignity: but then, that Per
2. The Perſon of a King, as King, in the lawful poſſeſſion of the Crown, is intruſted with the Adminiſtration of the Government, according to the Laws of the Kingdom, which he is bound to God, and the Kingdom, by Promiſe and Oath, to obſerve. And he ought to give himſelf to the actual exerciſe of that Truſt and Authority which he hath
3. The Soveraign of England, is only Soveraign for Ad
4. The natural Perſon to whom we are Subjects, and are obliged to be true and faithful to, as true Subjects, (How can he watch for our Good; if he be not ſecure from Danger from us, and of our Subjection and Obedience as ready to ſerve him, who is the Miniſter of God for good to us?) The Perſon, I ſay, to whom we owe Allegiance, is that Per
5. If He aſſume a greater Power than he hath by the Laws and Conſtitution, or endeavour by Arts and Force to change the Government into another form, or deprive the Subjects of their Fundamental Rights; then though he be the ſame Natural Perſon to whom we promiſed Allegiance, he is not the ſame Moral or Political Perſon. He is not that King to whom we are Subjects, but another, quite contrary to that Majeſty in
6. Allegiance is during the Life of the King, if while he lives he continueth to be King. He may forfeit to God: And if God diſable him, or remove him, Subjects are diſcharged for their Allegiance, while God hath depoſed him. He may forRegnum pactionatum, & non abſolutum. Great Failures come ſhort of Forfeitures. And if a King not only ceaſe to rule and defend according to his place, but be ſo far perverted as to ſet up his Will, and ſtrive to carry all before it, againſt the Religion and well
7. It conduceth much to ſatisfy Conſcience, (to underſtand what Allegiance is. Ligantia, & inde ligiantia, & Allegiantia) vinculum arctius inter ſubditum & Regem, invicem connectens. The Bond, Covenant, or Compact, by which a King and his Subjects are mutually bound to one another, Hunc ad Protectionem, & juſtum Regimen: illos ad Tributa & debitam ſubjectionem. The King is bound to Protection, and juſt Rule
Spellman, Gloſſ. Dr. Robert Auſtin, who hath taken pains to ſtate it, according to the ReſolutiCalvin's Caſe, gives this deſcription of Allegiance. Ligeance is a Quality of Soul, whereby were are diſpoſed to bear all Truth and Faith to the Perſon of the King, his Crown and Dignity, ready to yield him all true Obedience, according to the Laws of Nature, of God, and the Realm wherein we live.
Tract of Allegiance not impeach'd by the Parliaments taking Arms. c. 2.
8. Let us revive the Oaths wherein the promiſe of Fi
1. The Caſe is hardeſt upon them, who took the Oaths ſince the late King did manifeſtly act contrary to the Duty of his Place. But yet, the words of the Oath, are exbelieving him to be the Lawful and Rightful King of this Realm. Now he is Lawful King, who hath a Lawful Right, and is no Pretender or UſurFalkner. Chr. Loyalty, l. 2. c. 5. p. 544, &c. The Relation of an Engliſh Subject, is to an Engliſh, not an Abſolute King. If one term of the Relation be chang'd or ceaſed, the ObligaCeſſante
perſonâ relata naturali ceſſat obligatio perſonalis. Ceſſante relatione vel perſonâ Civili, ceſſat obligatio talis, quâ talis. The natural Father dying, the relation to him is at an end, and the Obligation to Duty is diſſolved. The moral and poliChriſtian Directory; Caſes, Obligation of Vows, and Promiſes, p. 703. And Mr. Lawſon is ſhort and poſitive; The perſonal Majeſty of a King with us, requires ſubjection whilſt he lives, and governeth ac
p. 214. Polit. Sacra & Civilis. In a word, ſo many ways as Majeſty and SoveraignIbid.
2. All that concerns the Papal pretended Powers (of doing Evil) in the Oath, remains true for ever. The only Clauſe in the Oath, in which any can think himſelf conI will bear faith and true Al
The reſolution of this Doubt depends upon the former. Plots and treacherous Conſpiracies, are practices unworthy of Chriſtians againſt the worſt of Tyrants. The ways of defence muſt be lawful. But who was that King which you promiſed to defend, and to bear Faith to? Was it not to your Lawful King, in the lawful Exerciſe of his Authority? If you were a Servant to his Arbitrary Will, if you had defended him, and ſerved him to perſecute the true Religion, or to remove and corrupt it, or to ſet up Arbitrary Power, you were a Traitor againſt God and your Country. Your Oath was a Bond of Iniquity, and ought now to be repented of: Had you fought for him when he was gone to the Camp to fight againſt the
England for whoſe good only Kings are ordained.
3. If you are enſnared with the Opinion of the pretended Prince of Wales's being the next Heir, you are to be pitied if you are ſincere in your Opinion. The great Conven
4. But then, if you inſiſt upon it, Why did not the unPeter Martyr was a very wiſe and learned good Man, and his words are worth our following; Nihil anxiè diſputandum eſt, quo jure, quarè injuriâ Principes adepti ſunt ſuam poteſtatem. Illud potiùs agendum eſt, ut Magiſtratus praeſentes revereamur; in Rom. c. 13. v. 1. Let us not anxiouſly diJames the Firſt ſpake it; I am ſince come to that Knowledg, that an Act of Parliament can do greater Wonders, than unite
And that old wiſe Man, Treaſurer Scotland to England, by the Name of Great Britain.
Burleigh, was wont to ſay, He knew not what an Act of Parliament can do in
And ſome great Lawyers, in a Parliament of Queen England;
Star-Chamber.
Elizabeth, Mr. Yelverton, afterwards Speaker and Judg, ſaid, That to ſay the Parliament had no Power to determine of the Crown, was High Treaſon.
And Mr. Mounſon ſaid, It were horrible to ſay, that the Parliament had no Authority to determine of the Crown;
S. Dew's Journal, p. 164, 176.
And what cannot a Convention, a Repreſentative of the Community do? and what Parliament will not confirm what they have done? And what good Man will be ſo cloudy and ſullen, as not to rejoice for what is done, to the unſpeakable Comfort of Proteſtant Countries, and of our own Times, and Poſterity after us, if we ſin not away our Mercies.
Theſe Things thus conſidered; I pray give me leave to come up cloſe to you.
1. Do you think in your Conſcience, that James the SeEngland, and our Brethren abroad? Was his daily augmenHenry Spelman above; What Legiance binds the King to, and upon what condition we promiſe Allegiance.
But if he break with me, I will keep Oath to him, and be his Liege Subject.
You will! If he then at this time ſhould ſend an Ex
But I will not oppoſe his Return, if he ſhould attempt it, to recover his own Lawful Inheritance, and to rule his People.
If ever he ſhould attempt to return, you think it will be by Force, don'd ye? And do you think it will be, to be a Nurſing-Father to the Church, and a graci
Will you be ever able to prove a Popiſh King to be a Lawful King of England? when you do, then you will have an anſwer to this Argument. That King who accord&c. And will you aſſiſt and ſerve ſuch a King, as bound in Conſcience? then your
vinculum iniquitatis; and by it you cannot aſſiſt him, but you muſt do Iniquity, or neglect a Duty, and violate the Bonds of all other Relations. Can the performance of your Oath to James the late King, conſiſt with the publick Safety and Welfare of the Church and Kingdom? Then, non eſt ſervandum juramentum, cujus Executio, cum ſalute publicâ, cum honeſtate & bonis moribus pugnaret: You a Doctor, I will not Engliſh it, I have neither Time, nor Paper to ſpare. It is a Rule about Oaths, among others, laid down by the excelRivet; Explic. Decal Juramenti obligatio qualis. Can your late King give you Protection, and the Benefit of Laws? If not, can you think your ſelf bound in Conſcience to be his Subject, and owe him Allegiance? Kings are the Shields of the Earth, to give Protection. Therefore they are choſen of Men, and given of God. That's the Conſideration that moves you to ſubjection: if that cannot be had from Him, are you not free? That's the Lige, the Ligeance between the King and Subject; if he cannot, and that by his Fault, the Bond is diſſolved: Who broke firſt? he with the Kingdom, or his Subjects with him? Si una partium prior juramentum violaverit in re mutuò promiſſa, altera ſolvitur obligatione; Rivet. L. cit.—R. 4.
But he was Diſabled, he was forced by his Subjects. And therefore it is not his fault that he cannot govern or protect.
He was deſpirited by him who cutteth off the Spirit of Princes, and diſabled, to a Wonder of Divine Power over him. Did he grant what his Subjects deſired, according to their Right and Duty? or hath he ever ſince his going, made an offer to return to govern by Law? You know his Mind, and his Engagements; blind not your ſelf. Was the leaſt Violence offered, or threatned, if he would ſtay, and not begon?—I know who ſaid it, but doth he not wrong our King and Nobles? To eaſe you by a Concluſion, Doctor, hath God wrought any Deliverance for us? If not, where are your Senſes? if he hath; why will you not help us to thank God our Saviour? And why will you not own Our InGlory to God on High, on Earth Peace, and good Will towards and among Men.
PAge 3. line 5. read afraid. P. 6. in T. 2d, the Scripture doth conſtitute no perpetual Form, inſert no. P. 13. l. 3. dele whom, and read, who is wonderful in working. P. 14. T. 2. dele non, and read legibus ſolutus. P. 23. Margin, r. Dr. Fern. P. 25. dele Hobs in the Margin, and after Pol. Sacr. & Civil, add c. 15. p. 125. And Anſw. to Hobs, p. 17. begin the next Sen&c. is a different Sentence.
The reſt of the Sheets the Author did not ſee, therefore the Reader is entreated to correct or pardon the Prin
☞ AN Account of the Reaſons of the Nobility and Gentry's Invitation of the Prince of Orange into England; Being a Memorial from the Engliſh Proteſtants concerning their Grievances; with a large Account of the Birth of the Prince of Wales: preſented to their Highneſſes the Prince and Princeſs of Orange.
A Collection of Political and Hiſtorical Papers relating to the Preſent Juncture of Affairs in England, in Ten Parts; which will be Continued from Time to Time, according as Matter occurs.
A Brief Hiſtory of the Succeſſion of the Crown of England, &c. Col
Wonderful Predections of Noſtredamus, Grebner, David Pareus, and Antonius Torquatus; wherein the Grandeur of their Preſent Majeſties, the Happineſs of England, and Downfall of France and Rome are plainly Delineated. With a large Preface, ſhewing, That the Crown of England, has not been obſcurely foretold to their Majeſties William the 3d, and Queen Mary, late Prince and Princeſs of Orange, and that the People of this Ancient Monarchy have duly contributed thereunto, in the preſent Aſſembly of Lords and Commons, not
A Seaſonable Diſcourſe, wherein is examined, what is lawful during the Confuſions and Revolutions of Government, eſpecially in the Caſe of a King deſerting his Kingdoms; and how far a Man may lawfully conform to the Powers and Commands of thoſe, who with Various Succeſſes hold King
A Seaſonable Treatiſe; wherein is proved, That King William (commonly called the Conqueror) did not get the Imperial Crown of England by the Sword, but by the Election and Conſent of the People. To whom he ſwore to obOriginal Contract between King and People.
An Anſwer to a Paper Intituled, The Deſertion Diſcuſſed: being a VindicaWilliam and Queen Mary.
An Exact Collection of the Debates of the Houſe of Commons (particu&c.) held at Weſtminſter, Octob. 21. 1680; Prorogued the 10th, and Diſſolved the 18th of January following. With the Debates of the Houſe of Commons at Oxford, Aſſembled March. 21. 1680. Alſo a Juſt and Modeſt Vindication of the Proceedings of the ſaid Parliaments.
Julian's Arts to Undermine and Extirpate Chriſtianity, &c. By Samuel Johnſon. The Impreſſion of which Book was made in the Year 1683, and has ever ſince lain buried under the Ruins of all thoſe Engliſh Rights which it endeavoured to defend; but by the Auſpicious and Happy Arrival of the Prince of Orange, both They and It have obtained a Reſurrection.
Dr. Gilbert Burnet (now Biſhop of Salisbury) his Tracts, in Two Vollumes; in which are contained ſeveral Things relating to the Affairs of England.
The Myſtery of Iniquity, working in the Dividing of Proteſtants, in order to the ſubverting of Religion, and our Laws, for al moſt the ſpace of thir
Liberty of Conſcience now highly neceſſary for England, humbly repreſented to this preſent Parliament.
An Enquiry into, and Detection of the Barbarous Murther of the late Earl of Eſſex, (now under conſideration of a Committee of the Houſe of Lords): Or, a Vindication of that Noble Perſon, from the Guilt and Infamy of having deſtroyed himſelf.
An Account of the Trial of Mr. Papillon. To which is added, The Matter of Fact in the chuſing of Sheriffs in Sir John Moor's Year, now under the con
A Collection of ſtrange Predictions of Mr. J. P. for the Years 1687, and 1688; about K. James the Second, Prince of Wales, and the ſcampering away of many great Miniſters of State.
Arguments againſt the Diſpenſing Power, in Anſwer to L. C. J. Herbert.
The Royal Cards; Being a lively Repreſentation of the late Popiſh and TyWilliam Henry Prince of Orange, now King of England, (whom God long preſerve) in curious Copper Plates. Price s.
a Pack.