THERE is nothing under the Sun, but is lyable to Alteration, the best and purest things ordinarily in the Change degenerating into the filthyest and most unsavoury. This Obser­vation holds good in Morals as well as Naturals; and even the Revelations of God himself, when abus'd to loose and ambitious Ends, when corrupted by the false glosses of deceitful Men, prove most destructive to the Peace and Welfare of the World. Hence it comes to pass, that W [...]rs Commenced upon the Account of Re­ligion, and carried on under pretence of Consci­ence, have evermore been the bloodyest, seldom or never ceasing, but in the utter Ruine of one side.

2. And for the same Reason Disobedience to Au­thority, and Rebellion against the Prince, when [Page 2] grounded on the mistaken Doctrines of the Gospel, are usually found most Obstinate, the Plague of the Com­mon-wealth, and an incurable Disease.

When Conscience, under a mistake, leads the Van, no Projects of Peace will please, but what she ap­proves of: When the Glory of God is writ upon the Banners, no Conditions are hearkened to, but what she propounds. When the Defence of the Gospel is taken up in Opposition to the Civil Magistrate, no terms of Agreement will be accepted, unless every point be gain'd exactly Conform to that Enthusiastical Model, to those conceited Schemes of Divine Wor­ship, which every Zealous Bigot lays down for the undoubted Law of the Gospel.

Conscience is the most Formidable Invader of the Rights and Properties of the Subject, of the Power and Soveraignty of the Supream Magistrate: And when she gives the Signal to Battel, the word is— Spare neither great, nor small: Neither Prince nor Peo­ple, neither things Sacred nor Profane escape her Fury; but all lye prostrate, and truckle to her Arbitrary Commandment. Whilst there are any left to make Head against her, she will never put up her Sword; her very Mercies are Cruel: She will never give over the pursuit, till glutted with the Blood of her Adver­saries, her self bursts asunder into Faction, Heresie, and the most Irreligious Separations. When the Num­ber of such as have been Slaughtered in an Holy War shall be reckon'd up, it will possibly be found, that In­terest, and Passion, and Revenge, and Civil Faction have slain their Thousands, but Conscience her Ten Thou­sands.

How this comes to pass, is not difficult to discern. An Opinion of our own Holiness begets in us Spiritual [Page 3] Pride, or rather Fleshly Wisdom and Confidence. Obe­dience to God is a most Powerful Motive pushing us on unto the most dangerous and desperate Enterprizes. The Propagation of the Kingdom of Christ oft-times makes us forget our selves, to over-look the means, and to think that the Goodness, or Innocence of our Design is sufficient to Sanctifie the Villany, and to Justifie the undertakers. To Defend the Purity of the Gospel is thought (as indeed it is if rightly manag'd) a Glorious work, it appearing to most of us the greatest instance of gratitude we can return to God, namely, to advance the Excellent Glory of the Divine Nature. Besides the Conversion of Men, yea, even the com­pelling them by force to renounce their Errors, and to embrace the Truths of the Gospel, seems at first blush, a Noble and Heroick piece of Christian Charity, worthy the Zeal and Pains of every one to effect as well in his Enemy as Friend.

Upon these general, but for the most part misapply'd Principles, many Ignorant Consciences full of Zeal and sudden flashes of Spiritual Light, like Paul in his Journey to Damascus, are indeed struck blind with the abundance of Revelation and Knowledge (falsly so called:) And from thence forward know not, neither care, nor will give themselves leave to consider what course they are taking for the compassing these great Ends; neither will suffer others to take them by the Hand, and Conduct them to the Infallible Oracles of God, where they may understand what it is which God would have them do, satisfying themselves with the uprightness of their remote intentions, but winking at the Iniquity of the means pursuant thereto: Although it is an Eternal Rule of right Reason, and an unque­stionable [Page 4] Maxim of our Holy Religion, That we must not do evil that good may come.

4. Conscience in this case (which is but an irregu­lar Passion, and may rather be called Self-conceit, or sullen Perswasion) becomes a most daring Champion, and that Cause is most likely to succeed wherein she is sworn of the Counsel, or made use of in the Execu­tion. Hence both Ambitious Princes, and Rebellious Subjects in their Foreign Invasions, or Civil Wars still either in pretence or Truth, have Painted Conscience and the Glory of God on their Ensigns; thinking it sufficient to Excuse their outrages with the pretext of Godliness. Some of you I know have read of the Holy War, carried on by the blind Zeal of Christen­dom against the Saracens; some have heard of the Holy League in France; many of you of the Spani­ards Invincible Armado, Equip'd at the Request of his Holiness, for the Propagation of the Faith; most of you are sensible that there was lately a Solemn League and Covenant set up in this Kingdom, for the Glory of God; and we are at this day freshly Alarm'd with the Report of an Association. These Proceedings are not to be wondred at, since Religion hath ever by Ex­perience been found first lyable to be deprav'd by ill Men, then to be made a stalking Horse for the carrying on the most Impious Enterprizes. Our Lord himself fore-told as much, and this Mystery of Iniquity began to work in the Children of Disobedience at the very dawning of Christianity. The first Hereticks and Schismaticks that sprung up in the Church, Men that boasted of their Knowledge of the Divine Will, as much as any among us ever did, arrogating to themselves the Name of Gnosticks (i. e.) (as the word imports) Knowing Men, who (as they thought) were fully [Page 5] acquainted with the Doctrine of God: Yet among many other freakish Opinions, deny'd Subjection due to the Magistrate, and are describ'd as such by St. Jude—Filthy Dreamers, who defile the Flesh, despise Ver. 8. Dominion, and speak evil of Dignities.

James 3. 17. 5. The Christian Religion is first pure, and then peaceable, as St. James teacheth us; intimating that the Purity of it being first lost, or renounc'd, nothing but Confusion and Disorder can be expected to follow; from whence it has often come to pass, that Men of Corrupt Minds, perverse Sons of Belial have set up Religion to countenance their Rebellion; and Christi­anity hath been frequently drawn in to bear a part in the most Bloody Tragedies that ever were Acted upon the Stage of the World. Thus it hath been from the beginning, and will continue thus to be notwithstand­ing our Blessed Lord and his Holy Apostles took the greatest care imaginable, both by Example and Do­ctrine to prevent these Mischiefs. St. Paul, among the rest, intending in these words now read either first (as some imagine) to overthrow that Rebellious Prin­ciple of the Gnosticks, just now mentioned, Despising Dominion, and speaking evil of Dignities, and to pre­vent its further growth among the new Converts at Rome. Or, Secondly, as Grotius conjectures to ob­viate that plausible Argument, which the Jewish Chri­stians might possibly be ready to draw from that pas­sage of Moses (viz.) Thou shalt in any wise set him Deut. 17. 15. King over thee, whom the Lord thy God shall chuse, one from among thy Brethren shalt thou set King over thee, thou mayest not set a stranger over thee which is not thy Brother; from whence they might gather, that the Emperour being not their Brother, not of the Seed of Jacob, but a Stranger, they were not obliged to Obey [Page 6] him. Or, Thirdly, as some think, to let the Roman Christians rightly understand his Doctrine and their own Duty, namely, that what he had before in this Epistle delivered concerning Christian Liberty, was not to be stretch'd so far, as to excuse their Subjection to the Temporal Magistrate. Upon some one or more of these Accounts the Apostle reads them their Lesson, here in the Text; of which I shall give you the Ex­plication, and thence fully set forth the Nature of Sub­jection, which is all I aim at, at this time.

6. The Grammatical form of the words is Impera­tive, [...], and by Consequence the words are Prae­ceptive, importing a Duty properly so called, unto which we are indispensably Oblig'd, and which the Apostle more peremptorily presses in the 5 th. Verse following, Wherefore ye must needs be subject, there is a Necessity laid upon you all. The Romish Divines tell us that this is only Prudential Advice, suited to the present Condition of the Christians, who were then few and poor, and unable to make resistance; therefore was it unseasonable for them to exasperate the Emperour, but their Interest rather and Wisdom to sit down patiently under Persecution, waiting a more favourable time of asserting their Civil Rights, and Liberty of Conscience, and of pulling down that Cruel and Arbitrary Government of Nero.

This Gap was first opened by the Papists, through which, many, even Protestants in Profession, have entred into the Field of Rebellion, choosing rather to become Companions with those unruly Beasts in the Transgression, than to be confin'd within the compass of Sobriety, and the Peaceable Principles of the true Christian Philosophy.

[Page 7] But what (I pray ye) is or can be the meaning of those words, Ye must needs be subject? Not only for Wrath, or fear of Punishment, that is indeed a Pru­dential Motive fit for every reasonable Man to con­sider for his Worldly Interest; but also for Conscience Ver. 5. sake, that's without Question a Divine Evangelical one, fit for every Christian to weigh in order to his Spiritual Interest: Conscience (I say) towards God, not for his own sake only, but, as St. Peter implies, for the Lords sake, in Honour and Obedience to the Law of God.

Let every Soul. No Mortal Man is exempted; nei­ther Bishop, nor Priest, nor Subordinate Magistrate, nor five hundred Princes of the Congregation, Men of Renown Assembled; no, nor all the People of the Land Combin'd and Associated together, can hold themselves excused.

Every Soul. This Expression is borrowed from the Jewish Writers, with whom it is very familiar to call Man Soul, as indeed 'tis not an unusual Idiom in our own Language, that being a principal part Synechdo­chically put for the Man himself: So that when St. Paul says, Let every Soul, 'tis equivalent as if he should have said, Let every Man, or rather, if we would render it to the full, Let every living Man. For so much the word [...] denotes, which most commonly in Scripture Language signifies the Life, the Animal Life, that Life which is common to him with the brute Beasts; or else the Life relating to our Natural and Temporal Concerns. Whence St. Paul opposes [...], 1 Cor. 2. 14, 15. the Natural Man, to [...], to the Spiritual Man. From whence I draw this Conclusion, that every true and sincere Disciple of Christ, although he may and ought to preserve his Reasonable Soul, his Conscience [Page 8] pure and unspotted from Actual Complyance with the sinful Commands of his Superiours (Conscience and the Rational Soul, and Spiritual things are not in their Nature capable of being subjected to the external Power of a Prince,) yet the [...], the Animal Life, all Temporal Civil Affairs being by God committed to the Supream Magistrate, we ought in all those respects to be Subject to the Will and Governance of the Prince.

By the Higher Powers ( [...]) the Abstract, is ne­vertheless meant the Concrete, the Person of the Su­pream Magistrate; he to whom the Government of the Common-wealth is entrusted, and the Execution of the Law belongs. So St. Paul expounds himself, back­ing this Precept with several Reasons, ver. 3. for Ru­lers, [...], ver. 4. For he is the Minister of God ( [...]) he beareth not the Sword in vain: He is [...] a Revenger. All which passages clear the Apo­stles meaning, that he treats not of the Supream Au­thority separate from the Person of the Prince; but the Prince himself in Possession of the Supream Power. This I the rather take notice of, because there are a sort of Critical, Pedantical Politicians, that distin­guish betwixt the Government and the Governour; between the Laws of the Common-wealth and the Kings Person. Government they are for, and willing to be Subject to it; the Law they cry up, and none more Zealous than they for the execution of Justice: But as for the Person of the Prince, how rudely do they treat him? How little do they Honour him? Ma­king him a King of Clouts rather than what indeed he is, the Minister, the Ordinance of God. What else means so many Hedge-creepers among us, pulling down the Fences of Obedience to the Magistrate, and the fat Bulls of Basan enclosing him in on every side? What [Page 9] else means that Malicious Raillery, and those abusive Pasquils sent forth for the wounding his Honour? And some have had the Confidence to threaten a Writ of Quo Warranto against his Authority.

By Power (if you will admit St. Paul to expound his own meaning) is to be understood not the Maje­sty of the Government, but the Majesty of the King, whose Person is Divine (being Ordained by God) whose Honour is Sacred and inviolate. And for a further Confirmation of this Exposition, you may please to remember, that [...]. Power is in this sense us'd by our Lord himself— When they bring you unto Synagogues, and unto Magistrates, and unto Powers, [...], Luke 12. 11.says St. Luke; which St. Matthew expresses more simply, Mat. 10. 18. [...] Kings and Governours, or Emperours.

The Learned well know that Magistratus and Po­testas, and Majestas are frequently put for the Prince Vid. Seld. Tit. Hon.himself in all sort of Writers; and nothing is more common than to call Persons by the Abstract, deno­ting some Property in special manner belonging to them. Thus we style a Notorious Malefactor, Villany it self, Villany in the Abstract, which some express in a more Comical way, a Rogue in grain, (i. e.) one who like Cloath dyed with Scarlet, has imbib'd the Principles of Naughtiness as a durable and inseparable Property. In like manner, to an Inferiour Magistrate we Address Your Worship; to a Peer of the Realm, Your Honour; to a General of an Army, Your Excellency; to one of the Blood Royal, Your Highness; to a Prince, Your Grace, Your Majesty. Thus Jacob, Gen. 45. 3.speaking to Reuben (to whom by Natural Right of Descent belong'd the Supream Power) Thou art my First-born, my Might, and the Beginning of my Strength, the Excellency of Dignity, and the Excellency of Power. And to make an end of this Observation, God himself [Page 10] is often called Wisdom, and Holiness, Righteousness, and Truth it self.

Now, as it would be thought an high Act of pre­sumption and Atheism for any Man to distinguish be­twixt the Person of God▪ and his Essential Attributes, (that is) to pretend to be subject to the Wisdom, Ho­liness, Righteousness, and Truth of Divine Grace and Providence; and in the mean time to Blaspheme the Person of God: Just such another piece of Hypocri­sie and empty Loyalty are they guilty of, who profess to Obey the Law, and to submit to the Government; but Murder, or Persecute, or Vilifie the Prince, in whom the Government rests as an Inherent Property, and the execution of the Law appertains, as his unque­stionable Right and Prerogative; by whose Wisdom and Authority Justice is distributed to the People of the Land, as Light and Heat is by the Sun to the whole World. But, as the Spaniards living under the scorch­ing heat of that Planet, are said to curse it at the ap­proach of Summer; so is it many times with an un­thankful and wanton People, enjoying too much Ease, Peace, and Plenty, through the abundant Grace and Goodness of a King, 'tis familiar with them to fly in his Face, and lift up the heel against him, that has made them thus Happy.

But to proceed▪ Let every Soul be subject, [...] 'tis Passive: Whence we learn, that it is not in our own Liberty to subject our selves when, or as long as we please, nor on what Terms and Conditions we think fit to stand, nor on whom we pretend to devolve the Government and Succession. It's not in our Power to pull down one, and set up another: That's the Prero­gative of God, by whom Kings Reign. It's not for us Violently and Clamourously to alter the Frame of Go­vernment already Established; but a modest and sin­cere [Page 11] Christian is to take it as he finds it. Outward Force, yea, Obstinate Petitions, and Importunate Ad­dresses, when the State is in a Commotion, and the Prince under some disadvantages, becomes not one, who is of a tender Conscience; but smells rankly of Disobedience and Rebellion. If it had been the mind of God, and the sense of the Apostle, to permit these things to our Deliberation, the words rather should thus have run, [...]. Let every Soul sub­ject himself. Government only in general would have been Ordained, but the Specification of it, and the Choice of the Governours left to the Peoples Suffrage and Election. But he is to be subjected because it is his Duty so to be Antecedent to his own Will and Choice: Because it is the appointment of one, who is Higher than either King or Subject; because it is the Ordinance of God: Of which more by and by.

If it be ask'd, What is the extent of our Subjection, and unto what Acts of Obedience are we hereby Ob­lig'd? I Answer, First, Positively, to acknowledge Ver. 2. Ver. 7.him the Ordinance of God; to render Tribute, and Cu­stom, and Fear, and Honour unto him, as it follows in the Apostles Discourse after my Text; to preserve his Person from outward Violence and secret Conspi­racies, Ver. 8. Ver. 2.to own his Rights and Prerogatives; yea, to Love and Reverence him. Or else thus, Secondly, Ne­gatively, not to resist him, not to Wound his Honour with Reproaches and Back-bitings, not to give him any just Offence, not to do or say any thing which may render him Odious to his People, or Contemptible to his Neighbours; not to discover his Infirmities, nor to aggravate his Faults, nor to blaze abroad his Mi­stakes. All which being a weakening of his Govern­ment, a lessening of his Interest and Authority over the Hearts of his People, is no less than Disloyalty by [Page 12] Consequence, and in its tendency, a Robbing him of his Crown and Dignity.

Which of you would endure your Children, or your Servants to slander or bespatter you with Lyes, or to Publish the Secrets of your Families, or to expose you for any weakness or ill Conduct in your Domestick Affairs? What the Pater familias is in the Oeconomy of the House, the same is Pater Patriae in the Polity of the State. To uncover the Nakedness of the Fa­ther of thy Countrey is inconsistent with all those fore­said Duties of Fearing and Honouring him, no less a violation of this Duty, than that of Canaan's was. Eccles. 10. 12.Therefore says the Preacher, Curse not the King, no, not in thy Thoughts, much less not by open Calumny, Acts 3. 5.or more sly detraction, for 'tis written, Thou shalt not speak evil of the Ruler of thy People.

I shall crave leave to go yet a little further on this Argument. 'Tis not enough to pay the Tribute, when required by a formal Law; but you are bound (in Conscience at least) to assist his and the Publick Ne­cessities at other times; otherwise I understand not how you can be said to Reverence and Honour the King: God and the King both no doubt love and require a chearful Giver. Those who in words profess to love the Prince, but will neither supply his wants, nor suf­fer others so to do, are like those Charitable Christians Chap. 2. Ver. 15, 16▪St. James mentions, who, when a Brother or Sister was Naked and destitute of daily Food, said unto him, Be thou warmed and filled, notwithstanding gave them not those things which were needful. Those who would have themselves believed His Majesties Loyal Subjects, and Declare they will stand by him with their Lives and Fortunes, Prosecuting him indeed with good wishes, but in the mean time starving him out of his Throne: [Page 13] That put the question which Nabal did unto Davids Messengers— Shall I take my Bread, and my Water, and my Flesh that I have killed, and give it to I know 1 Sam. 25. 10. 11. not whom, nor by what Authority, nor for what end demanded? who is David? and who is the Son of Jesse? are not these sort of men in Scripture-language cal­led Wicked, Churlish, evil doers, Fools, Railers, Sons of v. 3, 14, 17▪ 21, 25.Belial, such as requite evil for good, (that is) give nothing for their Peace and Protection, which they enjoy through the Providence of the Prince: Should five hun­dred at once forbid you to supply the Supream Power, yet I must let you know, that the will of God cannot be dispensed with by the Law of Men; that (as our Lord reply'd to the Pharisees) the Kings Image and Super­scription, being on their Gold and Silver, you are to render unto Caesar the things that are Caesar's; and in a word, that what Christian Charity, and common Humanity, binds you to, in the relief of your Neigh­bour, Evangelical Loyalty, and the Fundamental rea­son of Government obliges you to, in the supply of your Prince.

Hitherto we have explained the nature of the Duty, we proceed unto the Reason of it, in the latter part of the Text.— for there is no power but of God, &c. I shall easily give it for Granted, that a Prince may be an Usurper, and a Lawful King may turn Tyrant, that neither of them can be accquitted hereof at the Tribunal of God, where they must account for both: But still upon Earth among us men, even the Usurper is of God, and the Oppressour is the Ordinance of God: for there is no Power whatever, though Usurpt, though Tyrannical, but is by divine Ordination. St. Paul makes no exception unto this general rule. He might possibly at that time of day, have alledg'd both [Page 14] Usurpation and Oppression, against the present Powers. There was possibly sufficient reason (if any could be) to declaim and make publick Harangues against Grie­vances, and the Emperors personal crimes and expen­sive Debaucheries; which were beyond measure noto­rious; such as must needs drain the Exchequer, and whereon the Revenue of the Common-wealth was misimploy'd. There was not wanting plausible pleas against Monarchy it self in the Roman State, (which was a Common-wealth from the beginning even in Ro­mulus Pl [...]t. red.time, in the opinion of a late Author) at least in behalf of the Peoples right in choosing their own Supream Magistrate, as no doubt it was, and had so continued long by the Original frame of the Roman Government. But this is certain Aristocracy or De­mocracy, or a mixture of both, had for many Ages been own'd and received by all ranks and degrees of men, as the true and undoubted Government, until very lately by the Usurpation of the Caesar's, a single person having mounted the Steed, and setled himself in the Saddle, rid and spur-gall'd the Beast, the com­mon People almost to death. Thus much might have then been with truth argued, against the Emperors Government, but still for all this the Powers then in being were of God, had a lawful, yea divine Autho­rity over the People, in the Judgment of St. Paul.

[...] the word here rendred Powers, properly signifies lawful Authority; such as have a just right of exercising dominon over the People. I shall allow, if you please, as before I intimated, that the Empe­rour was not strictly and in every respect, [...] a law­ful Governour, not in foro Conscientiae, not in foro Coeli; for he had no true Natural or Civil Right to the Throne, antecedent to his Usurpation, nor has or can any [Page 15] Prince have and exercise a Despotical Power over the Subject (as did Nero) but he sins against the Law of Nature or of God. I shall therefore allow, that he was only in those regards [...], (i. e▪) one that had got the long Sword in his hand, and by force subject­ed the Romans unto his will and power, against the known Law, against the Will, and against the Intrest of the Roman People. Yet this notwithstanding I must acquaint you, that by the doctrine of the Scriptures, in respect of the People, after God has once declared his allowance of him by the success, [...] a Violent and originally Unjust Power may become [...] a Legal and Righteous Authority: unto whom the People of the Land, at least the People of God, must of necessity be Subject, and are bound in Conscience to yield Obe­dience; they having no inherent right in them nor permission from God to question his Title, or to throw off the Yoke of Subjection, though he attain'd the Empire by force, though he maintains it by the Sword, though he administers it with Violence, Injustice and Avarice, yet he is [...], his Authority is lookt upon as derived from God, to have receiv'd the divine stamp and approbation, so far at least as to require the Christi­ans humble and peaceable submission thereunto; which being a matter of no small difficulty rightly to state, I may possibly take occasion hereafter, more distinctly and fully to discuss.

c. 13. v. 3. 4. 'Tis true, St. Paul seems as if he discours'd of some incomparable Prince, whilst he describes him as exe­cuting Judgment and Justice, for the benefit of the Sub­ject, without wrong or oppression of the Innocent, for, says he— Rulers are not a terror to good Works, but to the Evil: do that which is good and thou shalt have praise of the same. He is the Minister of God to thee for good, [Page 16] he is a revenger to execute wrath upon him that doth evil. Plato himself were he now alive again (as they say he is lately risen, and has attempted the reforma­tion of our present disorders) could not give us a more noble and apt Character of a Prince.

However, neither will this pretence serve the turn of our Common-wealths-men, for if you will but con­sider those forementioned passages in Hypothesi as well as Thesi: if you will remember who was then the higher Power at Rome when St. Paul wrote this E­pistle, namely Nero, one of the most cruel impious and debaucht Princes, that ever sway'd Scepter, you will not then think that the Apostle here speaks strictly of some great and Heroick Prince then in being, (for Nero was not such an one) nor that the Precept is laid down as only obligatory, when the Prince hap­pens to be a terror unto evil doers, and a praise unto them that do well. We must then seek for Another sense of those words, which I conceive is this.

The Apostle in this description, lays down one e­special reason and ground of Subjection, fetch't from the benefit generally redounding to the People there­by, and this with peculiar relation even to Nero him­self, the Emperor of Rome; though one of the worst upon record in History. He intimates that no Prince, no not Nero himself, ('tis morally impossible, general­ly speaking) can be so sou'r and rigid towards the People, but that a modest and humble minded Sub­ject may hope for more advantages under his Go­vernment than by tumult and Rebellion; that as all Rulers in general, and in Thesi, so was Nero in par­ticular, and in Hypothesi, to be accounted a terror to wicked doers, and a Minister of God for the good of the People: that therefore, if the Christian Romans would [Page 17] but truly consult their own Interest, and would not be afraid of his Power, nor fall under the lash of his seve­rity, they should live quietly and innocently, not ex­asperating him by any indecent words or tumultuous behaviour; and that then they might more probably expect Praise and Protection from him, and be more likely to obtain those temporal blessings, than by re­proaching his Person, forming Conspiracies, and blow­ing up the Trumpet of Sedition against him.

This I take to be the Sum of the Apostles Doctrine and Argument, as I have explicated it, and am pretty confident agreeably to the mind of God, to the A­postles drift in this place, and to the unanimous Opini­on and Practice of the Primitive Saints. Which that you may after this large explanation, remember and distinctly comprehend, I shall reduce it into this short Proposition, (viz.) That it is the duty of every man, e­very Christian, to love, honour, to reverence and obey, and with their substance to support the Person of the Supream Magistrate, and this in Conscience towards God, as well as in order to his own temporal Interest.

Now though this be plain and obvious, yet in these unhappy days; men are and will be otherwise minded, their heads begin to turn round again, so ten­der of their own personal Rights and Properties, that like the Sensitive Plant, do but touch them, they Shrink, as if Wounded to death: or, as untoward Children, when disciplin'd for their faults, cry out Murder, and make hideous Complaints of Tyranny, Arbritrary Government, and Oppression. The rights of the People are of late so swell'd, their Properties so en­larg'd, their Liberties so extended, that the Body Poli­tick may not unfitly be resembled to those Crooked men, whom in abuse we call Lords, whose Heads are almost Shrunk down into their Breasts, and become in a [Page 18] manner invisible, at least-wise, whose shape by that unnatural approach appears Monstrous and Deformed. If the Head of the Common-wealth rises not at a due distance above the Body of the People, there is nei­ther Form nor Comliness in that Government; yea, and for the most part (as in the said similitude) the Constitution thereof proves Crazy, and the Life short.

The Supream Magistrate is now endeavour'd to be coopt up, and as it were Besieged with those fore-said Pretences: So that he cannot turn himself round in his own Orb, without the Offence of some peevish Liber­tine; nor can make one step forward in the exercise of Government, but is accused to Trespass upon the Pro­perty of some waspish Common-wealths-man, and to trample upon the heel of some Free-born Subject. So that indeed the Princes Person, his Honour, his Liber­ty and Property (i. e.) his Royalties and Prerogatives are in danger to be wrested from him by Force and Craft, and the unwearied Clamours of unreasonable and unsatiable Men.

I should now, had I time, and were it fit for me to intrench upon the Patience of this Honourable Audi­ence, or to Trespass upon the Publick Business of the Countrey, examine the Grounds, and the pretended Reasons of all this: For otherwise I must declare, that I am nothing terrified from this Task by the scornful Abuses of those late Demagogues, who in their Pam­phlets are pleased to call us Ministers Sycophants, and Publickly to Indict us of Flattery, because we Preach Obedience to the King, and as much as in us lies in our Places, and according to our Abilities, withstand the alteration of Government. For my self, I must de­clare, and I am sure no Man knows my Heart better than my self, nor therefore can in Charity contradict me: [Page 19] I say then, I wish (were not the thing impossible, and therefore in vain to wish, otherwise I could wish) that we were once again in Paradise, in the state of Innocence and Perfection, that there were no need of Government or Governours; at least, that we were all so good and virtuous, as to deserve that Liberty some Men gape after; that those especially had their Freedom, who could so use it, as not to abuse it for a Cloak of Maliciousness. But since this is not to be expected from the far greatest part of Mankind, since the World is, and ever will be full of Offences, pestered with the Excesses and Disorders of unruly Men: Since therefore it is the Interest of all good Men that Go­vernment should be maintained, and Governours Ho­noured and Obeyed; since the Law was made for a Curb to the Sinner, and not for a Punishment to the Righteous; since the Wisdom and Goodness of God has therefore Ordained all of us unto Subjection to Magistrates, and made it our indispensable Duty, yea, our Interest and Security so to be: And in particular, since we Preachers of the Gospel are Commanded to put you in mind that ye be subject to Principalities and Titus 3. 1. Powers, and that ye Obey Magistrates. I make no more Account of these spightful Insinuations, than I would of the Drunkards Songs, or the Atheists Wit­ticisms, that are so plentifully in these days exercis'd upon us, for no other Reason that I know of, but be­cause we tell them the Truth. We are indeed by the more cunning part of the Enemies of the Government, in a cooler manner blamed for making Princes Gods, as if they immediately came down from Heaven, which looks like a piece of high Presumption and Sa­criledge. And 'tis true, we do so in some sort, God himself having vouchsafed that Title of Honour to [Page 20] them, and our Lord confirmed it. Besides, St. Paul, in my Text, fetches them from Heaven, telling us, they are of God, or from God; that they are Ordain'd of God: I cannot pass by observing on the other hand, how that God▪ condescends also to assume the Titles of Earthly Governours; the word King, and Prince, Lord, and others of the like sort, being frequently attributed to him in Holy Scripture. And whereas God by way Dan. 2. 47. Ver. 17.of Excellence is styled King of Kings; nevertheless the Prophet Daniel scrupled not to give the same Appella­tion unto Nebuchadnezzar also. So frivolous in my Mr. Seld. Tit. Hon.judgment is that Exception of a Learned Man against Soveraign Princes assuming Divine Titles. They are therefore called Gods, because they resemble God in Supream Power. And as Man is said to have been Episcop.Created in the Image and likeness of God, because of his Dominion over the Creature, according to the Opi­nion of some Learned Men; so may the Prince be said to bear the Image and likeness of God in a special manner, upon the Account of his Soveraignty over the People.

In fine, there being you see so near an Affinity be­tween God and the King, 'tis not to be wondred, that we make so great a difference between the Prince and the Subject: And in our Discourses lay upon you the same burden of Reverence, Obedience, and Non-resistance, as St. Paul before us has done, teaching no other Doctrine than what the Holy Ghost has war­ranted and Commanded us to Teach, That ye be sub­ject to the Higher Powers, which are of God, that they who resist, resist the Ordinance of God: And oh! that ye would lay to Heart that terrible Punishment, which awaits all Rebellious and Disobedient Subjects, They Ver. 2. that resist, shall receive to themselves Damnation.

[Page 21] But after all is said, the Grand Debate will be, How shall we be satisfied, who is this Higher Power among us, and in whom that Soveraignty rests, to whom Subjection is due? Especially in this mixt Monarchy, where not only the greatest share of the Property, but a considerable part of the Legislative Power is in the People? For Answer, I say, that this notwithstand­ing, the King is the Higher Power, that Ordinance of God, in the Defence of whose Person and Authority this Discourse is intended. Or do I say it only? Does not the Municipal Law of the Land say as much? And this is I am certain (I speak it with somewhat more than ordinary Confidence) an Universal, an Infalli­ble way of knowing the Supream Power in order to our Non-resistance, according to the Doctrine of the Go­spel, (viz.) He that beareth not the Sword in vain, in whom alone the Military Power remains. He whose Person is inviolate, whose Life is Sacred, whose Power cannot be taken from him Legally without his consent; who is Accountable to none but God for any Misgovern­ment, (and these are His Majesties Prerogatives, even by the Political Contract, the express Statute-Law of the Realm) he is that Higher Power St. Paul speaks, and I have been Discoursing of, if there be any such thing as an Higher Power among us. Nay, I shall fur­ther add (though I will not positively affirm it, sub­mitting my self herein to better Judgments) That Prince who is not responsible to the People, is in effect the sole Soveraign Power, if he pleases to Usurp and Exercise it: Nor can the Subject Conscientiously resist him. For I cannot apprehend that any resistance can be Lawful in point of Conscience, that is forbidden by the Positive Law of the Land, which is our Case in this Nation. Though the Prince may be culpable in [Page 22] the sight of God for so doing, yet the Subjects can­not be Justified in Rebelling, when the Law has taken from them that Liberty and Power. Common Reason and Equity, the Law of Nature, and the Original of Government, and extream Necessity, will by no means Justifie such violent Attempts upon the Supream Ma­gistrate. It is one main ground of Political Govern­ment, to deprive the Subject from being his own Judge and Assertor of his own Priviledges. Without this Fundamental Principle, there will be only the Name and Shadow of Government, when as really 'tis but meer Anarchy. If the Subject might be per­mitted to fly in the Face of Authority, and to Assault him when ever he apprehends himself injur'd, we should but be Populus virorum, an Independent Herd of Licentious and ungovernable Men; not Corpus Po­liticum, not a Compact Body of Citizens, United to­gether in Peace, Order, and Subordination. But it is commonly Argued, Is not the Prince Oblig'd to Go­vern by Law, and if he transcends that Power, by In­vading the Peoples Liberty and Property, are we bound to Obey him? I Answer, He is Oblig'd, but the Ob­ligation is between God and his own Conscience. God only is the Revenger of the Breach of the Coronation-Oath, though the Peoples Liberty and Property, and the Laws are the subject-matter of it. Secondly, I grant, that in the Case put, we are not bound to Obey him, but we are bound patiently to suffer, not actively to resist. Thirdly, I am of Opinion, (but speak it still with Submission) that the King being by all sober, understanding Men, acknowledged the King of Right, before he gives the People that Assurance of his Go­verning by Law; that that Oath is therefore a volun­tary Act of Grace, unto which he is not Oblig'd by the [Page 23] Fundamental Constitution: For if so, he could not Exercise the Supream Governing Power before the Oath was taken; which yet neither he nor his Predecessors were ever thought uncapable to do.

Supposing then that the Prince would not give to the People this Assurance, I ask whether he is then Oblig'd to Govern strictly by the present Law? 'Tis my Judgment, he is not Obliged. He ought indeed, the Law of God and Nature, and the first Reason of Government requires him to Rule with regard to the good of the Governed; yet that he is strictly ty'd un­to the particular Methods of Government, declared by the present Law of the Land, I can by no means allow. For the good of the Governed being the first Fundamental Principle directing him what Measures to take in the Exercise of Government, and as yet there being no other Obligation upon him, it is left to his Conscience, Judgment, and Discretion, before that Oath, what Course to take in answering that great End of Government: And if any of the pre­sent un-repealed Laws shall be thought by him repug­nant to the good of the Subject, or but Comparatively not so effectual thereunto, may he not, nay, is he not in Conscience bound to lay down to himself some other Rules, in Order to that End? Fourthly, I might Answer, that seeing all Men look upon them­selves as freed from the punctual Observation of Po­sitive Laws in the Case of extream Necessity (this equitable Liberty God himself allows, I will have Mercy, and not Sacrifice;) and our Municipal Law indemnifies the Subject, in many such Cases:) And seeing the Security the King gives to his Subjects is a Voluntary Act, but the Peoples to the King may be Exacted from them by Force, and by Law; I think [Page 24] there is much more Reason, that the King in Extre­mity may depart from the Letter of the Law, than that the People should: And if the People may Ap­peal to Reason and Equity, to the Law of Nature, and the first Reason of Government in the Defence of their Priviledges, may not the Prince much more do the same in the Defence of his Prerogatives, and in the Exercise of his Dominion? And shall he be indis­pensably Oblig'd by the Letter of the Law, in Go­verning, not allow'd to plead Nature and Equity, the Reason and Ends of Government, and extream Ne­cessity? And yet the People be at their own Liberty in Arbitrarily Obeying as they shall Judge it Reaso­nable and Agreeable to the Ends of Government? Some of these foresaid Considerations (which I must repeat, are offered as Problems only, and with Submis­sion) or something like them might, I imagine, be in the Mind of that Eminent Lawyer, Serjeant Hale, one of the House of Commons in the 43 d. Year of Queen Elizabeth, who spake there to this Effect. I wonder (says he) that the House stands either at the greatness or time of paying the Subsidies demanded, since all we have are in Her Majesties Power; she may Law­fully at her Pleasure take it from us, she has as much Right to all our Land, as to any Revenue of the Crown: All which (saith he) I am able and ready to prove. Thus far he: But I shall not presume to go so high, nor will it be expected from me to proceed farther upon this tickle Subject: Only I do not find that he was called to the Bar, nor Reprimanded as a Pander to Tyranny, as opening a Passage to Arbitrary Go­vernment, for his plain dealing, and freedom of Speech. But this I shall say, that this one Speech of that Gentleman exceeds all that has of late been said [Page 25] or done (as far as I can learn) for the setting up an Absolute and Despotical Soveraignty: And yet it passed then without noise, or giving any Offence, or creating Jealousies and Fears in the Hearts of the Peo­ple against the Government.

Yet one word more: When I re-collect, how Judge Cook (the Oracle of the Law, as some of his Ad­mirers are pleased to call him, no Prerogative Lawyer, as all agree) assures us, that the first Kings of this Realm had the whole Land in Demesn, and therefore (upon the Principle now on foot, That Dominion is Founded on Property) undoubtedly Absolute Sove­raigns: I cannot but in two words expostulate with the Underminers of our present Establishment, Where is your Ingenuity? O ungrateful People of the Land! to treat your Princes so rudely, so unworthily; to Vi­lifie their Persons, to Invade their Prerogatives, and through unwearied Clamours and Importunate Com­plaints, to extort from their Crown the few remain­ing Flowers of the Regality: Like Vipers, to bite them, who have Nourished you in their Bosom, and, as it were, almost pulled out their own Eyes for your sakes. You, who have waxen fat through their Gifts and Concessions, who are grown thick by their In­dulgence and Liberality; to forsake them that have made you, and to lift up your Heels against them that have thus dearly treated you? Oh, Monstrous Ingra­titude! Them, that have given you all the Liberty and Property you can Legally pretend to, under whom you have enjoyed both, as fully as Heart can wish, beyond Example of past Ages, or the present Times in any other Common-wealth; from whom you have received all possible Assurance of continuing so for the [Page 26] future; you to Defame, to Libel, to Conspire against, to Resist, to deny Chearful and Conscientious Sub­jection, and Liberal Contributions, or rather neces­sary Retributions, to these Bountiful and Gracious Princes? Oh Height of Impiety! Oh Barbarous In­humanity! For shame wipe off this Reproach from the Christian Name, and from the English Nation, whereof you are Members.

IT is the Universal Custom of Mankind to carry on their Publick Triumphs with Feasting, and among other External Rites of Mirth, to chear their Hearts with a more than Ordinary freedom in the use of the Creature. To do so, is the Voice of Reason, the Lesson of Experience, a Maxim writ­ten in the Word of God it self, and Warranted by the practice of the most Holy Men we there read of. There is a certain sourness contracted in our Natures by business; and Absence is apt to interrupt our Cor­respondence, to estrange us from one another: But our Solemn Meetings re-collect us again, and Good Chear sweetens the Soul, softens the Temper, after all our Care and Travel: Hereby the Spirits being Re­viv'd, and the Heart putting on her Festival Robes (I mean Joy and Gayety) Mutual Love and Friendship [Page 28] among private Neighbours is easily renew'd, the com­mon Interest of Societies inlarg'd, and by doing and receiving Offices of kindness, the House is Swept and Cleansed from all those impurities of wrath, bitterness, dissentions and animosities; in whose room succeed those sweet and beautiful graces of Joy and Peace and entire Affection one towards another▪ Wine (saith the Ps. 104. 15.Psal.) maketh glad the Heart of Man, and Bread strengtheneth Mans Heart. It is good and comly (saith Eccles. 2. 24. 3. 12, 22. 5. 18. 8. 15. 9. 9.the Preacher) there is nothing better, than that a Man should eat and drink, and make his Soul enjoy good in his Labour; To whom God hath given Biches and Wealth, to him has he given Power to eat thereof, to take his Portion and to rejoyce in his Labour. This is the gift of God. Then I commended Mirth (saith he) because a Man has no better thing under the Sun, than to eat, and to drink, and be Merry. Our Lord himself took a free­dom herein, which drew upon him that spiteful Cha­racter Math. 11. 19.that he was A Glutton and a Wine-bibber, a friend of Publicans and Sinners. It is in my Judgment an unlucky observation, of one, but has much of truth in it, that they who are backward to bear a part in the Innocent diversions of Feasting and Rejoycing, are for the most part Ill-natur'd Men, Peevish and full of Malice, Men that watch advantages to ensnare their Neighbours, and to effect some ill design upon them.

But whatever usefullness may be observ'd in Publick Entertainments, yet however this is a more Noble Rom. 14. 17.truth— the Kingdom of God is not Meat nor Drink, but Righteousness and Peace; So may I say that the Publick Societies of Men, and Bodies Corporate, are not Meat nor Drink, but Righteousness and Peace; that Feastings are but the accidental, the circumstan­tial parts of Unity, the outward expressions of it, not [Page 29] the effectual means of Producing or Continuing it. If there be not an inward foundation of Peace laid in the Soul, our good fellowship will end in Variance, and Strife, and Riot; and our Love dissolve as soon as our Feasting is over; and all the substantial good design'd by these Festival endearments, will be utterly disap­pointed.

In these unhappy days of ours, there is one Mis­chievous disorder crept in among us, whilst most of us are ready enough to joyn in the outward Pageantry's of Peace and good will, in the Ceremonious Practice of love and good fellowship; I mean Eating and Drinking, and plentifully entertaining one another; yet our Hearts are divided, neither are we agreed in, that one necessary and fundamental Principle of Peace, viz. Obedience, and Subjection to the Civil Ma­gistrate; without which it is utterly impossible to maintain a good and lasting correspondence among our selves, in the mutual assistance and defence of one another. Whilst therefore you are Managing the exter­nal Pomp of your Love-Feasts, 'tis the Preachers business and duty too (I conceive) to lay the lasting Founda­tion thereof, upon your Hearts; whilst you are Drink­ing the Kings Health, and Continuance of the Pub­lick Happiness under Him; it will not be thought impertinent that we, who are invited to carry on the Religious part of these Solemnities, should en­deavour to commend unto your Conscience that Evan­gelical Doctrine of being Subject to Principalities, &c. without which all the shews of Friendship among your selves, of Loyalty to your Prince, and of Faith­fullness to the established Government, is but meer Pretence, and the vilest Hypocrisie, and will at last dis­cover it self in Treason to the Prince, in Faction to [Page 30] the State, and in Treachery one towards another. This then shall be my design and task at this time, to lay the Groundwork of Peace and Union among you, (viz.) Submission to the Governours and Government.

But alass amidst the many discouragements, we the Ministers of the Gospel labour under at this day, this is not the least, that we are become hateful, and exposed to the fury and madness of a Stubborn Peo­ple, and that chiefly, because we will not run into the same excess of Riot as they do; but continue Zealous in maintaining the Peace, of the Present Government, as by Law establish'd, against all opposition; that we still resolutly engage in that part of the Quarrel, where our presence and assistance is most useful, where the Ene­mies of the Publick Peace are most numerous and Powerful. To omit what might Justly be pleaded in our defence, as considered in our Politick Capacities, (scil.) that we are members of the same Publick So­ciety, and our Interests embarkt in the Ship of the Common-wealth, as well as others; that by our Promises and Oaths we are oblig'd (what in us lies) with our Lives and Fortunes, and then surely also with our Tongues and Pens to support the Govern­ment; that our temporal happiness and well being in this World, depending on the Peace of the Common-wealth, we should be wanting to our selves, and sin a­gainst the Eternal Law of Nature, if we did not endea­vour our own preservation as far as the Laws of God and Man will allow us. Upon which account certainly we might hope to pass, if not for Men of Conscience, yet of some tolerable degree of Sense and Reason, whilst we study to keep our own Ground, to maintain our Rights and Properties, at least we might Pass for such with those Men, who we plainly see resolve to Pro­tect [Page 31] themselves, contrary to the Law of the Land, without any regard to Honour and Conscience and the Religion they profess; in spite of that tye of grati­tude for the Protection they have hitherto enjoy'd, and of the repeated Assurances, by Oaths and Pro­testations given to the Government, for their Peace­able demeanour.

But setting aside all these considerations, when I recollect, how that in the Person of St. Paul, there is a necessity laid upon us Ministers, and a Woe pro­nounc'd against us all, if we Preach not the Gospel; and when I remember among other Evangelical Pre­cepts of Holiness, this of Subjection to the Civil Ma­gistrate is not the least, unto which we are frequently and most earnestly exhorted in the Holy Scriptures; but chiefly when I observe that St. Paul, who himself pres­sed this duty upon the Christians at Rome, was also care­ful to instruct the whole Church of God therein, and among many other Topicks and Heads commended Rom. 13. 1.unto Titus Bishop of Crete to Preach upon, charges him in my Text to put them in mind to be Subject, &c. and when, lastly I cannot but think and do Confident­ly affirm that in the person of Titus, all the Succeed­ing Preachers of the Gospel, are oblig'd by Vertue of that Apostolical Canon in the dischargè of their Mi­nisterial Office to Urge upon all Christian Subjects Obedience to Authority, for these reasons I do verily judge no Man of sense can, no one of Conscience will blame our Forwardness and Zeal in this kind.

For which reason, I shall here resume the argument of Subjection to the Civil Magistrate, which I lately enter'd upon, on another Publick Occasion. In the handling whereof I shall not need to repeat what was then said, in the Parallel Explacation of that place in the Romans, since [Page 32] many of you were present at that discourse: Neither will I give you or my self any other trouble, in the in­terpretation of these Words, more than to make these two Remarks. First, That St. Paul makes use here of three several Phrases in declaring the Nature of Christian Subjection, (scil.) To be Subjected to Principalities, to be Subjected to Powers, and to Obey Magistrates. Whence one of these two things plainly fol­lows, either supposing the Apostle to have had different meanings, in those distinct Phrases, he must then be understood to have provided for the Christians Obedi­ence, or Non-resistance, not only of the Supream Ma­gistrate, but also of the Subordinate: Or else sup­posing the Apostle fell as it were accidentally into this variety, intending no more than Subjection to the higher Powers only, it will however follow from the redundancy of expression, that the Apostle was nearly concern'd, and mighty careful to have the Doctrine of Subjection effectually Imprinted upon the Hearts and Consciences of the Cretians, as a Point of greatest moment: Therefore varying the Phrase, and expressing his mind so Copiously (as it were dwelling upon the argument) lest the duty should be slipt over as of small account, lest his meaning should be mistaken, or any unpeaceable Christian should find a loop hole to creep out at, excusing himself from that indispensable duty by some nice distinction and subtlety.

[...] c. 1. 12. But secondly, I again remark, that the Persons whom the Apostle directs Titus to admonish and put in remembrance, were the Cretians, who (as most Islanders) were of old noted as Faithless and Treacherous, apt to waver and be toss'd about with every Tempestuous Wind, and upon every slight provocation, to be blown up into Mutiny and [Page 33] Rebellion. 'Tis the Excellent Grotius's Gloss upon the words. Crete was always Turbulent and Seditious, Valde Seditio­sa semper fuit Creta, De eis vult moveri Cretas, quorum maximè indi­gebant.and St. Paul would have them Admonished of those Faults, to which they were Naturally addicted, and by inveterate Custom inclin'd: From this Observation you may be inform'd, as of the reason why St. Paul charges Titus to insist upon that point among the Cre­tians, so have you a fair and Justifiable Account why we at this day so frequently take pains to press it upon our Fellow-Citizens in this Kingdom.

These two Remarks present you with the full mean­ing of the words and Satisfaction for what I have al­ready, and shall now farther Discourse upon this Argu­ment; my business and intent being to Prosecute three or four difficult Cases, that usually fall under Debate, as concerning Non-resistance.

1 First, What if the Supream Magistrate be an Usur­per? Now, though this Question at first blush seems impertinent to our Condition in this Nation, yet it being look'd upon as a matter of no small moment and difficulty rightly to state it; and because what I shall deliver upon this Argument, will in the end, if care­fully attended to, conduce much to the Confirmation of that Doctrine which is my chief Aim to commend unto you this day, Scil. Subjection to the Legal Prince: I shall therefore crave leave, as briefly as I can, to resolve that doubt in the first place.

I Answer therefore in the Affirmative, that though he is an Usurper, yet still he is the Ordinance of God, the success of his Arms being a clear Indication of the Mind and Will of God, bearing on it the stamp of Divine Approbation, and indispensably Obliging the People unto Patient and Peaceable Subjection. This was (I conceive) the Case of the Christians, under [Page 34] the Roman Emperours; who were Usurpers, having no Legal Right to the Soveraignty, but what they at­tained by sinful Force and Violently abrogating the Ancient Government. At least I make account that that Despotical and Arbitrary Power, which they as­sumed and exercised over the People, was Unnatural, Unjust, and Usurpation; and yet God, whose special Care it is always to provide for Publick Peace, is pleas'd so far to own and Countenance the Higher Powers, as not to suffer us Turbulently to resist them, though Usurpers. Trace the History of the Church, you will not find Holy Men scrupling this point in the least, nor curiously sifting into the Princes Title, in every descent, and through a long series of Succession, nor upon any pretence of Weakness in their Tittle, putting themselves in the Head of the Populace, and encouraging to re­sistance. Pharaoh (as some Learned Men think) was Exod. 9. 16.an Usurper; For this Cause (saith God) have I set thee up; that is, have permitted thee to take upon thee the Supream Authority, by prospering, or suffer­ing thy Ambition to Succeed against the Ancient known Law of Succession, in Egypt. Yet neither Moses nor the Israelites took this Advantage against him, nor did God himself any other ways design their Deliverance at first, than by Ordering them in his Name Peaceably to Supplicate for leave to go into the Wilderness to Sacrifice. All the Kings of Israel were Usurpers against the Title of David's House; many of them against the better Title of their immediate Predecessors. Did the Prophets or Good Men blow the Trumpet, and Assemble the People to Oppose the Usurpers? Did not the Kings of Judah themselves by Leagues, and Confederating with them in Wars against their Common Enemies, sufficiently acknowledge their [Page 35] Providential Right unto the Kingdom? The Prophet Jeremy is clear in this matter,— I have made the Earth Jer. 27. 5, 6.(says God by his Prophet to the Jews) the Men, and the Beasts that are upon the Ground, in my great Power, and by my out-stretched Arm, and have given it unto whom it seemed meet unto me; and now I have given all these Lands into the hand of Nebuchadnezzar, King of Babylon, my Servant, to serve him. The Case of the Jews was thus. God as a Punishment had given to Nebuchadnezzar Dominion over them; that is, had permitted him to Usurp it, having carried away Cap­tive their Legal Prince unto Babylon. Hereupon the Jews had submitted to his Empire, and received Zede­kiah, Jehojakim's Brother, as their Deputy-Governour under Nebuchadnezzar. These things were done not by vertue of any express Revelation from God, but by the Rule of Common Discretion, and in Conformity to the Providential will of God. Now, if former Oaths un­to the Natural Prince irreversibly Oblige against the present signification of Gods Providence, then did Zedekiah and the Jews sin in thus owning and swear­ing Fealty to the King of Babylon, in prejudice of Je­hojakim, which is evident they did not; and their Sub­mission to Nebuchadnezzar was by God himself look'd upon as Lawful, and binding to the Conscience. There­fore does Jeremy in that Chapter chide the Jews for practising a Revolt, and the Spirit of God calls it Re­bellion. 2 Chron. 13.I shall confess here that Zedekiah had Sworn Allegiance to the Conquerour, that an unlawful Oath may bind, and consequently, that this defection of Zedekiah might be sinful by reason of the breach of his Oath; but then I must say in Answer, First, That if it had been unlawful for Zedekiah and the Jews fol­lowing the intimations of Providence, to Swear unto [Page 36] Nebuchadnezzar, either the Prophet, or the Inspired Historian would, and must have told us as much, and Reproved the Jews for that sin: Or, Secondly, if we grant the Oath unlawful, then it could not have Ob­liged them against the Antecedent and Lawful Oath given to Jehojakim. For where there are two repug­nant Oaths, 'tis more reasonable that the former should bind: at least, that the lawful Oath (that given for­merly to Jehojakim) should take Place of the unlawful (that given to Nebuchadnezzar;) so that in this in­stance it appears that the resistance of an Usurper is sinful, a resistance of the Ordinance; and that we may Subject our selves to him, when Providence com­pels us.

Now the Reason of this Conclusion of mine is (I think) Obvious. God is Lord and Proprietour of the whole World. 'Tis he that pulleth down one and setteth up another. By him Kings Reign. We are not always to expect an immediate Revelation from Heaven for the Confirmation of his Will, or Satisfaction of our own Conscience. He was indeed oft times pleas'd to discover his mind to the Israelites by his Prophets. What Prophesy and Revelation was to them, the same is Providence unto us, a manifest and sufficient Proof of the Divine Will. All Mankind, the most Religious and Loyal, bare witness to this Truth in their Pra­ctise: and the best, the wisest Princes allow their Sub­jects this Liberty, evermore passing bills of Amnesty Hen. 7th.upon the Recovery of their Kingdoms. This was the Motive, which prevail'd with one of our Kings for enacting that equitable Law, whereby the People are acquitted of Treason, when they submit to a crown'd Usurper, that Ceremony (it seems) being intended for a Legal Token of Gods Providential Will. Thus far [Page 37] (I am apt to believe) the most Disloyal among us will agree with me. Wherefore that I may not be misunderstood, it will be necessary to lay down these following Rules and Limitations.

1. That it is the duty of every Subject to assist his Prince, to maintain the present Government against an Usurper to the utmost of his Power; and this not only in the beginning of Rebellion▪ (which should always be nipt in the Bud) but continue so doing with the hazard of his Life and Fortune, whilst their remains any Hopes, any Legal Methods of Defence. For I would not be mistaken, as if I accounted it a matter of small Moment to depart from our Oaths and Assurances given to the Government; or as if I took upon me to licence People to practise against the Peace of the State, or to herd themselves with tumul­tuous and ungovernable Men. No, it will not be easy for a Loyal and Religious Subject, to prostitute his Conscience upon every first appearance of danger or to violate his Contracts by a ready complyance with the Usurper, before he does or suffers, or makes any opposition in behalf of the Natural Prince. But then only he may and is to submit, when Providence has put an end to the dispute, and clearly decided the Con­troversy. And this may happen two ways: 1. When 'tis become morally impossible to restore the oppressed Prince (as appears to have been the case of the Jews, when Jehojakim was captive in Babylon) then the hand of Providence has laid a necessity upon us to acquiesce in the Alteration of Government. For as necessity has no Law according to the vulgar saying, so im­possibilities fall under no Law, according to the Maxim of the Schools. This is taken for granted by all men, and even the supreme Rulers themselves approve it, [Page 38] No one is or can in the Nature of the thing be oblig'd to impossibilities either by God or Man: neither will the Powers in this Extremity require Subjects out of Fondness to run themselves head long into destruction in vain and to no purpose at all. It is an Aphorism in the Divine Oeconomy it self: God has thus (yea more favourably) resolved the Case between him and us— Math. 6. 13. I (says he) will have Mercy and not Sacrifice. We are not strictly tied to the observation of his Positive Precepts.

His negative Laws oblige semper & ad semper, as the Learned speak. That is plainly thus; our Circum­stances will never allow us to blaspheme God, to mur­der, to steal, or to commit Adultery. Because 'tis Ex. 20.said, Thou shalt not, &c. The Holiness of the Divine Nature cannot, will not in any wise dispense herein. But his Positive Commands do not oblige ad semper. It is permitted us upon urgent Occasions, for instance, to absent our selves from the Publick Worship, to do works of Necessity and Charity, and we are not always bound to publish our Opinions, or to profess our Faith. (tho we may not deny it.) The Goodness and the mercy of the Divine Nature thus far indulges us as to the performance of our Duty to him. And may we not reaso­nably expect the same Measure from our Earthly Go­vernours? It can never, I own, be lawful for us to blas­pheme their Honour, to fight against them or murder them, because 'tis said, Thou shalt not speak evil of the Rulers, thou shalt not resist them, (these negative Dutys oblige ad semper;) but 'tis not always our in­dispensible Duty to fight for them. In extream ne­cessity then we may submit to an Oppressor. Natural Prudence, and self-preservation will warrant and en­force us to it. Our Religion, our Conscience and [Page 39] Fidelity to our Soveraign being to be guided by the Rule of Reason and Discretion, to be concluded by the almighty Power of Providence, we must sit down, and like reasonable men examine, whether we are able with Luke 14. 31. ten thousand to march into the Field, and meet our Ad­versary with twenty thousand, as our Lord advises. When there is no humane probability of Success, there God has put a stop to our Endeavours. Hitherto we are to go, and no farther. For the Relation between the Leige Prince, and the Leige People, the mutual Offices of Protection and Assistance, are now, tho not wholly and eternally dissolved, yet, suspended for a while. As the Prince deprived cannot be taxt justly, because in the Discharge of his publick Trust, he does not de­sperately run himself into certain ruine for the Prote­ction of his Subjects: So neither can he reasonably ex­pect his People should do so in his Quarrel, when there is no Hopes of Success. Both the one and the other are patiently to suffer under the Disappointment. Re­servare se meliori fortunoe, waiting a more favourable conjuncture of asserting their Rights and Liberties.

Secondly when the Natural Prince and his Legal Heirs are all extinct, or lost, then certainly the Usurper is the Divine Ordinance and ought to be recogniz'd as such, having the best visible Title, i. e. actual Possession of the Crown; On whom by Providence and the Di­vine will the supreme Authority is devolved. And I am well satisfyed, that if this Rule is not to be fol­lowed, 'tis impossible for us to submit unto any Higher Powers at this day, so many Invasions, Usurpations and violent Changes having been made in all Go­vernments. Were we permitted to trace every Princes Title from the beginning downward to this present time; and then to resist upon the Discovery of any [Page 40] one Flaw in the several Alterations and Successions, we should find scarce one just, and might upon that score resist, I verily think. But then

When I affirm we may and ought to be Subject to a Usurper, yet (if there be but a bare Natural Possibility of our Soveraigns return) I would be understood to speak of an unactive Submission, (as I may call it) that is, of sitting down patiently under his Dominion as Sufferers, and as a conquered People, not actual Pro­moters or Defenders of the Change. For considering our former Oaths, 'tis Indecent and Treacherous so far to comply with Usurpation, as to become active Instruments in the new Tyranny. We may not then ingage in publick Offices, and places of Trust. We may not inform against, nor implead, nor judg, nor persecute our Fellow Citizens upon the Usurpers ac­count. We may not commend his Government, nor write Panegyricks, nor erect Monuments to the Com­mendation of his Person and Virtue. We may not enter into Engagements of Maintaining his Authority against the just and legal Title of the excluded Prince, nor positively abjure the Royal Family. If we proceed thus far in Subjecting our selves, we are guilty of perjury the downright breach of our Sacred Oaths: at least may bring our Consciences into such a Snare, that if ever Providence turns our Capti­vity and Restores our Soveraign, we are reduc't into this Streight of Necessarily forswearing our selves. For to adhere to the Usurper, to be active in his De­fence, is a Violation of our first Oath, which Eternally obliges us not to resist our natural Prince: And to be active in our Princes Cause, is manifest perjury for the same Reason. The Sin of forswearing our selves and unfaithfulness Will one of these Ways of a surety [Page 41] Cleave to us. But if any think to avoid this Dilemma by being a Neuter, he is so grossly mistaken, that he is perjur'd in both Respects, and doubly forswears himself. He defends neither the Prince nor the Usur­per: at least he resists neither, as he has oblig'd him­self. For the avoiding of which inconvenience it is our Wisdom and Duty, tho to be Subject, yet not active under the Usurper. Because,

3 When Opportunity offers its self of recalling the Prince, and Re-establishing the Lawful Government, (which oft times has and will happen, even when it has appear'd impossible) then our former Obligation re­vives and returns upon us. For Providence (which I always maintain is the Finger of God, a Demonstra­tion of his Will) not onely admonishes us of our Duty, but by putting it into our Power invites us to pull him down; who Ceases to be the Divine Ordinance, and as a rod is flung into the Fire. Thus Jeremy after he had exhorted the Jews to be subject to Nebuchadnezzar, Ch. 27▪ 7.to his Sons and to his Sons Sons, adds— after shall many Nations and great Kings serve themselves of him, that is, When Providence should put the Power and Opportunity into their Hands: The whole that has been said in Answer to this first Question seems in my Judgment agreeable to the Principles, and in a great measure to the Practice of that Learned Lawyer, that honest Gentleman, that good Subject; that excellent Christian, the Lord Chief Justice Hales in that account given of him by a late Learned Pen, and of that re­nown'd Roman Knight Pomponius Atticus, whose Life the said Eminent Lawyer has publish'd, having I suppose, singled if out for a Pattern and Coppy of his own Life. Now if what has been delivered upon this Argument be well laid together, I shall be so far from [Page 42] giving any just Offence, or that I judg my self to have bound such strong Shackles upon the Conscience, as will not be easily shook off by any, that have any Spark of Religion and Loyalty left in them.

I proceed now to a second Query, what if the Natural Prince stretches his Dominion beyond the Line, exercises his Power beyond the Compass & against the Rule of the Law? To this I reply, He is still the Higher Power, the Ordinance of God. Thou mayest not revile him, nor by Force resist him, nor with danger to his Life, his Per­son, his Crown and Dignity, or the Publick Peace de­fend thy self. Thou art notwithstanding bound to pay him all Reverence, in Patience and Humility to possess 1 Pet. 2. 13.thy Soul. This I take to be St. Peters Doctrine, who, when he had perswaded Submission to the King, and Subjection to Masters, even to the froward, backs v. 18.his Doctrine thus— For this is Thank-worthy, if a Tit. 2. 9. Man for Conscience towards God indures grief, suffering wrongfully; not so much as Answering again, (as St. Paul to Titus commands; that is, not saucily, not re­proachfully. Which also is by Peter recommended 1 Pet. 2. 23.from the Example of Christ,— who, when he was reviled, reviled not again. Now because, there are among us many, that ridicule this Doctrine, and with much Confidence explode that Principle of betaking our selves only to Prayers and Tears, humble and modest Petitions, which the Primitive Saints, and we at this day affirm the onely Conscientious Rule, and Remedy against Injury received from the Supreme Magistrate; 'Tis worth our pains to observe, how those Apostles encourage the Christians, and by what Motives they press them unto this patient Suffering. Says Paul— Coloss. 3. 24, 25. Knowing that of the Lord▪ ye shall receive the reward of the Inheritance. And, he that doth wrong shall receive [Page 43] for the wrong which he has done, that is, of God. Again he saith— Knowing whatsoever good thing any Man Eph. 6. 8. doeth, the same shall he receive of the Lord. Says Peter— If when ye do well and suffer for it, ye take it patiently, this is acceptable with God. For hereunto 1 Pet. 2. 20. 21. 23. are ye called, because Christ also suffered for us, leaving us an Example. When he suffer'd, he did not so much as threaten, but committed himself to him that judgeth righteously. Paul and Peter comforted not their Dis­ciples with hopes of Opportunity, some time or other to assert their just Rights and Natural Liberty; which had been safe enough to have done in these their pri­vate Letters; Nor do they talk of a Natural transcen­dent Power, to resist when they should be able: but as became good Subjects and Preachers of righteous­ness, dealt plainly with them, putting them in Remem­brance, what they were to trust unto, scil. to the righteous Judgment of God, to the future Recompence of reward, and to the Divine Punishments to be in­flicted upon their Oppressors. They had now per­fectly learnt their Lesson, not so much as to call down Fire from Heaven to consume their Enemys, nor muster whole Legions of Angels in their own just Defence and Preservation: much less not insist upon their Natural Right against the Publick Peace. Whence I conclude, that in Case of Injury and Oppression, God is the onely Judg, to him we are to appeal, to his Care and Goodness is the Cause to be committed. Our Obligations of Honour, Obedience patient Submission and peaceable Subjection cannot cease in the Mean Time. If any should now reply, that the foresaid Passages concern the Duty of Servants to their Masters, not of Subjects to the Higher Powers, I shall answer, that St. Peters Discourse and St. Pauls in Titus seems plainly intended [Page 44] of both: and I farther reply, that since Christians were commanded to be Subject, not indecently to an­swer their Patrons tho froward and unjust; that since they were not allowed by Disobedience to re­cover their Natural Liberties, but to abide in the Quos depre­bendit Evan­gelica Doctrina obnoxios servi­tuti, aequo ani­mo ferant, nec ideo se putent manumissos quod a tyran­nide vitiorum sint manumissi. Ne pretexiu Religionis Christianae ordo reip. turbetur suam quisque sortem ferat, & in ea per­duret. same Calling, wherein they were called: that is, as Erasmus glosses upon that Place, to bear their Lot with contended minds, not to plead the Law of Nature against the Dominion of their Masters, nor upon Pretext of Religion to disturb the Common­wealth: if it were thus with Christian Slaves, it must be understood thus by parity of Reason with Christian Subjects, tho they suffer unjustly, [...], illegally. There is, I will not deny a great Difference between them and us, the Emperours and Heads of Families being much more absolute and arbitrary, than our Princes and Masters are at this day. And yet this will not justify resistance, which being atten­ded with the Breach of the Publick Peace and Order, and a Subversion of Government in its Tendency, is as irregular & sinful in a Mixt as in an absolute Monarchy, and every whit as repugnant to the Doctrine of the Apostles. The Exorbitances of the supreme tho li­mited Power can be no plea for the Subject to rebell, when the Publick Contract has expresly forbid it. But if in contempt and spite of the Municipal Law the Subjects of a limited Monarch may fly to the Law of Nature, their Moral transcendent Power for the De­fence of their just Rights and Properties, I see no Reason, why the Christians under the Roman Em­pire might not betake themselves unto the same Law of Nature, their natural transcendent Power, and by Force assert themselves out of that Despotical, Unna­tural, Unjust and Unsupportable Slavery they were [Page 45] under. To make an End of this, It is acknowledg'd Especially Treatise of Mo­narchy, &c.by most of our ingenuous Adversaries, that even in mixt Monarchy as great Deference, Obedience and Submission is done to the Person of the King, as to an absolute Prince. And this at present I have only pleaded for.

Now, because when we back this Doctrine with the Christians Practice in the Primitive days, we are wont to meet with Scornful Men, such as will by no means admit the Holy Apostles and Martyrs, as the Pattern, but Reproach them for tame Fools, as I have my self heard some Censuring those Famous Souldiers of the Thebean Legion, I shall give you further to under­stand, that our Predecessors in the Faith were not so weak, not so Stoical, not so Prodigal of their Estates, nor weary of their Lives, but so far as the Law of God, and the Political Government gave them leave, were as brisk in their own Defence, and as tender of their Natural and Civil Interests as we can be. Of which I shall offer to you a plain Demonstration [...]ut of Scripture, the more fully to explain and prove my An­swer to this second Query. The Apostle Paul and Acts 16. Silas having been Imprisoned and Whipt at Philippi, unheard, uncondemned; that is, contrary to Law; the Magistrates, upon second and better thoughts, be­ing Conscious that they had exceeded their Commis­sion, as part of amends, and to stop their Legal Com­plaints, sent to have them dismist privately. But Paul, who could resent an Injury as well as any among us, was not so senseless and stark Mad, to let this pass without taking Notice, but valuing his Ease, and his Liberty, and his Roman Priviledges better than so, stands upon his terms, and requiring at least some Honourable Satisfactions, sends them this Couragious [Page 46] Message— They have beaten us openly uncondemned, Ver. 37. being Romans, and have cast us into Prison; and now do they thrust us out privately? Nay verily but let them come themselves and fetch us out; which the Ma­gistrates were forc'd to condescend unto, no doubt ac­knowledging their own Rashness, and begging Pardon, intreated them quietly to depart. Somewhat alike Story you will meet with in the 22 th. of the Acts, and in the 19 th. where Paul Appealed unto Caesar. But when he stood before the High Priest, and was com­manded Acts 23. 2. to be smitten on the Mouth, Humane Infirmity, and sudden Passion provok'd him to speak unadvised­ly with his Lips, so as neglecting, or forgetting his Duty, he burst out into these words, God shall smite Ver. 3. thee, thou whited Wall. Here the Supream Magistrate (for as such was the High Priest look'd upon by the Jews, though limited) proceeded not according to Law; on which Account Paul having Reproved him unmannerly, upon the very first check and Intimation Ver. 5.of hi [...] [...]ault confess'd, I wist not, Brethren, that he was the High Priest: I did not remember, nor care­fully enough consider it with my self (for Paul could not be Ignorant who he was) I acknowledge my Er­ror, my Passion herein. And thus he Argues at last Ver. 5.against himself; It is written, thou shalt not speak evil of the Ruler of thy People. Let us (my Brethren) Expound Paul's Doctrine by his Practice. What can be the sense of these words, Let every Soul be subject to Higher Powers—Be subject to Principalities—Obey Magistrates—Submit your selves to, and Honour the King—Resist not the Ordinance? Even in the present Case put of his Acting Illegally, 'tis so far from being Lawful to defend our selves, or repel Injury by Force, that 'tis not permitted us so much as to Reproach him [Page 47] by indecent Reflections on his Person, if the Apostles Practice may pass for a good Comment upon his own Text. And let this suffice in Answer to the Second Question.

I should now go on to two other remaining Queries, but it being not fit for me to intrench farther upon your Patience, I shall reserve them to the Afternoon. And for a Conclusion, shall beg leave to look back to what in the beginning I took some little Notice of, and in a few words expostulate with our Adversaries about those unreasonable Clamours they raise against us, who endeavour to inform our Congregations of the Nature, Duty, and Necessity of Subjection to the Higher Powers.

If indeed we would become Leaders of the People, and draw them forth into the Wilderness, the Field of Rebellion, we need not then Question at our descent from the Pulpit, but to meet with the Praises of Men for quitting our selves so dexterously in the behalf of the good of the People, as some Men are pleased to call Faction. Might we Preach to the People what is grateful to their Ears and corrupt Hearts, our Task would be easie, our Labours acceptable, and in some measure successful. If we could, or might be so wise in our Generation, as to suit our Discourses to the pre­vailing Distemper of the Times, letting our words drop smoothly, and our Doctrine run down gently with the Stream of Popular Humour: I am sensible we should be hugg'd, as Men of Temper, Peaceable and Moderate Men, Men that meddle not with the Times or State Affairs: That is in Truth, that say no­thing; that is, nothing to purpose; that is, nothing towards the Information and Amendment of the pre­sent Disorders among us. We might then be an happy [Page 48] sort of Men, always in Favour, and evermore sur­rounded with Applauses, which are the most bewitch­ing Temptations to sinful Silence and Moderation falsly so called. Had I ex. gr. no call to this. Publick Performanc [...] here, did I not verily think it both sea­sonable, and my indispensable Duty to urge the Doctrine of obedience to the Higher Powers at this time, I might have remain'd lurking at home quiet, not have raised the malice and hatred of this pievish Generation against me, nor drawn upon my self the odious Character of being a Tory, and a Sycophant. I might have been content with my private solitude, sometimes with Democritus, Laughing at the Folly and Madness of this unquiet World, sometimes with Heraclitus bewailing the Giddiness of the sinful Peo­ple, and daily in my Closet, with the Prophet im­ploring the Mercy of God upon this miserable Na­tion.

But it is otherwise with me and the rest of my Bre­thren in the Ministry, we are not to be afraid of the faces of men through Cowardise, nor seek their com­mendation by Treachery and Compliance.

It is our work and business, which God has ordain­ed us to, and strictly requires at our hands, to watch over Mens Souls, as they that must give an account, to instruct, to rebuke, and to reform their evil ways, how­ever dangerous it may be to us, or displeasing to them. And so much the stronger obligation lies upon us to Preach up any Evangelical Precept, by how much the more we see the Peoples Principles and Practices run­ning counter to the Doctrine of the Gospel. To af­firm (as many do) that this is not to Preach Christ and the Faith in Christ is meer Ignorance, to say no worse of it. As if to Preach the Doctrine of Christ [Page 49] and the Gospel Precepts was not to Preach the Faith in Christ. St. Luke, I am sure long since thought so. Acts 24. 24, 25.He has told us that Felix sent for Paul and heard him concerning the Faith in Christ. What was the Subject of the Apostles Sermon? 'Twas— Righteousness, Tempe­rance and Judgment to come. So that if to reason of Righteousness, and Temperance, be to Preach the Faith in Christ, then surely to plead for Obedience to Autho­rity, and patient suffering under Oppression is like­wise to Preach the Faith in Christ, I am therefore little concern'd, when 'tis told me, you lose this Friends kindness, that Neighbours good Opinion, you forfeit such a Persons Favour by your indiscreet and resolute ingagement on these ungrateful Points. A­lass, these are but Worldly motives, not worthy to be laid in the Balance with a Mans Duty, the friend­ship James▪ 4. 4. of Men being Enmity with God, and the Wisdom 1 Cor. 3. 19. of this World Foolishness with him. The Favour of God and some few good Men, the inward Peace and Satisfaction, that in simplicity and Godly sincerity, I have held forth the words of Truth and Soberness; and the Recompence of Reward promis'd to all the faithful dispensers of the Gospel, will infinitely out­weigh those▪ Vain and Momentary advantages. It is (I'le assure you) one great design of the Gospel to set­tle the unstable minds of the Multitude in Civil Peace and Patient Obedience, to compose them unto chearful­ness, and a readiness unto every good work. And it is by consequence our Duty, and ought to be our endea­vour to Promote the same to the utmost of our Power, to put an hook in the Nostrils of the Leviathans of our unhappy Age, to chastise such as make sport and play the Wantons in the Disturbances of the Common-wealth. Thus much I here freely confess, concerning [Page 50] the Nature and Design of the Gospel, and our Duty: and think it so far from being an Objection against the truth of the Revelation of Jesus Christ, or a Crime in us, that 'tis its singular Excellency, and ought to be accounted our Glory and Commendation; whatever the conceited Atheists, the profane Wits, and the busy Pamphleteers of these days say to the contrary. For is it not reasonable thus to Judge, of the Wisdom, and Righteousness, and Goodness of God? That he who Matth. 6. takes care of the Lillies of the Field, of the Sparrow on the House top, and numbers the very Hairs of our Head; that he who regards every particular Mans welfare, and is pleased to make known our mutual Duty one toward another in our private Relation, should much more provide for the Honour and safety of Principalities and Powers, of the Publick Peace and the relative Offices between the Prince and the Subject. Is not this Publick, this General good of infinite more Value to the World, and more worthy the Providential care and gracious regard of God by Revelation? He that Quarrels the Gospel (and all Revelation) as a Trick of State, a Politick contrivance of Priests, and Damns the Ministers of the Gospel, as base Instruments of the Princes Tyranny, because both it and they teach Obedience to the Soveraign Ma­gistrate; may as well argue against our Religion and us, because we instruct Children to Obey their Parents, Servants to be subject to their Masters, and exhort you all to mutual Love, Peace, Charity, Justice and Uprightness one towards another. I maintain then, that Peace on Earth, National Peace, is one principal aim of our Christianity, one of the Chief blessings design'd us here below, by Christs appearance in the Flesh, and was the argument of the Heavenly Host's, [Page 51] Anthem at his Birth. And oh! How beautiful on the Mountains are the feet of them that bring good Tidings, and publish Peace? who in the Name of God charge the People with the Kings Peace.

Ay but (say some) these Priests are always medling with the Municipal Laws of the Land, obtruding up­on their Auditors such discourses, as would beseem the Reverend Judges on the Bench, rather than Mi­nisters in the Pulpit. This exception (I confess) im­plies too much of Commendation, tho it carries little of truth in it. However (since 'tis made use of against us) why (I beseech you) may not we acquaint our selves and those that hear us (when the Argument leads us to it, and since our adversaries require it) with the Law, which is in part the measure of our Subjection to Civil Authority; as well as others Examine the Gospel, which is the Rule of their Obe­dience to God, and to their Church Governours? Or how is it possible for us, to state the question aright? Unless we first inform the Conscience of the Law of the Land, which (as many contend) is the only Stan­dard of our Duty to the Prince.

But 'tis yet farther Objected. You are such stick­lers, so restless on this Point, that your Sycophancy is manifest, and your Harangues become Nauseous to the Peoples Stomachs. Ay, and will be so, as long as we thwart their quarrelsom Humour, as long as we oppose their turbulent Practices against the present Powers. Is there not reason, a necessity for us so to do? Are there not more Underminers of the Go­vernment, than Preachers of Submission to Authority? Are there not more Libels sent forth to overturn the present Establishment, than Sermons to uphold the Peace and Order of the State? Yea, are not the Ene­mies [Page 52] of Peace more apparently guilty of Flattery? whilst they fawn on the Multitude, Court the Popu­lace, Cajole the People, and raise the Mobile into Discontent and Mutiny, still keeping them in conti­nual Motion, still Heightening their Fears, and A­laruming them with the Prospect of remote dangers: and by these little Arts improving their instability and suspicions of danger, (which blessed be God, is acknowledged uncertain and at a distance) even to the present disquiet of the Nation: Foolishly anticipating their own misery, and bereaving us all of our present happiness, by too careful a providence of future trou­bles; whereas Wisdom its self has said, that we must Matth. 6. 34. not take care of to morrow▪ and sufficient to the day is the evil thereof.

And why (forsooth) should we for discharging our Duty, be thus malitiously slandered, as Hypocrites and Court-flatterers? Did Paul flatter Nero in his Epistle to the Romans? It cannot be imagin'd. Did Peter flatter all the Princes and Magistrates in Pontus, 1 Epist. 1, Asia, Galatia, Cappadocia and Bithynia (to the Christi­ans of which Provinces he wrote, as you learn in the Preamble of that Epistle?) It cannot be suppos'd. Did Paul here in the Text, put Titus upon that Unchristi­an, Servile, that Unmanly art of Flattery? It cannot be thought. Or was our blessed Saviour himself a Flatterer, when he bids the Jews— give unto Caesar; the things that are Caesar 's? Surely none will dare to harbour so mean, so Blasphemous thoughts of the Son of God. In fine were all the Bishops, Priests, and Holy Men of Old, that laid down their Lives for the Faith, Parasites? Was Tertullian a Sycophant? who Apologizing for the Christians thus boasts on their behalf— We Christians adore the Righteous Judgment [Page 53] of God, who has Ordain'd the Emperor to Govern the Nations: We Christians are Enemies to none, no not to the Emperor, who is appointed Ruler over us by God, and 'tis our duty to Love, Reverence, Honour, and wish him Prosperity: We Christians in the first place Reve­rence and Obey God, and next unto him the Emperor.

Is this Flattery? Was this an unfaithful Represen­tation of the Christians Loyalty in those Days? In no wise. To make an end of this Apology, If the Primitive Fathers and Noble Martyrs, if the Holy Apostles, if the Blessed Jesus were Sycophants, then, O my Soul, come not thou into their Secrets: Mine Honour, be not thou United to their Assemblies, who whilst we are labouring for Peace, make themselves ready for Battel. I had much rather be reckoned a­mong those Hypocrites, and to have my Portion with those Glorious Transgressors. This short Defence of my self and Brethren will not (I hope) be accounted unseasonable; nor can it be look'd upon as impertinent to the Text, if it be well considered, as no question it will be by so Judicious an Audience. If then it be right in the sight of God, to Obey Man rather than God; to follow the People in their Turbulency, rather than the Apostles Canon of putting them in mind to be sub­ject to Principality, &c. Judge ye.

IT must be confess'd that all Parties among us ac­knowledge (in general) Obedience due to the Supream Magistrate; but in the mean time are so miserably Divided in Opinion, in what Person or Per­sons the Supream Power is Lodg'd, that (as our Lord Prophetically describing the Heresies and Divisions of the Church, fore-tells that one Separation would cry, loe, here is Christ; another, loe, he is there: Even thus it fares with us at this day, as to the Higher Power.) We are not yet agreed among our selves, to whom the Supream Authority of the Nation belongs, nor by Consequence know, how far Non-resistance of the Prince in our present Constitution is Obligatory. Those who of late have wrote on this Argument, have so un­mercifully tormented the Doctrine of Subjection with distinctions, that 'tis as hard to come to the knowledge of our Duty, what Governours we are to obey, where [Page 55] and when, how, and in what Case, in what sense and degree Resistance is Unlawful, as 'tis to find the true Doctrine of the Gospel in the School-men, or to di­rect the Conscience in the Practice of Holiness out of the Jesuits Morals. This Evangelical Precept is so strangely Wire-drawn, brought into so narrow com­pass, that I cannot apprehend what tye can be laid upon the Subject, since 'tis impossible, but upon some pretence or other a Factious Spirit may still alledge something to Justifie his Rebellion: For most of these Disputers about the Nature of our Government, do still centre and agree upon this one Pestilent and Ruining Principle, That the People by the Law of Nature, by the first Reason of Government, by a Moral transcendent Power (not express'd, but neces­sarily implyed in every Political Constitution) are their own Judges; what their Rights and Priviledges are, when Property is Invaded, when Religion is in danger to be Subverted, when Liberty of Conscience is Violated, and when their Civil and Spiritual Inte­rests may forcibly be maintain'd. How of late was Obedience to the Higher Powers run down with full Cry, forc'd to skulk, and pass along the Streets in Masquerade? And sometimes to Attire her self in the Harlotry and Disguise of Rebellion its self? So that an inquisitive Man would have been puzzled to disco­ver her, as much as Diogenes was to find out an Honest Man, or Elijah another besides himself, that had not bowed the Knee to Baal. The Matter is (Blessed be God) somewhat amended among us in appearance: Yet because 'tis to be feared that there are still many tainted with Factious Principles (a very little of which, like the Leaven of the Pharisees, is able to Leaven and Corrupt the whole Lump) since many [Page 56] ignorant People know not which way to turn them­selves, nor whose Servants they are, whom they ought to Obey. I shall now proceed farther on the Argument of Non-resistance, and endeavour to resolve two other Queries relating thereunto: The first of which is,

What if the Supream Power sets up Idolatry? What if he become an Enemy to Godliness, a Betrayer of the true Reformed Religion of the Nation? Still I Reply, he is thy Natural Leige Prince, and the Ordinance of God. When the Citizens of Delphi, upon the ap­proach of Xerxes in his Formidable Invasion of Greece, Consulted the Oracle, what course they should take for the preservation of their Religion, their Sacred [...]. Herod. lib. 8. cap. 36.Reliques? They received this Answer— God is able to provide for the Security of his own Honour and Wor­ship. 'Tis not unlikely those wretched People were more sollicitous about the [...], those Rich Pre­sents, and Inestimable Treasures, which had been sent to the Idol by Croesus and other Superstitious Princes, more than for the Honour of God. And so I fear 'tis with most among us, whatever Zeal they make shew of for the Preservation of Religion, and the Glory of God; the care of their Wealth and Estates is at the bot­tom of all, which indeed they are not ashamed in their Discourses many times to own. But whatever it be, and though the Oracle of the Devil seems to deny that People Liberty of using Lawful means for the Security of their Religious Treasure (for certainly 'twas Law­ful for them to defend both against the Power and Avarice of an Invader, either by hiding it in the Earth, or removing it into a more safe place, which was the only Question put to the Oracle) yet certain­ly the Infallible Oracles of God does not allow us to [Page 57] maintain his Honour by dishonouring, and illegal Resi­stance of our Natural Prince: (For God himself is able to defend it, and has taken it into his own immediate Protection, if the Prince apostatizes.) Nor may we upon Pretence of the purity of Divine Worship renounce our Lawful Soveraign.

That Dominion is founded in Grace is as wild a Pa­radox as that other of its being founded in Property, and is so much the more dangerous, in that being the Manufacture of Rome, and transported hither by their Spiritual Merchants, the Jesuites, is bought up gree­dily by our zealous Hucksters, the true Protestant Dis­senters. So far indeed the Government is beholden to them, that they have almost monopoliz'd the Com­modity. But, my Brethren, ye have not, I hope, so Learned Christ. I do not read, that our Lord or his Apostles give us leave, nor Encouragement to pro­pagate Christianity by the Sword, or to defend the Gospel by Tumult and Railing at Superiors, or Threatening to advance another on the Throne, whom we shall please to canonize for a Saint, contrary to the Known and Fundamental Law of Succession. Peter, who mistaking Christs meaning, when he bad the Disciples to furnish themselves with Swords, briskly cut off Malchus's Ear, but received this Check— Matth. 26. 52. Put up thy Sword. 'Tis worth our while to take a view of our Lords Discourse and Behaviour on this Occasion. For, says he, they that take the Sword, shall perish by v. 52. 53. 54. the Sword. Thinkest thou not, that I can pray to my Father, and he shall presently give me more than twelve Legions of Angels for my Defence? But how then shall the Scripture be fulfilled? It was not then (as some are pleas'd to affirm of the Primitive Saints) for want of Power that our Lord would not resist, but in [Page 58] Conscience to the Ordinance, and in Obedience to the Authority of the Priests. Besides, Christ to make amends for the rashness of that hot headed Disciple was pleas'd by a miraculous Cure of the Wound to re­pair that publick Injury and Breach of the Peace (for such it was, Malchus being one of the High Priests Servants.) This (I imagine) gave such Satisfaction on all sides, as you read not that the Crime was ever laid to Peters Charge, nor rose up in Judgment against our Saviour. Hence 'tis very probable that St. Peter afterwards became a most Zealous Assertor of the Do­ctrine of Subjection, as you will find in his first Epistle. The Children of Israel under Pharaohs hard Bondage cryed unto the Lord? And God undertook their Deliverance: not by Encouraging them to resist the King, and disturb the Peace by Rebellion. But sending Moses and Aaron to supplicate in their behalf. God himself condescended to send Ambassadors to him, and became a peaceable Intercessor for them. And lest Pharaoh (as he did) should look upon Moses's Message as a Sham, and his Miracles, as the Magical Tricks of an Aspiring Spirit, how did God Evidence the Truth thereof? With what Power and Might, and outstretched Arms did the Lord of Hosts second his Petitions? All the Resistance they offered was but running away, and that too by the special Appoint­ment of God. When the Tyrant pursued them, (tho in a warlike Posture and Able in some Measure to sell their Lives at a dear rate, yet) they did not lift up their Hands against the Kings Army. And when it must needs be, God contriv'd and wrought their De­liverance without their active Resistance, or the Breach of the Peace, himself overthrowing Pharaoh [Page 59] and his Egyptians in the Red Sea. God, who is the Author of Peace and Order, the Ordainer of Govern­ment, seems always to have been so tender in this Point, that he never has made use of his supreme Power and Prerogative, so as to Commission or Ju­stify any Subject in their Resistance of the Higher Powers, no not when the Higher Powers have been rejected, and their Successors appointed by God himself. The Israelites petitioned Rehoboam for redress of Grievances, and after denyal, ten Tribes revolted, but the Spirit of God has all along term'd it Rebellion. Shew me (if it be possible) one single Instance in all the Changes of Government among them, where God contriv'd, or countenanc't, or the Spirit of God has commended or excus'd the Usur­pation. But this Point has been so learnedly handled, and so fully demonstrated by many Excellent Pens of late, that I think it needless at Present to enlarge my self farther on this Subject.

If it be objected that our Case is different from the Apostles and Primitive Christians, our Religion being the Religion of the State establish'd by Law: (And blessed be God it is so. Let our Mouths be filled with Laughter, and our Tongues with Joy. Let our Hearts be enlarg'd with Thankfulness to God, and the King for this Unvaluable Blessing. But if for our Unwor­thiness and Unfruitfulness under this Spiritual Advan­tage, God as a Punishment of our Sins shall please to turn the Hearts of our Rulers, against us and the Truths we profess) What then? May we revile them; may we by force resist them; may we secretly conspire against them; may we murder or eject them? (God forbid.) Re­ligion upon pretence of being the establish'd Law of [Page 60] the Land has no better Security thereby, than those Laws by which we lay claim to our Temporal In­terests. It is then only to be considered as such, as to the Formal Nature, tho not as to the subject Matter of it. So that look how we are to demean our selves towards our Governours upon the Violation of our Civil Rights (of which I discours'd in the Forenoon) the same Course we must take upon their Breach of Trust in our Spiritual. We must by no means resist, affront, or libel them. We must not bring railing Accusations, nor vent venemous and spiteful Words against their Honour, Safety and Government. One Special Advantage we have as to our Religious con­cerns above our Temporal, sc. the Promise of the more immediate Care and Protection of God, whose we are, and whom we serve, which is an Anchor of the Soul both sure and stedfast: that if the Earthly De­fender of our Faith leaves us, God himself will receive us under his Wings, and at last crown our Sufferings, with a far more Exceeding and Eternal Weight of Glory. But,

2 I proceed to the Second, which is the Grand Query and Difficulty of all, which many Men of Under­standing and Sobriety, Men of Interest in their Coun­try make a mighty Question of. For (say they) Saving to the Kings Person all due Honour and intire Submission; may we not by Force resist his evil Coun­sellours, his wicked Instruments, his Cut-throat Offi­cers, those who for base and ambitious Ends invade the Peoples Liberties and Properties? I reply, No, you may not; which Conclusion I shall back with some following Reasons, in Order whereunto, I must pre­mise, first,

[Page 61] 1 That I do not plead for active Obedience, when the subordinate Magistrate Acts contrary to Law, but against active Resistance only. No good Subject, no honest Patriot, ought, neither will become an Instrument of Tyranny, a Betrayer of his own, and Fellow Subjects just Rights and Priviledges, by actual Complyance and Execution of illegal Commands. If the Kings Ministers should order me to cut my Neigh­bours Throat, to pillage his House, to levy Taxes upon his Estate contrary to Law, I am not bound to obey, nay, I am bound in Conscience not to obey. But to oppose them by Force is on the other Hand unexcusable before God and Man. It being a Manifest Violation of the Publick Peace, and of Worse Conse­quence to the Government than the arbitrary procee­dings of the Kings Ministers can be.

2 When I affirm, that the Kings Ministers ought not to be resisted by Force, I understand only such as are Legally commissionated by him. For they, who by a pretended Secret, or Extraordinary Commissions (unto which the Government is a Stranger) invade my Person or Estate, I may oppose them and repell Force by Force. The Kings publick and deliberate Will declared in the known unrepeal'd Laws of the Land is to take Place of his private and sudden Will exprest in a Secret Warrant or Commission: An Officer employed and acting in such an illegal and extraordinary Manner is not to be lookt upon as the Kings Minister, but is to be treated as a Thief and common Enemy, and such he will be found to be in the Judgment of the Kings Laws. I grant there­fore, that in this Case Resistance may be made Con­scientiously, [Page 62] but not when the Officer is Legally Commissionated. Because, that would be a Breach of the Publick Peace, and a Subversion of the Go­vernment by Tumult and Rebellions.

3 When I acknowledge that the Kings Officers not Legally Commissionated may be resisted, I do not thereby intend seditious or Tumultuous Resistance, such as is accompanied with Publick disturbance. I do not impower the Subject to beat up the Drum, to list Soldiers, and to march in the Field, in a warlike or riotous Posture, tho the Kings Ministers should act never so extravagantly. In so doing he exceeds his Political Power, and usurps such an Authority as is expresly provided against by the Law. It is more­over a Breach of the Publick Peace, and directly tends unto the Subversion of the Government. No Resistance can in Conscience nor with Safety to the Common­wealth be made, but what is permitted us by the ex­press Law of the Land. The Resistance then I allow of in the Case put, is such as I am enabled to by the Politick Contract of the State, as appealing to Su­perior Courts or Magistrates, or in my single Person resisting the violence Offered to me, such as I may use against an Highway-man, a Fellon or a Murderer. For they, who, by Virtue of a private Commission from the King, contrary to his known Publick Will publish'd in his Laws, invade my Person or my Property are no better than Thieves and Rogues, and may by per­sonal Force be thus resisted, this being so far from being a Breach of the Publick Peace, or taking upon me more than by Law belongs to me, as that 'tis but the Execution of the Kings deliberate Will, the Law, [Page 63] and defending my self, as the Law of the Land per­mitts me, and as the Law of Nature, Self-preservation guides me. These things premis'd, I return to my re­solution of the Query propounded, i. e. That upon the infringement of our Liberties, or incroachments upon our Civil Interests, we may in no wise forcibly resist the Kings Legal Ministers, however Exorbitant and Ar­bitrary they are in the execution of their Power. The reasons of this conclusion are as follow:

1. Because the holy Scripture has plainly laid down our duty of Obedience and Non-resistance of the Sub­ordinate, as well as of the Supream Magistrate.

Thus much I hinted in the explication of the Text, that when St. Paul with so much variety of Phrase directs Titus to put the Cretians in mind, that they be Subject to Principalities and Powers, and Obey Ma­gistrates, he cannot in my Judgment be thought to trifle so long, and by Principalities, Powers and Ma­gistrates, in the Plural number, only intend all that while the person of the Emperour. He must also mean the Subordinate Ministers in Crete. Besides I cannot conceive that the Apostle should intend to admonish them of their duty towards the Emperour only, and to have so little regard to the Publick Peace, as to permit them upon every disgust and grievance, to move Sedition against the Pro-praetors or Deputy Governours of that Island. But I will not insist upon this conjectural In­terpretation, however unquestionable it seems to me. 1 Pet. 2. 13▪ 14.Yet St. Peter is most express herein— Submit your selves to the King as Supream, and to Governours as un­to them that are sent by him, i. e. unto Subordinate Magistrates and Judges commission'd by the King. Lastly, I observe St. Paul exhorts that Supplications 1. Tim. 2. 1. 21. and Prayers, Intercessions and Thanksgivings be made [Page 64] for Kings, and for all that are in Authority. Pray for them we must, not fight against them, which will appear from the reason inforcing this Precept.

To this end we are commanded to Pray for them— that we may live quiet and peaceable lives in all God­liness and Honesty. But if we should Pray for them and at the same time rise up against them, our Actions would contradict our Prayers, we should undo with our hands, what we are bound to interceed for with our Charles 5th.Hearts and Lips; we should frustrate the design of our own Intercessions: an Hypocrisy as impious in us, as 'twas Ridiculous in that Emperour, who detained the Pope in Prison, and yet commanded Prayers to be made for his enlargement. The late Writers about Subjection (the more moderate of them, who main­tain the People to have a Power of resisting only the Subordinate Ministers of the King, his destructive Counsellers and Agents) seldom or never take notice of these passages in the word of God, as far as I have observ'd; especially not that of St. Peter upon which I lay the greatest stress of my argument, and think it unanswerable. He certainly knew best and more ex­actly weighed our Lords Doctrine, who first violated this Evangelical Canon in cutting off Malchus's Ear (the High Priests servant) and was roundly reprov'd by Christ for so doing. And why St. Peters pretend­ed Successors and their Disciples should so far for­get themselves, as to run into the same excess, as their first Founder did, and yet not, as he did, renounce their error, but stand obstinately in the defence of them­selves, no other reason can be given, but their blind Zeal of propagating Religion by the Sword, since reason and argument and exemplary Lives (which are the most powerful and the only Gospel motives [Page 65] to perswade) having so long since fail'd them. For my own part I doubt not to affirm, that as the King within his own Dominions is the Image and Representative of God in the Government of the Peo­ple; so are the inferior Magistrates the Image and Re­presentatives both of God and the King: that as the Su­pream Governour is Gods immediate Ordinance, so are they, that are sent by him, the mediate and derivative Ordinance of God. To deal freely with you, I question not that Obedience and Subjection in all its branches, in its utmost latitude is due to one as well as t'other: that in case of the greatest outrages committed by them either through neglect, or mistake, or Passion, or pri­vate Interest or Revenge, or Servile Flattery of the Princes Humour, the Subject ought not to seek re­dress but by such Peaceable methods as the Law pre­scribes and allows: that in the mean time he ought to abstain from Violent Defence and Active Resistance. For so is the Will of God, that we suffer Patiently, that we Honour and Reverence, not Revile, not Li­bel the Persons of the Subordinate Governours, sent or commissioned by the King. Let no one think here to avoid the strength of this Scripture argument, by distinguishing between the Government of an abso­lute Arbitrary Prince, such were the Emperours of Old, and a mixt or limited Government, as our's is at this day. This makes no difference, gives the Subject no Priviledge of resisting the Kings Ministers The Power of the Subordinate Magistrate, is of the same Nature in both these Governments, limited in the former by the will of the Emperour, in his publick Edicts, and private Instructions; limited in the lat­ter by the known Laws of the Nation, let the Prince be Arbitrary, or not, still his Ministers are always [Page 66] limited: though they transgress and depart from their Rule, the People has in neither case Liberty, turbulent­ly to defend themselves, with the breach of the Pub­lick Peace, the preservation whereof is still the Funda­mental Principle and Care of every Government, whe­ther Absolute or Limited. For which reason the Sub­jects in the Roman State were directed to appeal unto Caesar as their last refuge, and we in this Nation unto the Kings Supreme Court of Justice as our only remedy against injury; if they fail'd, or we be disappointed of our expectations, we have nothing more to do, than pa­tiently to submit to the Will and Providence of God. This I take to be St. Peters Doctrine, and am sure was St. Pauls Practice, as is before prov'd; and I lay it down as the first Reason of my resolution of the Question under debate. We must not forcibly resist the inferiour Magistrates, because it is the express Doctrine of the Scripture.

2 Because violently to resist the Kings Instruments Legally commissionated by him, is inconsistent with our Duty to the Person of the King himself. By the Doctrine of the Gospel we are to Love, to Honour the Kings Person, not Libelling Him, not defaming Him. What is the meaning of this? We are not to bring into Question his Abilities, his Justice, his Wisdom, his Vigilance, his Integrity, his Fidelity to his Oaths and Assurances given us of Good and Legal Government.

But he who by Force resists the Kings Officers, Dis­honours the Kings Person, and Stains his reputation in all those respects: by his turbulency and sturdy re­sistance of the Magistrate, he does in effect tell the World, that the King is unable or unwilling to Pro­tect him, resolved to crush and oppress him: He there­by suggests the Higher Power, to be either Fool or [Page 67] Knave, or Tyrant, or Perjur'd, under which imputati­ons 'tis dishonourable for him to Lie. For no man that thinks his Prince able to defend him, will Rio­tously defend himself. No one that judges him upright, but will peaceably appeal to him, none that believes him a Man of Honour and Conscience, will question to be relieved by him, and his Superior Courts of Justice. In a word, there can be no resistance, no affront Offer'd to the Kings Ministers, but tends directly to the Dishonour of the Kings Person. The King has the same reason to complain of those that Violently persecute his Ministers, as God had of the Israelites, whom nothing would satisfy but to have Samuel de­pos'd— They have not rejected thee, but they have re­jected 1 Sam. 8. [...]. me. Against me principally is this Rebellion and Change of Government design'd. Every Indignity cast upon the Servant, reflects upon the Master, and as Naturally and Necessarily ascends unto the Head, the Supreme Governour of the Body Politick, as the pains and anguish of a wounded Member arises unto the Head of a Natural Body. He that breaks my Bones and bruises my Flesh, and yet tells me he is tender of my Head (the Seat of Sensation) may (if he please) Va­lue his wit upon the distinction, but cannot satisfy me thereby for the injury done me. And again as upon pretence of Putrefaction to lop off all the Members one after another, is certain destruction both to the Body and the Head, which cannot consist without the Integral parts: so they who will never acknowledg the Prince to have any faithful Servants and Counsel­lors, but are still ready to cut them off so soon as they are received into his Favour and Service, whatever kindness they make show of to him; yet forcing him to be thus Naked and to shift for himself, leaving him [Page 68] as it were to wander alone on the Mountains, as a Partridg, to sit as a Pelicane in the Wilderness, or as an Owl in the Desart, do indeed destroy the Govern­ment, and by Necessary Consequence murder the Kings Person also. And if Reason will not, I am sure sad Experience has once convinc't us of this Truth.

3 To use Force against the Kings Legal Instruments is a Breach of the Publick Peace, Frustration of the Chief Ends of Society, the Good of the People, and endangers the Dissolution of the whole Frame of Government. For without Order and peaceable Sub­jection, there is nothing but Confusion and Violence, and perfect Anarchy, our Persons, our Lives, our Liberties and Properties (when once a Civil War is commenc't) being expos'd to the Dominion and Cruelty, and Avarice of the Revengeful and Successful Conqueror. And because I have made the Preserva­tion of the Publick Peace, the Ground of much of my Reasoning in this Discourse▪ I the rather choose here a little to enlarge my self upon that Topick. I shall readily grant (if it be demanded) that the Good of the Go­verned is the first Reason, and the great End of Go­vernment: but the next, and in order to it is the Publick Peace, which is the very Life and Soul of Govern­ment, and absolutely necessary to the Peoples, both Private and Political Happiness. As therefore 'tis the Princes Office by any means to secure it, so it is the Subjects Duty and Interest to keep it, tho with the loss of their private personal Concernments. Peace is an unvaluable Blessing, like that rich Jewell in the Gospel, 'tis Worth our while to sell all we have for the purchase of it. I have seldom read (nor does it often happen,) that the Subjects Circumstances were so hard, their Condition so miserable, where 'twas worth [Page 69] their while to hazard their Lives and Fortunes by Civil Discord.

Pax bello potior seems to be a Rule almost without Exception: But that other ex bello pax is a Motto fit only for Traitors and Ufurpers to stamp upon their Medals. Let any understanding Man sit down, and with himself calmly consider, how easy it is, when once the Sacred Bonds of Civil Peace are broke) for a forraign Enemy to invade and enslave the Nation; what Devastations are made, what Detriment sustain'd in private Estates, how much Time and Expense of Treasure is required before any tolerable Settlement can be made; how easy 'tis for the Conqueror to set up a Tyrannical and Arbitrary Government, which is oft­times the Issue of Domestick Wars; at least, how strangely the Government is weakened, how universally the People are debauch't, how difficult 'tis for them to recover both their Publick and Private Losses. Where is that wise Man, and indued with Knowledge? Let him tell me, whether 'tis not much better, more Ho­norable and Heroick to flying over Board all his Sub­stance, yea and suffer himself, with Jonah to be cast into the Sea, for the Preservation of his Fellow-ci­tizens, rather than the Ship of the Common-wealth should sink in the Waves of Popular Insurrections.

The Safety therefore of the Government and of the Governours, and the Good of the Governed being thus closely twisted with the Publick Peace, they who take upon them violently to resist and engage the People in Rebellion, do by consequence overthrow the Ends of Society, and reduce us into that Condition, (which some Men call the State of Nature,) wherein every Man having a General Right to every thing, but a Particular Right to nothing, we sight and devour one [Page 70] another. And which is the worst of all, when we are weary of our Dissensions, and an End is put to the Quarrel, the Issue is seldom to the Advantage of the Subject. We may alter the Government, but for the Worse: we may change our Masters, but not ease our Shoulders from those Grievances, we formerly groan'd under. 'Tis easy to fore-see these Inconveniencies by the Eye of Reason; and Experience, which is the Mistress of Fools, will abundantly convince us of them. But,

4 Because, when ever we Preachers inforce this Do­ctrine from the practice of Holy Men recorded in Scri­pture, or other Instances out of Profane or Ecclesiasti­cal History, still the Diversity of Government is al­ledged as a sufficient Bar to the Force of the Argu­ment. I shall in the last Place make good my Con­clusion from the express Statute Law of the Land. And whereas I could produce several Acts of Parliament to this purpose, yet Choosing rather to keep my self with­in Compass, within my own Sphere, being unwilling to seem too pert and busy in other Mens Province, I shall not give my self the Trouble to examine Cook and other Learned Digesters of our Laws, nor to search the Rolls in the Tower: Yet I hope I may be allowed to take my own Book into my Hand without Offence, and put you in Remembrance of that Declaration and Acknowledgement, which I have more than once made. You may meet with it in that Publick Act prefixt before the Liturgy in these Words— I do declare that it is not Lawful upon any Pretence, whatever to take Arms against the King, and that I do abhor that Traiterous Position of Taking up Arms by his Authority against his Person, or against those that are Commissionated by him. So that to take up Arms, to resist the Kings Mi­nisters, [Page 71] and Officers having his Commission, is Treason; To maintain the Legality of it is traiterous, and to be abhorred. And hence you see that 'twas no Crime, nor Scandal in sixty two to be an Abhorrer, even in the Judgment of the Wisdom of the whole Nation. If I should be told, that this Declaration was intended only for the Clergy and School-Masters to subscribe, I shall acknowledge that True: but must by the way ob­serve, what Opinion our Law-givers then had of those who would be thought the only Preachers of Christ and him Crucifyed, but it seems were suspected as the vilest Disturbers of the Government, and most dange­rous Incendiaries of the Common-wealth. And since so great Trust is reposed in those who take upon them these Employments, since they have Opportunity (if they will) to debauch the Understandings of their Disciples, our Law-givers judged it necessary to oblige them to that Declaration, and only to admit such, of whose Fidelity to the Peace of the Nation they were assured, and of whose indeavours of instilling no tur­bulent and treasonable Principles into the Ears and Minds of the People they were competently secure. However tho the Clergy and School-Masters only are obliged unto that Acknowledgement; yet if the Taking up Arms against those that are Commissionated by the King is to be abhorred by us, and is in its self traiterous, then certainly no Subjects ought to resist the Kings Ministers: the Position of its Lawfulness being Traiterous, the Execution thereof can be no less then Treason. But that the People may Lawfully and Conscientiously commit Treason, is a Solaecism in Government as well as Heresy in Divinity. Hence the Phansie of the Author of that Book, entituled A Treatise of Monarchy, is plainly confuted, who argues [Page 72] tho not for a Legal Power exprest in the Political Con­tract, yet for a Moral, Natural Transcendent Power (implyed in all Constitutions) for the People to resist the Kings Ministers and Destructive Instruments. To assert this Lawful upon any pretence, whatever is you see traiterous, the enterprice is therefore Treason, strictly and expresly provided against by the Law of the Land. So much for the Reasons of my Answer to this Question.

And thus I have said, (as breifly, as I could) what I thought fit upon this Argument, expecting now to be answered in the Words of the Disciples— This is an hard Saying, who can hear it? What? may we not de­fend our selves against Manifest Injury, against Unsup­portable Oppression, when all other Relief is denied us, when there is no other Way left to avoid the Mi­series of Tyranny and Slavery? If this be our Case, who are Christians (as you have stated it,) then fare­well all our Temporal Interests, we are then the most wretched People in the World. With what ease than may ambitious Men and corrupt Magistrates trample on us? Where is the Law of Nature, that Great, that Royal Law of self Preservation? In Answer hereunto, I shall readily grant, that 'tis an hard Chapter, not easily read or believed, not willingly digested by Flesh and Blood. 'Tis one of those high and difficult Points, which I do not expect should take Root in the Heart of every Half-thick Christian and temporary Believer. Either the wicked one Will catch away this Seed sown, or Persecution, or the Cares of this Life, or the Deceitfulness of Riches, or the Love of them­selves and of this World will choke it. But I would desire Men of Understanding and Integrity (for that such only I can hope to prevail,) to recollect my [Page 73] reasons; and moreover to consider with themselves, how that there are many other strict Precepts laid upon us by our blessed Lord, no less difficult in themselves, and altogether as repugnant to the Law of Nature Self preservation. How often, how peremptorily are we commanded in general to crucifie our selves to the world, and the world to us? to mortifie our earthly members, to moderate our selves in the desire and fruition even of such things which nature prompts us to, and allows us; to vanquish our Passions, which, as the Wise man tells us, is a more heroick atchievement than to conquer a City. Prov. 16. 32.How frequently are we directed to lay aside those incli­nations, which Nature and the God of Nature has im­planted in us, to subdue those appetites which our na­tural temper inclines us to, which Interest, Self love, and Self preservation dictates to us? What a paradox is it the Natural man, yea to many Pretenders unto strict Holiness to hear, that by the Doctrine of God our Saviour, they must not render evil for evil, nor 1 Pet. 3. 9. railing for railing, but contrariwise blessing? That they must not be their own Judges, nor revenge their own Rom. 12. 19. quarrels; that being the prerogative of God, and is only communicated to our earthly Governours? What will these men say or think, when I shall put them in mind of that restraint God has laid on us all, how he has limited the Natural Law of preserving our selves? When I shall repeat those excellent Sayings of Christ and his Apostles; If thine Enemy hunger, feed him; if Ver. 20. he thirst, give him drink. Love your Enemies, bless them Matth. 5. 44. that curse you, do good to them that hate you, pray for them that despitefully use you and persecute you? What can the Troublers of our Israel answer, if I help them to re­member the prudent Caution of the Apostle, of ab­staining 1 Thes. 5. 22. from all appearance of evil; those admirable Pas­sages, [Page 74] 1 Pet. 3. 17. 1 Cor. 6. 7. Matth. 5. 39. that 'tis better to suffer for well-doing than for evil­doing: Why do you not rather take wrong? To him that smites thee on the right cheek turn the other also? When and where (I pray) and in what Relation are these Gospel Precepts applicable to us, if not in our Political State? And is it not much more reason, that we avoid appearance of evil, and offences towards our Superiors and Rulers, than towards one another? To suffer pa­tiently from the Civil Magistrate, to take wrong from the Kings Ministers rather than from our equals and Fellow Subjects? I can never enough admire the confi­dence of some men, who are not asham'd to ascribe Plat. Red.the preservation of Gospel Holiness solely to the Dis­senters amongst us; whereas I cannot discern the Spi­rit of the Gospel among them at all. Where almost will you find that Modesty, Humility, Peaceableness, Gentleness, easiness to be Intreated, Moderaton, Obe­dience, Condescention (I shall for once on this occa­sion call it so) unto Governours which are required in the Scriptures, and are reckon'd up as the fruits of the Spirit? I would once again here ask, Why may not our Religion be suppos'd to restrain and interpret the general Law of Nature Self preservation, in the point of Subjection and Non-resistance of Authority, as well as in the case of private Revenge? Why should we not be thought oblig'd to cut off one of our hands, or feet, Matth. 5. 29.and to pluck out our right eyes (those darling, usefull and necessary Members) for the sake of Publick Peace, as well as to avoid Private Offences.

It is no small argument to me of the Wisdom and Goodness of God in setting his stamp and approbation upon the precept of Subjection; that to our own per­sonal Contracts he has superadded an immediate tye of Conscience in the Revelation of his Will: That God, [Page 75] who best knows our Hearts, the frowardness of our Wills, the violence of our Passions, the stubborness of our Affections, what Lovers of our selves we naturally are, what partial Judgers of our own Rights and In­terests, has therefore thought good to inclose that Law of Nature Self preservation, allowing it unto us in no case to the breach or hazard of the publick Peace of the Commonwealth. And if I may not defend my self against the injuries of my private Brother and Fellow Citizen, but as the Law and the Peace of the State permits, how shall I challenge that Liberty in a vio­lent and tumultuous resistance of the Civil Magistrate? God, who is a God of Order and not of Confusion, has himself so dispos'd and methodiz'd the Polities and earthly Governments of men, as that 'tis impossible (if we would Conscienciously attend our duty) that Wars, and Fightings, and cutting of Throats should in any wise be justifiable. If so, then Government is defective and in effect dissolv'd; then is not Magistracy the Ordinance of God, but at the Will of the People, and alterable at their pleasure, when ever they think fit to quarrel at the Princes conduct, or at his Ministers pretended outrages and encroachments. For where every one may do what is right in his own eyes, that State which admits the Subject in any case whatever to call the Rulers to account, to punish or to dethrone them, or to make any violent changes in the Com­monwealth, there is no Government at all among them, but Anarchy and Confusion, and every evil work. But

To draw to a Conclusion, these Discourses (I con­fess) administer but cold Comfort to the greatest part of men, who (like Beasts) live by Sense and not by Reason, are led by an excessive Love of themselves, [Page 76] more than by the Will of God, and the publick good of Societies. What Security in the mean while (say they) have we of our Liberties and Properties, of en­joying in any tolerable measure the labour of our own hands, and of transmitting the benefit thereof to po­sterity? I answer, You have all the Security this un­certain world can afford. You have the Almighty God Psal. 76. 12.taking care of you, in whose hands are the Spirit of Princes, and he will restrain them. His word and pro­mise is engaged. His hands are not short that they can­not save, neither are his ears heavy that they cannot hear. You have his Almighty Power to rely on, his Unsear­chable Wisdom to depend on, his Infinite Goodness to shelter you, his Truth and Faithfulness to trust in, and the eyes of his Providence continually watching over you. You have the consideration of the natural frail­ty of your earthly Governours to comfort and to up­hold you. Though they are Gods, bearing the image of God in the Political Government, yet are they but Psal. 82. 7.meer moral men, whose breath is in their Nostrils; they must die like men, and fall like Princes. Look, how dieth the greatest Potentate? even as the meanest Subject. There will be no difference between you and them at the Great day, the day of Judgment. They must (then at least whatever privilege they claim in this life) give an account at the Tribunal of God, where there will be no respect of persons, where there Cruelty and Tyranny (if they are guilty of any) and all their Kingcraft and Mysteries of State will be disclos'd, and must be answer'd. The dread and ex­pectation of which last Assizes will in a great measure check their exorbitances, and put such manicles on their hands, that ofttimes the things they would they [Page 77] cannot do; and what they would not, even that they do against their wills.

Yet farther, you have the consideration of the stur­diness of many ill principled Subjects among you, who (though not to be justified yet) are as a bullwark to the peaceable and conscientious. There is a shrew'd Proverb among us, Oppression will make a Wise man mad, much more the Wicked and the Rebellious. In the utmost extremities, there will rise up men (not strictly conscientious, but) of undaunted natural spirit and courage, that will not stick to break through all the honds of Duty and Obedience, and with the ha­zard of their Lives and Fortunes endeavour to redress intolerable Grievances. And thus their Sin through the righteous Judgment of God may prove the security. But why do I mention these things? I see no necessity of this Discourse. I know not wherefore we should entertain such odd suspicions of our Magistrates, as to support our selves with the probability of their disasters. Let us be more just and charitable towards them, ac­counting of them as men of Honour and Honesty as well as our selves; that know their duty, and will lau­dably discharge it out of a principle of Conscience. They cannot be ignorant of this one thing, that the end of Government and the measure of their Power is the good of the People. There is likewise the Oath of God upon them, that they will Govern according to Law. And what other assurance would any man wish for? 'Tis more I am sure than many among us will give for their peaceable demeanour. He that is not content herewith 'tis impossible to satisfie him, ex­cept by delivering up the reigns of Government into his hand, and then the Subject can still have no better security than an Oath. An Oath is the end of all [Page 78] strife among men, and 'tis the highest Assurance God has or can give us of the righteousness of his Govern­ment and Providence. He that thinks not this suffi­cient is not fit to live in this world, unworthy to en­joy the Society of men, and the benefit of Govern­ment. Besides, it is the Interest of Governours that the Subjects Rights and Properties be maintain'd, that they should be secur'd and encourag'd in their Labours, and reap the fruit of their Industry and Improvements, the Riches of the People being the Glory, the Strength, and the Riches of the Prince; and therefore if Con­science will not, yet at least his Interest will incline him unto moderation in the exercise of Dominion. I shall yet farther add, that you have the Security of your Fellow Subjects, such I mean as are wise and conscientious, that will not be destructive instruments, nor actively assist in oppressing the people contrary to Law. As for others, Fear will in some measure check many of them, and the Law of the Land will curb them. The crys of the afflicted Subjects will at length reach the ears of the Prince, and necessity of State will prevail with him to deliver up his evil Counsellors as a sacrifice to the peoples discontents. Yea (as the case now stands with us) the Kings Officers, though com­missionated by him being punishable by Law, as I take it, for their illegal proceedings, there is little ground to fear, tis hardly possible any barbarous or unsup­portable mischief should arise in our Government; and the most that can in likelihood happen, will be much more eligible than the breach of the publick Peace, and the violent overthrow of the present Establish­ment.

Finally, my Brethren, give me leave to add; count me not a flatterer if I speak it out of the reach of his [Page 79] Sacred Ears, when I consider the person of our pre­sent Prince, the sweetness of his Nature, our long ex­perience of the mildness of his Government, the bles­sings of Peace, plenty and increase of Trade, which we have long enjoy'd under him: When I recollect how strictly and impartially righteousness and justice is executed among us, he seldom or never obstruct­ing the course of the Law; except it be in extending his mercy and pardon to unfortunate Criminals, which is the heighth and pride of his good nature; and wherein he may be said truly to resemble God him­self. But otherwise let me ask you, whose Ox has he taken, whose Ass has he seiz'd, who has he De­frauded or Oppressed, whose Life, whose Property has he invaded, whose Liberty has he illegally or unrea­sonably restrain'd in Prison, or in Exile? When I re­member his Charity in forgiving us, his Readiness to oblige us, the fresh assurances we have of his Govern­ing by Law; when I here of foreign Princes admiring his Wisdom, and courting his Friendship, as much perhaps as Sheba did Solomons; when I see the mise­rable and afflicted Subjects of other Nations seeking and finding shelter under his wings; when I read those but just thanks and commendations they return him, whilst they admire the prudence and moderati­on of his Conduct, the protection and quietness we our selves receive from him: Yea, when in a Seditious Author, I met with this Testimony of his Royal Grace and goodness,— That he never made use of his Ne­gative Voice, or denied his Assent but to one publick Act only: And whereas one of the worst of his Enemies has allow'd him this Character, That he is a Prince un­der whose displeasure his adversaries fall gently. In fine, since I cannot but behold and admire his Wisdom in [Page 80] the choice of the subordinate Magistrates, whose Pie­ty, Learning and Integrity is conspicuous amongst us, I cannot forbear, not only out of duty to the Divine Ordinance, but in gratitude and thankfulness to God and the King, acknowledge our present happiness and security: Not only put you in mind to be subject to Principalities and Powers, and to obey Magistrates; but also offer up my Prayers to God,— That he would grant the King a long Life and abundance of Years, at home Peace, and Victory abroad▪ a Loyal Senate, and a faithful People, a quiet World, and a secure Reign: And in fine, that God would inspire us all with such a measure of his Grace, that by our patience, peaceableness and chearful subjection, our present happiness may be con­tinued still longer unto us under his Government, and his Successours that shall come after him; that we and the Ages to come may lead quiet and peaceable Lives, in all godliness and honesty.

AMEN.