The Healing Paper, Postscript – Notice
A Poſtſcript.
THis Paper being a Countermine againſt Popery, I do think fit to haſten it out, that the Members of Parliament may have competent time to conſider of it this Seſſion. I did not think the later Part would have been ſo ſeaſonable, as I humbly believe it may be now to the moſt of thoſe who deſire a long Life for the King, and the Growth of the Proteſtant Religion. It was almoſt Deſpair ſet me on the Work, and now there is a little Hope got into my Heart, that ſomething may come of this Endeavour, and God's Bleſſing be upon it. The Reaſon why I annex this Half Sheet to the reſt, is becauſe I find it neceſſary in regard to that one Clauſe in the Subſcription, And that the ſame was in it ſelf an unlawful Oath. I deſire the Reader here to remember, that I ſubſcribe not this Clauſe by vertue of an Interpretation, for I think the meaning of the Law giver to be more then I can ſubſcribe unto: but by virtue of my Liberty of Exception and Reſtriction. I do therefore diſtinguiſh between the Matter Covenanted, which is the Extirpation of Prelacy, or Change of Government: and the Act of Covenanting, which was their ſwearing to endeavour it. I would have the Reader then note alſo, that I ſubſcribe not that the Oath in the Matter Covenanted was in it ſelf unlawful: for this Matter Covenanted (I have ſaid) may be conſidered Preciſely in it ſelf, or Complexly with its Circumſtances, and more particularly under the Circumſtance of the King's Remonſtrances againſt the Covenant. I do believe, that an Endeavour of any Alteration of Government under this Circumſtance of the King's Prohibitions that is, for any to go about it without his Conſent and againſt it (as I ſpeak) was Ʋnlawfull, though I ſuppoſe it not ſo under the contrary Circumſtances (if the King had allowed it), and conſequently that it is not ſo in its ſelf, if we reſpect onelyonly this Matter Covenanted: But for as much as an Act becomes Evil upon every Defect, when all Circumſtances muſt concur to make an Action Good, and he that ſwore this Covenant could not ſwear to the Matter Preciſely, but Complexly conſidered, that is, to the Matter under this Circumſtance with others, I do apprehend that the matter being thereby render'd evil, the Oath as taken for the Act of Covenanting, in regard to this Circumſtance was in it ſelf unlawful. It may be pleaded, that the Covenant maintaines the King and his Authority to the full, and limits this Endeavour to mens Places and Callings, and that there was therefore nothing in this unlawfull. I reply, If any man ſhould argue rather, that the ſupream Power of this Nation does lie in the King and the Parliament as one Corporation, and when they were divided (and the Parliament could not be diſſolved) the Conſtitution was at an end, or Interſtition; That conſequently every one, & any one, might covenant, at that time, to ſet up a new Government without the conſent of Either, King or Parliament, by the way of an Agreement of the People, This were to ſay ſomething: But to own the King and his Authority, and ſwear to maintain it in the ſame Oath, wherein they ſwear to change the Government (when he declares againſt that Change, that is) without him, and againſt his Authority, this is vertually a contradiction in Adjecto, and makes the Oath in the very act it ſelf of ſwearing (if that be, or may go for, the Oath in it ſelf) unlawful. Again, To ſwear that in our place and calling, we will endeavour to change the Government when the King refuſes his conſent, What is it, but to ſwear to do that, in the doing whereof we muſt Act out of our Place and Calling, ſeeing there is, and can be, no Endeavour of that kind in our Place and Calling, but what is done with Subordination to his Conſent in an Act of Parliament? You will ſay perhaps, It is true, that they entred this Covenant without the King's Conſent, but the Meaning of the Covenant was, That the Change ſhould be made, and endeavoured to be effected only by his Conſent. I return, To enter into Covenant to Change the Government when the King by his Remonſtrances and Declarations did declare that he would not conſent to that Change, and prohibited his Subjects to enter into ſuch a League, was I ſuppoſe in it ſelf Ʋnlawful. Or thus, To Swear againſt the King's Will or Prohibition to do a thing which to do without his Will is unlawful, is in it ſelf. (I take it) an unlawful Oath. Such was this Covenant. But to proceed, It is too well known that it was the Scots brought in this Covenant, and that it is (or was) a Principle of theirs, That the Reformation of Religion belongs to the Kirk, ſo as they may (or might) ſet it up, or endeavour the ſame without the Conſent of the King, if they obtain it not (which is a Principle in my Apprehenſion directly repugnant to that Supreamacy which the Engliſh Subjects give to their King), and it was apparent, that the Covenant was carried on by the Parliament and Army according to that Principle; ſo that if any piouſly judicious Man ſhall ſcruple his Soul with the Belief that this was the Meaning of the Oath, That they ſhould endeavour a Reformation to be effected only by the King's Conſent, and not otherwiſe, I have two things to offer him for his Conviction; to wit, The conſtant Practiſe of the Covenanters to the contrary, and this one Argument, wherein alone I ſhall reſt. To ſwear to endeavour a Change of the Government when the King refuſes his Conſent, muſt either be with Intention to do it without his Conſent, or elſe be a vain Oath. But to do this in a diſorderly way without his Conſent, or to take the Oath in vain, either of the two, was in it ſelf (I ſuppoſe) Ʋnlawful. Ergo, This Oath was in ſelf an unlawful Oath. I would not have any of my Brethren therefore here to be ſtumbled (as they are apt to be) ſo ſoon as they diſcry the Scope of this Subſcription to tend to a Renunciation of the Covenant; for if we may be permitted to Renounce this Covenant with this Liberty of Exception of what is Good and Obligatory in it, and Reſtriction of the Renunciation to that only which is Unlawful, as the Endeavour of any Alteration of Government in a diſorderly way, without the Conſent of the King (as they did in the late times) was, I ſee no reaſon why they ſhould not be as forward to ſuch a Renunciation, as to any other the like Injunction. For my own part, to rid my ſelf of this Scruple quite, which in regard to the Words in it ſelf, have been apt to ſtick upon me ſtill in this Clauſe, I will conclude thus. If the meaning of the covenant by endeavouring the extirpation of Prelacy, was only to endeavour the reformation of the Church in ſubordination to the Conſent of the King with his Parliament, I put in my exception againſt the Clauſe: but if the intent of it was to have us endeavour any ſuch thing without his conſent, and againſt it, as the practiſe of the Covenanters did ſhew, and as it was generally (I think) underſtood, I do Subſcribe to this Clauſe, And that the ſame was in it ſelf an unlawful Oath, as I do to the reſt, with my Liberty of Limitation. It is but an honeſt thing (I judge) for me, and others (if they will follow), to do what we can; and ſo long as I do no more than I can, I ſhall not (I hope) hurt my Conſcience. If the Biſhop will be contented with this Rule, and we be alſo contented with it, what ſhall binder our Concord? When the Miniſters of the Roman Policy have ſo long been hatching up Sects amongſt us, and fomenting our Diviſions, and even now plodding at one Thruſt, or one Blow (if Fame have any more in her Trumpet than Sound only) the general Deſtruction of our Religion, it is time (or there is Reaſon), for the Parliament to think on Ʋnion; or for the Biſhops and us, to come to Compoſition. Then Abner called to Joab, and ſaid, ſhall the Sword devour for ever? Knoweſt thou not that it will be Bitterneſs in the latter End? How long ſhall it be then ere thou bid the People return from following of their Brethren?
The Author.
Some further Advertiſement.
LEt the Reader note, that where I ſpeak ſtill of all Endeavour to change the Government without the Conſent of the Supream Authority to be unlawful, I underſtand it of that Change altogether that is Publick, and concerns the Church as National. I meddle not with Reformation otherwiſe. I alſo Advertiſe the Reader, (ſeeing I have a Side to ſpare) That it hath bin in my thoughts (I muſt needs tell him) ever ſince the Ejecting Act, to offer ſomething (the beſt I could) for our Rulers Condeſcention to our Scruples: and for our Submiſſion to their Laws. That is to be Equal on both ſides. As I have formerly therefore ſent out ſeveral Papers on the Firſt Errand; Here is two ſent now upon the Second. My Paper about the Oxford-Oath, and this Paper. I have ſome Sheets more by me (under Twenty) that carry Things a little Higher, if not quite Home; and I could not let them therefore come out, till this Paper ſhould make their Way for them. They have bin long ready, and bin ſeen by many, as Biſhop Wilkins, Judge Hales, and the like Temperate Perſons. I ſhall Entitle thoſe Sheets, A Peaceable Reſolution of Conſcience concerning our preſent Impoſitions. When that Book alſo is come abroad (out of which I have bin borrowing ſomething or other ſtill for the Papers and Books that ſince paſſed from me) I ſhall have accompliſhed my Purpoſe, and intend to have done for ever about theſe Matters. I muſt add, that I have juſt now Received this enſuing Letter.
To my Honoured Friend, Mr. … in Oxenden-Street.
SIR,
I Thank you heartily for your Kindneſs, in ſending my your Healing Paper ſo ſpeedily. This Day I received it, and red it to my great Satisfaction. I fully agree with the Rule which you have laid down in order to Peace and Concord; and judg, that in the whole Management of the Deſgine, you have done Honeſtly and Prudently. I firmly believe, that Ʋnion by a reaſonable Accommodation, is Religions Interest. The Relaxation that would ſuffice you, I think would ſuffice me. In the Terms of Conformity as explained and limited by you, with whoſe neceſſary Reſtrictions, there is no material Difference between you and me, as I diſcern. … My carneſt Prayer is, that God would proſper this your Deſigne of Peace; And I am much perſwaded, that Good will come of it.
Chicheſter, Octob. 12. 1678. Your Obliged and Affectionate Friend & Servant, John Corbet.
End of the text · John Humfrey, The Healing Paper (1678)