Pacification Touching the Doctrinal Dissent, Conclusion
Memoriae Sacrum.
WHereas there have been ſome that fear God, of all Ranks, the higher and meaner Rank and Conditions, Clergy and Laity, that could not ſubmit to the Preſent Government, ſo as to take the Oath of Fidelity to the King, nay nor ſo much as come to the Liturgy (whereof otherwiſe they were ſo fond) becauſe of the Prayers that are there ſaid for him: And whereas there are now many more, that though they have Sworn Allegiance to William as King de Facto, they cannot come to an Acknowledgment of him as King de Jure, ſo as to Aſſociate in a Cordial Defence of him with others; All which Doubts depend upon the ſole Queſtion about King James's Conſcionable Excluſion; wherein it is not meerly out of Intereſt, (as moſt ſelfiſh Men will think) Humour, or Inclination, that they are gravell'd, but out of Conſcience grounded on the Thirteenth to the Romans: And foraſmuch as I wrote a Book in the year 1680. printed for R. Clavel, Entituled, A Peaceable Reſolution of Conſcience, touching our preſent Impoſitions, wherein I have ſpoken for Loyalty againſt Reſiſtance, not only as much, (for it is a Political Book) but more in one Vertical Point than others, and too much upon further Knowledge than is fit for our Engliſh Government: I do think meet, for the rectifying my ſelf, and an humble Tender for other Satisfaction, (eſpecially ſuch devout Loyaliſts as have forſaken what they had, rather than the Confeſſion they once made in ſo ſolemn a Declaration and Subſcription, which was then enjoyned all Conformiſts, That it is not Lawful to take Arms againſt the King upon any Pretence whatſoever) to bear this Teſtimony to that Text of the Apoſtle, and leave it on Record before I dye, being now 75 years Old, for the ſake of Poſterity. The words are theſe, Let every Soul be ſubject unto the Higher Powers: For there is no Power but of God. The Powers that be, ore Ordained of God. Whoſoever therefore reſiſteth the Power, reſiſteth the Ordinance of God, and they that reſiſt ſhall receive to themſelves Damnation.
There are two Diſtinctions here neceſſary to be known; To offer more, were to Confound, not Edifie. One is, between Subjection and Obedience. It is Dr. Field's Diſtinction in the Words, and in the Meaning none of thoſe that are for the Doctrine of Non-reſiſtance and Paſſive Obedience, but will ſo far agree with us. We are not always to Obey the Higher Powers (Themſelves muſt acknowledge) but we are (they ſay) always to be in Subjection, and never Reſiſt, riſe up, and deliver our ſelves from them. If God forbids what the Magiſtrate commands, or if God commands what he forbids, God muſt be obey'd rather than Man. This by their Word [Paſſive] they aſſent unto; but, as to the Point of Subjection, it is in that, the Queſtion and Difference lyes betwen us. The other Diſtinction then is, what They have not yet known, nor was it ever yet uſed before by any that I know, unleſs perhaps my ſelf. The Senſe almoſt all have, but not the Elucidation. Diſtinguiſh we then between theſe two things, which certainly are different things, the Powers that are, and the Powers that are *There may be a Pretended Power, where there is None: Such as was King James's Diſpenſing Power, and his Commiſſions now.not. This is a plain Diſtinction, every one can underſtand it, and it is undeniable. The Powers, the Higher Powers in the Text are foreign, the Powers that be. This is certain and expreſs, the Powers that be, are the Powers in the Text, the Powers that are of God, the Ordinance of God, and they that reſiſt ſhall receive to themſelves Damnation. Let this be granted to theſe Devout Men; but then muſt they grant to me again what cannot be denied by any, that as for the Powers that are not, the Powers (I ſay) that are not the Powers that be, they are not the Powers in the Text, not the Powers that are of God, not the Ordinance of God, and they that reſiſt them, (and not the Powers that be) ſhall not receive to themſelves Damnation. This is is plain and undeniable as before.
Now there is one Queſtion to be ask'd, which alone will reſolve the whole Caſe at ſtake between us, and that is this: What is the true Meaning of the foreign? What is really and in good earneſt (ſo as the Conſcience may reſt upon it,) That, which is meant by the Powers that be? I Anſwer, The Powers that be, are certainly the Powers according to the preſent known*Auguſtus brought in a New Conſtitution into the Roman Government, the People conſenting: And Nero was Obeyed, and not to be Reſiſted, as ſuppoſedly Ruling thereby. Conſtitution. There are Higher Powers (or Kings) whoſe Government is Abſolute, and ſo Abſolute, as that Subjects have no Liberty of Perſon, or Propriety in Goods by the Conſtitution: But it is not ſo with other Higher Powers (or Kings) whoſe Government is according to a ſuppoſed Original Contract (appearing in the Laws) which gives the People ſuch Liberty and Rights, as the King ſuch a Prerogative, extending ſo far, and no farther than the Contract allows. There is here therefore two things to be conſidered, the Poteſtas, and Forma Regiminis; the Power and the Form in ſuch Governments. The Form or Conſtitution (which tells what ſort of Government it ſhall be, what Perſons ſhall Govern, and how far they may go) is of Men, (of Men altoge…her, unleſs in the Jews Commonwealth) and then the Power does flow from GOD to Rule ſo, and no otherwiſe, but according to that Conſtitution. Poteſtas eſt à Deo, but Forma ab Hominibus, ſays Biſhop Andrews. If then the Higher Powers for the Adminiſtration Rule not by that Form, or according to that Conſtitution, (but deſignedly and reſolvedly, and not by a ſlip and meer Inadvertency, depart from it,) the Power à Deo, the Poteſtas, fails them; and they do Cadere de Jure, fall from their Right to our Subjection.*A Diſpenſing Power indefinitely maintain'd, is a Power over the Laws. A Power over the Laws, ſubverts the Government. A Change of Government Abſolves the Subject from his Allegiance. I have thought on this long, I was at Oxford when I compoſed that Book forementioned, and had the Uſe of the Library, and I pitch'd on this as the Texts Fundamental Expoſition, That the Powers that be, are the Government in every Country according to its own Conſtitution: And conſequently, that the Subjection (or Non-Reſiſtance) which is required of God as due to the Higher Powers, is a Subjection (or Non-Reſiſtance) no other but according to the ſame. Look you Sirs, the Scripture does not go to preſcribe, alter, or meddle with the Governments of the Nations, but it ſuppoſes a Government in every Kingdom or Country, and commands Subjection to the Government that is. We overturn all if we Preach otherwiſe than thus, Evangelium non abolet Politias.*When Luther had taught that the Magiſtrate ſhould not be Reſiſted, and ſome Lawyers prov'd to him, that the German Empire was not Abſolute, but that the Laws thereof permitted Reſiſtance, he then held they might make a League to defend themſelves; Upon this Reaſon, Becauſe (ſaid he) the Goſpel aboliſhes not the Laws of any Commonwealth, Sleidan lib. 8. Note here in the way, That if William be Lawful King, King by Law, then he muſt be Rightful King [King in Foro Interiori, unto whom Subjection is due, not for Wrath, but Conſcience-ſake; King in foro Dei Sive Conſcientiae, and not in foro Exteriori Sive Humano only:] Upon the ſame Reaſon, Becauſe the Goſpel, the Word or Laws of God does ſupponere, not ponere any thing in this Matter, but according to the Law of the Land.
Now then let us come to the Government of our Nation, and this Government we all know (and none more like than theſe Men to ſtand by it) is foreign, as Sir Thomas Smith, the Secretary of State in two Reigns, hath told us in his Authentick Book, De Republica Anglicana: That is, A Government regulated by Laws, a Government which is Kingly by the Statutes of the Realm, and not at the Will of the Lord. Non eſt Rex ubi Voluntas imperat, non Lex, ſays Bracton; and ſo ſay all our Great Lawyers. Well! Such being the Conſtitution of our Government, Be it Known and Acknowledged, That if any King of England therefore ſhall Rule ſo (or really go about it ſo, that if he be not hindred, he will effect it) as to change the Government, or Manner of the Kingdom (as the Scripture expreſſes it) from Legal to Arbitrary, from Regal to Deſpotical; and it ſhall pleaſe God to give the People, who are Free Subjects, the Happy Means of a Deliverance, they do not reſiſt in this Caſe, or riſe up againſt the Powers that be, the Powers in the Text, the Powers that are of GOD, the Ordinance of GOD: But the Powers not in the Text, the Powers that are not of GOD, the Powers that are not the Ordinance of God, and it being indeed only a Riſing for the Government, and not againſt the Government, and no reſiſting the Powers that be, they ſhall not receive to themſelves Damnation. This is the Caſe of the Revolution.*As We know, (ſays Hooker in larger Words) That they are Lords of ſuch or ſuch Lands, unto whom, in defect of Heirs, they fall by Eſcheat: So does it rightly follow, ſeeing Dominion, when there is none to inherit it, (or when it is forfeited) returns to the Body, that it does fundamentally and radically reſide in the Body, and that the Inheritors hold it in dependency on them. This Saying of his, I confeſs in my Judgment, does require that grain of Salt, which is above in the Paper (too much to be explained and adapted to a Marginal Note:) But is ſo far true to me, as undoubtedly to make the Application. Our Government therefore thus Eſcheating, or become Forfeit to the People, and they by their Repreſentatives in a Convention, having ſettled it on William, here is the moſt certain, true, indubitable Title that any Prince is capable of; and better than any other hath to his Government, for ought I know, in the Earth beſides.
There are two Reaſons now (beſides the Conſcience to my ſelf in regard to the Book forecited) for the Publication; which being apparent, I own. The One, That all Honeſt Scrupulous Men, who have been hitherto Non-Jurors upon the Point of Conſcience (as to them) may be ſo ſatisfied to take the Oath of Fidelity to King William (with us that have,) as to bleſs God for him, and to enter the Aſſociation, as they ſee it good for them. The Other, That the King himſelf, and thoſe that ſucceed him in the Throne, may not be tempted by the Love of their People, or Liberality of Parliaments, to make ſuch Uſe of their Raiſed Strength, as our Neighbour Kings have done, to go out of the Circle of our Engliſh Conſtitution: Eſpecially knowing, that the Spirit of the Nation, and the Conſcience of it alſo is hereby ſo reſolved, that under King James we would not be Papiſts; under thoſe that ſucceed, We will not be Slaves.*Having ſaid this for the People, I muſt ſay one thing alſo for the King out of the ſame Principle. There is the Poſitive and Negative Power of Rulers. According to our Engliſh Government it is true, and to be held, that the King can Poſitively do nothing but according to Law: But it being true alſo, and to be conſidered, that the Supreme Law in all Polities is the Common Good; if a Prince, in the uſe of his Power only, which is Negative, ſhould upon occaſion do ſomething otherwiſe than Law, for the Benefit of the Subject (Bona fide) and not his private Ends, I do believe, both Politically, and as a Divine, that he may have a good Conſcience in it; and when he has, that he is not to account he acts then againſt the Law, but according to it, ſeeing he does Govern in ſuch a Caſe by the Supreme Law, unto which all others are Subordinate. Not long before King Charles's Death, the Juſtices were ſending Mr. Baxter to Priſon for Conventicling, but he hearing of it, and being told it might kill the ill good Man, out of his kind Nature, ſends word immediately he would have him forborne. To have controul'd the Law to a Man's hurt, it had been Tyranny; but when it was only for Good, without detriment to any, who could open his Mouth againſt it? It is to be ſuppoſed no Law-givers can foreſee all Caſes that may happen, and when Equity and a good Conſcience is againſt the Letter of the Law, thus much I think Juſtifiable by the Old Covenant Oath, where the King Sware to execute the Laws, Cum Juſtitia & Miſerecordia: If not it will be, by that Power our Kings have of granting a Nolle Profequi in ſome caſes to Offenders, and much more by that of Pardoning All ad libitum, which a Majore ad Minus cannot but warrant more than this. It is fit that Kings, before they Swear, do underſtand their Oath to have this Conſtruction, and to know that which is much more to the purpoſe, that any Law which is againſt God or Nature, that is, which is againſt the Law of Nature, or Word of God, or the Common Good, is really in foro Conſcientiae, No Law; ſo that in the Non-Proſecution thereof, they are not to be condemned. Nay, if a Prince by Malverſation, even Poſitive or Privative, ſhall render himſelf Obnoxious to God, and the People, it is good yet for the Subject to bear with him (as we do with Storms) ſo long as we can; but if the Caſe comes to that once, as the Nation is in danger of Ruin by it, the Doctrine of Non-reſiſtance, any longer than we can help our ſelves, is perfect Ignorance of our State, or raving Obſtinacy. Salus Populi Suprema lex eſto.
Habetüs Sententiam meam, in Cauſa hac gravissima. J. H.