A LETTER TO A FRIEND, OCCASIONED By the late Reprinting of a JESUITES BOOK. ABOUT SUCCESSION TO THE Crown of ENGLAND, Pretended to have been written by R. Doleman.

My Son, fear thou the Lord and the King, and meddle not with them that are given to change, Prov. 24. 21.

LONDON, Printed for W. Davis and J. Hindmarsh, at Amen Corner, and at the black Bull in Corn-Hill near the Royal Exchange, 1682.

THE Apostate Protestant.


I Received your Present, and if I thank you for it, 'tis purely out of respects to the hand that sent it; I mean a Book bearing this Title, A Conference about the next Succession to the Crown of England, pretended to be written by R. Doleman. Yet considering what you write, that you was startled and astonish'd to see in it such Horrid and Traiterous Assertions, and Principles so destructive not of Monarchy only, but of every Form of Government; I am apt to mistrust that you parted with it chiefly out of Fear of keeping such a Lewd and Dangerous Companion in your Closet, especially since you confess, that 'twas brought to your hands as it were by stealth, being happily seized on by one of his Majesties Officers. 'Tis a dangerous Book indeed, and without doubt is published and hand­ed up and down to serve a Turn in these Ticklish times, when some Ambitious men have taken Pepper in the Nose, and to be Re­venged for their disappointments endeavour to make another strong Pass at our Government, and would sain hurl the world into Confusion.

Since you have lodged the Knave with me, I'le take care that for me he shall not go abroad to do mischief. But yet I cannot answer your Commands, unless I give you some account both of the Author, and the Book.

[Page 2]As for the Author; it was not R. Doleman, (that is but a Coun­terfeit) but Robert Parsons was his Name; a notorious and violent Jesuite in the days of Queen Elizabeth; a fellow born at Stockersey in Somerse [...]shire, Note: Fa. Watsons Quodlibets Pag. 236. and a Bastard it seems: which possibly might be an Omen, that afterwards he would own for his Mother that Church which is an Whore, and (as much as in him lay) prefer Ba­stards to a Crown. Note: Id. p. 109. A man of whom the Papists themselves in those days gave this Character, that he was filius populi & filius peccati; one born to be a Plague to the world, restless, seditious, turbuleu [...], cruel, imperious, treacherous, and in a manner the very Epitome of all wickedness. They who knew him and his Dealings at Oxford, Note: Id. p. 217. have told us, how seditious, wanton, and factious this lewd Bastards Conversation was, and how for his Libelling and other mis­demeanours he was thrust out of Baliol College, having been so infamous there, being then Master of Arts, that they hissed him out with hoo-bubs, and rung him out with Bells.

In those days, saith my Author, England was made the main chance of Christendom, Note: Id. p. 30 [...]. the only Butt, Mark and White that was aimed at. And indeed, such was the strength of the Romanists, their Conspiracies so frequent, and their endeavours so great for a Successor for their turn, that affairs were in a very uncertain and tottering condition; so that it was expresly given out,Note: Id. p. 305. That England should be made an Island of Jesuites. But to promote the Plot, none was more industrious than this Parsons. 'Twas He chiefly that wrought with Pius Quintus to excommunicate the Queen. 'Twas He chiefly that stirred up the King of Spain to in­vade our Country. 'Twas He chiefly that sollicited her Majesties Subjects to abandon their Allegiance. Nay, 'twas He chiefly that that occasioned those Severities the Government was forced to use upon the Papists: For the Secular Priests did acknowledge, that her Majesty used them kindly for the space of the first Ten years of her Reign,Note: Id. p. 265. so that their condition was tolerable, and in some good quiet: It was the Principles and Practices of this Parsons, that were so injurious not only to our Religion, and our Government, but to the Interest even of his own [Page 3] Party too. You may take this Character, as I find it given (and very deservedly) by a Popish Priest then living. ‘This (saith he) is that same Parsons, whom Pope,Note: Id. p. 236. Prince and Peer with all true English hearts have cause to hate. This is he of whom his own General repor­ted, that he was more troubled with one English man, than with all the rest of his Society. This is he of whom Cardinal Alan held this opinion, that he was a man very violent, and of an unquiet Spirit, and of whom Mr. Blackwell (now his Darling) said, that his turbulent and lewd life would be a discredit to the Catholick Cause. In short, the general conceit of all that ever have throughly conversed with him, is this, that he is of a furi­ous, passionate, hot, cholerick, exorbitant working humour, busie headed, and full of Ambition, Envy, Pride, Rancour, Ma­lice and Revenge: Whereunto, through his latter Machiavilian Practices, may be added, that he is a most diabolical, unnatural, and barbarous butcherly fellow, unworthy the Name (nay, cursed be the hour wherein he had the Name) of a Priest, nay, of a Religious Person, nay, of a Temporal Lay-man, Jesuit, nay, of a Catholick, nay, of a Christian, nay, of a Humane Creature; but of a Beast or a Devil; a violater of all Laws; a contemner of all Authority; a stain of Humanity, an Impostume of all cor­ruption, a corrupter of all Honesty, and a Monopoly of all mischief.’

This was the man, Sir, whose Book you sent me; and had I ne­ver look'd into the Book, yet considering who and what the Author of it was, I could not but blush and be ashamed to think, that any in our days (especially Pretenders to the Protestant Religion) should be such Enemies to Truth, to Religion, and to Common Honesty, as to bring such a wicked mans Issue to light again, and to dress it and set it out afresh for a Tool. What good can the indifferent world conceive of them, who of all Principles, espouse the Principles of the Jesuits, who are the worst of Papists; and of them, do especi­ally Admire and Recommend to our reading the Writings of this Parsons, who was one of the worst of all Jesuites?

As touching the Book it self, Sir, there are divers things which are worthy your observation, and which may be of good use to you, and to every man in these times who is a zealous, impartial, and honest-hearted Protestant.

[Page 4]First, That it is so full of Principles that are apparently false, pestilent, and scandalous, that in Queen Elizabeths days when it was first Printed, it did not only exasperate our English Govern­ment, but did likewise give such offence to the very Popish Faction, that several of them wrote Books on purpose in confutation of this Counterfeit Doleman, so ashamed they were of it: Nay, Parsons himself finding his Party so offended, and himself so rated and condemned upon the coming out of this Book,Note: Quodlibet, p. 286. though he was shameless enough, endea­voured nevertheless to shift and wash his hands of it, as if he had not been the Author of it, though 'twas notorious that he was.

Secondly, 'tis to be noted that in the fatal year 1648, when that blessed Martyr King Charles the First was so barbarously Murdered, the several Articles brought in charge against him were all ground­ed upon Principles taken out of this Jesuites Book; nay, a great part of the very Book it self (so much as served the turn of those cursed Regicides) was Reprinted under another counterfeit Title, viz. Several Speeches delivered at a Conference, concerning the power of Parliaments to proceed against their Kings for misgovernment. They were forced to be beholden to this Jesuite for Principles to defend that Unnatural War, and that Unjust Sentence: For could the Protestant Religion (which they pretended to maintain) have born them out, it is not credible; they would have brought upon themselves so much Infamy, by raising up a Jesuites Ghost to speak for them. The sending of that Book abroad, did clearly demonstrate what they and their designs were.

And I would sain know, whether an unprejudiced man will not conclude, that there is some ugly design on foot now, when this very Book is brought upon the Stage again? For, you must ob­serve, in the next place, that the Present you sent me, is the very same Book, now lately Printed the Third time; the very same Book, that was first intended to tear the Government into pieces, and to turn this Land into a field of Bloud: the same Book, that laid the foundations of the late Rebellion: the very same Book, [...]hat served to bring the best of Kings to the Scaffold: the very same Book, that helped them to justifie that villanous and most horrid Fact. And what can we gather hence, but that some extraordinary [Page 5] Intrigue is in hand▪ which needeth the help of this old Jesuit again? There are so many Knaves in the world already, that men need not fetch Father Parsons from the dead, only for a shew: And the world is so abundantly stockt with Books, that Doleman would not have been Re-printed for nothing.

For, be pleased to observe too, what the state of Affairs was then, in the days of Queen Elizabeth, when this Book was published first under that Title. A zealous and wise Protestant Monarch was then Reigning; but she being not likely to have any Issue, the discourses of men were (as they are now) about the Succession. James King of Scotland was the next Heir by Bloud, but his Religi­on did not please the Jesuits.

For this reason they laid their Noddles together, to defeat him of the Crown, if it were possible; and that matchless man at mischief, Father Parsons, wrote (among other Books) this, which he called by the name of Doleman: wherein he indeavoured to per­suade the World, that all Monarchies are de jure Elective, and that Proximity of Bloud was not sufficient to intitle any man to the Im­perial Crown of England, without the Peoples Choice, Approbation, and Consent, (which by reason of the Numbers, Interest, and Policy of the Papists then, he did hope would never be given to King James.) As the ground of all this, he had the confidence to place the Plenitude of power, and all Absolute Soveraignty in the hands of the People; so that (according to his Principle, owned in this Doleman) the Commonwealth may Lawfully and at their pleasure fore-close and hinder the next Heir, if on the account of his Reli­gion, or in any other Respect, they judg him unfit to Succeed; nay, that they may, without sin, Depose and Destroy a Prince, though actually vested and possest of the Throne, if in the admini­stration of the Government he answer not that Trust, which was reposed in him by his Lords and Masters, the People. In fine, He told the Queens Subjects, that the Descent and Disposal of the Crown did depend wholly upon their pleasure, and that they had an unlimited power at any time to determine upon this or that form of Government, and might alter it when they thought fit, and chuse whether they would have a King, or no, and turn the Mo­narchy into an Aristocracy, or Democracy, as they saw occasion, and judged it best.

[Page 6]By these Popular Principles, this Jesuit and the rest hoped to serve these Ends; either to prevent the Succession of the King of Scots, (which was the first and Grand design) or in case he should Succeed, to prepare a ready way to Ruine him, and indeed to ruine his Family too, and to subvert his Government, if they did not answer the expectations of the Church of Rome. Nor did they fail of their ends in every particular. For though King James came peaceably to the Crown, yet these Principles did work so power­fully, that they laid Barrels and Trains of Gunpowder under the Parliament House, and afterwards made stirs in the Parliament it self, and in Forty One raised a Bloudy and Unnatural Rebellion, and in the end changed the Government into a Republick, and caused the Monarch and the Monarchy to be cut off together. Haec Ithacus voluit; these were the natural effects of this Book, called Doleman, which some now have thought convenient and necessa­ry for their Turns to set out again in a new and more polish'd Edition.

These things being observed touching the Author, and of the Design in Printing and Reprinting of this Book, I cannot fancy my self to have paid you all those Respects which are due from me, till I take a few steps further, and shew you a little, first, what Use hath been made of this Book and these Dolemanian Principles of late; and then what those Reasons are on which these Principles are founded. For affairs are Uncertain now, as they were when these Principles came first into the world: The Book is admirably well Calculated for our Meridian (otherwise it might have lain still in the dark, and no more regarded than an Almanack out of date:) Methinks I see in it some of Lilly's Prognosticks, or Hopes at least, of some change of weather: and therefore 'tis necessary, that to preserve our Peace and good Government, we look a little into the Nature and Strength of the aforesaid Principles.

And the rather, because I see they are very Pleasant and Taking with the People; their bare Popularity, though they have no Rea­son or Sense, is enough to recommend them to the favour and kind embraces of the Vulgar, who love dearly to be medling with Government, and cannot but be Tickled at Heart when they are told, that they have a Soveraign Power in them which they did not dream of, that they can Make and Unmake Kings, that Crowns [Page 7] and Scepters lie at their Worships feet, that Princes must make court to them for Succession, and that they can, if they will, bar them out, and come like the Tribunes of the People of Rome, with an uncontroulable Veto. These are fine and delicate Doctrines, and beyond the Fawnings of some others, who tell us, to please us, that we have power to chuse all our Bishops; though I confess we may think it fitting, that we should have power in both points, as well as in one; and as the world goes, Kings and Bishops way well expect to fare alike.

But in good earnest, Sir, I am grieved at Heart (and 'tis enough to raise the Indignation of every Honest man) to find, that so many among us do inconsiderately (not to say, maliciously) run al­together upon this Jesuits Principles, and that in these times, when we are all so afraid of Popery, that one would think we should be most especially afraid of Jesuitism. Yet if you please to give your self the trouble to peruse those seditious Pamphlets which have been published of late, you will find what I note to be true; that gene­rally they borrow large portions out of this most wicked Libel, writ­ten by a most wicked Wretch, on purpose to ruine the interest of the Protestant Cause: Nay, that the Authors of them have so ex­actly followed the Scope, the Tenents, the Arguments, the Ex­amples, and the very Phrase (many times) that we may well believe they had old Doleman open before them as they were writing.

I shall give you Proof and Instances of this by and by. In the mean while we may conclude, that these men were not so straight­ned, as to be Constrained to do this. For they might have been abundantly furnished with Anti-Monarchical and Repub­lican Principles out of other Authors, such as aDe jure Magistrat. in subdit. Ficklerus, bVindiciae cont. Tyran. Stephanus▪ Junius Brutus, Knox, [...], and some more of that Age, who were main good Friends to the Jesuits in this point. But because Fa. Parsons hath made great Improvements of those Principles which others had vended a little before, and because his great design was to bar all Succession to the Crown of England by Natural Descent and Inheritance, and to that end hath used all the most plausible Arguments; and because all this is serviceable to the Designs of some Now, who consider [Page 8] more what is Expedient than what is Just, therefore they do wil­lingly chuse to make this Author (though a Jesuit) their Guide, and do take all their Measures from this Libel, rather than others.

How they will answer this to God, to their own Consciences, and to the sober World, I do not know; but that the Truth of what I say may be manifest, I shall instance in some of the Principal Pamphlets, which have been written of late.

And I shall begin with that which hath made the greatest Noise, viz. the History of Succession, which the Author saith is Collected out of the Records, and the most Authentick Historians. But had he said, Collected out of Doleman, he had spoken a more Ingenuous Truth, than perhaps he hath told us in the whole Book besides. For, though he hath adorned his Margin with div [...]rs Quotations out of Records and Authors, (which I suppose he consulted to conceal his Theft, or to put a fair Colour upon it at least) yet the Matter is taken out of that Authentick Historian, Doleman. However he came by the Fringe and the Lace, 'twas his Friend, honest Fa▪ Par­sons that furnish'd him with the Stuff.

I do not intend to examine the Candour, the Sincerity, or the Logick of this Collector, because it is a thing besides my Purpose, and for the consideration of those things I refer you, Sir, to that Learned and Solid Answer called, The great Point of Succession dis­cussed, &c. and to that excellent Tract entituled, Religion and Loy­alty supporting each other. For my business is only to shew matter of Fact, that this Collector hath filch'd his Pamphlet out of that Jesuit, who to cheat the world gave himself the Surname of Doleman.

In this blessed History we are to consider, first, the Design; Se­condly, the Principles of the Author; And thirdly, the Examples he useth to serve his Ends.

I [...] Now the Design is to prove, that the Government of England is not a setled Hereditary Monarchy; that Succession is not Title enough to make the next Heir King, but that the Election of him ought to be before his Coronation; that the Succession is wholly un­der the Controul of Parliament, and that they can limit it, and sub­ject it to Conditions, and alter the Course of it as they please.

[Page 9]Now, this is the very Sum of the First, and the sixth Chapter in Doleman, Part. 1. For in the first Chapter he tells us, ‘That Suc­cession to Government by nearness of Bloud is not by Law of Na­ture or Divine, but only by Humane and Positive Laws of every particular Commonwealth, and consequently may up [...]n just cau­ses be altered by the same, pag. 1.’ And in the sixth Chapter he affirms, ‘That though Priority and Propinquity of Bloud in Suc­cession, is greatly to be honoured, regarded, and preferred in all affairs of Dignity and Principality, yet are we not so absolutely and peremptorily bound thereunto always, but that upon just and urgent occasions that course may be altered and broken, pag. 104.’ He founds Regal Power in Succession and Election both, pag. 105. And being to answer that Question, What interest a Prince hath by Secession alone to any Crown, before he be Crowned or Admitted by the Commonwealth? He saith, ‘That an Heir Apparent before his Coronation and Admission by the Realm, hath the same (and no more) interest to the Kingdom, which the King of Romans, or Caesar hath to the German Empire after his Election and be­fore he be Crowned; and to use a more familiar Example to to Englishmen, as the Mayor of London hath to the Mayoralty, after he is chosen, and before he be admitted, or have taken his Oath. For as this man in rigour is not truly Mayor, nor hath his Jurisdiction before his Oath, and Admission, nor the other is pro­perly Emperour before he be Crowned, so is not an Heir Apparent truly King, though his Predecessor be dead, until he be Crowned and admitted by the Commonwealth, pag. 106. In fine; He is Positive, that Heirs Apparent are not true Kings, until their Coronation, how just soever their Title of Succession otherwise be, and so, that no Allegiance is due unto them before they be Crowned, pag. 108.’

To make these things out, is the Grand Design of Father Par­sons and his Plagiary, the Author of this History of Succession. And though you well know, that all this is contrary to the Laws of our Realm, which recognize all Succession to this Crown to be by Inheritance, and allow of no Interregnum, but say, that the King never dieth, because the next Heir is actually King that very minute after the breath of his Predecessor is gone; yet you see, how closely this Collector hath followed the steps of Doleman, all our Laws to the contrary notwithstanding.

[Page 10]II. As touching this Collectors Principles. 1. He is clearly of opinion, ‘That the Commonwealth hath Power to change the direct order of Succession, for otherwise the Government would want power to defend it self, by making such alterations as the variety of Accidents in several Ages may make absolutely necessary, p. 15. That in Parliament a Supreme Uncontroulable Power is lodg­ed, Ibid. That a Nation (in excluding a Successor) is to be ex­cused for executing Justice Summarily, and without the Tedious Formalities of Law, when the necessity of things requires haste, pag. 19. And that the People are bound in Conscience to obey (the Parliaments) Laws, and must not pretend to enquire whe­ther they were made upon just grounds, ibid.

Now such simple men as you and I, have ever thought, and do think still, that all Humane Power is subordinate to Gods, under the Correction of it, and Controulable by it: That Law-givers ought to take their measures according to the rules of natural Justice, and Equity; That m [...]ns Laws do not oblige, if they be contrary to the Laws of God or Nature; That Parliaments have not that Power, which Bellarmine (another Jesuit) gives the Pope, to make Good Evil, and Evil Good; That common Honesty ought to Go­vern the whole world; That Necessity cannot be pretended to ju­stifie an Evil Action; that no Commonwealth hath a Sovereign Power over the Commands of God and Nature; and that divers Statutes and Acts have been judged ipso facto void, and with­out need of Repealing, being contrary to Divine or Natural Laws.

But you see, that this Collector is of another Faith, telling us, ‘That a Commonwealth can do any thing, what they please, without any Controul.’ But the reason is, because he takes Fa­ther Parsons for his Great Apostle. For he, speaking of a Com­monwealths Power to Exclude a Successor, though contrary to the ordinary course of Law, saith, ‘That our Common Law must needs have further consideration than of the bare Propinqui­ty of Bloud only, for that otherwise it would be a very imperfect Law, that hath not provided for accidents so weighty and im­portant, as these are, for saving and conserving of our Com­monwealth; Preface to Doleman, pag. penult. These are the words which the Collector hath in a manner Transcribed and copied out. [Page 11] Moreover the Jesuit tells us,Note: Though 'tis hard that the same men should be Par­ties and Judges too. ‘That the Com­monwealth hath Authority to judge of the Law­fulness of the Cause (for putting back the Prince;) That God doth allow for a just and sufficient cause in this behalf, the only Will and and Judgment of the Weal Publick it self: And seeing that they only are to be Judges of this case, we are to presume, that what they de­termine is Just and Lawful for the Time; and that they being Lords and Owners of the whole business, it is enough for every particular man to subject himself to that which his Common­wealth doth in this behalf, and to obey simply without any fur­ther inquisition, &c. pag. 159, 160. part. 1.’ Now do but com­pare this passage in Doleman with that cited above out of the Hi­story of Succession, and judge whether this Jesuit was not that Collectors Guide.

2. Another of the Collectors Principles is this, ‘That though Government is of Nature, and derived from God; because nothing is more Natural in man than the Desire of Society, and without Government Society would be intolerable; yet it cannot be proved from hence that the Government cannot be moulded in­to several Forms, agreeable to the Interest and dispositions of se­veral Nations, and may not be varied from time to time, as occa­sion requires, by the mutual consent of the Governours, and of those who are Governed, pag. 16.’

This is right Father Parsons all over, and so exactly, that as I was comparing the Books, I was like to have mistaken Doleman for the History of Succession. For thus saith the Jesuit, ‘Albeit So­ciability or Inclination to live together in company, man with man, be of Nature, and consequently also of God, that is Au­thor of Nature; and though Government in like manner, and Jurisdiction of Magistrates (which doth follow necessarily upon this living together in company) be also *For without Or­der there is nothing else to be hoped, but Horrour and Con­fusion, Doleman, Pa. 6. ca. 1. part. 1. of Nature, yet the particular Form or manner of this or that Government, in this or that Fa­shion, as to have many Governours, few, or one: or that they should have this or that Au­thority, more or less, for longer or shorter time, [Page 12] or be taken by Succession or Election, themselves and their Chil­dren, or next in Bloud, all these things (saith the Jesuit, agree­ably to the Collector) are not by Law either Natural or Divine, but they are ordained by particular positive Laws of every Coun­try; Doleman, part. 1. cap. 1. pag. 2, 3.’ I have seen many an Har­monia Evangelica; but never shall I see a fairer Harmonia Politica than between these two Brethren in iniquity, Parsons and the Collector of the History of Succession.

3. Especially if we add another Principle of his, viz. that it is no matter of what Stock or Lineage a Successor to the Crown is, or whether next Heir or not, if he doth but pass for one that Pro­miseth well, and is likely to make a good King. And to let us know his mind in this, he tells us a remarkable Story, which I beg of you, Sir, to observe, because it is word for word in Doleman. ‘I cannot (saith our Collector) forbear reciting the Speech, which Embassadours sent from the States of France, made to Charles of Lorrain, when they had solemnly rejected him (though he was Brother to Louys d' Outremes, and next H [...]ir to the Crown) and had Elected Hugh Capet for their King. They told him, that every one knew that the Succession to the Crown of France be­longed to him, and not to Hugh Capet. But yet (say they) the very same Laws which give you this right of Succession, do judg you also unworthy of the same; for that you have not hitherto indeavoured to frame your manners according to the Prescript of those Laws, nor according to the Usages and Customs of your Country, but rather have allyed your self with the German Nati­on our old Enemies, and have loved their vile and base manners. Wherefore seeing you have forsaken the ancient virtue and sweet­ness of your Country, we have also forsaken and abandoned you, and have chosen Hugh Capet for our King, and put you back; and this without any scruple of Conscience at all, esteeming it better and more just to live under him, enjoying our ancient Laws, Customs, Priviledges, and Liberties, than under You, the Heir by bloud, in oppression, strange Customs and Cruelty. For as those who are to make a Voyage at Sea, do not much consider whether the Pilot be Owner of the Ship, but whether he be Skilful and Wary, so our care is to have a Prince to govern us gently and happily (which is the End for which Princes were [Page 13] appointed) and for these ends we judge this man fitter to be our King. Hist. of Succession, pag. 15.’

There is a mistake in this Story: for Charles of Lorrain was Son to one Louys, and Vncle to another. However thus our Collector sets it down, and quotes Gerard for it, when he ought (but that he would not betray himself) to have quoted his Father Parsons, who relates the same Story in the same words, and directed him to Gerard.

I think it not amiss (saith the Jesuit) to put down here some part of the Oration or Speech, which the Embassadors that were sent from the State of France unto Charles of Lorrain, after their Election of Hugh Capet, and Charles's Exclusion, did use un­to him in their names, which Speech Gerard doth recount in these words: Every man knoweth (Lord Charles) that the Succession of the Crown of France, and so on, to the very Similitude of the Pilot, which our Collector useth, being of the same mind with the Jesuit, who speaking of a Successor to the Crown of England, saith, ‘I for my part do feel my self much of the French opinion before alledged, that so the Ship be well and happily guided, I esteem it not much important of what Race or Nation the Pilot be.’ Doleman. Part. 1. Cap. 8. Pag. 139, 140, 143. Father Parsons moreover observes,Note: For remarques upon this Story see the Answer to the History of Succession, p. 25. ‘That this Hugh Capet had that Surname given him when he was a Boy, for that he was wont to snatch away his Fellows Caps from their heads, whence he was termed Snatch-cap, which some did in­terpret as an Abodement that he would also also snatch a Crown from the true Owners head in time, as afterwards it fell out.’ But this our Collector would take no notice of, lest Hugh Capet should be lookt upon as an Usurper, as indeed he was, notwithstanding the Election and Approbation of the Realm.

4. It is an avowed Principle in Doleman, that 'tis both sinful in an high degree, and against all Wisdom and Policy to suffer a Prince of a contrary Religion to come to the Crown; Part. 1. Cap. 9.

And thus much our Collector insinuates, when he saith, He will not dispute how far the difference of Religion, which will also [Page 14] necessarily draw on a change of the Gocernment, doth justifie men in seeking to preserve the two dearest things on earth in an orderly and lawful way. Pag. 19.

5. But he doth confidently insist on this, that the Crown is not a bare Inheritance, but an Inheritance accompanying an Office of Trust, and that if a mans defects render him uncapable of the Trust, he has also forfeited the Inheritance. ibid.

This, if it be true, equally holds against the King himself, as well as against his Heir. For faileur in point of Trust may be (and has been) pleaded, for the Deposing of the King, as well as for the Exclusion of his Successor. And so Parsons reckons; who affirms likewise, that the Princes power is Potestas Vicaria, or delegata, that is to say, a Power delegate, or by Commission, given (by the Com­monwealth) with such Restrictions, Cautels, and Conditions, as if the same be not kept, but wilfully broken on either part, then is the other not bound, &c. Doleman, part, 1. Cap. 4. pag. 59. And from this Principle he concludes, that even a true King may be de­posed when he answers not that Trust which the People hath reposed in him: Id. part. 2. pag. 48. cap. 4. This Jesuitical Doctrine did not long ago cost one of our Kings his Throne and his Life too; I pray God it may not be so chargeable to another; but 'tis ominous, when Pretending Protestants will be nibling at such Jesuitical Principles, which under colour of keeping back an Heir, naturally and necessa­rily strike at the very Crowned Head.

III. Having hitherto instanced in some of this Gentlemans Prin­ciples, to shew you that he hath carefully written after the vilest of Men, and the worst of Books, I shall now for your further satisfa­ction instance in those Examples which he makes use of (and hath borrowed out of Doleman) to prove, that Succession to the Crown (and even to the Crown of England) dependeth upon the Plea­sure and Courtesie of the People.

If you compare the History of Succession with this Book of the Jesuit Parsons, you will find it to be nothing but a little Improve­ment of the eighth Chapter of Doleman, Part. 1.

For that Jesuit and this Collector undertaking to prove, that the Commonwealth hath power to alter Titles of Succession, as publick Necessity or Utility shall require, do both of them shew, what the Realm of England hath done, and what Alterations they [Page 15] have made formerly, and their Instances are alike, as you may see by casting your Eye upon the two following Columns, (for it will not be amiss to set the Thief just over against the Knave.)

Thus saith Doleman, the Jesuit.And thus saith the Collector of the History of Succession, the Protestant.
King Egbert came to the Crown by Election, though he were not next by propinquity of Bloud, Doleman, pag. 144.Egbert himself, the first Eng­lish Monarch, came to the Crown not by Succession, but Election, being no ways related to Bithricus. Hist. of Succession. Pag. 1.
Athelstan, illegitimate Son to to King Edward, was preferred to the Crown before his two Brothers, the Princes Legitimate. Id. pag. 145.Athelstan, though a Bastard succeeded his Father, and was Preferred to his Legitimate Bro­thers, Id. pag. 1.
King Edmond left Two Law­ful Sons, but for that they were young, they were both put back by the Realm, and their Uncle El­dred was preferred before them. Id. p. 146.Eldred, the younger Brother of King Edmond, was advanced to the Throne, though the de­ceased Prince had two Sons, Id. ibid.
Canutus was admitted for King of England by the whole Parliament and consent of the Realm, Id. p. 149Canutus had so great an Inte­rest, that by an unanimous con­sent, in a full Council, he was Elected King, Id. pag. 2.
After the death of Canutus, all the States of the Realm met to­gether at Oxford, to consult whom they should make King, and at last by the more part of voices was chosen Harald, the first Son of Canutus by a Concubine, &c. Id. p. 149.Immediately upon the death of Canutus, there was assembled at Oxford a great Council to de­termine, who ought to succeed, and Harald Harefoot, Canutus his Bastard, was Elected, &c, Id. p. 2.
After the death of Harald, Hardicanutus was received with the great good will of all, and by common consent made King, Id. p. 150.Harald died in the fifth year of his Reign, and then the People were content to accept of Hardiknute for their King. Id. p. 2.
Haraicanutus being dead, the States of the Realm determined to chuse Alured for their King, Id. ibid.After the death of Hardiknute the People proceeded to elect Alfred, Id. ibid.
Alfred being traiterously mur­dered by Earl Godwin of Kent, Prince Edward was chosen King, Id. ibid.Alfred being murder'd by the treachery of Earl Godwin, they chuse his Brother Edward, com­monly called Edward the Con­fessor, Id. ibid.
Nor had the State herein any respect to antiquity of Bloud, for that before Alfred were both his own elder Brother Prince Edward, and before them both were Edmond and Edward, the Children of their elder Brother Edmond Ironside, Id. ibid.Nor were these Elections of theirs made with any respect to nearness of Bloud; for Edmond Ironside, their Elder Brother, had a Son then alive, whose name was Edward, Id. ibid.
The Confessors Title by Suc­cession cannot be justified, for that his eldest Brothers Son was then alive, to wit, Prince Ed­ward, who in this Kings Reign came into England, and brought his Wife and three lawful Chil­dren with him. But yet was not this good King Edward (the Confessor) so scrupulous, as to give over his Kingdom to any of them, or to doubt of the right of his own Title, which he had by Election, &c. Id. p. 151.And though this Edward had an undoubted Title to the Crown, if Proximity of Bloud could have given it, yet the Confessor was so far from suspe­cting any danger from such a Title, as that he invited his Ne­phew into England, and wel­com'd him when he came with the greatest expressions of Joy, and entertain'd him with the greatest confidence, Id. ibid.
This King Edward being dead, Harald, Son of Earl God­win, had also the approbation of the Realm to be King, Id. p. 152.Nor had the People any re­gard to this Royal Bloud upon the death of the Confessor, but elected Harald, the Son of Earl Godwin, Id. p. 2.
All this is before the Con­quest; but if we should pass any further down, we should find more Examples than before, viz. of Kings made in England, by only Authority and Approba­tion of the Commonwealth, con­trary to the ordinary cours [...] of Linc [...]l Successi [...]n by Propinquity of Bloud, Id. p. 53.These few, among many other instances which may be given, will shew plainly enough, how men intituled themselves to the Crown in those days, and that then it was no strange thing to hear of a Parliaments medling with the Succession. — Let us go on more particularly to ob­serve, what has been done since the Conquest, Id. ibid.
After the Conquerors death, William Rufus was chosen King, though younger Brother to Robert Duke of Normandy, to whom the most part of the Realm (he means the Normans) was incli­ned, to have given the King­dom presently▪ as due to him by Succession, notwithstanding his Fathers Will to the coutrary, Id. p. 153.William Rufus had the consent of the Nobles and wise men for his Title; and the English In­terest was so great at that time, that it k [...]pt the Crown upon William Rufus's head, in spight of all that the Normans could do in the behalf of Robert, though they universally joyn'd with him, Id. p. 3.
By like means got Henry his younger Brother the same Crown afterward, to wit, by fair promises to the People, &c. Id. p. 154.It was by the full consent and Counsel of the whole body of the Realm, that the Conq [...]erors Third Son Henry was Elected for their King, Id. p. 3.
King Henry dying left a Daughter behind him named Mawd, which being married first to the Emperour Henry V. he died without Issue, and then was she married again the second time to Geoffry Plantaginet, Earl of Anjou, to whom she bare a Son, named Henry. — But for that Stephen, Earl of Bologn, was thought by the State of England to be more fit to govern, he was admitted, and Henry put back, Id. p. 154.King Henry died, leaving no Issue but Mand his Daughter, who had been married to the Emperour, and afterward to Geoffry Plantagenet, Earl of An­jou. No dispute can be made, but that she had all the right which Proximity of Bloud could give; yet Stephen, Earl of Bologn, stept in before her, and prevail'd with the Estates of the Realm to Elect him King, Id. p. 3.
The States some years after in a Parliament made an agree­ment, that Stephen should be lawful King during his life only, and that Henry and his Off­spring should succeed him. Id. p. 155.Afterwards Stephen came to an Agreement with the Empress and her Son, and a Parliament (who alone could give a San­ction to such Agreement) was assembled to confirm it, and then Stephen publickly adopts Henry for his Son, and with their full consent declares him his Heir, and with the same consent Henry gives Stephen the name of Fa­ther, and agrees that he should continue to be King during his Lise, &c. Id. p. 4.
After King Richard, John, younger Brother to Richard, was Admitted and Crowned by the States of England, and Ar­thur Duke of Britain, Son and Heir to Geoffry (that was Elder Brother to John) was against the ordinary course of Succession Excluded, Id. p. 155.Richard dying without Issue, Arthur (Son of Geoffry Duke of Britain,) the next Heir to the Crown ought to have Succeeded. But John, younger Brother to Richard, without regarding this divine right of his Nephew, ap­plies himself to the People for a more sure, though but a Hu­mane Title, who being sum­moned together Elected him King, Id. p. 5.
Some years after, when the Ba­rons and States of England misli­ked utte [...]ly the Government and Proceeding of this K. John, they rejected him again, and chose Lewis the Prince of France to be their King, and did swear Fealty to him in London; de­priving also the young Prince Henry, King John's Son, that was at that time but eight years old, Id. p. 156.When King John gave over to dissemble his Nature, and went about to change his Religion, and discovered himself not to be that worthy man, which the People supposed him to have been, they remember'd whence he derived his Title and pro­ceeded,Note: Observe, that the power of Deposing a King naturally follows from the Doctrine of the Peoples power to chuse one. upon the same reason they had chosen him, to make a new Election, chusing Lewis Son of Philip King of France, who coming to London, was there Elected, and Constituted King, Id. p. 5.
Upon the death of King John, the People recalled again their former Sentence, and admitted (Prince) Henry to the Crown, by the name of King Henry the Third, and disanulled the Oath of Allegiance made unto Lewis Prince of France, Id. p. 156.King John hapning to die very opportunely, the Great men of the Kingdom were cal­led together, and Prince Henry then an Infant, placed in the midst of them; and the whole Assembly cried out una­nimously, Fiat Rex; and a­cordingly they Crowned King Henry the Third, and soon after compelled Lewis to renounce all pretences to the Crown, Id. p. 6.

The Jesuit Parsons goes no further upon particulars, in Chap. 8. Part. 1. than Henry the Third. But saith, Should we enter (into the contention about the Crown, between the Two Houses of York and Lancaster, which took their beginning from King Henry [Page 20] the Third) we should see plainly, that the best of all their Titles, after the deposition of King Richard the Second, depended on the Authority of the Commonwealth, for that as the People were affected, and the greater part prevailed, so were their Titles either allowed, confirmed, altered, or disanulled by Parliaments; Cap. 8. Part. 1. Pag. 156.

This hint the Collector of the History of Succession took to pro­ceed upon more particulars still, and pickt them up and down out of other places in Doleman, to which Book he was mainly beholden for the History of the Pretences, Claims, Titles, and Fates of those Princes he names since Henry the Third.

The doubt, whether Edward the First, or his Brother Edmond were the Elder, he fetcht clearly out of Doleman, Part. 2. Cap. 2. pag. 25. and both Parsons and this Collector say, that Edmond was believ'd (by some) to have been put by the Crown for his Defor­mity. The Story of the deposition of Edward the Second is in Doleman, Part. 1. cap. 3. p. 46, 47. The instance of Edward the Third's being chosen and Elected by the People, you find it ibidem, and in part. 2. cap. 2. of Doleman. The instance of King Richard the Second's being deposed, is in Doleman, part. [...]. cap. 3. and part. 2. cap. 3, 4. That of Henry the Fourth's being Elected by the People (as he pretends) is in the same place. And what our Collector saith of Henry the Fifth, is all taken at large, and word for word (in a manner) out of Doleman, part. 1. cap. 6. pag. 108, 109.

Not to trouble you with every little particular, when you have already so much of a Specimen, I dare say, that let any man carefully peruse, observe, and remember the Contents of Doleman, and he will easily discover, that this Book is the Forge, out of which the Collector of the History of Succession hath taken all those Irons, which he hath sent abroad to set this Kingdom on Fire.

But I must observe unto you, that as he hath followed the Jesuit over hedge and ditch in his Examples, so he hath followed him ex­actly too in dealing basely with the world, by downright Falsities in some things, by gross Partiality and disingenuity in others, and by Illogical Consequences in the rest, forcing out such Conclusions as the instances do not really yield him, to serve his turn. But for this I must intreat you to consult well those two excellent Tracts which I recommended unto you above. And so much for that Gen­tleman.

[Page 21]From whom we could not expect any other Notions, than what are serviceable to his secular Ends, because his Book argues him to be one that is a meer Politician, regardless of the Laws of Religi­on, and governed only by his Interest: and he must thank your Charity, if you do not think him to be much of the mind of a Gentleman, famous now for his zeal (whether for his Countrey or himself you may judg it) who said once upon a time, That he is a Fool who hath any more of Religion than what will serve his Interest. And if that be true, I must give him that due Character, which he hath been meriting for above these 40 years, that he for his part is one of the wisest of men.

But of all men living, I wonder at Mr. Hunt; a person whose name I cannot mention without due respect, because in his Argu­ment for the Bishops Right, &c. he hath shewed a great deal of good Learning in the Laws, and hath exprest his just Zeal for the Interest of the Church, and that deep sense (which I am perswaded he hath) of the Calamitous condition which this poor Nation is now in. So that I should have taken no notice of his writings, but what would have been entirely for his Honour, but that his Personal Worth (which I love and value) may probably give a Reputation to some Foreign and Groundless Opinions which he runs upon in his Postscript, and which the Jesuite Parsons hath furnisht even him with.

I have heard say, that when our Government was lately in a fair way to be run down, he was prevailed with to write that Postscript partly by Fear, and partly as Penance and Satisfaction (to a Party) for the Argument which he had written before. This is clear, that the Bishops are more beholden to him than the King is: for he owns their Authority (as Bishops) to be Divine; but as for the Kings title to his Crown, he believes it, as Doleman (alias Parsons) did, to be a meer Human thing.

If any of our Clergy deny this, I see no reason Mr. Hunt hath to be so very angry with 'em; for they hold no more than what all good Christians have ever held, no more than what the Church of England hath declared, no more than what the Laws of our Country do own and will bear them out in.

I have been told by many of them, that Mr. Hunt hath done them wrong, and that he may convince himself, if he will but look [Page 22] into their Sentiments well, and consider them with an Indifferent and Candid mind: but where he pretends to Vindicate and to be Concern'd for them, there he accuseth'em, and the charge is unjust, and, had another drawn it up, I would have said malitious, design­ed on purpose to render the Clergy odious for being steady and true to the establisht Government, in a time when so many are longing for a Change. ‘Those Fancies and Dreams of his, that the Cler­gy of England are for a Popish Successor and no Parliaments, that they allow of Arbritrary Power, that they are ready to abett any Extravagancies in a Prince, and the like, are idle, evil and un­worthy insinuations;’ and if Mr. Hunt please to enter the Lists, I will find him one that shall undertake the Cause in this point, out of that Veneration which we all ought to have for that Sacred Function, and out of just and due respects to our present Cler­gy, than which perhaps this Nation was never yet blest with a better.

But, Sir, my business is to shew you, that Mr. Hunt hath been foully imposed upon by the Jesuite Parsons, as to Principles and Do­ctrines, which concern the State. And for evidencing thereof, you may please to remember, that 'tis a fundamental Principle in Dole­man, ‘That all Power and Authority to Institute, to Modifie, or to Change the particular form of any Government, and to admit or exclude a Successor in Monarchy, is wholly and uncontroulably in the People.’

Now this is taken for granted by Mr. Hunt, as if it were as clear as a Postulatum in the Mathematicks; and so he does not so much as offer at any solid and just proof of it, only now and then touches upon some notions in Doleman, which at first sight may seem to look a little that way.

Sir, I would not willingly and knowingly do this Gentleman any the least wrong or unkindness; nay, I have that respect for him, that I could strain my Charity to believe, that he himself hath not borrowed of Doleman, but some body else for him.

But that there has been borrowing in the case, you may easi [...]y perceive by the following account.

[Page 23]

The Jesuite saith,And Mr. Hunt saith,
That though Government and Jurisdiction of Magistrates be of Nature (and consequently also of God) yet the particular form or manner of this or that Go­vernment, is not by Law either Natural or Divine, but is ordain­ed by particular Laws of every Country. Doleman, part. 1. pag. 2, 3.That Government is from God, as he hath made Govern­ments Necessary in the General order of things, but the Specifi­cation thereof is from men. Post­script, p. 38.
Father Parsons tells us, that par­ticular Forms of Government are not determin'd by God or Na­ture, for then they should be All one in all Nations, seeing God and Nature are one to All. Dole­man, part 1. pag. 7. 11.And Mr. Hunt tells us, that no man intends by any thing in the Scripture, that All Mankind is obliged to any One Form of Go­vernment, and therefore All men are left to their own. Posts. p. 39.
It is left unto every Nation or Countrey to chuse that Form of Government which they shall like best, and think most fit for the Natures and Conditions of their people. id. p. 7. 10.Civil Offices are of Humane Original, id. Argument. p. 241. The Government is de jure such as it is, ibid. God never made any Common-wealth but one by his Directive Will, and that only for One Nation: for in these things he hath left men ordinari­ly in the hands of their own Councils, and to their own Pru­dence. ibid.
God approveth what a Realm determineth in chusing or chang­ing its form of Government. Doleman, pag. 10, 11, 58, 118.Such Governments which men make God approves, and requires obedience to them, Mr. Hunt in Postscript. p. 38.
The Commonwealth hath power to chuse their own fashion of Government, as also to change the same upon reasonable causes. Doleman, par. 1. cap. 1. pag. 10.No Civil establishment but is Controulable and Alterable to the publick weal. Postscript, p. 42.

[Page 24] Though many Learned and Great men have believed (and for good Reasons, as I may shew you hereafter) that Monarchical Govern­ment came into the World by Gods own Grant and Appointment.

Yet Doleman saith, that Mo­narchy was commonly chosen by the people in the beginning. Part. 1. pag. 12, 21, 66.And Mr. Hunt asketh, where is the Charter of Kings from God Almighty to be read or found? Postscript, pag. 36.
The Jesuit alledgeth, that St. Peter calls Kingly Authority a Humane Creatu [...]e, for that by mans free Choice this particular form of Government (as all o­thers also) is appointed in every Commonwealth, and that by Mans Election and Consent, the same is laid upon some particular Man or Woman, according to the Laws of every Countrey. Doleman, part 1. cap. 2. pag. 14.And Mr. Hunt alledgeth in like manner, that Saint Peter stileth Kings, as well as the Go­vernours under them, the Ordi­nance of Man, which cannot have any other sense, but that Men make them, and give them their Powers. Postscript, pag. 37.

Whereas an Objection was foreseen, that God said to Solomon, By me Kings reign, Prov. 8. 15. and that St. Paul told the Romans, that there is no Power but of God; the Powers that be, are Ordained of God; whosoever therefore resisteth the Power, resisteth the Ordinance of God, Rom. 13. 1, 2. And whereas the Apostle doth there speak not only of Authority in General and in the Abstract, but pointeth also to the very Person of the chief Magistrate (to Nero himself) stiling him, the Minister of God, a Revenger, one that beareth the Sword, meaning plainly the Man;

To this the Jesuite answers by a Jesuitical evasion, that all this is to be understood of Authority, Power, and Jurisdiction in itself, according to the first institution. Doleman, part 1. cap. 1. pag. 7.And Mr. Hunt answers to the very same effect, that this is meant of Government in the General, which is called Gods Ordinance for this reason, because in general God approves of Governments. Postscript, pag. 37.

[Page 25]Yet this reacheth not the point, nor is it any answer at all. For the Scripture there speaketh of the Person and Power of a Monarch, and of Government by a Monarch; and so it followeth, that Monar­chy is of Divine Institution, the Ordinance of God himself. To evade which, the Jesuite and Mr. Hunt do equally hold, that Regal Go­vernment is by Gods Permission; that Kings are said to Reign by God, because they Reign by his Permission; and that their Power is the Ordinance of God, because Gods Permission goes along with the Peoples Choice. Doleman, part 1. c. 6. pag. 99, 100. and Post­script, pag. 36. Both of them do interpret it, not of Gods Directive, but his Permissive Will; which is not pertinent, nor home to the pur­pose, because Gods General Providence is over all things: He suf­fers even Sin to Reign; he permits Thieves to Steal, and Murderers to Kill; and yet who will dare to say, that by him Thieves R [...]b, and that Murder is his Ordinance?

As to the point of Succession to a Crown by Descent, Inheri­tance, and Birth,

Thus saith Father Parsons.And thus saith Mr. Hunt.
It was ordained by the Com­monwealth, that the elder and first in Blood should succeed. Doleman, part 1. cap. 6. pag. 106.The Succession to the Crown is Hereditary, because the Peo­ple so appointed it, would have it so, or consented to have it so. Postscript, pag. 43.
Some other conditions must needs be requisite for coming to Government by Succession, be­sides the only propinquity or pri­ority in blood—and yet it seems they are not prescribed by any Law of Nature or Divine, for that then they should be both im­mutable, and the self same in all Countries (as God and Nature are one and the same to all, with­out change) where notwith­standing we see, that these con­ditions and circumstances of Suc­ceeding by Birth, are divers or different in different Countries; as also they are subject to chan­ges, according to the diversity of Kingdoms. Id. par. 1. c. 1. p. 2.The Succession to the Crown is of a Civil Nature, not establi­shed by any Divine right: seve­ral Kingdoms have several Laws of Succession, some are Ele­ctive, others are Hereditary, under several limitations.—The several limitations of the De­scent of the Crown, must be made by the People, in con­ferring the Royal Dignity and Power, which is more or less in several Kingdoms. Id. ibid. pag. 42.
As the Commonwealth hath Authority to chuse and change her Government, so hath she also to limit the same with what Laws and Conditions she plea­seth. Id. p. 10.If the Royal Family be ex­tinct, it belongs to the People to make a new King under what Limitations they please, or to make none. Id. ibid. p. 43.
The Commonwealth giveth the King his great power over them—and prescribeth Laws un­to him—and all Limitations of the Princes absolute Authority, do come from the Commonwealth, as having Authority above their Princes. Id. part 1. c. 2.It is evident, that the Succes­sion to the Crown, is the Peoples Right. Id. ibid.
Both the one and the other of these two points, were ordained by the Commonwealth, to wit, that the Elder and First in Blood, should succeed, and that he should be such a Person, as can and will govern to the publick weal of all. Id. pag. 106. For Princes are sub­ject to Law and Order, and the Commonwealth which gave them their Authority for the common good of all, may also restrain or take the same away again, if they abuse it to the Com­mon Evil. Id. p. 58.Though the Succession to the Crown is Hereditary, because the People so appointed it, would have it so, or contented to have it so; yet in a particular case for the saving of the Nation, the whole Line and Monarchy it self, may be altered by the unlimited Power of the Legislative Autho­rity. Id. Postscript, pag. 43.
If one of a false Religion, or some other notorious wicked man or Tyrant should be offered by Succession, or otherwise to govern among Christians, in these cases every man is bound to resist what he can. Id. pag. 16 [...], 169, 172, 173.What unreasonableness is there in shutting the door upon him, making it fast against him by an act of State, who hath excluded himself by his Principles and De­signs. Id. Postscript, pag. 45.

[Page 27]

Now if you ask, by what Law or Power a Commonwealth can pretend to keep a Prince back from succeeding? The Jesuite and Mr. Hunt will tell you, that the Will and Pleasure of a People in this Case is Law enough; that they have an Unlimited and Arbi­trary Power lodged in them, and that we ought to submit to their determinations, without calling their proceedings into question, or disputing about the Lawfulness and Justice of them.

Thus saith Father Parsons.And thus saith Mr. Hunt.
The Realm or Common­wealth hath power to admit or put back the Prince or Preten­der to the Crown; and the same Commonwealth hath Au­thority to judg of the Lawful­ness of the Cause: it is their own affair, and a matter that hath its whole beginning, con­tinuance and substance from them alone, I mean from the Commonwealth, for that no man is King or Prince by in­stitution of Nature—Therefore it is enough for every particu­lar man, to subject himself to that which his Commonwealth doeth in this behalf, and to obey simply, without any fur­ther inquisition. Doleman, part 1. pag. 160.It is Criminal, and dangerous to the being of any Polity to re­strain the Legislative Authority, and to entertain Principles that disables it to provide remedy a­gainst the greatest mischiefs that can happen to any community. No Government can support it self without an Unlimited Power in providing for the happiness of the People. No Civil establish­ment but is Controulable and Al­terable to the Publick Weal. Whatever is not of Divine Insti­tution ought to yield and submit to this Power and Authority. Mr. Hunt in Postscript, pag. 41, 42. And a little before; if any Law should exceed the declared mea­sures of the Legislative Authori­ty, though in such a case men may have leave to doubt of the lawfulness of such a Law, yet if it be not against any express Law of God, they will upon a little Consideration determine it lawful, if it be necessary to the Commonweal, for that nothing can be the concerns of men united in any Policy, but may be govern'd and or­dered by the Laws of their Legislature, for Publick good: for by the reason of all Political Societies, there is a submission made of all Rights, especially of the common Rights of the Community, to the Government of its own Laws. Id. ibid. pag. 32, 33.

According to these Principles, the Power of a Commonwealth is so unlimited, boundless and extensive, as that it can over-rule mat­ters which are naturally just and right, and justifie any thing that is intrinsically evil, if it be for the publick good. And whether this be not against the tenor of Christianity, and clearly repugnant to the Apostolick Rule, that we must not do evil that good may come; and whether it be not perfectly introductive of a more Arbitrary Power in the People, than can be feared in any English Prince, I leave to such Honest and Indifferent Persons as your selves to judg.

It hath been a Doctrine hitherto received by all rational and so­ber men, that Dominion is not founded in Grace, and that men do not hold their Estates and Civil Rights by their Religion. And I am confident, there is no Dissenter from the Church of England, but would think himself hardly and unjustly dealt with, should he be bound to forfeit all he is worth in the World for his Non-Confor­mity. Now one would think that Princes should have the same priviledg, at least which all Ordinary and Private men have. But in this point some are very Partial, and would vary and alter the case, where a Successor to the Crown is concern'd.

For thus saith the Jesuite Parsons; ‘of all other holds, I esteem the tenure of a Crown (if so it may be termed) the most irregular and extraordinary—Men may not judg of this as of [Page 29] other Pleas of particular persons, nor is their trial alike; nor the common Maxims or Rules always of force in this thing as in others: For if a Private man have many daughters, and die seized of Lands in Fee-simple without Heir Male, his said Daugh­ters by Law shall have the said Lands, as Copartners, equally di­vided between them; but not the Daughters of a King, for that the Eldest must carry away all, as though she were Heir Male; Doleman, part 2. pag. 72.’ And thus saith Mr, Hunt, as he had writ­ten just after Doleman, ‘The descent of the Crown is governed according to the presumed will of the People, and the presumpti­on of the Peoples will is made, by measuring and considering what is most expedient to the publick good, whereas Private Estates are directed in their descent according to the Descendents. And this is the reason that the descent of the Crown is governed by other Rules than Private Estates: Only one Daughter, and not all, as in Private Estates, shall succeed to the Crown, Postscript. pag. 42.’

I did not think to have found so much of old Father Parsons his Paw in a New Book set forth for the preservation of the Prote­stant Religion: For who could dream, that any man should make use of a Woolf to save and secure the Sheepfold? Yet I am willing to believe that Mr. Hunt in all this has no Design which he thinks to be Evil, and am heartily sorry, that so zealous a Protestant hath so unfortunately run upon Jesuitical Principles.

But Mr. Hunt in page 33. of his Postscript directs us to a Pamphlet called, The great and weighty Consideration considered. And good Reason he had to recommend it, the Book is so very like his own, that a diligent Reader would believe them both to be the Off-spring of one Father, and as near of kin as Simeon and Levi. Old Father Parsons can never die, as long as he hath such an hopeful Issue, so like him in Lineaments and Spirits: And I begin to wonder, why some of late would be at the Expence to set out Doleman in a New Edition, since in this and the two former Pamphlets a true Protestant (so called) may find matter enough to compile a Dolemanian Ca­techism, were old Doleman utterly lost; at least he might extract enough again to do the job of 41. and 48. and that, I suppose, is as much as some in the world do desire.

[Page 30]Sir, you must well remember, that these are the Articles of Doleman's Creed, ‘That though Government, in the general Notion of it, be of Natural and Divine Institution, yet the particular Forms of Governments depend upon the Consent and Good will of the People, that Kings are their Creatures; that Succession to the Crown is at their disposal, that they can alter Government and Succession if they please, and even Depose the King himself, if they judge it needful; and all this by a Boundless, and unlimited power of right belonging unto them.

Now this Considerers Faith is just of the same piece for all the world. For he holdeth, ‘That though God commands us in our Nature, to form our selves into Governments, for that Man­kind cannot tolerably subsist without them (which is Dolemans very Reason;) though Government, because it makes men equal and Reasonable, &c. seems to be the most principal Institution and Appointment of God in Nature, yet the Forms of Govern­ment, the Persons of the Governours, the Order of Succession, their respective Powers and Ministries, are of Mans appointment, and an Humane Creature, pag. 8.’ exactly agreeable to what Dole­man delivers, pag. 2, 3.

If you urge, that Soveraign Power is called in Scripture the Or­dinance of God, Doleman will tell you in answer to it, that 'tis so called, because Gods Approbation and Concurrence goes along with the Peoples consent. And this is our Considerers very No­tion, ‘That Gods doing a thing is only the course of Natural and Second causes, to which because God gives the Direction and Motion, he both doth, and is said to do all that is done, pag. 13.’ Whence he proceeds to tell us, ‘That every Form of Government is of our Creation, and not Gods, ibid. That the King hath his Authority from the Consent of the People in the first constitution of the Government, pag. 20.’

'Tis upon the strength of this Principle that he tells us, with the same Confidence as Doleman doth, ‘That no Laws of Men are so fundamental, but that they are Alterable, Consider. p. 4. That a Government made by Men is not to be left meerly to Chance and [Page 31] the contingency of Birth,Note: But is not that Right of Power which a Father hath over his Child, and an Husband over his Wife, by Divine appoint­ment? pag. 5. That all rights of Property are of Positive and Civil appoint­ment and institution, p. 7. That no man can have, or is entitled to any thing, but what, and as the Laws allots it to him, Ibid. And that (just according to Dolemans Notion) every Form of Government was never intended un­alterable, or at least inflexible, but was intended and made under Reservations, reasonable Exceptions of unfore­seen Accidents, and rare Contingencies in Humane affairs, pag. 13.’

Now to prove all this, That every Form of Government is of Hu­mane Institution, &c. Doleman offers and insisteth upon but one Ar­gument, and 'tis this, viz. That had Forms of Government been prescribed by any Law of Nature or Divine, then they should be both immutable, and the self-same in all Countries, as God and Nature are one, and the same to all, without change, Doleman part. 1. pag. 2, 3.’

Now this is a very weak Argument; for God and Nature have been one and the same to all, because Anciently every Form of Go­vernment in all Countries was Monarchical: And it will no more follow, that this one Form of Government was not setled at first, because several other Forms of Government were set up afterwards, than it will follow, that one sort of Religion was not insti­tuted at first, because so many sorts of Religion crept in after­wards.

However, this poor Argument of Dolemans is made use of by our Considerer, ‘For (saith he) Nature hath made no Laws about Property, nor about Governments; otherwise all Laws of Pro­perty and Right, and all Governments would have been the same; for what she makes are Universal, as the Nature of man: Answer to a Letter, p. 29.’

'Tis an avowed Principle in Doleman, ‘That it belongs to the Commonwealth to order all Succession to the Crown.’ And this is our Considerers Principle, ‘That Succession is properly the Right of the Community, p. 20. That Succession to the Crown is the Peoples Right, the Right of the whole Community, their Ap­pointment, their Constitution, and their Creature; Answer to a Letter, pag. 32, 33.’

[Page 32]Whereas it is urged well, that the King is by Nature, that he is our Natural Prince, our Natural Liege Lord, &c. this Considerer calls this, Loathsom Pedantry; Answer to a Letter, p. [...]9. And in like manner saith Doleman, ‘When men talk of a Natural Prince, or Natural Successor, if it be understood of one that is born within the same Realm or Country, and so of our own Natural bloud, it hath some sense: But if it be meant as though any Prince had his particular Government or interest to succeed by institution of Nature, it is Ridiculous, Doleman, part 1. pag. 11.’

If you ask, What power a Commonwealth hath to deprive a Successor without such Causes and Reasons which in the Eye of the Law seem Just? Doleman will tell you up and down, ‘That the Peoples Power is Boundless, Uncontroulable, and Unquesti­onable; and that it is to be presumed and owned, that what they do in this case is just, because they do it.’ And at the same rate our Considerer speaketh, That no Government can want a power to pre­serve it self, (whether it be by Right or Wrong means he considers not) pag. 4. ‘That no private Right but what is governable, and may be ordered as to the Legislature shall seem necessary to the preservation of the whole, pag. 20. That the King and his great Council, in providing for the establishment and security of the Government, in their Proceedings are not tied up to the Forms of Judicial proceedings; but are to act upon such inducements, and in such methods, whereby the wisest men govern their affairs, in which they are at perfect Liberty, and not under the restraint of Laws: And that they cannot do Unjustly, whatever Methods or Means they use, that are Prudentially and Morally necessary to this End, Ibid. p. 21.’

It is justly demandable, How a Commonwealth came by this Pro­digious, Omnipotent, and Ungovernable Power, so as to be un­der no Laws of Religion or Natural Equity? In answer whereunto Father Parsons saith, (what I noted before) ‘That it would be a very imperfect Law, that hath not provided for accidents so weighty and important, as some are, for saving and conserving of a Commonwealth, Preface to Doleman, part 1.’ Answerable whereunto is that Question of our Considerer, ‘Can we imagine a Government, which is of Humane contrivance, to be without a Power to Preserve it self, and an Authority in cases that threaten [Page 33] its Ruine, to interpose with apt remedies for its Preservation? Consider. p. 5.’

If by apt Remedies he meant Honest and Lawful means, we deny it not. But we cannot yield, that any men have Authority to do Injustice. They may have Power and Force enough to do so; as some upon Shuters-Hill have Power to take away my Purse, and as the High-Court of Justice (so called) had to take away the late Kings Life; but this is not Authority, or Lawful Power, or Law­ful Proceeding. No private man ought to lose his Estate, but for Legal Causes, and by Legal Proceedings: To evade the force of this Argument, Parsons the Jesuit saith, ‘That the Tenure of the Crown is irregular and extraordinary. Men may not judge of this as of other Pleas of particular persons, nor is their trial alike, nor the common Maxims or Rules always of force in this thing as in others.’ To prove which he tells us, ‘That only one Daughter of a King (though he hath many) is to go away with the Crown; whereas Private Estates are Divideable among all the Daughters for want of Issue Male, Dolman, part 2. pag. 72.’ It seems there is Law and Justice for Private persons, but not for Princes. And so this Considerer reckons too, ‘That the Right of Succession to Government is not placed in the same rank with Private Inheritances, nor to be governed by the same Rules. That there is one Rule for the Succession of the Crown; and another for the Succession of Private Estates: For the descent of the Crown is governed and directed according to the presumed will of the People, and this (saith he) gives us the Reason, (the very Reason in Doleman) why one Daughter or Female of the next degree shall succeed to the Crown, and not all, if more than one; whereas a Private Inheritance is equally divided amongst them all, Consider. p. 32.’

Heirs Apparent are not true Kings until their Coronation; nor is Allegiance due unto them before they be crowned, saith Doleman, pag. 108. No Allegiance is due to any Prince, but whom the Law appoints, and as the Law appoints, saith this Considerer, pag. 30.

But Doleman is Positive that Princes may lawfully be Deposed; and he observes too (as a Remarkable Circumstance, as he calls it,) That God hath wonderfully concurred (for the most part) with such ju­dicial [Page 34] Acts of the Commonwealth against their evil Princes, not only in Prospering the same, but by giving also some notable Successor in the place of the deposed, Pag. 26. and Chap. 3. Had Father Parsons been alive in our days▪ perhaps he would have instanced in that blessed Bird Oliver Cromwell, among the rest. But I leave it to you and to other Honest men to judge, whether our Considerer had an eye to that passage and observation in Doleman, when speaking of the Exclusion of the D. of Y. he saith, we know, and are most assured of the justness of the undertaking, and we have good Hope in the Goodness of God, that he will Succeed it, p. 7.

Yet I do not much wonder at this, considering that he goes higher still, even from the Successor to the Possessor of the Crown. For thus his Politicks run, The Crown doth not lie in Dominion, but in Trust; not in Property, but in Care, pag. 31. This is exactly Dolemans Notion, that a Princes power is, Potestas Vicaria, or delegata; a power Delegate, or power by Commission from the Commonwealth, given him as their Trustee, or Proxy, part 1. chap. 4.

Upon this Doctrine he builds that Position (and it naturally follows) that true Kings may be Deposed, ibid. and part 2. cap. 4. wherein our Considerer follows the Jesuit at the heels, owning that the People may recall their Letters of Attourney, and exauctorate their lawful King, p. 6. where he saith, (and with base abusing Dr. Falkner, when he seems to commend him) ‘I will hope there are very few in this Nation so ill instructed, that doth not think it in the power of People to Depose a Prince, &c. Here the Gen­tleman speaks out and home; and insinuates, that for a man to be a Martyr, or to bear the Cross of Christ, is to be ill instructed. Ac­cording to this Jesuitism is the only true Orthodox Principle; and so this Considerer hath lastily con'd Doleman thanks for all his Ortho­dox instructions.

For, saith Doleman, the Commonwealth hath Authority above their Princes, pag 19. And this Considerer calls the Commons, the Greatest and Best part of the Nation, p. 6. which is plainly meant with respect to their Authority, because a King cannot be deposed but by some that are supposed to be Greater and Better than Him­self. And so you see in the end what it is which this Gentleman and others of his Party and Persuasion would fain be at. They [Page 35] pretend the Preservation of Religion, and at the same time ven'd such Principles as overthrow the very foundations of our Govern­ment; so true is that common observation, that these Pamphleteers begin with his Royal Highness, and end at last with his Royal Majesty.

I need not say any thing of this Considerer's short Historical Collection touching the Succession of the Crown. For you and every body may easily see, that 'tis taken out of Doleman. And so, let this Considerer and his Father Parsons go together.

The next that comes to my hands is that Sir Positive Statesman, the Author of Plato Redivivus, who was so well pleased with the Comical Preface to Doleman (where the Jesuit, after a Poetical manner, brings in two Lawyers at Amsterdam, discoursing about Succession to the Crown of England,) that he could not but imitate the Poetical Fancy himself, bringing in a Noble Venetian, an Eng­lish Gentleman, and a Doctor at London, all discoursing about the present Government in England: So that 'tis but altering the Scene, and the Quality of the Interlocutors, and then the Dramatick Farce is in a manner the same.

I confess this Gentleman is not Doleman all over from Head to Foot, but seems to have only the Guts and Garbage of the Jesuit; I mean, his most Carrion-Principles, For in two respects Dole­man seems to have been the better man of the two: 1. First, in re­spect of that Regard and Esteem for Religion, and for the Church, which the Jesuit expresseth with so much zeal, that he would have all other Interests to truckle to this: Whereas this Gentleman seems to own no Apostle but Machiavil the Divine (as he often calls him) but Ridicule's things Sacred, Scoffs at Ordination, maliciously De­praves our Church Constitutions, and makes use of his best Rhe­torick (that is, Buffoonry and Scurrility) to reproach all our Cler­gy, speaking plainly thus, (pag. 98.) ‘The truth is, I could wish there had never been any Clergy; the purity of Christian Reli­gion, as also the good and orderly Government of the world, had been much better provided for without them.’ Had the Bookseller been well advised, he might have been so respectful to the memory of the Divine Plato, as not to have put a Jewel of Gold in a Swines Snout, but should have entitled this Book rather, Luci­anus Redivivus.

[Page 36]2. Then as touching Monarchy, even Doleman is so fair, that he allows it to be the most Excellent, most Perfect, and most An­cient Form of Government, pag. 12. But this Gentlman looks upon it as the very worst, and to have proceeded from the Corrup­tion of better Governments, pag. 33. Therefore he admires the Venetian Government, as the only School in the world at this day, pag. [...]4. and prefers a Democracy before all, as a Government which is much more powerful than an Aristocracy, pag. 46.. And speak­ing of the Democratical Government of Rom [...], (which he extols as the b [...]st and most glorious Government that ever the Sun saw, pag. 45.) he is pleased to observe, how truly we are not to examine now) ‘That in the most turbulent times of that Commonwealth, and Factions between the Nobility and People, Rome was much more full of Vertuous and Heroick Citizens, than ever it was un­der Aurelius or Antoninus, p. 43.’

By the way, I do not wonder, that this Gentleman should in­deavour, as he doth, to persuade the King (as if he could Cully him out of his Rights) to share those four great Branches of his Prerogative among the P [...]ople, The power of making War and Peace, the disposal of the Militia by Sea and Land, the appointing of Officers of Trust, Civil, Military, and Ecclesiastical, and the Imploying of the Revenues of the Crown, pag. 2 [...]6, 257, 258. For if these things were done, the Ends of this Gentleman, and of his Party, would soon be served, and His Majesty would shrink into a Duke of Venice strait, and we should have an Imaginary Prince indeed (as he calls the King, pag. 43.) were but our Government new modelled ac­cording to this Platonick Idea.

But not to digress. Though Doleman and this Gentleman differ in some Points, yet they agreein the Main; viz. ‘That the Foun­dation of Government, and the Power of making Princes, is in the People.’ This (saith Doleman, p. 11.) is the ground of all the rest that I have to say: Meaning, that if this Power be once allowed, the rest of his Book must be granted, and the Peoples power to change their Government, to fore-close a Successor to the Crown, to Depose, Chastise, and Proceed against their King, to renounce their Allegiance, to forsake their Oaths, and the like; all this Pow [...]r will Naturally follow. So that all Rebellions and Treasons are grounded upon this prime Jesuitical Principle, [Page 37] touching that Soveraign and Absolute Authority supposed to be lodged in the People, of making Kings, and of making choice of them a [...] their Proxies and Trustees.

And is not this the Faith of the Author of Plato Redivivus? For, pag. 32. ‘He slights the Plea of a Monarchs Divine right to his Crown, as a piece of Court-Flattery; just as Parsons doth in answer to Belloy, Dolman, part. 1. cap 6. He tells us, That the frame of Government was first made by the Persuasion and Me­diation of some wise and vertuous person, and Consented to by the whole number, p. 30. That our Ancestors made choice of this sort of Government (Monarchy,) p. 113. That the bur­den of the Government is divided between the King and his Subjects, p. 116. That the Kings share in the Soveraignty is cut out to him by the Law, p. 120. That our Prince hath no Au­thority of his Own, but what was first Intrusted in him by the Government, of which he is the Head, p. 125.’ ‘He looks upon these Notions as meer Pretences, that the Kings Power came from God, that his Subjects cannot dispute it, and that he ought not to give an account of his Actions to any but God. p. 178. He excuseth the taking Arms by any People in opposition to their Prince, from their claim to a Lawful Jurisdiction or Co [...]ordina­tion in the Government, by which they may judge of, and de­fend their own Rights, p. 215. He tells us (as if it were nothing but lawful) that all People in the world that have Property, will drive out a King that doth reign injussiv populi, and exercise the Government Tyrannically, p. 71.’

Besides all these Principles, exactly agreeable to those in Dole­man, he hath a fine Similitude, ‘That as in some distempers in the Body, when the Head is out of order, though the distemper may begin from the disease of some other part, or from the mass of Bloud, or putresaction of other Humours; yet since that noble part is so affected by it, that Reason and Discourse fails, therefore to restore this again, Remedies must be applied to the Head, and Humours and Vapours must be drawn from the Head, that so it may be able to govern and reign over the Body as it did before, or else the whole man, like a Slave, must be ruled and guided ab Extrinsec [...], that is, by some Keeper: So (saith he) it isnow with us in our Politick disease, where granting (if you please) [Page 38] that the distemper does not proceed from the Head, but the cor­ruption of other parts, yet in the Cure, applications must be made to the Head, &c. p. 231.’ Now as I was reading Doleman, I found such another Similitude, in part. 1. cap. 3. where he saith. ‘As the whole Body is of more Authority than the only Head, and may cure the Head if it be out of Tune, so may the Weal publick cure or cut off their Heads, &c. pag. 31.’

How admirably well do good wits many times jump? I remem­ber now, that a friend of ours dreamt about two years ago, that a great Consult was held somewhere at the Sign of the Nags-head, which afterwards adjourned somewhere else to the Sign of the Kings-Head, and that there Father Parsons the Jesuit sate Chair­man, under the name of R. Doleman.

Among other things, my Friend dreamt too, that a wicked Political Catechism was a making there. But I lookt upon that as an Idle Fancy; for who could dream that such a seditious Pamphlet should come abroad at this time of day? But I perceive I was mi­staken; for yesterday I hapned to read a new Assemblies Catechism bearing that Title, A Political Catechism: And I found it as full of the Jesuits Venom, as if it had been spitten out of Dolemans own mouth. For these are some of the Principles in it, word for word; ‘That the Government being a regulated Monarchy, the King is not above the Law, but is accountable to the Law, and not to God only, p. 1. 2. That whatsoever is done by the King, with­out and beyond the limits of the Regulation, is not Regal Au­thority, p. 2. 3. That to resist the notorious Transgressions of that Regulation, is no resisting of Regal Authority, ibid. 4. That it is so far from being a resisting of the Ordinance of God, that it is not so much as resisting the Ordinance of men, ibid. 5. That the King hath not his power, solely, or immediately by Divine-right. But 6. That the immediate Original of it was from the People. 7. That in questioned cases the King is to pro­duce his Grant (for he hath no more than what was granted) and not the People to shew a Reservation. 8. That the good of the Subject is ever to be preferred before the greatness of the King, p. 5. 9. That it is lawful for the Two Houses to raise Arms to defend themselves in case an Army be raised against them, p. 7. 10. That They are the Legal Judges, when there is danger of [Page 39] Tyranny, and that they have Legal Power to command their Judgment to be obeyed. 11. That they have Power to dispose of the Militia▪ to Levy Moneys, Horse, Arms, &c. even without or against the Kings Consent. 12. That of their Power they are the Legal Judges, and that all the Subjects of this Kingdom are bound by the Laws to obey them herein.’ Ibid.

Sir, you cannot but remember, that the late Rebellion was raised and maintain'd upon these Principles. And if there were no new Rebellion intended again, for what Reason can you imagine is there a Revival of these Principles, which serve for no other end: The Au­thor of Plato Redivivus, who doth confess, (pag. 172.) ‘That we are to this day tugging with the same difficulties, managing the same debates, and giving the same disgusts to the Court, and Hopes to the Country,’ which our Ancestors did before the Year, 1640. might have added too, if he had pleased to speak truth to the full, that we are acting to this day upon the same Principles, on which they acted in 1641. All which Principles are of their Fathers the Jesuites (who are of their Father the Devil) and are so mani­fest, that he that runs may read them all in Doleman Redivivus.

If now you chance to read the Character of a Popish Successor, you will find it there Asserted, (pag. 21.) ‘That in the Infancy of time, and in the first Original of Nations, Monarchy came by the Peo­ples Choice, who frequently in the beginning of the World, o [...] of the natural desire of safety, for the securing a peaceful Commu­nity and Conversation, chose a single Person to be their Head, as a proper Supreme Moderator in all differences that might arise to disquiet the Community.’ Now this is utterly false: but yet 'tis directly Dolemans very Notion, pag. 12.

And in the Vindication of that Character you will find another of Dolemans Pleas, viz. ‘That the Succession of Kingly Government has not been so sacred, but upon some Occasions it has been chan­ged by Divine as well as Lawful Authority, pag. 14.’

And in the Vox Populi the zealous True Protestant speaks after the Jesuite, saying, ‘That the King has no Power, but what the Law gives him, pag. 2.’ (And yet I ever thought, that the Law hath no Power but what the King gives it; and if the Law be His Crea­ture, how can it be His Creator?) And again he tells us, ‘That the Kings share in the Sovereignty is cut out to him by Law; and [Page 40] not left at his disposal, pag. 9. and that the King has no Preroga­tive, but what the Law gives him, pag. 13.’

Now, Sir, the Books and Pamphlets hitherto mentioned, have been all Printed since the beginning of the Year, 1680. B [...]t I must observe to you, that these Anti-Monarchical and Seditious Doctrines have come so thick into the World, by the Midwivery of a certain Speech which was made five years before, and which was Father'd upon a Noble Peer, who was then very active in the House of Lords. In which Speech you find these Positions, ‘That the King is King by Law, and by the same Law that a poor Man enjoys his Cot­tage: that to say, this Family are our Kings, and this particu­lar frame of Government is our Lawful Constitution, and ob­ligeth us, is owing only to the particular Laws of our Countrey.’ Where the Author confesseth also, ‘That he cannot find that ever the Jesuites or Popish Clergy, only some of our Episcopal Clergy, owned Monarchy to be of Divine Right.

Of all this we had heard no N [...]ws for a long time, 'till some turn'd Mal [...]contents, by being turn'd out of their Honours and Of­fices at Court: Then the World began to turn too, and old Doleman, who had been so serviceable to Faction all along, was brought again above-board.

You see the Gentleman doth own, that he had been Dealing and Consulting with the Jesuites and Popish Clergy; for he matches them against our Episcopal Clergy, and declares himself plainly on the Jesuites side. But had he held his tongue as to that, yet such as had Parsons his Libel in their Studies, clearly perceiv'd whom he had been Trucking with; for what he saith in that Speech, is the very substance of the first Chapter in Doleman. Our Clergy do not deny, but the King is King by Law, if he means, according to Law: for the Law doth Recognize his Sacred Authority; our Laws give him his Due, they Own and Acknowledg that Right of Sovereign Power which he hath by the Laws of God, by Natural Claim and Inheri­tance. But the Law doth not Found his Right to the Crown, as it doth the poor mans right to his Cottage. For Kings were Kings before there were Laws; and our King would be our Rightful So­vereign, were there neither Statute-Book nor Magna-Charta in all England. For the Authority of Kings doth not originally depend upon the Laws, or Consent of the People, any more than it depen­deth [Page 41] upon the Consent of my Children that I should be their Father. The Kings Power is Antecedent to Law, which hath its force from Him; as my Being is Antecedent to the Being of my Children, which have (under God) their Life from me.

I hope it will appear [...]'re long, that our Episcopal Clergy ar [...] but just to their King, in owning their Principles, which every know­ing Man may justifie for them, if he will but obey his own Reason.

That the Jesuites and Popish Clergy should be otherwise perswa­ded, is not to be wondred at, because being ingaged by their Inte­rest to pretend, that the Popes Supremacy is of Divine Right, they are forced in defence of his pretended Power over all Princes, to lay their Authority very low, as if it were a Mushrome of the Earth, a little Creature of yesterday, depending for its Being upon the Peo­ples Courtesie. They therefore are not to be wondred at: but the wonder is, that any among us, that are Protestants, Zealots, Pa­triots, should fetch their Principles from Dow [...]y or St. Omers. We are like to have good work, when an Israelite must go to the Phi­listines to sharpen his Coulter, and for Heisers to [...]ough with.

Really, Sir, I am quite tired with looking into Libels of this na­ture; and shall only add, that if you have Time and Patience enough to read over as many of them as I have done, you will find, that the most Considerable Writers of Sedition, have taken large Collops out of Dolemans sides, and that every little Pamphleteer has come in for a Snack; so that could Father Parsons now peep out of the Earth, he would bless himself to see what Filching and Kid­napping work hath been made of his Principles.

But I must not forget to tell you of one very lewd Tenent, which Father Parsons had the Impudence to Publish to the World, to the great dishonour and scandal of Christianity. For speaking of the Pri­mitive Christians Passive Obed [...]ence, under Julian and other evil Princes, he was not asham'd to give this as the Reason why they suffer'd so patiently and resisted not, because they wanted Arms to maintain their Quarrel, and had not Strength, Power and Force enough to cope with their Governours.

Indeed I do not remember to have met with this Tenent in Dole­man: but you may find it in another Book written by Parsons, which he called Philopater, though I have it not by me at present to refer you to the particular place.

[Page 42]I confess too, that it was not Parsons single conceit for that no­torious and swinging J [...]suite, Cardi­nal Bellarmine saith,Note: Quod si Christiani olim non deposuerunt Neronem & Dio­cle [...]ianum, & Julianum Apo­statam, & Valentem Arianum, & similes, id suit quia deerant Vires. Bellar. de Rom. Pontif. 1. 5. c. 7. That if Christians in the Primitive times did not Depose Nero and Diocletian, and Julian the Apostate, and Valens the Arian, and the like, it was because the Christians had not strength enough.

In like manner another Jesuite, Azorius, giving a Reason why the Antient Popes dealt not roughly with Princes,Note: Azor. instit. Moral. par. 2. 1. 10. c. 2. [...]ith, It was because they wanted strength.

I own too, that Buchanan spake at the same rate in his Book de jure regni apud Scotos: and whether Buchanan did borrow this Noti­on of the Jesuites, or the Jesuites borrowed it of Buchanan, others are concern'd to dispute it out. This is evident [...] that it is a Jesuiti­cal Notion; and I will add, a Notion which others even of the Po­pish Clergy did detest when it was first broached, as being utterly against the constant sense of the whole Catholick Church.

Yet the late angry Author of Julian the Apostate confidently runs upon this very Notion. For speaking of the submission of Chri­stians under Julian, he saith, What would men have a few Defence­less Christians do, when they had lost all their strength, and so many of their Numbers? p. 94. Have they never heard a West-Country man say, Chud eat Cheese an Chad it.

By applying which Boorish Proverb to his Purpose, our Author doth seem to intimate, that if the Primitive Christians had had Strength and Numbers sufficient, Rebellion would have been as welcom to them as their very Food, and that they would as gladly have resisted, as they would have relieved their Hunger: but it seems they wanted Cheese, and could not do what they had a mind and stomach to do. A most Monstrous expression from the Pen of a Christian, of a Protestant, of a Clergy-man!

For, first, nothing can be more false: because it is notorious, that Julians own Army consisted for the most part of Christians, (if their Religion and Consciences would have given them leave) could soon have done the Emperors work, when their Swords were in their hands, and Julian was at the Head of them in the Field. In those [Page 43] days the Numbers of Pagans were inconsiderable in comparison. For Christianity gained ground every day at such a strange rate, that (before Julians time) St. Cyprian tells us, the Heathens were Over­matcht by Christians: for (said he to the Proconsul of Africa) None of us resisteth, Note: Nemo nostrum quando ap­prehenditur, reluctatur; nec se adversus injustam violenti­am vestram, quamvis Nimi­us & Copiosus noster sit po­pulus, ulciscitur. St Cypriar. ad Demet [...]ian. p. 257. edit. Pamel. when he is apprehended, nor revengeth him­self against your Unjust Violence, although the men of our side be Numerous and more than enough to revenge themselves. And before St. Cyprian, Tertullian boasted of the great Numbers and Strength of Chri­stians. Of which, (to omit other pregnant instances) that passage in his Apologetick is a clear Demonstration. For saith he to the Emperor, ‘Had we (Christians) a mind to do like Enemies, could we want Numbers or Armies? such Foreigners as we are accoun­ted, we have filled all that belongs to you, your Cities, Islands, Castles, Towns, Camps, Tribes, your Palace, Senate, Courts: we have left your Temples only to your selves. We who are thus willingly killed, what War were we not fit, not ready for, but that by our Religion it is permitted us rather to be killed, than to slay? We could have fought against you even without the help of Arms, and without being actual Rebels, only by standing out, and holding off from your Assistance, out of spight for being severed from your Fellowships and Societies (for so I understand those words, solius divortii invidia.)’

These Testimonies alone do plainly shew the horrible falshood of that Jesuitical Notion, which this Author hath entertained, and is pleased to revive. And were this all, it would not be so much.

But I add, secondly, that 'tis a pretence which casteth such a Disgrace, such a reproach, such a scandal upon Christianity, and the Christian Church, that you can hardly find any thing to com­pare with it (unless it be the lewdness of a certain virulent scribler, that pretending to write a Church-History, hath Calumniated the Christian Bishops, as if they had been a Race of the most Blood-thirsty and wicked men in the world,) what would not a Celsus, or a Porphyry, or Julian have given for a Clergy-man in those days, who would have given it under his hand, that Christians were a sort of men, that wanted only strength and opportunity to be Re­bels? [Page 44] such a man would have done most rema [...]kable service to all sorts of Infidels and Blasphemers: For then they would have had some Reason and Authority for such Di [...]bolical sugg [...]stions as these. 1. That when Christ said to his Disciples. Render to Caesar the things which are Caesars, he was nevertheless Caesars Enemy, being supposed to mean, T'ill you can help your selves, and can be able by force of Arms to be revenged upon the Emperor. 2. That when the Apostles comman­ded Christians to Honour the King, to Obey Magistrates, to be Subject to the Higher Powers, and that not only for Wrath, but also for Consci­ence-sake, yet nevertheless they Disse [...]bled and plaid the Hypocrites, being supposed to mean, that Christi [...]ns should be Civil to the Go­vernment for the present, and till time served, and for fear only, and that they should be subject till th [...]y were [...]ble to Rebel, and that they should be damned for resisting, unless they could resist to some pur­pose. 3. Whereas the Ancient Christians universally acknowledg­ed, that the Emperor was the Vicegerent and Minister of God himself, that he was inferiour to God alone, and that Julian himself reigned by Gods Authority, as well as Constantine; the Pagans would have lookt upon all these Professions to have been gross falsifications and lies, had a Church-man but insinuated, how that it was the sense of the Church, that they could lawfully Fore-close or Dethrone Princes when they had Power; and nothing could have served more [...]ffectually to render Christians odious, and Christianity it self Abo­minable. 4. Whereas the simplicity of Religion was so much Preached up, and the simplicity of its Professors was so much admi­red, that ' [...]was the great Honour of the Church in those days, they would have been hated as meer Parasites and Hypocrites, should they have doubled in this particular, and the Heathens would have scoff'd and steer'd at their Profession of Loyal [...]y (as this Author doth at the Doctrine touching Prayers and Tears, pag. 30.) as a piece of Quackery and Mountebank-craft.

I doubt not but all those in this Age who have no kindness for Religion, will make a great use of this Authors insinuations, and hereafter upon his credit believe, that the Primitive Christians were in their hearts so many Cut-throats and Rebels, whatever they pre­tended to the contrary while they wanted strength: and if this be not a scandal thrown upon the Catholick Church, a reproach cast upon Religion, and an horrible reflection made upon the very Foun­der and Author of it, I know not what is.

[Page 45]And since this Person hath been pleased thus to disparage Christi­anity, and to ridicule the Doctrine of the Cross, by Drolling with the Doctrine of Passive Obedience, I do not at all wonder that he h [...]th taken the confidence also, to fall so foul upon Dr. Hicks, as to bring both his Integrity and his Learning into Question.

1. First his Integrity. For he plainly intimates his suspition, that when the Doctor in his Sermon on the 30th of January Prea­ched the Doctrine of Passive Ob [...]dience, he might have a secret de­sign to wheedle men out of their Lives: that he taught such Doctrine as is fit to turn a Nation into shambles, and enough to tempt and invite Tyranny and Cruelty into the World, pag. 88. Nay, he declareth his fears, that this Doctrine was calculated and fitted on purpose for the use of a Popish Successor, and to make us an easier prey to the Bloody Pa­pists, pag. 89.

In such times as these, when it may soon cost any man his Life to lye under the displeasure of the Rabble, could this Author have any but a Black and Malicious design, in thus exposing a worthy Person to their Hatred and Fury?

Dr. Hicks is better known than to be suspected by any but ill men, and yet I do not see what Reason even such men can have to su­spect his Integrity for that Sermon. For, is not the purport of the day enough to excuse and justifie him? Or could a man Preach upon the point of Passive Obedience more seasonably than on that day? If you please to consult the Office appointed for that day, you will find that the Epistle ordered to be read contains and inculcates that very Doctrine; and I wonder how it should escap [...] this Authors Observation, if he useth to be at Church on the Anniversary of the Kings Martyrdom.

The Doctors business was to Preach submission to our lawful Governours. This every Clergy-man ought to do, and every ho­nest Clergy-man will do, that loves and regards his Flock, and is careful to give them wholsom food, and to keep them from the Bane, (for it seems the Sermon was Preacht a year before in his own [...]a­rish, where he Resides.) Now, could the Doctor pursue this good Design better than by shewing what the Doctrine and Practice of Christ himself was as to this matter, and how agreeable thereun­to the Doctrine and Practice of the Primitive Christians was? Since therefore that Blessed Prince was Resisted and Murder'd by men, [Page 46] whose Principles and Practices were of a far different nature and utterly inconsistent with Christianity, how could the Doctor chuse (unless he would have been a Tergiversator) but take notice thereof, and shew the difference by making a Comparison?

And why should this be construed, as a Design to serve the turn of a Popish Successor? Surely the Doctor had no need to look so far: For I am bound to believe, upon this Authors Principle, what some would be doing even now, had they but opportunity and Po­wer: They have plainly shewn their Teeth, and we may read the West-Country-Proverb on their Grinns, Chud eat Cheese an chad it. But whatever these are for, the Ministers of the Gospel ought to be for Obedience and Peace; and I wish that the C [...]nsti­tution of our present times were such, as that they might think it an Unnecessary and Impertinent thing, to preach against Resisting even a Protestant Prince.

2. Besides this, he is pleased to disparage the Doctors Learning, as if he were better versed in the Dissenters Sayings, than in the Histories of England and had been behold [...]n to the Dissenters Say­ings for a great part of his Sermon.

Truly I think this Gentleman may well forgive the injury, if he be abused with this complement, that he may compare with the Doctor for his Readings. But I am apt to think, that what Books soever he hath been poring into, he hath not read (at least, not considered) some of the Doctors. For in the Dedication of that Controverted Sermon, he tells that excellent good man, the pr [...]sent Lord Mayor, that he had made it a year ago, (before the Dissenters Sayings came abroad) and that since he had made that Discourse; New Collections had been made (meaning those Sayings) but, saith he, I have added very little, contenting my self with what I had before provided out of their Originals. He seems to have men­tioned the Dissenters Sayings, not upon his own account, as having been beholden to those Collections himself, but rather for the Rea­ders sake, to direct him where he might find many more of the same nature with his own.

Besides, Dr. Hicks his several Citations in his Peculium Dei, which was not only framed, but Printed before the Dissenters Say­ings, do sufficiently shew, that the Doctor had no need to consult them.

[Page 47]Into the bargain there was Printed about three years ago a very Useful Book (which I would recommend to you) whereof Dr. Hicks is on all hands taken to have been the Author,) 'tis cal­led, The Spirit of Popery, &c. And the Animadversions up and down in th [...]t Book upon the Speeches of Kid and King, give abundant Evidence, that the Doctor had been long conversant with the Pha­natical Originals, and the Histories which give an account of them.

I believe the Author of the Dissenters Sayings will not think him­self dishonoured, should it be said, that this Book furnisht him with some Materials. But suppose (which is common among Writers) that Dr. Hicks had borrowed some Hints from Mr. L' Estrange, and that Mr. L' Estrange had borrowed others of Dr. Hicks, yet this is no more, than for one honest man to borrow of another; and that is far more Reputable than for a true Protestant to borrow of a true Jesuit, and then to be ashamed of his Creditor and Friend.

For the Doctor had justly Arraigned the Author of the History of Succession, for having stoln his Pamphlet out of Doleman (the Book which you sent me, and which the Doctor in his Sermon calls, The most pestilent and dangerous piece, that ever was written against this Government, p.28.) Julian took snuff at this, that a se­ditious Pamphleteer was discovered to have been trading with a wretched Jesuit. And yet he confesseth it to be possible to write an History of the Succession without borrowing from Doleman, p. 60. Very good: And why then did not that Pamphleteer do it? Why, was he so Ill-advised, as to be beholden to a Jesuit at all? Or why was he so Immodest, as to borrow his whole stock? Or why was he so disingenuous, as not to own his Benefactor, in whose Book he had run a Tick thus? Or, why was he so Impudent, as to pre­tend, that this Pamphlet was written by a Protestant hand, when 'twas taken out of the Closet of Father Parsons? All that Julian saith to it, is, That 'tis impossible to write an History of the Succession, without having a great many passages which Doleman has got into his Book ibid. But, by his good leave, 'tis possible to write one History without stealing out of another. 'Tis possible to imitate a Book, without Transcribing it. 'Tis possible to observe another mans Method, without running upon his Principles. 'Tis possible to [Page 48] treat of his Matter without using his Fancy, and to pursue his De­sign without using his Phrase: This is as possible, as 'tis possible for me to follow a Leader though I do not tread in his very steps. But let an indiff [...]rent person compared Doleman with the History of Succession, and he will find such an exact agreement, not only be­tween the Method, Matter, and Scope of them both, but also be­tween the Principles, Expressions, Arguments, Instanc [...]s, and the like in b [...]th, that though the world be full of Histories, yet you shall not find any two, that do so exactly jump together, as Dole­man and the History of Succession do unless they be Abridgments or Transcripts.) So that a man may well say, that the Pamphle­teer had a design, not to write a new piece, but new Vamp an old one; and to put a damned J [...]suit into such a new Dress, that he might appear in the world like a true Protestant.

All these things considered duly, I may Infer, that since there is now adays such Fresh Trading and Trucking with the Jesuits, it is high time for every honest man in this Kingdom to make a Pause, and consider seriously whose hands we are in, &c. p. 27.

It is high time for all the honest men in the Kingdom to consider whose hands we are in: And I am glad, that you begin to consider what a sort of men these are, who out of a pretended zeal for the Pro­testant Cause, take such an extravagant course as they do. What, is there no way to prevent Popery, but by planting Jesuitism? Is this the way to uphold the Church of England, to fetch Shoars and Buttresses from the Church of Rome? Have we not good store of wholsom Lews on our side? Is not the Genius of the Nation so set against Popery, that they may as soon be persuaded to turn Turks? Is not our Church so firmly Establisht, that if we be but Faithful to Her, it is impossible for that Scarlet Whore (with whom so many Princes have committed Forni [...]ation) ever to have again Joynture or Dower in this Kingdom? Besides, and above all this, are we not sure, that the good hand of God will be over us, if we be but careful to commit our selves to him in well-doing? But 'tis observable, that these men in all their Writings take so little notice of the Providence of God, that a sober man may Reasonably suspect, that God is not in all their thoughts. They begin at the wrong end, and thinking that all must be done by Humane Arts and Policy, even rake Hell and scum the Devil, as if that were [Page 49] an effectual course to preserve the true Religion and Church of God.

Setting aside the Romish Faith, and the Vow of blind Obe­dience, tell me wherein these men differ from the Disciples of Ignatius Loyola? Why, only these are Popish, and they Protestant Jesuits.

"Of all Sects and Religions (saith Father Wat­son) the Jesuit and the Puritan come nearest,Note: Quodlibets p.27. and are fittest to be coupled like Dogs and Cats toge­ther. And so he goes on comparing them, and making both of them equally alike for their Hypocrisie, for their Conspiracies, for their Schismatical humour, for their malice against Bishops, for their Insolence and Disobedience to Government, for their violation of Oaths, for their Commonwealth-opinions, for their Tyranny and Usurping a Power over Princes, for their Con­forming to the Laws sometimes to serve a Turn, for their Dispen­sing with one another in case of Occasional Communion and Occa­sional Perjury, &c. He instanceth in no less than twenty four points; a full Double Jury (if that would do any good) by which if you try both Factions, you will find, that as they came into the world much about a time, so they have been sworn Brethren from the Womb.

But he abuseth the old moderate Puritans, for 'twas only some Rigid men among them that were so Ill-natured, so Imperious, and such Thorns and Goads in their Governours sides. However, one Faction has hither so shifted it self into another, that the old Puritan, that was peaceable and fair-conditioned, is quite gone out of the world; he has been long ago lost in the Presbyterian, and the Presbyterian too is upon the matter lost in the Independent, and all of them are so lost in the Jesuit, that if you go to unken­nel the Fox, 'tis an even Lay whether you hunt a Jesuit or a Whig.

What an odd thing is this, that men should turn Jesuits for fear of being Papists? As I am an honest man, 'tis matter of great Asto­nishment to me, and a most horrid scandal to Religion, that peo­ple should pretend such zeal for the Protestant Faith, and yet infect themselves with such Jesuitical Principles.

[Page 50]We Rusticks are wont, when we plant an Orchard, to observe this Rule generally, to graft a better sort of fruit upon a worse, as we use to graft an Apple upon a Crab. H [...]d these men taken this course, and have studied Melioration (as our term of Art is) they would not have grafted the Jesuit upon the Protestant, but the Protestant upon the J [...]suit: Then they would have [...]hewn their good Husbandry, and good Fruit would have come of their Labours.

But they do not go according to the Rule: And then they say, they act according to their Consciences. Now Cons [...]ience, if it be Right and Honest, observe, the Laws of the great Husbandman: But when men overlook the directions of God, and act according to their Humours, or according to the Humours, or seeming Inte­rest of a Party, then Conscience makes m [...]d work, and proves a meer Ignoramus, for it ever grafteth the Crab way.

Hence it cometh to pass, that there is such a D [...]mn [...]ble deal of sowre fruit among us, as hath set the teeth of all honest men in the Kingdom on edge. For when once men are Jesuited, they will never stick at any manner of wickedness. Lying, Libelling, Se­dition, Dishonesty, D [...]faming of Government, Disobedience to Laws, Obstruction of Justice, Hypocrisie, Perjury, and I know not how many Vices more, they have now lost the name of Sins, and are made the Honourable Characters of som [...], who are pleased (by a figure) to call themselves True Protestants.

For you may easily observe, that mens Scruples now lie one way only, viz. about Ceremonies, and little things pertaining to Order and Decency in the Church; but there is little or no scruple about Immorality; they Protest against Conformity, but not against Knav [...]ry. They will condemn Kneeling at the Sacrament as a damnable sin, and yet be guilty of it themselves to serve an End: And I cannot but tremble to consider, that the blessed Sacrament of Christs Body and Bloud should be used only as a Politick Tool, to capacitate men to be Potent Villains.

Are not these Dainty Conscientious men, who can thus play fast and loose with their Consciences? And who have got such a perfect mastery over them, that they can set them a whining, or put them to sleep at their pleasure, so that if a friendly job be to be done at Guild-hall or the Sessions-house, poor Dame Conscience [Page 51] is commanded to lie quiet behind the door; and when the business is over, then she is taken up again to Pewk the next Sunday at the very sight of a Surplice.

Sir, if you think me somewhat sharp, I must desire your Excuse, because nothing is more hateful to me, than a Conscience that is Tender in Part only; a Conscience, that is much like an Animal in your Garden, which you call a Tortoise; a Creature that is so very Nice and Tender in some parts, that it shrinks up it self pre­sently, if you touch it with a Straw; but yet is wrapt up in such a deadly hard, crusty shell, that you may drive Horses and Carts over it, and not hurt it. And really, Sir, as I was considering with my self, how mighty shy and scrupulous some are in things which are of an inconsiderable nature, (but Straws in comparison) and yet what little impression the weighty things of the Law make up­on them, I thought presently of your Tortoise; and was minded (but that I do not care to give Names) to call that a Tortoise Con­science, which some call a Tender, a True-Protestant, and an Ignoramus-Conscience.

You need not wonder at all this, since (as I said) they have grafted the Crab upon the Apple, I mean the Jesuit upon the Pro­testant: For no good can ever be expected, where Dolemans Prin­ciples are suckt in.

But you may see, how basely Partial these Folks are in their ordi­nary Censures: For let a man be a true Friend to the King and the Established Government, and presently (forsooth) he is a Papist. Let him Kneel at the Rails in a Chancel, and he is a Papist. Let him be for the use of the sign of the Cross, or for reading part of the Com­munion-Service at the Communion-Table, and h [...] is a Papist. Let him refuse to do evil that good may come though that was St. Pauls way) and he is called a Papist. Or let him be for Subjection to a Lawful Prince, and (when time serves) for Passive O [...]edience, and he is a Papist with a witness. But let these men profess the Faith and Doctrines of the Jesuits; let them Lie and Equivocate like the Jesuits; let them violate Oaths, or Conster them in the [...]r own sense like the J [...]suits; let them Dispense with one another in doing any wickedness that is serviceable to their Cause (as the Jesuits do) yet who but they the True Protestants? The only Pa­trons of their Country? The brav [...] Assertors of Religion, Liberty, and what not?

[Page 52]That Learned and great man Bishop Sanderson hath in one of his incomparable Sermons this following passage:Serm. 12. Ad Aulam, p. 166. ‘I remember (saith he) to have read long since a Story of one of the Popes (but who the man was, and what the particu­lar occasion I cannot now recal to mind) that having, in a Con­sultation with some of his Cardinals, proposed unto them the course himself had thought of for the setling of some present Affairs to his most advantage, when one of the Cardinals told him, He might not go that way because it was not according to Justice; he made answer again, That though it might not be done per viam Justitiae, yet it was to be done per viam Expedientiae. The Pope thought, that any thing was lawful for him to do, that was but expedient for his Turn and Interest.

Are not our Factious men now clearly of that Popes Persuasion; (goodly Protestants, as they are!) Do they not break over all bounds of Justice, when it is expedient for them? Do they not Plead or Contemn the Laws, according as it is expedient for them? Do they not Obey or Disobey, as it is expedient? Do they not cry up or cry down Parliaments, as it is most expedient? Do they not go to a Church or a Conventicle, as it is expedient? Do they not Receive or Refuse the Holy Sacrament, as it is expedient? Do they not avoid or stickle for Offices, as it is expedient? Do they not observe or violate Oaths, as it is expedient? Do they not shake hands with the Jesuit, or give him a kick, as it is ex­pedient?

And yet these men would persuade us, that there is no Plot on their side, though Doleman be brought to life again: just as the Jesuits pretended, that there was no Plot on their side, though they plaid the like Pranks, and disseminated the like Principles, when Doleman saw the light first.

I accuse no particular Persons, but if the Faction have no villa­nous Design in hand, they are damnable Fools to make such broad signs, and have damnable ill luck to have so many ugly Marks upon them. For what courses have they omitted, which a cunning Achitophel would think necessary to be taken, supposing that there were a design to subvert our present Government?

[Page 53]As little a Politician as I am, yet were I a great man, and could I suffer my self to be an Ill Subject, I know not what more effectual course could be taken to rend all into pieces than this: First, I would make my self Popular, and would curry favour with City and Country, by pretending to be a very Consciencious man, and a zealous Protestant, whether I had any thing of Conscience or Re­ligion in me, or no. My next care should be, the Populace ha­ving entertained a great opinion of me, to tell my Fellow-Subjects and Admirers, that Kings are not such great men, nor Kingly Go­vernment such a great matter, but that Monarchs and Monarchy it self ought to truckle to the Conveniences of a Kingdom. Third­ly, my business should be to possess the People throughly with this Opinion, that all Power is derived from them, that a Crown is a Donative and Gift of theirs, and that they have an Unlimited Power either to continue a King and his Government, or to lay aside both, as shall be most expedient. My fourth care should be to lay open my Princes Infirmities, to disparage his Judgment as Weak and Impolitick, to render his Authority contemptible, to Reflect upon all miscarriages in his Government, and to make his Person vile and hated. But then, for fear of falling into open Treason, my next care should be to traduce and accuse his Coun­sellours, and to make the world believe, that they were all Papists, and perfectly designed the introduction of Arbitrary Power, that so I might wound the Prince himself through the sides of his Mi­nisters. Sixthly, Under pretence of securing Religion, Liberty, and Property, I would make my Interest and Party strong, and gain over as many considerable men as I could, and persuade them to enter into a Mutual League, and throw the Government into the hands of such, and such only, as should subscribe and enter into the Association. After this, I would work so with my friends, that if one of our Allies and Confederates should be found out and Indicted, a Pannel should be packt of such True men to the Cause, as would stretch their Consciences a little to bring off a poor Bro­ther, and keep him out of the reach of the King and his Laws. Be­sides, I would load all the Kings Friends with Reproaches, and odi­ous Characters, and call'em Tories, Rogues, Popishly-affected Ras­cals, Enemies to their Country, and the like. And at last, if a Parliament should happen to be called, especially to Oxford, I would [Page 54] indeavour that our Party should go in a Formidable mann [...]r, and with a numerous train of such true Protestants as Stephen Colledge; and should be strongly guarded with Men, Horse, and Arms, so that nothing should be wanting but the sound of the Trumpet, and a Rendezvouz. Now, should I do thus, would not you think that I had a base Design a [...]d Plot in my head? Would not any man think, that I had a mind to set things on a flame, when I had thus laid the Fewel together, and had blown the Coals, and was stirring up the Fi [...]e? Sir, I do not say, or mean, that my Conscience can suf­fer me to do these things; but whether these things have not been done, let the world judge.

Yet truly I do not believe, that there is a Protestant-Plot, nor would I have it called so; for the Principles of our Religion are such, that we dare not be seditious; we dare not be ungoverna­ble; we dare not be Enemies to the King; we dare not endeavour to pull down a Government that is so admirably well established; we dare not be dishonest, unless we will be Hypocrites; nor be Rebels, unless we will be damned. In a word our Religion is such, that we can lay no Plot, but this, How to be quiet while we live, and how to go to Heaven when we die. This is the business of a Right Protestant.

Nor do I believe, that there is a Presbyterian-Plot neither (pro­perly so called.) For that is such an odious, such an Ill-natured Sect, that the Genius of the Nation is set against them; and we have had already such abundant experience of their Hypocrisie, Knavery, and Tyranny, that 'tis not credible, that any man of Consideration will Plot, or venture his neck for them.

Neverth [...]l [...]ss, the late Loyal Addr [...]sses from all parts do shew, that 'tis the general opinion of the Kings good Subjects throughout the Nation, that there is another wicked Design on foot, be­sides that horrid Popish Conspiracy, which was discovered about four years ago.

Indeed we cannot say, 'tis managed by any one single Party or Faction in Religion, but rather that 'tis a Motley, Pye bald Com­bination of many Factions, somewhat like that Army we read of 1 Sam. 22. which was made up of men that were in distress, of men that were in d [...]bt, and of men that were discontented. In like manner the Factions which threaten our Peace now consist [Page 55] of a Farrago and a Medley: you miy call it the Confusion- [...]ot, not only b [...]cause it tendeth to the utter [...] [...]n of our Laws, Liberties, Prop [...]r [...]ies, Peace and Gover [...]t both in Church and [...]tate, but also because it is carried [...]n by a con­fused mixture, such as th [...]s [...] viz. Some that hav [...] lost their Pre­ferments at Court, and would fain be Revenged▪ some that ne­ver d [...]served any P [...]ferments, and would fain be scrambling; some that have inr [...]ched themselves by the Kings favour, and are therefore ungra [...]ful, because they are unfatiable; some that want Money, some that want Wit, and some that wa [...]t no­thing b [...]t Honesty and Religion; some that are A [...]heists and Hobbists; some that have been old Rob [...]s, Republicans, Rum­pers, Cromwelians, Committee of Safety-men, Levellers and Se­questrators; or the Heirs and Children of such; some that hav [...] an aking Tooth after Crown and Church Revenues, some th [...]t are notorious for Dishonesty, and become Bankru [...]'s and som [...], that have been Infamous for Vice; some that have been Ca­techiz'd in a Wine-Cellar, and made Maudlin-C [...]e [...]ts at the Tap head; some that have been Illuminat [...]d on a sudden in Moor-Fields, and been Dipt in Cornelius his Tub; s [...]e pretenders to Conformity that have been unfortunately hook't in una­wares; and divers Ringleaders and Abettors of Schism, who would gladly have another run after that Breath'd Puss, the Good Old Cause, which we were apt to think, when a most Graci­our Act of Oblivion came forth, would have died quietly in its Form.

Of this Design we had evidence abundant by the late famous Association, which opened the eyes of so many honest Royalists in the Kingdom. That alone gave a clear Demonstration of the matter, though we had reason enough to suspect it shrewdly before.

For it was observed, that upon the Discovery of the Popish Plot, when the Church of England-men unanimously and vigorously fall upon the Church of Rome, the Dissenters at the same time fell foul upon the Church of England. You know how maliciously active and zealous Mr. Baxter and the rest have been in that Cause, and in that Cause only. This we were amazed to see, and could make no [Page 56] other Construction of it, but that they took an early care to destroy the establisht Church themselves, as if they believed not, that the Papists could be able to do it. For the Church of England being the only impregnable Fort against Popery, we could not conceive, that Protestants would endeavour to remove, or weaken, or pull down that, if they did believe really that the common Enemy had a Plot against it. How can this be, that men should fear an Enemy, and believe him to be under the Walls, and yet at the same time open the City Gates, and with a pretended Design to keep the Enemy out too? this is as unlikely, as that men should believe and fear that the Kings Life and Person is in imminent danger, and yet at the same time endeavour to remove his Guards and leave his Palace naked, pretending to preserve Him. How, I pray, can these things consist?

Besides, we see how zealous the Factious have been and are, in stickling for Offices of Trust, which in quiet and setled times they studied as much to avoid, as being only vexatious, troublesome and chargeable, but of no use than for the disturbance of a Profound Peace.

We see how readily they themselves have confuted their own pre­tences, touching the sinfulness (forsooth) of complying with some Laws, and Conforming to the Church of England. For rather than stand out of play, when the Old Game is going again, they will (for once) abju [...]e the Covenant, and take the Test, and seal all this by receiving the Holy Sacrament according to Law, even when their own Consciences tell them (unless their Tongues lie) that it is Damnable to do so.

Add to this, that the world rings of Ignoramus-Juries, when Full, clear and plentiful Evidence hath been given by men whose Credit in other cases has passed unquestioned. By which means Justice hath been obstructed, and the Law hath been over-ruled, or the edg of it hath been turned on one side only, so that the King himself hath been denied the benefit of it, and men that were noto­rious for Dishonesty and Sedition have been Protected against him.

Now, it is not credible, but that all this is in order to some very evil Design, which cannot be carried on but by these very evil means; because it cannot be supposed, that men would dare to be Hated by [Page 57] the Government, to be Obnoxious to the Magistrates Sword, to mock Heaven, to forfeit their Reputation, and to play handy-dandy with their Consciences, did not some desperate Plot require such desperate Courses, as they cannot but know will one day rise up in Judgment against them even in this World, if the establisht Go­vernment holdeth.

The Consideration of these things is enough to convince all thinking Persons, that there is a Monstrous Intrigue in hand against the Government. But, to deal plainly with you, all these Argu­ments to me seem to be over and above.

For, as I mistrusted something of an extraordinary nature above three years ago, when Pamphlets came every week abroad full of unworthy and base reflections upon the King, upon his Counsellors, upon the Bishops and all the Clergy, upon the Offices and Rites in the Service Book, upon the Long Loyal Parliament, and indeed up­on the whole Frame and Constitution of our excellent Government (which reflections, had they been just, were surely altogether need­less then, if nothing but an engagement against the Popish Interest was intended) so when I saw the Jesuites Principles brought upon the Stage again, and found it confidently Asserted, and by many Believed, that Monarchy is a meer Human Ordinance, that Kings hold their Crowns by the Consent of their Subjects, that all Power is Originally in the People, that this Power of theirs is Unlimited and Uncontroulable, and many the like Positions more, which over­threw the Government once; then all my doubts vanished strait, and what I mistrusted before, then I firmly Believed, that an Alte­ration of our Government was intended again, and that these Prin­ciples were vended about to prepare a way thereunto: for to what other purposes could these Principles serve?

But now at last, when I saw that evil men were not contented to Skim and Retal these Principles out of Doleman, but moreover have reprinted Dolemans whole Book at large, it is impossible for me to force my Charity to believe otherwise, than that they have such a black Design against the whole Royal Family and the present Go­vernment, as I am loth to mention. For Books are not wont to be sent abroad into the World, but with a Design; nor are Booksellers willing to run the hazard of a whole Impression, unless there be [Page 58] strong probabilities that it will do either Good or Mischief: and the Reprinting of Doleman at this ticklish juncture, when the affairs of England are in such an U [...]certain and Tottering Posture, is a plain Ar­gument, that 'twas done with a Design to possess the People of Eng­land with such Notions, that they might be ripe for a Rebellion, and ready [...]or a total change of our Government, either according to the State of Venice (which is the drift of Plato Redivivus) or according to the Model of Holland (which other Factionists are generally more inclined unto.) Consider the thing well, Sir, and then tell me your thoughts, whether that might not be the intent of putting that Pestilent and Villanous Book again into the Press now, which at the Kings Restauration, and for many years since, was hardly va­lued so much as waste Paper in comparison.

Men and Books rise or sink in their price according to the condi­tion of Times. Twenty years ago it was Hony-moon in England, and, under God, nothing was so dear to our Souls then as our King and our Government: and had Doleman appeared abroad then, as he doth now, we should have thought that Oliver Cromwel had sent the Jesuite from Hell, and he would have been Executed at Tyburn by the Hangmans hands, before he had done any further mischief. But now the Case is alter'd, and the smart of Rebellion and Inno­vation is quite out of some mens fingers; and such as are for playing the Old Game over again, think it their best course to use the same Cards that were so lucky to 'em once before; and Father Parsons is called for to help 'em Deal.

Sir, I will not give you any further trouble now, though when I first set Pen to Paper, I thought it necessary to Examin those Prin­ciples in Doleman, which are so Popular in these days. And because I find, that the Doctrine of the Kings Divine Right to his Crown is become odious to many, who look upon it to be full of dangerous Consequences, as well as unreasonable in it self: and because the Clergy of our Church are hated for that Doctrine sake; and the ashes of that Learned, Loyal, and Honourable Person, Sir Robert Filmir, have been of late polluted with a great deal of dirt out of the Kennel, for no other Reason but because he was such a Fatal Enemy to that Jesuitical Principle, that the Original of all Power and Government is in the People; therefore I judged it proper and [Page 59] seasonable to shew you, what is meant by the Jus Divinum of Mo­narchy, and what strong Reasons that Doctrine is founded upon, that so I might vindicate the Integrity and Honour of the Assertors of it. But I am not willing that this Letter should swell into a large Discourse. However, if it may be an acceptable thing to you, to be acquainted with my thoughts on that Subject, you know you may Command me, as my business shall give me leave. In the mean time I own my self, Sir,

Your faithful Servant, &c.

This keyboarded and encoded edition of the work described above is co-owned by the institutions providing financial support to the Text Creation Partnership. This Phase I text is available for reuse, according to the terms of Creative Commons 0 1.0 Universal. The text can be copied, modified, distributed and performed, even for commercial purposes, all without asking permission.