The English Nonconformity Under King Charles II and James II, Chapter 53 – Chapter 54
CHAP. LIII. POINT X. Of Swearing never to endeavour any alteration of Government in the Church.
M.
HOW far this extendeth objectively I before proved X. by. 1. The words of the Oaths. 2. The consent of the Bishops. 3. And the words of the seven Canons; and the Et Caetera Canon in 1640. so that there is no doubt of it.
2. How far it extendeth as to the persons obliged, I before told you, and you may read; 1. In the Corporation Act, which imposeth it on all Corporations. 2. In the Vestry Act, which imposeth it on all Church-Vestries. 3. In the Act of Vniformity, which imposeth the subscription on all the Clergy. 4. In the Oxford Act of Banishment, which imposeth the Oath on Non-conformists, and more. 5. In the Militia Act, which imposeth it on all the Military Commanders, and Souldiers in the Land; so that you may well say, that is a National Covenant or Oath.
3. What is amiss in the Church-Government that needeth an amending alteration, I have so often told you, that I will not repeat it. Judge then what this Oath importeth.
L.
It could never be the meaning of the Parliament, that no man shall endeavour to amend the faults of any Officers, Courts or Actions; for they often amend their own Acts of Parliament; and they reserve a Power in King and Parliament, to make alterations even in Church Governments: But that belongs not to the People, nor should they endeavour it.
M.
1. I hope you will not confound Stated Offices, and Mens Exercise of them in Practice. I grant that they do not bind us by Oath never to endeavour that Bishops, and all the Officers of their Courts may be honest men, and slander, and injure no man against Law, &c. But it is the Offices, as here stated, that are made thus far unalterable, named in the Canon [Arch-Bishops, Bishops, Deans, Arch-Deacons, and the rest that bear Office therein.]
2. I grant, that the Law is made to bind none but Subjects; and that an altering power is reserved to King and Parliament: But it doth not follow, that all the Subjects be not bound by it: Though They may change Laws, yet We may not: And as you say, They suppose that it belongeth not to the People to endeavour it: Which We grant, as to any Rebellious, Seditious, or otherwise unlawful Endeavour: But whether God bind not all men in their own Place and Calling, by Prayer, Conference, Elections of Officers, Petition, &c. to endeavour to amend all Crying, Dangerous, Common Sins, is a farther Question.
L.
They cannot mean to exclude Petitioning, for that is the Subjects Right, and is by them allowed with Restraints.
M.
1. It is meant in opposition to the Scots Covenant, which tyed men to oppose Popery, Prelacy, and Schisme, only in their several Places and Callings.
2. It is expres'd in the most universal terms, without the least Exception, by men that knew how to speak.
3. Reasons were given in Parliament against any Limitation, and those Reasons carryed it.
4. They were Men that were wholly for the Church of England, whose Canon had before Excommunicated themselves, and all men, that accused any Office in the Church Government as sinful. And they knew, that should any of them, when the Parliament is risen (yea, or there) so say, he is an Excommunicate Man.
5. It is most certain that they intended to bind all Subjects on whom these Oaths are imposed, even from petitioning, or any other Endeavour of Alteration; though they allow petitioning in other Cases; for they intended to fix and secure the Church-Government against all Alterations.
6. Therefore (as I said before) they joined it with, yea, and set it before State-Government in all their Oaths and Covenants; And do you think in Conscience, they left men at liberty to petition against Monarchy, or against the Life, or Power, or Honour of the King: Far be it from us to think so ill of them.
I must profess to you that I do not think half so ill of well-order'd Monasteries of Men or Women, as I do of our large Diocesses, or our Lay-Excommunicators, according to the Canons. And yet even in the Times of Popery, the Nation was not Sworn never to endeavour any alteration of Monasteries.
If you would have all Corporations, Soldiers, Vestries, Ministers sworn never to endeavour to cure the Sick, to relieve the Poor, to seek more Wealth, to reform all Play-houses, Ale-houses and Taverns, to Catechize their Families, &c. I would not join with you.
National Oaths and Covenants are Matters of great moment: We have deeply suffered by rashness in such already: And should any of them prove false and wicked, and the Nation be stigmatized with Perjury, you might more sadly write, Lord have Mercy on us, on the Land, than on the Doors where the most dreadful Plague prevaileth.
CHAP. LIV. POINT XI. Of Swearing an Abhorrence of taking Arms against any Commissionated by the KING.
M.
THis also I have said enough of in the Case of the XI. Ministers, and told you that we are far from scrupling it in Disloyalty; but in Loyalty, only, 1. Lest the Keepers of the Seals may by Commissions depose the King, or deliver up the Kingdom to whom they please. 2. Because the Authority of a Commission, as above, and against the King's own Law, is not a matter that Lawyers and Judges themselves are agreed of, and therefore unfit for the unskilful Vulgar to determine by their Oath.
L.
The end is but to secure your Loyalty.
M.
The End is one thing, and the Means another: We are ready to give better security of our Loyalty than this, which I before intimated to you.
Do you think in your Conscience that all the Souldiers in England, and all the Corporation-Officers, and entrusted Persons, and all the Vestry-men, and all the Ministers are so well skill'd in Politicks and Law, above Bishop Bilson, Grotius, Barclay, and all the Tribes of Learned Lawyers, Casuists, Canonists, Philosophers, &c. before named, as that they can take such an Oath in Truth, Iudgment, and Righteousness? Swearing Allegiance, and renouncing Rebellion, is easily known to be every Subjects Duty. But to unty knotty Controversies in Law, is sure above every vulgar Brain.
Why was not this way found out to prevent all the Civil Wars in the days of the two Williams, of Stephen, of Henry the 1st. and 3d. of K. Iohn, of Edward 2d. of Richard 2d. of Henry 4th. and Edward 4th. and Henry 6th. and Richard 3d. and to prevent the Insurrections in the days of Q. Mary, and Q. Elizabeth? Why do they not this way decide all the Controversies at Liege, Colen, &c. to make the People determine them by Oath?
All Politicks agree that the Difference between near Subjects and Slaves, is, that the former have propriety which none can take from them, but by their Consent, at least in their Wives, Children, and Lives; and that Slaves have none such, nor may resist a Commission to take them away, though causlesly, and Laws are there but the Will of the Lord, who may cross them at his pleasure; and that a Ruler of Subjects, and an Owner of Slaves thus differ. Now if it be a Controversy, Whether the English be meer Subjects or Slaves, the ignorant Vulgar are no fit Judges to decide it, and that by Oath?