Animadversions on Johnsons Answer to Jovian, Letter 2
SIR,
I Have read Sir R. H's. Preface, which operates quite contrary to your expectation, and instead of inducing my consent, rather confirms my former resolution to suppress the Letters you urge me to make publick. For if Persons of his Birth, Education, Parts, and Figure in the World, are so easily imposed on, and will not be at the trouble of reading on both sides, what fruit can be expected from these Papers, what candour or justice are they like to meet with? I am sorry to observe a Gentleman professing to have his sentiments altogether free, and unprejudiced by other Mens Opinions, so absolutely resign his Iudgment to a fond Passion for Mr. Johnson, and pour out his F…ry on Jovian, a Book he seems to have read nothing of, but in Julian's Answer. I see Implicite Faith hath large Dominions, lying without the Pale of the Roman Church; and that Persons of the most refined Wits, and even Sceptical Curiosity, too frequently submit to its Yoke.
I know it is not the particular infelicity of this Noble Person, but an unhappiness incident to all great Men, that their circumstances and more… weighty employments will not allow their Personal examination of many things which come before them. They are forced to see with other Mens Eyes, and to hear with other Mens Ears, and so long as they trust none but Persons of Iudgment and Integrity, they suffer little thereby. But it hath been Sir R's. ill Fortune to use the Observations and Collections of some Men, who either for lack of sense or honesty, have shamefully abused his confidence in them.
I cannot, out of respect to him, believe, that if Sir R. had read Jovian through, he would have failed to observe the vast difference between calling the Laws which secure the Rights of the Crown, Imperial Laws, and ascribing to our King's Imperial Power, or that he would have stained his Honour by that unjust Charge on Dr. Hicks, saying,Pref. p. 22. That Imperial Power may make a lawless attempt or prosecution lawful. But he had that, and several other invidious reflections on the Doctor, out of the excellent Mr. Johnson, who made Collections out of Jovian for him, and deserves very ill of him, for doing it with so little fidelity.
His Collection of Protestant Writers, which favour the Doctrine of Resistance, was made by a no less trusty hand. The Authorities of Zuinglius, Calvin, and some others, are borrowed from Philanax Anglicus, a Iesuit, whom Dr. Du Moulin excellently answered: where he met with the rest I know not. I cannot be so injurious to the Honourable Authour, as to believe, that he made the Collection himself, since upon examining two or three of the Citations, I find such errours, as I am perswaded it is impossible for him to commit.
What he cites from Calvin on Daniel 6. ver. 7. is not there, nor yet hath the place to which Philanax refers, either the words or sense of what we read p. 16. *The passage which occasioned Sir Robert to say Peter Martyr on Iud. c. 3. approves the proceedings against Richard the Second is this, Polydor…s Virgilius tradit Anglos aliquando Reges suos compulisse ad. rationem reddendam pecuniae malè administratae.Peter Martyr on Judges c. 3. hath not a word of the Parliaments Proceedings against King Richard the Second, and considering how he determines the Case of Resistance there, I very much question whether he approved them. Again, he calls the Authour of the Book of Obedience Thomas Goodman, whom both the Title Page of the Book, and Whittingam's Preface call Christopher. The mistake, I confess, is of no moment, but it sheweth the negligence of the Person who made the Collection. I wonder for what reason Sir R. brings afresh on the Stage such passages as these, which our Romish Adversaries have for above a hundred years cast in our Dish,See Bishop Bilson of Christian Subjection. Part 3. p. 270. &c. Edit. 8. he saith Goodman disliked his own Opinion, p. 274. as Seditious, and our own Divines have vindicated the Reformed Churches, partly by condemning some of them, and partly by shewing, that others are maliciously wrested, or impertinently alledged. But I know not how such Collections make for their Majesties Service, and the Honour of the Reformation; it's possible this Noble Authour doth.
I think he is as little obliged, by a third Person, who eased him of the drudgery of turning the Bible for Scripture Examples of an Original Contract. For had Sir R. used his own Eyes in that search, he would have seen, that the Instances of David and Jehoiada are no proofs, that there were pacta conventa, between the Iewish Kings and their People, as there are in Poland; or that the former were accountable to the latter.Cum Re…um Iudeorum ejuscem…di esset, u… omnes à Rege pènderent (non enim à Proceribus eligebatur, sed ex successione posteri ejus familiae imperabant, quam Deus praescripserat) ideo, in legibus Deuteronom. & 1 libro Samuelis, in quibus jus regium sancitur, nullis facultus conceditur ut illos deturbent, &c. P. Mart. in Judic. 3. sub finem. Peter Martyr on the third of Judges, teaches the quite contrary. And whoever reads the two places in the Chronicles, cited to prove a Contract between David and his People, and compareth them with the parallel places in Samuel, and Kings, will hardly think them satisfactory.
David's Covenant with the Elders of Israel, was a plain Treaty of Peace, and Submission to David, after a long and unsuccessful defence of the Title of the House of Saul. It was first concluded by Abner, and upon his Murder, renewed and solemnly ratified by the Elders of Israel. See 2 Sam. Ch. II, III, IV, V. But you read of no Covenant made with the Men of Judah, who Anointed him King immediately on Saul's Death.
The Instance of Jehoiada making a Covenant, 2 Chron. XXIII. 16. signifies as little. As it is related, 2 Kings XI. 17. it appears indeed, that a Covenant was made between the King and People, as well as with the LORD. And as the tenour of the latter was, That after their Apostasy to Idols, under Athaliah, they should become the Lord's People; so probably the tenour of that with the King was, That after Athaliah's Vsurpation, they should become Subjects to Joash, their rightful King. He was but seven years old, and at that age incapable of contracting for himself, and it appears not that Jehoiada made any conditions for him, the breaking of which should absolve them from their Allegiance.
And now we are upon Scripture Collections, you shall see how unfortunate he is, in an instance or two more. To prove, that all wrongs [done by wicked Kings] are not unquestionable in this World, P. 36.he alledgeth the case of Ahab, who forfeited his Succession for Tyranny; Now I do not find, that after the Prophet Elijah pronounced the Sentence, the People deposed him, or altered the Succession, but waited till God, by express Revelation… transferred the Crown to another Family, and sent the Prophet Elisha to anoint Jehu. I believe neither Jovian, nor any other of our Passive Doctors, ever said, That God may not call wicked Kings to an account in this Life; but the contrary, and that he usually doth it. And his other instance, if it be possible, is less to the purpose. He saith, Samuel medled not till God saw good to reckon with him: For God had given a special Commandment to Saul, to destroy the Amalekites, and spare none, which Command Saul not executing, the Prophet did it with his own hand. I ever thought Agag's losing both his Kingdom and his Life, was part at least of his account with God.
You see, Sir, how dangerous it is to trust to other Mens Collections, unless you are well assured of their Fidelity. Yet I must confess, Sir R. H. had as much temptation as any man could have to trust. He formerly met with an honest Sorbon Doctor,Io. Launoy de …ariâ Aristot. in Acad. Paris. Fortunâ. who obliged him with a true Account of the various Decrees for and against Aristotle, in the Vniversity of Paris, which makes as handsome an appearance as any thing in this whole Book. He deserved his acknowledgements, and praise, much better than Mr. Johnson, tho' I do not yet find that they are any where paid him.
I believe Dr. Hicks is not ill pleased with this Noble Authour, for suggesting that Jovian was written by a Club, and takes it for a great Honour, that he esteems him the most considerable of all the Learned Assertors of the Doctrine of Non-resistance. Yet I have great reason to tell you, that he is mistaken, that Jovian was as much the Doctors own Work, as any Book extant, was the Authours whose name it bears; and I am confident he hath no other ground for this fancy, but only that he knoweth, (and who doth not know?) that Julian and its Defence were both made by a Club, and that as Mr. Hunt's Postscript afforded the choicest materials of the former, so Mr. Atwood's Letter of Remarks, furnished the most considerable Reflections upon Jovian, we meet with in the latter.
I might observe to you, how little Reverence Sir R. discovers for Christian Religion, and amidst all his zeal for it, takes the liberty to make sport with the Baptismal Vow, p. 19. and calls the Dreadful Iudgment, which must pass on Kings, as well as their meanest Subjects, a pretended Account to be made up only with God. Tho' I hope the latter was rather from an infelicity in expressing himself, than any bad meaning. But I must remember that I am answering your Letter, and not Sir R's Preface.
The Story your Friend told me of the great Church-man, was, I confess, altogether News to me, and very surprizing, and more than I can yet believe. If he were not able to discern the difference between Passive Obedience, and Blind Obedience, he had great reason to complain of an unhappy Education. Passive Obedience is not inconsistent with the liberty of examining the commands of a Superiour; it freely exerciseth a Iudgment of Discretion, and arms a Man with Courage, to despise all the hazards he may run, for choosing to obey God rather than Man. Passive Obedience tempers no Man into a soft and base compliance with the Arbitrary and Illegal designs of a Prince; but on the contrary alloweth a Man by all legal means to oppose them, and in case he falls into disgrace, or any other suffering on that account, it fortifieth him with Patience to bear it like a Christian. He who understands what Passive Obedience is, will live happily and easily, so long as he keeps a good Conscience, though he puts himself thereby out of his Prince's Favour.
I cannot forbear smiling at these pleasant Gentlemen, who have so extravagant an opinion of Mr. J's. Performance and Merit; nor can I envy him such Applauses, as shew some little Wit, but no Iudgment; those merry Gentlemen too much despise the dark Subtilties of Aristotle, Reflect. p. 21.to be competent Iudges of the Merit of this Cause, their Heads lie readier to take a Iest than an Argument.
Therefore, Sir, in yielding to the Desires of your self and other Friends, that I would permit the Printing of my Letters, I have no consideration of any of those Gentlemen; here is no Entertainment for such Readers, nor do I expect that they will vouchsafe to read, but that they will condemn them, as they did Jovian, unheard. There are too many ready to speak evil of things they know not, and it were great vanity in me to hope, That I can influence the Opinions of Patriots, that is, Men who carry on their Mischievous Designs, and Private Interests, under the Specious Cloak of a Publick Spirit. 'Tis for the sake of a more Sincere and Sober sort of Men, who have patience to hear both sides, and are ready, whatever their present Sentiments are, to yield to the clear evidence of Truth, that I resign these Papers entirely to your disposal.
Since you assure me they have rectified the mistakes of some, I hope they may do like service to others: and if so, I shall rejoice in being an Instrument of lessening the unreasonable Esteem some have for Julian, which otherwise will unavoidably be of very ill Consequence to their Majesties and the Nation. For I always was of that great Man's Opinion, the Learned Dean of Canterbury, now of St. Pauls, in his Letter to the Lord Russel, That Resistance, if our Religion and Rights should be invaded, is not allowable, because the Government and Peace of humane Society could not well subsist on those Terms.
He thus closeth his determination of this Case of Resistance. Id respondi quod pietas & Sacrae literae s…adent, Certè si populo sit fas regno dejicere injustè imperantes, nulli Principes aut Reges usquam tuti erunt. Quamvis enim probè & sanctè regnant, non tamen populo satisfaciunt.This was Peter Martyr's Doctrine on the third of Judges, about 120 years before. Turbulent and designing men will never want quarrels against the best and most gracious Princes: they will cast off the most Iust and Easy Yoke, A Theocracy would not please them, they would pick quarrels with a Samuel, or Moses; and they who set up for the Redress of Grievances, never want followers. For Slanders are easily credited against a King.
I must desire you to advertise the Reader, that I do not professedly treat of the Subject of Non-resistance, or any other subject handled by Jovian; All I design is, to consider the Controversy between that Authour and Mr. Johnson, and how fairly the latter hath treated his Adversary. And though the Reader might expect a much better Vindication from the Learned Authour, if he saw good to write one; yet he will find so much said in these Letters, as will satisfy him, that Jovian continues Master of the Field, notwithstanding the vain Triumphs of the Republican Party, and that the Doctrine of Non-resistance conduces as much to the security of the Subject as of the Prince.
July 31. 1690. Sir, I am, &c.