LIBUARY 
 
 PRli¥<;ETO«J,  mi.  J. 
 
 DDNATION    UK 
 
 S  A  M  U  K  L    A  <^4  N  K  W  , 
 
 Letter 
 A'o. 
 
 1  K     H  H  I  L   i  I.  K  L  1'  n  1  A  .     PA. 
 
 .<?<^*^. '>r^8«^/ 
 
 i 
 
 ■>^ 
 
I^  >Mi^^T:^^^ . 
 
 f 
 
Digitized  by  tlie  Internet  Arcliive 
 
 in  2011  witli  funding  from 
 
 Princeton  Tlieoiogica!  Seminary  Library 
 
 littp://www.arcliive.org/details/sliorthistoryofreOOIind 
 
THE 
 
 SHORT  HISTORY 
 
 Regal  Succession:^ 
 
 A  N  D    T  K  E 
 
 •  Ri^ts  of  the  federal  KINGS 
 
 Recorded  in  the 
 
 KOLY     SCRIPTURES; 
 
 Enlarg'd  and  Improved  in  a  Fourth  Editiox  ; 
 
 Iliuflrared  with 
 
 JSeafonahk  Remarks  on  Mr.  TFhiJlon^s  Scripture 
 Politicks,  and  levcral  other  modern  2>^^; 
 and  Sermons  on  the  fame  fubjecft. 
 
 .The  Whole  v^ritten  v/ith  an  Eye  to  that  niofl 
 
 <jBjl*CCraMC  f^tt,  for  which  our  N:Jtion  is  jullly  vilitevl 
 with  the  Divine  Diiplc-fure,  even  to  thlsDa'^:  and  dedi- 
 cated to  all  the  Tnue'^Sons  oi  the  C  h  u  r  c  u  of  E  n  c  i.  a  n  d. 
 
 ■  Bya^V^^^Tof  the  fame  CftlJ  RCtl. 
 'v ^ ^ 3y    •^^A,  yjlij}^^^,  y 
 
 A^  zee  /aid  before,  fo  faj  I  now  again,  if  <?//v  Mafi*f  reach  an« 
 
 ether  Go/pel  unto  you,  than  that  ye  h.- 
 y    accurfed.  Galat.  i.'9. 
 
 /.  o  //  /;  O  N  : 
 
 Printed  for  the  Author,    and  foiil('^>y  fbeBorl 
 fellers  of  London  (in J  WeftminO-e*-,   t  '^  .•  r 
 
TO    ALL    THE 
 
 TRUE  SONS 
 
 OF    THE 
 
 Church  of  England. 
 
 H  O*  I  have  a  great  averfion  to  the 
 fullbme  flatteries,  and  other  imper- 
 tinences, which,  by  our  fafliionable 
 writers,  are  oftentimes  foifted  in  be- 
 tween their  title-page  and  book  ( as  if  they 
 wanted  Ibmewhat  of  a  foil,  to  make  their  fol- 
 lowing pages  appear  the  brighter)  ;  yet  Fm 
 not  io  far  prejudic'd  againfi:  prefaces  and  dedi- 
 cations, as  to  deny  them  to  be  many  times 
 uleful,  fometimes  neceffary.  And  therefore, 
 whilft  I  thought  there  was  no  necellity  for  ei- 
 ther, I  ventured  into  the  world,  without  pa- 
 tron, without  apology :  (And  who  would  not 
 have  perlvvaded  himlelf,  as  I  did,  that  a  faith- 
 A  a  ful 
 
iv    The  Dedication. 
 
 ful  CYtracl  out  of  the  holy  Icripturcs  might 
 have  been  fufficlently  proteded,  as  well  as 
 warranted,  by  their  divine  authority  ? )  But, 
 lince  I  have  had  full  experience,  that  the  bell 
 caule  is  not  always  the  moft  favourably  heard, 
 and  that  even  thofe  of  God  and  the  King  have 
 oftentimes  the  moft  adversaries  in  this  world, 
 I  thought  it  high  time,  to  bethink  my  £4f  of 
 fome  patron,  under  whole  wing  I  might  find 
 encouragement  and  proteclion. 
 
 And  where  can  I  lb  reaibnably  prefume  up- 
 on a  defence.againlt  the  impertinent  cavils,  the 
 groundlcfs  criticiirns,    and  the  odious  rcflefti- 
 ons,  of  the   open  and  fccrct  enemies  of  the 
 church  and  monarchy,   as  from  you,    whole 
 common  concern  this  is  ?  For  as  the  rights  of 
 the  Church  can't  be  violated,  but  your  religi- 
 on (or,  at  leaft,  the  exercile  of  it)  will  become 
 precarious :  {o  neither  can  thole  of  the  Crown 
 be  invaded,    v.'ithout  involving  every  private 
 fubjecr  (and  more  elpecially  you,  who  by  prin- 
 ciple arc  the  moft  inviolably  attach'd  thereto) 
 in  the  common  calamity.     For,  fcch  hath  for- 
 merly been  (and  I  hope  ftill  may  be)  the  cha- 
 raderiftlck  of  that  church,   of  which  we  are 
 members,  that  it  '  hath  ilood  unfhaken  in  its 
 
 *  loyalty  among  all  the  ftorms  of  fury,    and 
 
 *  paroxiliiis  of  miadnels,  which  have  fcized  our 
 
 nation. 
 
The  Dedication,     v 
 
 nation.  For  neither  the  rage  of  the  heathen, 
 nor  madnels  of  the  people,  that  imagined  a 
 vain  thing  ;  not  the  fears  and  rumours  of  in- 
 novations in  religion,  drefl  up  with  all  the 
 amazing  circumftances  of  horrour  ;  not  le- 
 cret  underminings,  and  open  batteries ;  not 
 the  force  of  threatning,  nor  power  of  per- 
 f\vafion  ;  nor  all  other  ilratagems  of  rebelli- 
 ous minds,  could  ever  draw  off  one  true  Ion 
 of  the  church  from  his  allegiance  and  loyal- 
 ty :  loyalty  being  the  badge  of  the  church 
 and  clergy  o^  England  ^  and  there  being  no 
 truer  Shibboleth^  to  diftinguilh  her  true  icns, 
 from  thole  that  are  Ipurious  and  pretended 
 ones  {li) '. 
 
 And 
 
 {a)  Hejrich's  ferm.  26  Jul.  i^8r,  p.  10,  it.  The  f.> 
 mous  Dr.  Exek.  Hopkr,:s  (m  hi?  leim.  31  Jav.  1659,  p.  ^5. 
 37,  in  4to.)i3ysj  '  Ic  \va?  cncc  the  glory  or  the  Trotcfiar.t  rc- 
 
 *  iigion,  that  it  taught  fabjeds  to  account  the  perfons  or"  their 
 '  princes  facred  and  inviolable  j  ropream  to  ail  under  Gcd. 
 
 *  and  sccountablsio  none  but  hirn :  but  nov/our  adver- 
 
 *  faries  triurr.phin  thefhameofourprofeirrjn,  whcnthemoft 
 
 *  norcrious  regicides,  who  no:  only  avow  the  dod-ine,  buc 
 
 *  pubiickly  perpetrate  the  faifl.   of  depcfu^g  ard  killing  a 
 
 *  Kin^;  are  found  among  thofe  who  pretended  to  be  st  the 
 '  greiteft  d'ftsnce  iVom  Rowijo  principles  and  pratfbices  \ 
 And  Dr.  Sherlock  (in  a  vindicat.  ot  his  fcrm.  29  May,  1685, 
 p   z^.  )  fpeaking  of  the  Bill  of  ExclufuTi,  lays,  '  If  ever  rhe 
 
 *  loyalty  of  the  chtuch  of  Et:;:^LTsd  was  tried,  it  was  in  that 
 
 *  sffair,  which  fhc  lui  no  otiicr  in'creft,  bu:  a  fenfe  of  du'y, 
 
 *  CO  ob'i,:e  her  tu':  and  1  know  not  any  or^e  nun,  who  was 
 
 *  firm  and  ftcdfift  to  'he  church,  buc  was  fo  to  the  fuccefli- 
 
 *  on  too  j  tho'he  undcr\^'enc  the  impuution  of  being  a  Ta- 
 
vi    The  Dedication. 
 
 And  yet,  it  is  not  your  concern  alone,  but 
 that  of  every  Englijh  fiibjecl.  For,  fince,  as 
 hath  been  lately  well  obferv'd,  the  king  '  has 
 *■  at  leaft  the  lame  right  with  every  private 
 
 *  perlbn,  and  a  much  greater  right,  as  he  liif- 
 
 *  tains  the  perfon  and  fortunes  of  every  private 
 
 *  man  in  that  community  (a)  \  it  follows, 
 that,  whenever  the  rights  of  the  King  are  inju- 
 rioufly  attempted,  thofe  of  every  J^rivate  fiiS- 
 je^  muft  needs  be  fenfibly  affecled  \  and  con- 
 iequently,  every  private  fubjeB  in  the  com- 
 munity ought  to  interelt  himfelf  therein,  and 
 make  it  his  own  cale.  But,  that  this  is  even 
 our  indifpenfible  duty,  v/e  have  alio  the  ex- 
 prels  authority  and  evidence  of  our  bleffed  la- 
 viour  :  who,  in  what  he  lays  relating  to  him- 
 felf, plainly  intimates,  that,  whenever  a 
 King's  perfon,  or  rights  are  in  danger,  from 
 either  the  hands,  pens,  or  tongues  of  his  ene- 
 mies, it  is  the  duty  of  all  his  fubjeds  to  aflift 
 him,  by  all  manner  of  ways ;  yea  even,  ifoc- 
 cafion  requires  it,  to  fght^  that  he  jhoiild  not 
 he  delivered  to  his  Jev/ilh  {p)  enemies. 
 
 '  This, 
 
 '  ^//?,  or  ^cp'iply  inclined,  for  ir  '.  And  Dr.  Will.  Kirg  fof 
 I>:/b!in)  in  a  lfc:cr  prcF.K'd  to  Bp.  SbsriJafis  ferm.  22  A'ar. 
 1684.,  fays,  *  U  is  impoliible  any  one  of  our  comnnunion 
 '  /hou'd  be  difloyi!,  without  renouncing  his  religion  '. 
 
 (a)  Serm.  at   Worccji.  7  June,   lyi^j    by  E.   Chandler, 
 D  D,  &c,  p.  II.    ib)  Sc.  John  xviii.  16. 
 
The  D  E  D  I  G  A  T  I  o  >T.   vii 
 
 <  This,  my  brethren,  {to  ufe  the  "words  of 
 ^  a  late  eminent  prelate)  is  not  only  the  belt, 
 '  but  the  only  true  caufe  of  God  in  this  world, 
 *■  for  which  all  flibjeds  are  bound  in  conlcience 
 '  to  fight ;  the  caufe  of  their  lawful  lb veraign, 
 *■  that  which  he  authorizes,  either  by  his  per- 
 ^  Ion,  or  his  commillion,  or  his  {a)  allowance'. 
 
 The  fatal  confequences  of  the  negledof  this 
 duty,  in  the  beginning  of  the  troubles  of  our 
 Royal  Martyr^  (whom  we  this  day  commemo- 
 rate) argue  ftrongly  alio,  from  our  own  expe- 
 rience, as  EngUflrmen^  againft  the  like  negli- 
 gence, whenever  it  pleaies  God  almighty,  for 
 our  national  fins,  to  afflid  us  with  the  like  na- 
 tional judgments. 
 
 For,  then,  our  undoubted  lawful  ibveraign 
 was,  by  his  natural-born  and  fworn  fiibjeds, 
 refilled,  impriibn'd,  deposed,  and  murder'd: 
 his  fbn,  and  undoubted  heir,  firft  driven  into 
 ^opfh  countries,  for  protection  and  fubfiftence  ^ 
 and  then,  under  a  charge  of  Tofery,  &Cc.  re- 
 nounc'd,  attainted,  abjur'd,  and  a  price  (much 
 greater  than  thirty  fieces  of  Jiherl)  fet  upon 
 his  head  (who  nevertheleis  was  the  head  of 
 the  whole  comm.onwealth  •)  tho'  in  truth,  if 
 he  had  been  a  Tapft  indeed,  (as  certain  authors 
 
 of 
 
 {a)  Sprat's  ferm.  20  -^/r.  1682,  p.  13,  8vo, 
 
viii  The  Dedication. 
 
 of  great  name  do  affirm  he  was,)  it  had  been 
 his  misfortune  only,  but  their  own  fault. 
 
 For  (as  a  late  eminent  divine  obferv'd)  thofe 
 rebels^  '  by  banifhing  the  royal  family,  caft 
 '  them  into  the  very  jaws  of  Popery  and  le- 
 *■  duclion,  and  not  only  led-,  but  drove  them, 
 '  into  tempation  \  Upon  which  he  expoftu- 
 lates  thus  \  '  And  now  will  theie  fellows  plunge 
 '  men  over  head  and  ears  in  a  ditch,  and  then 
 
 *  knock  out  their  brains,  for  having  a  fpot 
 '  upon  their  clothes?  kindle  a  flame  round  a- 
 '  bout  them,  and  then,  with  tragical  outcries, 
 ^  reproach  them  for  being  fnged  ?  do  all  that 
 '  thev  can,  compailing  even  lea  and  land,  to 
 '  make  a  prolelyte  to  Popery,  and  then  llrip 
 
 *  hin:s  of  his  inheritance  for  being  lb  ?  O .'  the 
 '  equity,  realbn,  and  humanity  of  a /r//t?'Pr^- 
 '  tefuvitj  fanatick  zeal !    much  according  to 
 
 *  the  devil's  method  •  firll  to  draw  men  to 
 '  fin,  and  then  to  damn  and  deftroy  them  for 
 'it(^)!' 
 
 But  further  j  the  biihops  and  clergy,  who 
 adher'd  to  the  ancient  and  orthodox  dodines 
 of  the  church  o'i.  England^  were  turn'd  out  of 
 their  freeholds  by  pretended  acls,  or  ordinances, 
 of  a  rebel-parliament :  and  others  (after  the 
 order  of  'Jeroboam  ! )  trealbnably  and  fchiima- 
 
 tically 
 
 {a)  Dr.  Soutb\  ferm.  vol.  vh  p.  27,  28. 
 
The  Dedication,    ix 
 
 tically  brought  upon  the  ftage,  to  ad  the  parts 
 of  kings  and  priefts,  in  the  refpedive  offices  of 
 the  church  and  kingdom  of  Chrift  I  our  an- 
 ceftors,  the  true  churchmen  and  loyal  fubjeds, 
 were  forc'd  to  retire  into  uf^^r  rooms ^  for 
 communion,  and  to  put  the  doors^  (as  their 
 exemplars,  the  primitive  ChrifiianSy  did,  in 
 the  time  of  the  like  perfecutions,)  for  fear  of 
 the  (^a)  Jews ;  there  privately  to  pray  unto  that 
 God,  who  feeth  in  (J?)  fecret,  and  hath  promiA 
 ed,  that  where  two  or  three  are  gathered  toge- 
 ther  in  his  name^  and  with  one  accord^  (in  how 
 private  or  oblcure  a  place  foever)  there  he  will 
 be  in  the  midft  of  {c)  them :  and  even  the 
 good  King  himlelf,  for  want  of  his  orthodox 
 clergy,  was,  during  his  confinement,  forc'd 
 to  be  his  own  chaplain  in  his  bed-chamber, 
 (where  he  conftantly  (^)  uled  the  common- 
 prayer  himfeif,)  rather  than  join  with  the  in- 
 truded Ichilmaticks ;  while  the  pulpits  and 
 parilh  churches  were  open  to  every  body,  but 
 fuch  only  as  had  the  right  and  lawful  call  to 
 them !  then,  as  a  faithfal  and  con£-ientioas 
 adherence  to  the  lawful  King  was  accxDunted 
 high  treafon  \   ^o  to  ferve  God,   according  to 
 
 a  his 
 
 (a)  Sz.John  X3C.  19.  ASif  I  x-\.  The  reader  may  fee  a 
 full  ftate  of  rheir  caie,  in  the  preface  to  Mafons  vindica\ 
 of  the  Ch.  of  Engl.  1728,   fol.  Ixx.      (b)  St.  Mat.  vi.  6.  iS. 
 
 {c)  — -xviu.  18.  19.  Aas  j.  14. ii.  1,  45,     {d)Clarer2d. 
 
 hift.  rebell.  vol.  iiij  p.  39. 
 
X     The  Dedication. 
 
 his  own  inftitation,    was  reckoned  an  high 
 crime  and  misdemeanour  !    for  in  fuch  times 
 
 *  a  man  may  be  thought  a  rebel  for  recom- 
 *■  mending  loyalty,  or  leditious  for  preaching 
 <  againft  {a)  fedition  ' !  In  a  word,  the  be  ft 
 fubjeds,  purely  for  their  loyalty  to  their  cxil'd 
 Ibveraign,  were  punifh'd  as  rebels  by  open 
 rebels,  and  for  their  orthodoxy y  as  fchifmaticks 
 by  notorious  fchifmaticks :  under  pretence  of 
 which  falfe  charges,  they  were  frequently  pur- 
 fued  to  death,  (and  conlequently  (J?)  crowned 
 with  martyrdom)  or  bury'd  above  ground  •  or, 
 atleaft,  by  mercilefs  fines,  fequeftrations  and 
 compofitions,  generally  reduc'd  to  rags  and 
 penury,   for  the  lake  of  a  good  confcience, 
 
 *  many  thoulands  of  them  having  quitted  all 
 
 *  they  had  in  the  world,  endured  a  great  fight 
 '  of  afflititonsy    took  joyfiilly  the  [foiling  of 
 
 *  their  goods  J  had  tryal  of  cruel  mockingSy  yea 
 
 '  more- 
 
 {a)  Dr.  Sachev.  fpeech,  in  bis  trial,  p.  24.4.  {b)  The 
 learned  bifhop  Morley  (m  hii  ar.fw.  to  Father  Crejjey,  p.  9) 
 affirms,  that  Obedience  to  our  /over aign  is  a  part  of  cur  religi- 
 on: '  and  we  think  him  as  much  a  Martyr,  that  dies  in  de- 
 
 *  fence  of  the  fifth,    or  any  other  of  the  ten  Command- 
 '  ments.   as  he  that  dies  in  defence  of  any  of  the    Arti- 
 
 *  cles  of  the  Creed':    and  yet  fas  another   well  obferves) 
 
 *  men  of  fofr  and  fmooth  inlinuations  would  introduce  a 
 
 *  principle  q^  fe}f-prefervatio?i  (as  they  call  it,)  £S  if  it  were 
 
 *  unworthy^  as  if  it  were  unlawful,  to  fufFcr  any  thing  like 
 
 *  Martyrdom-^   nay,    as  if  it  were  more  Chrijiian  to  be  re* 
 
 *  bels  and  regicides,  thm  to  be  fo  much  ^s  Covfejfors  m  \h^ 
 
 *  caufe  ot  C/?r//?'.    lurner's  ktm.  ^.  Sept.  16831  V-^^'  ^7* 
 
The  Dedication,    xi 
 
 '  moreover^  of  bonds  and  imfrifonmentSy  and 
 
 *  wandered  about y  being  [a]  defiitiite^  to  pre- 
 ^  lerve  inviolable  their  fidelity  to  the  King  and 
 
 *  the  {b)  church  '\  while  the  tifur^ers^  and  their 
 adherents,  by  the  means  of  unwarrantable  {c) 
 compliances,  received  their  good  things  in  this 
 life,  being  clothed  in  pirfle  and  fine  linnen^ 
 and  faring  fumpuonfiy  every  (d)  day ;  and 
 '  mean  and  ignoble  perlbns  trampled  upon 
 '  crowns  and  mitres,  enriched  themfelves  with 
 '  the  Ipoils  of  church  and  ftate,  ufurped  the 
 *-  royal  power,  but  governed  like  {e)  flaves  ' ! 
 lb  that  *  every  good  man  ought  to  be  very 
 '  careful,  at  leaft  in  this  our  day^  that  he  do 
 ^  not  herd  or  concur  with  thofe  Ipirits,  which 
 <  but  the  other  day  (as  it  were)  to  lliut  out  all 
 
 a  2  '  arbitrary 
 
 {a)  Uehr.  x.  32,  &c. xi.  ^G,  &c.      {b)  Walkers  fuff-; 
 
 clergy,  pref.  fol.  v.  {c)  '  The  CnoJli:hs,  in  the  primitive 
 '  church  —  held  it  lawful  to  apoftatize  in  nme  of  danger> 
 '  and  comply  wirh  the  Jenui  for  fear  of  perfecution  :    bur, 
 
 *  when  the  days  of  vengeance  and  vifitation  came,  God 
 «  makes  a  diftiniftion  between  thofe  carnal  pretenders,  and 
 '  foch  as  continued  fledfaft  to  the  profeffion  of  his  truth. 
 "  He  provides  a  Telia  for  the  Cbrijilam,  a  hiding-place  tor 
 '  them,  to  retire  to,  — but  leaves  thofe  abominable  Herp^/V-^y 
 
 *  to  be  deftroyed  with  the  crucifiers  of  Chrifi,  and  hypo- 
 '  crites  to  perilli  with  unbelievers:  and  this  is  faid  by  fome 
 
 *  to  be  the  accomphfliraenc  of  that  predidion  of  our  S3f  1-^ 
 
 *  our,  Ue  that  ixiill  fave  bis  life  Jh all  loje  it,   when  the  G;^o-  ^ 
 
 *  jlicks.  who  by  their  compliances  expeffed  fhelter  among 
 
 *  the  Jeivst  were  together  with  them  fo  fignally  involved 
 '  in  the  fame  ruin'.  Dr.  ya?ies  ferm.  11  Apr  1679,  p  39. 
 {d)  St.  Luke  xvi.  151,  ace.  (?)  Dr.  Shsrl.  ferm.  29  May,  1685. 
 P  27. 
 
xii  The  Dedication-; 
 
 '  arbitrary  power  brought  it  in,  and  to  pre- 
 ^  vent  Popery  laid  afide  all  true  religion,  and 
 '  the  fear  of  (^)  God  '. 
 
 To  bring  all  which  about,  thole  audacious 
 rebels  began  firft  with  jealoufies  and  fears  (as 
 they  pretended)  of  To^ery ;  which  they  falfe- 
 ly  and  malicioufly  infinuated  againft  the  belt 
 King,  and  one  of  the  beft  archbifhops,  that 
 the  beft  of  churches  was  ever  blefs'd  with« 
 Falflyy  I  fay,  to  Ihew  their  malice :  tho*,  if 
 the  King  had  indeed  been  of  that  church,  it 
 would  not  have  follow'd,  (as  fuch  fbphifters 
 would  infer)  that  our  church  muft  have  been 
 ruin'd ;  fince  '  we  might  have  a  freedom  of 
 '  religion  under  a  Popifli  government,  and  a 
 '  Popifh  diredion  (^)  \  For  proof  of  which 
 we  need  but  to  take  an  unprcjudic'd  view  ol 
 the  religion  and  eccleiiaftical  government  here 
 maintained  amongft  us,  after  the  reitoration 
 of  king  Charles  II.  who,  we  are  pofitively  told, 
 was  ^  perverted  in  his  religion  abroad,  and 
 ^  came  over  (as  hath  iince  very  plainly  ap- 
 ^  pear'd,)  with  a  defign  and  relolution  to  e- 
 ^  ftablifn  Popery  in  thefe  (c)  kingdoms '. 
 
 And 
 
 (a)  Dr.  Ed-w.  Tellingh  ferm.  ^  Ncv.  1683,  p.  54.  (^)  ^■ 
 Hoadlfi.  ferm  at  Hertf  22  Mar.  1 707,  p.  ii^  in  8vo. 
 (c)  Bp.  Gibfins  four  fermons  1719.  p.  85.  and  Bp.  F/eetvj. 
 7  7f/we,  iyi6j  p.  14.  See  a  fair  ftate  of  the  fucceflion  of 
 biftiops,  in  that  and  the  following  reign,  m  the  pref.  to  Ma- 
 fons  vindicat.  of  the  ch-  ot  England^  1728,  fol.  Ixxx,  ixxxi. 
 
The  Dedication',  xiii 
 
 And  befides,  'tis  certain,    '  No  prince  can 
 
 *  take  our  religion  from  us,  if  we  relblve  to 
 
 *  keep  ia)  it :  —  Men  may  keep  their  religi- 
 '  on,  if  they  pleale,  in  defpite  of  earthly  pow- 
 
 *  ers ;  and  therefore  no  powers  can  hurt  reli- 
 
 *  gion,  though  they  may  perlecute  the  pro- 
 '  feflbrs  of  it :  and  therefore,  when  men  take 
 '  up  arms  to  avoid  perfecution,  it  is  not  in 
 '  defence  of  religion,  but  of  themfelves,  that 
 '  is,  to  avoid  their  fuffering  for  ij?)  religion  '. 
 But,  above  all,  as  we  have  God's  repeated 
 promiies  to  take  care  of  his  church  in  all  its 
 dangers,  there  is  nothing  for  us  to  do,  but  to 
 ufe  lawful  means  only,  for  its  fecurity,  and 
 truft  in  him  for  the  effe6l: :  for  '  a  good  caule 
 
 *  leldom   needs  to  be  fupported  by  wicked 
 
 *  means ;  or,  if  it  fhould,  yet  a  good  man 
 '  would  rather  leave  his  caule  to  God's  pro- 
 
 *  vidence,  and  let  it  fuffer,  than  venture  to 
 '  fin  againlt  God  and  his  own  Ibul,  for  the 
 ^  fake  of  (c)  it '.  Whereas  the  contrary  pro- 
 cedure, of  reviling,  refilling,  impriibning,  de- 
 pofing,  murdering  or  banilhing,  God's  lawful 
 vicegerent,  under  the  Ipecious  pretence  of  fe- 
 curing   religion^   is   condemn'd   by  all  true 
 
 {a)  Dr.  Sherl.  ferm.  29  May,  16^2,  p.  27.  (^)  —  Cafe 
 of  refill,  p.  6 1,  (c)  Bp .  fJ^ake's  Csrai.  2  j^^.  1710,  p.  23, 
 in  8vo. 
 
xiv  The  Dedication. 
 
 Englijhmeny  all  true  TrotefiantSy  all  true 
 Chrijiians.      For  '  tho'  the  maintenance  of 
 
 *  religion  is  commonly  made  the  moil  plaud- 
 *■  ble  pretence  for  rebellion  (as  it  was  for  the 
 ^  lail  among  us,    and  has  been  made  uie  of 
 
 *  fince,  towards  the  encouraging  of  another,) 
 *■  yet  rebellion  almoft  conftantly   proves  (as 
 
 *  that  lall  provM)  the  means  to  deftroy  [a)  re- 
 
 *  ligion  \  And  how  fliould  it  be  otherwiie, 
 when  it  is  no  better,  than  applying  to  the 
 devil  (Jp)  for  help  in  God's  caufe,  and  ading 
 upon  the  principles  of  thofe  who  hold  it  law- 
 fal  to  do  evil  that  good  may  come  ?  of  whom 
 an  infpired  Apoftle  has  declar'd,  that  their 
 damnation  is  {c)  juft,    '  from  which  no  Ma- 
 
 *  chiavel  can  preferve  us,  nor  any  policy  of 
 ^  flate  procure  a  (d)  dilpenlation  '  I 
 
 However,  thus  our  pretended  patriots 
 aded !  for  which  they  are  branded  with  the 
 charader  of  Fanaticks  and  mifcreantSy   and 
 
 declar'd 
 
 (a)  Bp  TurneT\  ferm.  25  Apr.  \C%<^,  P- 19-  (^)  Treafin 
 in  Trotefiants   '  is  like  the  Italian  diftemper:    ic  was  firft 
 
 *  brought  from  another  councry,  and  is  no  way  natural  to 
 «  our  own,  tho*  the  infedion  haj  been  taken  by  too  many, 
 «  who  bad  an  ill  temper   prepared  for  itj    and  others,  if 
 
 *  they  take  not  care,  are  lialjle  to  catch  it  by  the  lewd- 
 «  nefs  of  ambition,  revenge  or  difcontent '.  IV  Fayyie's 
 ferm.  9  Sept.  1685,  P-^o.  (0  Rom.  iii.  8.  See  alio  Dr. 
 Bradford's  ferm.  5  Nov.  1696.  Mr.  Milbournes  ^o  Jan. 
 1716.  and  Mr.  Keitlewe/Ts  works,  vol.  ii,  fol.  33  and  74. 
 (d)  Bp.  Griff".  Williams's  rights  of  kings,  &c.  fol.  16. 
 
The  Dedication,  xv 
 
 declared  to  have  been  '  as  far  from  being  true 
 *•  Proteltants,  as  they  were  from  being  true 
 ^  (a)  fabjeds  '  1  And  having  fucceeded  ib  far 
 as  to  inllill  that  groundleis  apprehenfion  of 
 Tofery  into  the  too  credulous  mob,  they  eafi- 
 ly  poflels'd  them  with  the  danger  of  Tyranny 
 and  Arbitrary  Tower^  as  the  necelTary  and 
 (J?)  unavoidable  coniequence  of  the  other :  as 
 if  our  anceftors  had  all  been  Slaves  under  the 
 Tofifi  Kings,  before  the  Reformation !  where- 
 as, to  ipeak  the  truth,  our  Magna  Charta^ 
 and  many  other  of  the  belt  of  our  privileges'^ 
 which  are  the  peculiar  glory  and  happinefs  of 
 Old  England^  (and  for  which  the  liberties  of 
 EngUjhmen  have  been  the  envy  of  all  other 
 nations,)  were  granted  in  thofe  times.  And 
 yet,  how  untruly,  how  unjuftly-appiied,  and 
 how  abfurd  Ibever  theie  fuggellions  were  in 
 themlelves,  they  were  taken  for ,  granted 
 then,  and  fb  did  naturally  help  forward  the 
 
 downfai 
 
 {a)  Stat.  xii.  Car.  II.  c.  ;o.      {h)  We  are  nflurcd,  even 
 in  the  reign  of  the  Topifj  Queen  Mary,  that  when  a  fchtme* 
 was  laid  before  herj  propoling  to  make  her  abfolure  and 
 arbitrary,    fo  that  fhe  might  ruk  according  to  her  pht^fures 
 
 into  the  fire,  charging  thofe  about  her,  asvir  to  receive  more 
 fuch  projeSii :     Dr,  Burn.  hift.  reform,  vol.  ii,  1681,  fo!. 
 
X vi   The  Dedication. 
 
 downfal  of  the  crown,  and  the  fin  of  this 
 day :  tho',  if  they  had  been  true,  'tis  a  cer- 
 tain rule,  that '  no  jealoufies  or  fears,  no  threat- 
 ^  ning  dangers,  can  juftify  any  unwarrantable 
 '  means  of  our  preiervation,  or  make  us  for- 
 
 '  get  our  duty  to  God  and  the  (a)  King  ;• 
 
 '  and  even  the  Lion's  i^oiitk  itlelf,  opening  to 
 '  devour  us,  can  never  excule  us  from  our  ob- 
 '  ligation  to  fubmit  and  fuffer,  if  God  had  {o 
 
 *  ordered  it  by  his  providence,   that  we 
 
 '  were  born  under  one  that  would  deliver  us 
 '^  up  to  the  {b)  Lion  I ' 
 
 Their  next  bufinels  was,  by  a  multitude  of 
 leditious  pamphlets  and  fermons,  (for  Rebels 
 never  wanted  (c)  writers  to  maintain  their 
 trnjufi  anions  :)  to  prejudice  the  unthinking 
 multitude  againft  the  government  both  in 
 church  and  liate,  as  ufurpations  upon  the  li- 
 berties of  the  Free-born  Teope^  (forlboth !) 
 j.nd  to  perfuade  them  to  exert  themfelves,  in 
 order  to  the  recovery  of  their  pretended  na- 
 tive freedom.  As  if  a  man  was  born  into  the 
 world,  like  a  wild  afs's  (d)  colt  I  tho'  'tis 
 plain  to  a  demonltration,  from  the  following 
 hiftory,  that  no  man  ever  was  born  free  from 
 
 govern- 
 
 (a)  Mr.  SaiT}.  J>Javn\  ferm.  upon  rebdi.  17KJ,  p.  24. 
 {h)  Dr.  Burvet's  ferm.  5  Noi?.  1684,  p.  27.  [c)  Papers 
 betw.  K.  Cha.  I.  and  Mx.Hej.'derfon^  ^6^6,  (printed  1(^49, 
 in  8vo.)  p.  58.    {d)  Job  xi.  12. 
 
The  Dedication,  xvii 
 
 government,  or  ever  can  be  fo,  unleis  when 
 a  fovereign  prince  happens  to  be  born  after  the 
 death  of  his  (a)  father. 
 
 And,  the  better  to  bring  this  about,  they 
 impudently  afferted,  and  demurely  quoted  the 
 holy  (^)  fcriptures,  as  if  they  could  have  found 
 
 b  evidence 
 
 (a)  The  learned  Bp.  Morton,  having  obferv'd,  that  the 
 King,  with  refpedl  to  his  fubjedls,  is  like  a  father  with  re- 
 fpedt  to  his  children,  fays  of  the  latter,  '  If  he  do  injurioufly 
 
 *  intreat  any  of  them,  or  not  carefully  keep  his  own  goods. 
 
 *  or  live  any  way  diforderly,  it  is  the  duty  of  his  children,  if 
 
 *  not  with  filence  to  fuflPer  it,  yet  with  great  modefty  to  ad- 
 
 *  monifh  him  of  it :  but  if  they  (hould  join  themfelves  toge- 
 '  ther,  and  offer  any  violence  unto  him ;  efpecially,  if  they 
 «  fhould  throw  him  out  of  his  houfe,  all  men  would  count 
 ^  them  rebellious  and  ungratious  children  :    but  if  they 
 
 *  fhould  take  his  life  from  him,  they  were  to  be  efteem'd 
 
 *  notorioufly  wicked  ;  yea,  rather  as  monfters,  worthy  to 
 
 *  be  abhorred  of  all  men  '.    Salomon  159^,  p.  19. 
 
 [b)  '  It  is  the  unhappy  fate  of  the  holy  fcriptures,  to  be 
 '  abufed  into  a  kind  of  publick  armory,  whence  the  feveral 
 
 <  contending  parties  - —  fetch  weapons  to  arm  themfelves, 
 
 *  and  fight  each  other — .     We  find  it  pradtis'd  —  by  the 
 
 *  grand  impoftor  of  the  world — :   and  Satan  has  always 
 
 *  had,  and  ftill  has,  his  agents  and  emilTaries,  that  ufe  the 
 
 *  fame  devilifh  policy.  This  they  were  at  in  Forty  t'wo:  and 
 «  the  fame  evil  fpirit  is  conjur'd  up  again — i  there  be- 
 
 *  ing  men  found  in  our  days,  who,  tho'  in  open  and  adiual 
 
 <  rebellion ,  appeal  to  heaven  for  the  jujiice  of  their  arms*, 
 
 &C.  C.Huiton's  ferm  26  July,  1685,  p.  I,  2. *  They  go 
 
 *  to  the  fcriptutCj  not  to  iearn  from  thence,  what  or  whufe 
 '  opinions  are  truefl,  but  how  they  may  beft  defend  their 
 '  own  ':  Dr.  Harems  ferm,  5  May,  1719,  edit.  2,  p.  11. 
 And  another  (whofe  knowledge  of  what  he  wrote  about  can- 
 not be  difputed,)  gives  a  plain  reafon  for  all  this,  becaufe 
 
 *  Hypocrify,  as  all  other  things  that  we  wear,  is  capable  ut 
 
 *  new  tadiionsi  and  the  skill  of  thofe  who  ufe  it,  is  to  find 
 '  out  that  which  is  moft  likely  to  take,  and  to  fuit  it  with 
 
 *  the  prefent  occafion  '!  Bp.  Burnefs  ferm.  at  the  coronat. 
 of  K.  f-Kand^  AT.  II  ^pr.  i(J8^,  p.  i8. 
 
xviii  The  Dedication. 
 
 evidence  in  the  word  of  God  againft  his  own 
 inftitutions !)  that  neither  the  regal,  nor  epif- 
 copal  power  had  any  ground  or  foundation  in 
 the  facred  records ;  but  that  all  power,  eccle- 
 fiaflical  as  well  as  civil,  was  radically,  or  ori- 
 ginally, in  the  people,  and  therefore  but  a 
 truft,  which  the  truftees  muft  be  accountable 
 for  to  them ;  and  confequently,  that  the  peo- 
 ple might  juftly  deprive  the  one,  and  depoie 
 the  other  (yea,  and  put  them  both  to  death) 
 when  ever,  they  thought,  the  publick  good 
 might  be  advanced  thereby. 
 
 Neither  were  they  leis  notorious  for  their 
 falie  gloflfes  upon  the  laws,  and  fundamental 
 conftitution  of  our  own  country :  where  they 
 audacioufly  infilled,  (as  their  ObfervatorSy 
 and  Previews-,  and  other  wretched  hirelings, 
 have  done  in  our  days,)  that  the  King  is  one 
 of  the  three  eftates,  and  therefore  but  co-or- 
 dinate with,  not  fupreme  over,  the  reft ;  and 
 confequently,  if  the  Lords  and  Commons  join 
 againft  the  Crown,  they  have  the  authority  of 
 two  to  one  againft  him,  and  may  therefore 
 lawfully  controul  and  over-rule  him !  Notwith- 
 ftanding  it  is  manifeftly  evident  [a)  from  the 
 
 parlia- 
 
 (a)  \t\  thefe  we  read  of  fuch  and  fuch  thing",  done  by  the 
 authority  of  the  Kh/g,  'with  the  af[e'nt  of  the  Three  Ejiates : 
 and  find  the  Lords  Spiritual,  the  Lords  Temporal,  and  the 
 
 Coin^ 
 
The  Dedication,  xix 
 
 parliament-rolls,  and  other  publick  records, 
 that  the  three  eftates  are  the  Lords  Sfiritualy 
 the  Lords  "temj^oral,  and  the  Commons :  and 
 that'theKingistheheadof,  and  fupreme  over 
 them  all ;  by  whole  fiat  alone  their  a6lions  be- 
 come valid,  and  without  which  all  their  coun- 
 cels  and  deliberations  have  no  manner  of  au- 
 thority to  bind  their  fellowfubjeds. 
 
 *■  Many  other  dodrines  there  are  which  bear 
 
 ^  affinity  with  thefe,   and  which  of  late  have 
 
 b  a  '  ferv'd 
 
 Commons,  declaring,  ofthemfelves  together  in  a  body,  that 
 they  do  Teprefent  in  parlianierit  the  Three  EffaUs  of  the  realm ; 
 and  at  the  fame  time  profeffing  themfelves,  as  fuch,  to  be 
 (as  indeed  they  cannot  pretend  to  be  any  more,  than)  his  Ma- 
 j?fifs  Tnofi  dutiful  and  loyal  Jubjeiif^   of  which  I  cou'd  fill 
 the  margin  with  a  multitude  of  inconteftable  proofs^  anci- 
 ent and  modern.     But  a  man  who  is  not  a  meer  ftranger  e- 
 ven  to  the  Evglijh  ftatute-book  can  have  no  more  ground 
 to  difpute  the  truth  of  this,  than  he  can  have  to  doubt  whe- 
 ther it  is  day-light,  when  he  fees  the  fun  fhining  in  his  wer/- 
 dian  (plendor.      However,  for  the  unlearned  reader's  fatis- 
 fadionj  I  fhall  refer  him  only  to  the  office  for  the  fifth  of 
 Nov.  in  the  Common  prayer  book,  (which  is  confirm'd  by 
 fever al  a(fls  of  parliament,  and  is,  or  ought  to  be,  well  known 
 in  every  good  family:)  where  he  will  find  it  entitl'd  A  form 
 
 of  prayer  ivith  thankfgivuig fur  the  happy  deliverance  of 
 
 K.James  I.  and  the  Three  Eftates  0/ England,  <^c.  and  in  the 
 colle(5i:  before  the  epiftle,  we  addrefs  our  (elves  unto  God  in 
 the  fame  terms,  with  due  acknowledgments  for  his  pre- 
 serving the  Kifig  and  the  Three  Efiates.  And,  to  Oiew,  that 
 this  dodrine  is  not  chang'd  with  the  times,  the  Lords  Spi- 
 ritual and  Temporal,  and  the  Commons  which  afTembled  in 
 the  convention,  1688,  were  fo  far  from  reckoning  the  King 
 one  of  the  Three  Eftates,  that  they  declar'd  themfelves  to 
 reprejent  all  the  eftata  of  the  people  of  thii  realm,  even  when 
 they  neither  had  tny  King  among  them,  nor  were  afTem- 
 bled by  any  King's  writ. 
 
xxii   The  Dedication. 
 
 had  captivated  the  people.  'Tis  enough  for 
 me  here  to  point  to  Ibme  {a)  of  thofe  many  au- 
 thors, who  have  given  a  Jarge  and  lively  de- 
 Icription  of  the  whole:  but  I  prelume  upon 
 the  reader's  pardon,  while  I  give  him  a  tafle 
 of  fuch  entertainment,  as  he  muft  expect  to 
 meet  with  in  the  perufal  of  more  voluminous 
 works. 
 
 As  to  their  reformation  of  religion,  it  was 
 root  and  branch :  the  chafte  f^oufe  of  Chrifty 
 the  true  old  orthodox  church  was  defil'd  and 
 polluted  at  the  will  of  every  bold  and  licenti- 
 ous invader ;  and  inftead  of  found  dodlrine  no- 
 thing fubftituted  but  time-ierving  nonfenle, 
 cant,  profanenefs,  and  blafphemy !  the  boaft- 
 ed  liberty  of  the  fubjects  was  rendered  preca- 
 rious by  their  ov/n  reprefentatives ;  who,  at 
 the  fame  time  that  they  amus'd  the  people 
 with  jealoufes  and  appreheniions  of  tyranny 
 and  oppreffion  from  their  lawful  and  gracious 
 Ibveraign,  aflum'd  to  them.felves  an  unprefi- 
 dented  arbitrary  power  of  taking  into  cuftody 
 their  fellow-lubjeds,  for  matters  no  ways  re- 
 lating to  the  ilated  privileges  of  parliament » 
 
 and 
 
 {a)  I  would  parricularly  recommend  the  Earl  of  Clar en- 
 Jons  hiftory  of  the  Rebellion :  and,  after  a  careful  perufal  of 
 that.  Walker's  Sufferings  of  the  Gergy,-  as  the  heft  fund  to 
 Iccure  a  fufficient  flock  of  knowledge  of  the  true  ftate  of 
 tbofe  times,  and  the  ibirit  of  the  party. 
 
The  Dedication,  xxiii 
 
 and  the  property  of  every  honeft  EngUJhman, 
 (yea,  and  his  life  too)  was  liable  to  be  taken 
 away,  without  caule,  without  legal  trial,  and 
 contrary  to  all  law,  at  the  pleafure  of  every 
 upftart  Committee-man,  or  upon  the  malici- 
 ous fuggeftion  of  every  fpiteful  and  perjur'd 
 informer!  But  indeed,  fince  they  '  were  per- 
 '  mitted  by  the  juft  judgment  of  God,  for  the 
 '  punilhment  of  the  many  crying  fins  of  this 
 ^  nation,  to  ufurp  a  power  to  which  they  had 
 '  not  the  leaft  colour  or  pretence  of  right ' : 
 'tis  no  wondei,  that  they  did  (as  all  Ufurpers 
 in  general  do)  '  cxercile  it  in  a  more  cruel,  ar- 
 '  bitrary,  and  tyrannical  manner,  than  was 
 '  ever  done  by  any  of  our  rightful  and  lawful 
 '  (a)  princes  \  In  ihort  (to  ufe  the  words  of 
 an  eminent  preacher,  who  knew  the  men  and 
 their  manners,)  — '  If  to  render  the  fervice  of 
 
 *  God  ridiculous  and  contemptible ;  if  to  play 
 '  the  hypocrites,  and  to  violate  oaths,  and  by 
 '  all  inftances  of  wickednefs  to  bring  a  reproach 
 '  and  odium  upon  Chriilianity :  if  fuch  religi- 
 '  ous  villanies  as  thefc  did  Ipeak  men  to  be 
 
 *  the  true  friends  and  patrons  of  religion,  I 
 '  am  fure  no  age  of  the  church  ever  produced 
 '  fuch  friends  and  patrons  before  ^   though  I 
 
 *  cannot 
 
 {a)  Bp.  Wynnis  ferm  29  May,  lyT^,  p-  5.  6. 
 
xxiv  The  Dedication. 
 
 «  cannot  undertake  but  this  age  poffibly  may 
 
 <  produce  the  {a)  like  '. 
 
 Another  plaufible  colour,  which  they  gave 
 their  caufe,  was,  that  their  principal  aim  was 
 not  againft  the  King  himfelf,  but  only  to  take 
 him  out  of  the  hands  of  his  evil  counfellors ; 
 whereas,  in  fa£l,  his  counfellors  in  general 
 (except  two  or  three  of  the  beft)  were  left 
 unmolefted,  and  the  King's  ferfon  only  {h) 
 hunted.  But  a  venerable  prelate  of  thole  times, 
 affures  us  of  their  perfidy,  upon  his  own  fuffi- 
 cient  experience ;  '  I  am  fure,  (fays  he)  I  am 
 
 *  able  to  arife  in  the  laft  day,  to  teftify  againft 
 *■  many  of  his  enemies  and  acculers,    that  I 
 
 <  have  often  heard  them  juftifying  him  in 
 *-  thofe  things,   for  which  afterwards  they  ac- 
 
 *  culed  him  and  condemned  him-    yea,  they 
 
 *  were  his  counfellors  to  have  them  done,  and 
 
 *  then  his  prolecutors,  and  perfecutors  of  him 
 *•  unto  the  death,  for  doing  {c)  them  ' .  So 
 that  a  late  reverend  and  learned  divine  might 
 well  lay  of  that  party,  that  they  '  are  general- 
 '  ly  known  by  this  charader,  that  they  are 
 '  for  the  King  againft  his  evil  counfellors,  and 
 
 '  for 
 
 {a)  Dr.  Ednv.  Telhngi  ferm.  30  Jan.  i6l\,  p.  28.  (b) 
 Dr.  Heylins  life  of  Abp.  Laud,  1668,  fol.  522.  {c)  Bp. 
 Griff.  Wuliapii's  declar.  of  God's  judgm.  1661^  fol,  2. 
 
The  Dedication.^  xxv 
 
 ^  for  the  ^rotejlant  religion  againft  the  {a) 
 <  church'! 
 
 But  the  true  fecret  of  all  was  plainly  to 
 make  a  breach  and  interruption  {b)  in  our  fuc- 
 cellion  of  Kings  as  well  as  of  biftiops ;  in  con- 
 iequencc  of  which  the  Fanatkks  projeded  a 
 Ichifrn  in  the  church,  and  a  commonwealth 
 (as  they  call  it)  in  the  ftate :  which  the  more 
 cunning  Jefuits  heartily  encouraged;  well 
 knowing  that  in  luch  times  of  confulion  they 
 fliou'd  have  the  better  opportunity  to  pick  up 
 the  wandering  flock,  when  once  gone  aftray, 
 and  to  feduce  them  again  to  their  pretended 
 mother-church ! 
 
 Yet  ftill  the  principles  of  the  party  were  ib 
 wild  and  romantick,  io  manifeitly  contrary  to 
 
 c  Icrip- 
 
 {a)  Dr.  Hickes*s  fertn.  at  IVorcefi.  29  May,  16841  cl^dicar. 
 p.  2.  {b)  I  remember  to  have  read  of  feme  memoirs  of 
 Sr.  John  JDhgley^  fecrecary  to  the  Prince  and  Princefs  Pala- 
 tine (fometime call'd  King  and  Queen  of  Bohemia:^  where- 
 in it  appears,  that  thefe  rebels,  by  feveral  agents,  tempted 
 that  unfortunate  Princefs,  under  pretence  of  the  fears  of  Po- 
 pery, to  take  part  with  them,  aga'nH;  her  own  father  King 
 famei  and  her  brother  King  Charles,  fuccefl^veiy,  infmuating 
 that  they  would  fettle  the  crown  upon  her  and  her  children: 
 But  flie  had  more  grace  than  to  hearken  to  their  diabolical 
 fuggeftions,  and  gave  them  an  anfwer  worthy  of  h-r  high 
 birth  j  plainly  forefeeing,  that  their  real  defign  was  to  de»- 
 ftroy  the  whole  Royal  Family,  by  fetting  up  one  branch  of 
 them  againft  another:  Neither  did  the  Prince,  her  husband, 
 give  them  any  more  encouragement  in  their  cppofuion  to 
 tpifcopacy,  tho'  he  bad  not  cftablilVd  ic  id  bis  own  Germain 
 dominions. 
 
xxvi  The  Dedication. 
 
 fcripture,  hiftory,  law,  reafon,  and  even  to 
 common  fenie  too,  that  many  well-meaning 
 people,  and  among  the  reft  the  good  King 
 himfelf,  (whofe  credulity  and  hereditary  cle- 
 mency were  his  greateft,  if  not  his  only  faults) 
 would  not  be  pcrfwaded  to  fufped  the  loyal- 
 ty, or  fenfe  of  the  people  of  England,  Co  far 
 as  to  apprehend  any  danger  therefrom.  But 
 alas!  (lb  little  aflurance  is  there  of  the  affecti- 
 ons of  the  giddy  multitude,  that)  when  it 
 was  too  late  to  rcdtify  it,  they  were  all  con- 
 vinced cf  their  miftake:  inlbmuch,  that  when 
 the  King  iifued  his  declaration,  in  answer  to 
 that  of  the  5th  of  M?)',  i<542,  concerning  the 
 Militia,  he  attributed  the  chief  caufe  of  all 
 thofe  troubles,  to  thole  very  pamfhlets  and 
 facers,  which  he  had  before  thought  below 
 the  high  and  royal  dignity,  wherein  God  had 
 ■placed  him  to  take  notice  of.  And  therein 
 his   Majefty   complained,     that  *  whilft   the 
 
 *  prelfes  fwarmed  with,    and  every  day  pro- 
 
 *  duced  new  tracts  againit  the  eflablifli'd  go- 
 
 <  vernment  of  the  church  and  ftate,  moft  men 
 
 *  wanted  the  courage  Cr  the  confcience  to 
 '  write,    or  the  opportunity  and  encourage- 
 
 *  ment  to  publifli  fuch  compofed  ibber  anim- 
 
 <  advcrfions,    as  might  either   preferve   the 
 '  minds  of  his  good  iubjeds  from  fuch  infedi- 
 
 on. 
 
The  Dedication,  xxvii 
 
 <  on,  or  reftore  and  recover  them,  when  they 
 '  were  fb  infeded  (a) '. 
 
 Agreeable  to  which,  the  great  council  of 
 the  nation,  in  a  lawful  parliament  affembled, 
 upon  the  refettlement  of  the  government  after 
 the  happy  reftoration  of  the  Ion  and  heir  of 
 the  Royal  Martyr,  declar'd  the  true  fenfe  of 
 a  free  people,  as  follows ;  '  that  the  growth 
 '  and  encreafe  of  the  (then)  late  troubles  and 
 >  difbrders  did,  in  a  very  great  mealure,  pro- 
 
 <  ceed  from  a  multitude  of  leditious  lermons, 
 ^  pamphlets,  and  fpeeches,  daily  preached 
 f  and  publifhed,  with  a  tranlcendent  boldnels, 
 
 *  defaming  the  perlbn  and  government  of  his 
 '  (then)  Majefty  and  his  royal  father,  where- 
 '  in  men  were  too  much  encouraged :  and,  a- 
 
 *  bove  all,  from  the  wilful  miftake  {b)  of  the 
 ^  fupream  and  lawful  authority,    whillt  men 
 
 c  2  *  were 
 
 {a\  Clarend.  hifl.  rebell.  vol,  i,  p.  522,  in  8vo.  [b)  This 
 mull  needs  be  a  •wilful  mijt a ke,  becauf-^  *  ihe  knriwn  laws  of 
 '  the  land  have  declar'd  it  fo  fully,  and  particularly  tlie  oath 
 
 *  of  fupremacy  exprefs'd  ic  fo  clearly,  chat  any  man  of  or- 
 
 *  dinary  capacity  may  underftand  it  as  well  as  the  deepeft 
 
 *  flatefman  in  the  world  '.  Bp.  Savderjous  pref.  ro  Abp. 
 Ujbers  power  cf  the  Prince,  &c.  fed.  xiv.  And,  as  for 
 the  confeque77ces  of  this  miftake,  another  modern  prelate  well 
 obferves,  that  '  no  change  can  befo  beneficial — ,  as  ufurp- 
 
 *  ing  upon  lawful  authority  is  deftrudive:  —  and,   where 
 
 *  the  pretence  is  real,  yet,  to  feek  publick  good,  in  oppo- 
 
 *  fition  to  publick  authority,  is  like  curing  diftempers  by 
 
 *  deftroying  the  patient  *!  Tbo.  Sherl.  ferm.  iifaa,  1703, 
 
xxviii  The  Dedication.' 
 
 ^  were  forward  to  cry  up  and  maintain  thofe 
 
 <  orders  and  ordinances,  oaths  and  (a)  cove- 
 
 '  nants,    to  be  a£ls  legal   and   warrantable, 
 
 *  which,  in  themfelves,  had  not  the  leaft  co- 
 ^  lour  of  law  or  juftice  to  fupport  them. 
 '  From  which  kind  of  diftempers,     as   the 
 
 *  prelent  age  is  not  wholly  freed,  fo  poftcrity 
 
 *  may  be  apt  to  relapie  into  them,  if  time- 
 '  ly  remedy  be  not  provided  (^) '. 
 
 If  then,  according  to  the  fenfe  of  the  na- 
 tion (which,  however  pretended,  is  never  to 
 be  fo  truly  known  as  in  fuch  free  (c)  parlia- 
 ments) 
 
 (a)  '  All  aflbciations  and  covenants  againft  any  of  God's 
 
 *  commandments,  are  diredtly  covenants  with  death  and  a- 
 
 *  greements  with  hell:  and  all  the  oaths,  vows  and  ftatutes, 
 
 *  made  and  framed  thereupon,  are  diredtly  mifchiefs,  fram* 
 '  ed  by  a  law,  and  obligations  fealed  to  ferve  the  devil  '. 
 Dr.  Hudfon  of  government,  1(547,  ^^  ^^^  ^"^'  ^"^'  '^  '^ 
 Well  worthy  of  remembrance,  thar,  among  the  other  mo- 
 tives gravely  prefented  to  the  houfe  of  Covitnonsy  to  prevail 
 with  them  [o  take  the  covenant,  this  was  one,  that  •■  the 
 
 *  devil  himfelt  will  have  a  covenant  from  all  his  vafTals,  that 
 
 *  expedl  any  extraordinary  matters  from  him;  elfe  he  will 
 
 *  not  be  engag'd  to  be  at  their  command:  there  is  not  a 
 
 *  witch  but  (he  muit  feal  a  covenant '!  Corn.  Burges's  ferm; 
 17  Nov.  164.0,  p.  6^.  {}>)  Stat,  xiii,  Car.  ii,  cap.  I.  [c] 
 '  Many  good  people,  —  are  miferably  carried  away  by  a 
 
 *  ftrange  implicit  faith,  to  believe,   whatfoever  is  <aid  or 
 
 *  done  in  the  name  of  a  parliiment,  and  in  the  pretended 
 
 *  defence  oi  religion,  liberties,    laws,  to  be  infallibly  true, 
 
 *  and  altogether  juft  '.  Dr.  Ferns  refolv.  of  confc.  i6^2p 
 p.  I.    But  '  all  parliaments  are  not  always  guided  by  an  un- 
 
 *  erring  fpiritj  but  were  many  times  fwayed  by  the  heads 
 
 *  of  the  moft  powerful  fadion  ':  Bp.  Griff.  WtUiams's  rights 
 of  Kings  1^62,  fol.  91.    And  King  Charlct  i  himfelf  C'n 
 
 his 
 
The  Dedication,  xxix 
 
 ments)  the  late  troubles  and  diforders  fcon- 
 iequent  upon  the  grand  rebellion^  which  ws 
 to  this  day  do  yearly  commemorate,  with  "[o" 
 lemn  profeffions  oidetejiation  and  abhorrence^ 
 did  indeed  in  a  'very  great  meafitre,  proceed 
 from  feditions  fermons J  pamphlets y  and  jfeecb* 
 €s  \  and  above  all^  from  the  wilful  mijiake  of 
 the  fupreme  and  lawful  authority ^  &c.  (as  you 
 fee  they  did ;)  how  much  does  it  behove  all 
 true  churchmen  and  loyal  fubjeds  to  encoun- 
 ter fuch  feditious  {a)  fermonsj  famfhlets^  and 
 Jpeeches,  and,  above  all,  to  do  their  utmoft 
 endeavour  to  give  their  fellow  lubjeds  a  true 
 notion  of  the  fupreme  and  lawful  authority  j 
 the  mifiake  of  which,   it  feems,   has  been  16 
 
 deftru- 
 
 his  fccond  paper  to  Mr.  Henderfon-^  6  June^  16^6,  p.  20.) 
 fays,  '  I  am  confident  to  make  it  clearly  appear  to  you,  that 
 '  this  church  never  did  fubmit,  nor  was  fubordinare  to  the 
 '  tiuo  houfes  of  parliament :  and  that  it  was  only  the  King 
 '  and  clergy  who  made  the  reformation  j   the  parliamenc 
 
 *  meerly  ferving  to  help  to  give  the  civil   fandtion  * . 
 
 {a)  '  The  church  of  Evgland — certainly  abhors  the  rebel 
 
 *  in  the  pulpit,  as  well  as  the  rebel  in  the  field  'j  Cha.  Latnbes 
 ferm.  28  Mar.  1717,  p.  12.  But,  '  upon  fuch  a  lolemn  oc- 
 '  cafion  as  this,  to  fpeak  carelefly  and  difrefpedfully  of  the 
 
 *  royal  caufe,  and  the  loyal  adherents  to  it,  to  flirt  at  that 
 
 *  primitive  doctrine  of  paflive  obe<lience,  and  ftart  intricate 
 
 *  and  perplex'd  cafes,  which  may,  upon  any  pretence  what- 
 
 *  foever,  fuppofe  the  neceflity  of  refifting  the  fupreme  pow- 
 
 *  erj  what  is  it,  but  to  ere<^  a  fcaffold  every  year  for  the 
 
 *  righteous  Martyr,  and^  without  a  vizard,  continue  to  re- 
 
 *  peat  the  mournful  ftroke  oi  the  executioner'?  Edm.  AT" 
 cher's  ferra.  30  Jan.  lyiOj  p.  2$. 
 
XXX  The  Dedication. 
 
 deftruclive  to  our  nation!  Remember  this^ 
 therefore,  and  Jhew your  (elves  (a)  men  I  fub- 
 je£fs  !  Chrijlians  !  and  fince  (we  have  the  fame 
 authority  to  fay,  that)  the  frefent  age  is  not 
 wholly  freed  from  thofe  kindof  diftemfersy  lee 
 that  you  watch  againft  them,  and  ft  and  faft 
 in  faith  (and  loyalty  I)  quit  you  like  men  !  be 
 (h)  ftrong!  fb  that,  it  may  pleale  God,  a 
 timely  remedy  being  happily  ^rovidedy  nei- 
 ther we,  nor  our  fofterity^  may  hereafter  be 
 fubjed  to  lb  fatal  a  relaffe. 
 
 <  Let  us  not  lufFer  ourlelves   at  any  time 
 '  to  be  abuled  with  a  fhew,  nor  to  truft  rafli- 
 
 *  ly  to  pretences:    becaufe  what  hath  hap- 
 
 *  pen'd  may  happen  again;    and  to  tread  in 
 
 *  the  lame  track,  is  the  ready  way  to  drop  in 
 *■  the  fame  {c)  Ihare  ' :   and  '  what  a  Ihame 
 
 *  wou'd  it  be  for  us,   meanly  and  bafely  to 
 
 *  betray  that  caule,    for  which  our  anceftors 
 
 *  facrific'd  their  (d)  lives  '  ?   yet,    ^  I  know 
 <  not  how  it  comes  to  pals,   but  ib  it  often 
 
 *  happens,  that  they  who  are  moll  fecure  of 
 ^  truth  on  their  fide,  are  moft  apt  to  be  remils 
 
 *  and  carelefs,  and  to  comfort  themlelves  with 
 ^  fome  good  old  fayings,  as  God  will  provide •» 
 
 '  and 
 
 {a)'  Jfa.  xlvi.  8.     f^)  i  Cor.  xvi.  13.     {c)  Vellm£%  ferm. 
 ^o  Jan.  1681,  p.^r.     {d)  Stillmgfi,  ftrm.  21  Se^t.  1(^73,  p. 
 
 45-  ^ 
 
The  Dedication,  xxxi 
 
 ^  and  truth  ijuill  frevailj  though  they  lye 
 '  ftill,  and  do  nothing  towards  it :  but  cer- 
 '  tainly  fuch  negligence  is  inexculable,  where 
 '  the  matter  is  of  fo  great  importance,  the 
 '  adverlaries  ib  many,  and  an  account  muft 
 '  be  given  fhortly  in  another  world,  of  what 
 '  men  have  done  or  fufFer'd  —  in  (a)  this  ' . 
 The  lame  caulcs  will  naturally  produce  the 
 iame  effeds :  and,  if  it  Ihou'd  be  our  misfor- 
 tune now,  as  it  was  then,  that  men  want  the 
 courage^  or  the  consciences  to  oppofe  fuch  a 
 growing  evil,  whillt  it  is  in  their  power,  how 
 juft  will  it  be  in  Almighty  God,  to  give  us  up 
 to  be  a  prey  to  the  like  ufurpations,  and  to 
 confitme  both  lis  and  our  (b)  King  I  —  w  hich 
 God  avert. 
 
 What  a  calamitous  condition  our  natural 
 Ibveraign  has  heretofore  been  liable  to,  and 
 how  wonderfully  reftor'd,  is  thus  defcrib'd, 
 by  Ibme  eminent  divines,    'z;/^.  that '  he  was 
 
 *  forc'd  to  live  in  exile  and  banilhment,  di- 
 ^  vefted  of  royal  power,  and  all  the  enfigns 
 '  of  majefty,  reduced  to  a  precarious,  and 
 '  fbmetimes  a  neceilitous  ftate,  while  he  law 
 ^  his  friends  impoverilh'd  and  ruin'd,  his  loy- 
 
 *  al  fubjeds   opprels'd,    his   enemies  trium- 
 
 '  phant, 
 
 («)  Uid.  p.  48.     (h)  I  Sam.  xii,  2^. 
 
xxxii  The  Dedication. 
 
 phiint,  too  vigilant,  and  too  powerful,  to 
 allow  any  hope  to  lee  an  end  of  theie  trou- 
 bles: but  that  God,  who  can  do  what  he 
 plealcs,  and  oftentimes  does  fuch  things,  as 
 no  human  force  nor  power  can  efFed,  put 
 an  end  to  thele  troubles,  and  reftor'd  him 
 to  his  father's  throne  in  peace  and  honour, 
 and  with  the  univerlal  joy  and  triumph  of 
 his  fubjefts  —  ;  without  any  power  of  his 
 own,  without  the  help  and  affiftance  of  fo- 
 reign allies ;  while  his  friends  at  home  were 
 oppreft,  while  the  lame  power  that  drove 
 him  out  was  Itill  in  the  hands  of  his  ene- 
 mies y  while  fo  many  perlbns,  who  were 
 in  grcateit  power,  were  concerned,  for  their 
 own  prelervation,  to  keep  him  out ;  while 
 thofe  who  wifh'd  his  return  durft  not  whii^ 
 per  any  thing  tending  to  call  the  King  back 
 (a)  again :  and  (which  ought  the  more  to 
 endear  our  deliverance)  all  this  was  brought 
 about  by  a  miracle  of  mercy,  far  beyond  all 
 our  hopes  and  contrivances,  at  a  time  when 
 we  were  quite  loft,  without  all  vilible  means 
 of  a  {/?)  reftoration  \  After  ally  .-^feeing 
 that  otir  God  hath  pmifhed  us  lefs  than  our 
 iniquities  deferve^  and  given  us  fuch  a  deli- 
 verance 
 
 {a)  Dr.  Skcrl,  ferini.  on  the  difcov.  of  the  plot,  t^S],  p. 
 ^,     (f)  Dr.  Janeh  ierm.  ii  A^r.  l57p,  p.  4<^- 
 
The  Dedication,  xxxiii 
 
 "verance  as  this-,  Jhou'd  we  again  break  his 
 commandment Sy  and  provoke  him  by  our  re- 
 peated rebellions  againft  him  and  his  ordi- 
 nance, what  lefs  can  we  exped,  than  that  he 
 wou'd  be  angry  with  us  till  he  had  confitm'd 
 MS-,  fo  that  there  jhotid  be  7io  remnant  nor 
 [a)  efcaping.  For  Mt  is  a  fearful  aggravati- 
 *■  on  of  fin,  after  great  judgments  and  great 
 ^  deliverances,  to  return  to  fin,  and  efpecial- 
 
 *  ly  to  the  lame  fins  again:  becaufe  this  can 
 ^  hardly  be  without  our  finning  againft  know-* 
 '  ledge  ^  and—  is  an  argument  of  a  very  per« 
 *■  verle  and  incorrigible  (J?)  temper ' . 
 
 ^  What  the  ftate  of  things  is  now, 1 
 
 '  ihall  not  need  to  obferve.  We  all  fee  it, 
 '  and  know  it  full  well.  And  if  I  fhould 
 *•  lay  moreover,  that  there  are  Ibme  ftill 
 '  among  us,    as  deeply   tainted   with   thole 
 
 *  principles  of  ledition  and  rebellion,  which 
 *■  brought  about  this  day's  tragedy,  as  any  of 
 '  their  fathers  were,  and  who,  if  they  had 
 '  liv'd  in  their  days,    would  have  been  as 
 
 *  forward  as  the  forwardeft  of  them  were,  in 
 '  unhinging  the  government,  and  deftroying 
 <  the  church,  nay,  and  in  bringing  their  {o^ 
 
 *  veraign  to  the  block:   though  Ibme  per- 
 
 d  ^  haps 
 
 {a)  Ezra  ix.  13,  14.     {b)  Dr.  TiVotJ.  (crm.  51  Jan, 
 1688,  p.  15,  aod  13. 
 
xxxiv  The  Dedication. 
 
 haps  would  be  angry  at  my  faying  this,  I 
 fear  it  v/ould  be  only  for  my  ipeaking  a 
 truth  out  of  fealbn  ^  and  they,  I  believe, 
 wou'd  be  moil  angry  with  me  for  {aying  it, 
 who  bell  know  it  to  be  a  {a)  truth  ' .  '  And 
 I  am  exceedingly  afraid,  —  the  very  crime 
 of  this  day  is  not  lb  generally,  fo  thorough- 
 Iv  repented  of,  as  it  ought  to  be.  If  it  be, 
 how  comes  it  to  pals,   that  the  very  fame 
 
 maxims  and  doctrines, are  fb  publickly 
 
 avov%-'d  and  induftrioufly  propagated  ?    And 
 what  can  be  the  meaning  of  that  barbarous 
 [If]  fealt,  that  is  faid  (nor  can  it  t-e  gainfaid) 
 to  b-e  annually  kept  up,    to  mock  the  lad 
 Iblem.nity  of  the  day,  and  glory  in  the  exe- 
 crable (r)  deed  *  ? 
 But,    becaule  (I  know)  fuch  diabolical  tri- 
 umphs in  the  moft  monllrous  wickednels  can- 
 not eafilv  find  credit,  among  men  of  true  Eng' 
 Ijfh  fpirits,  I  think  it  neceffary  to  inform  my 
 reader,  that  feveral  of  our  young  nobility  and 
 gentry,  having  been  trained  up  in  leminaries 
 of  fchiCm,   have  there  been  (as  it  were)  cate- 
 chiz'd  into  a  belief,    that  the  murder  of  our 
 King  was  a  gallant  and  heroick  acUon !    wit- 
 
 nefs 
 
 (a)  Bp.  BloihaWs  Term.  31  Jan.  \-jo%y  p.  2i»  in  8vo. 
 
 (b)  Meaning  the  Cahis-beeU  ciub.     U)  D:.  Irloji'i  fcxnb 
 30  Jan.  i-joC,  p.  27,  28. 
 
The  Dedication,  xxxv 
 
 nefs  Lord  WiU'tam  (a)  Ruffel,  and  others^ 
 who,  if  not  thus  unhappily  prejudic'd  by  an 
 ill-fated  education,  might  have  liv'd  and  died 
 in  peace  and  honour.  Nay,  fbme  of  the  par- 
 ty, even  in  our  times,  tho'  they  pretend  to 
 abhor  the  bloody  fact,  don't  blufh  to  under- 
 take a  {b)  profefs'd  juftification  of  thole  anti^ 
 d  2  chrijlian 
 
 (a)  This  noble  perfon  was  not  only  influcnc'd  by  the 
 
 prir.ciples  of  Dr,  I^Ijvton,  Mr.  fohnfo-^,  and  o:hers  of  the 
 rerublican  claf*,  bat  had  been  fer.t  f.r  education,  tcgether 
 with  u\tfo"S  of  tkst:)  noclemen  snd  geKtleyreri-,  to  one  Lf^^if, 
 '  a  {tickl-n?  Prerbyierian,  tfcac  hid  gorren  the  rsqueurarion 
 
 *  ox  Tctfnhan:-H:gkcroJs,  frrm  Mr.  IF/rrpe^^',  aioyal  minifter 
 
 *  of  the  church  of  England  ' ;  w:h.cb  impious  wrerch, 
 "Le-jj-i,  '  to  divert  his  iGholars,  corr.pos'd  a  fjrce,  where- 
 '  in  the  yourg  gentlemen  were  to  be  aviJors.  The  farce 
 »  h'd  all  the  formsijries  of  a  Irgh-ccuit  of  jujiicej  preGdspt, 
 
 *  fuiiiciror,  wirnelTcs,  c^c.  The  cnn-iinai  was  an  c'.d  lliGck 
 «  water  dog,  which  he  called  Ckiznts  Stum^:  !  this  dog  W3S 
 '  arraigt^'d,  rry'd,  condetnn'd,  and  executed,  by  cuttn  g  off 
 '  his  head!  by  which  Sifiion  he  inihlled  the  principles  o: 
 '  king-killing  into  his  fcholars ;   as  if  the  murd'ring  ot  a 
 
 *  Kii  g  were  no  iTiOre  thin  the  cjrri::^  cdTa  dcg's  neck  M 
 Tho.  Longs  hift.  of  plors.  168+,  p.  1S6.  (0)  ji.  ?e-r:e,  a 
 licensed  pre£c'~er,  in  th;  Curfe-caufelefi,  fa  lermon,  a:  £xjt, 
 50  yj».  1716^^  does  not  only  boirt,  thjt  he  Kfzer  coud  fee 
 reafon  to  fafij  or  pay  any  rehgious  regard  to  tbe  day,  (pret.  p. 
 iii )  and  call  it  a  fafing  for  frrfe  (p^gc  6  )  but  i.-  fo  :udact- 
 cu ■,  as  to  affirm,  that  '  a  grtat  part  of  the  mafer  {cba^g'd 
 
 *  upon  tbcir  party -^^\<  Co  far  from  beirg  criminal,  that  it  is 
 '  truly  noble,  and  deferves  much  pri;ie  and  ccmmencati- 
 
 *  on  '!  (p.  12  )  meaning  (as  he  conteiTes)  -^'/u/  li'at  don:  a- 
 gainj}  the  King,  cr  h:s  evil  csunfeUors :  and  that  *  all  the 
 '  world  muft  juftify  that  parliament,  for  ftanding  up  in  de- 
 
 *  feV.ce  of  the  right  of  the  fubje<3s  ',  &c.  [p.  15  J  He  pre- 
 fumes  to  call  that  refiilance  and  open  rebellion  a  neble  fiandl 
 (p.  15.  14.)  to  which,  be  fays,  -l.^  are  indebted,  that  ue  are 
 
 njt 
 
xxxvi  The  Dedication. 
 
 chr/ft/an  principles,  which  naturally  and  di- 
 rectly tended  to  it :  as  if  they  prefum'd,  that 
 they  had,  not  an  indulgence  only  for  confci- 
 ences  truly  tender,  but  even  a  licence  to  fo'W 
 their  tares  of  rebellion  and  herefy ;  and  that 
 too,  not  in  the  night-time,  as  the  old  {a)  ene- 
 my did,  but  in  the  open  day ! 
 
 With 
 
 not  a  gfneration  of  fiWjesl  (p.  14.  j  he  calls  the  King's  It^yal 
 and   faithful  ftrvancs  a   corrupt  and  vile  minijiry  j    and    the 
 learned  and  pious  b;fhopsj    and  other  orthodox  divints,   a 
 'vicious,  fwxrAng  clergy  !  (ib'd.)  nd  all  thofe  who  duly  obfcrvc 
 this  anmverfary,    according  to  the  iawt.  ol"  our  church  ar  d 
 {late,  are  fawcily   filled  avgry  men!  profa7is  men!    (p    26  ) 
 the  -viicked!  fp.  27.)  and  compar'd  to  thofe  Jews  and  IJca- 
 ihens,  who  perfecuted  the  Chiiftians  falfiy  for  Chrift'iiy/?/^  / 
 (p.  :t.6)  while  they  (the  felf-call'd  faints)  are  compar'd  to  th? 
 hefi  of  men!  (p  ay.j  to  David  ind  Jeremy!  (p.  33.)  to  the 
 apoftlesj  yea,  and  to  the  fon  of  God  bimfclf!  Cp.  27.)  For 
 they,  good  men,  the  Treibyteriam,  are  harmkfs  and  per fd- 
 ly  innocent!  fp.  9,  11,  i(J.)and  muft  be  fuppos'd  to  have  a 
 more  than  ordinary  goodnefs  !   fp.  27.)  their  adions  are  Juch 
 as  merit  commendation  and  praije!  (p.  9.)  and  therefore  the 
 curfeoi  this  day  is  caufelefs  (forfooth)  as  to  them,  and  jhall 
 come  upon  him  that  denounces  it !  (p.  7,  Sec.)  But  (what  is  fiill 
 more  remarhble  and  furprizing)  this  zealous  Revolutionill 
 (as  he  wou'd  ucverthelefs  be  thought)  takes  pains  to  retort 
 it  upon  thofe  of  the  church-party^  who,  in  a  later  revoluti- 
 cn>  fas  he  with  great  boldnefs  affirms)  were  as  guihy  of 
 tefifting  and  lifting  up  the  hand  againfi  the  Lord's  anointed, 
 and  their  a<9:ions  *  as  truly  a  confpiring  his  death,    as  any 
 «  thing  they  were  ever  guilty  of,  who  actually  put  his  father 
 
 •  to  death  '!  (p.  21,  22.  j  nay,  he  endeavours  to  make  the 
 latter  revolution  the  more  unjuftifiable;  where  he  fays, 
 «  Will  they  blame  us  for  (landing  up  for  our  liberties,  when 
 .*  we  had  the  parliament  —  on  cur  fide;   and  yet  think 
 
 *  themfelves  innocent  in  inviting  over  the  prince  of  Orange, 
 '  to  refcue  their  liberties,  when  they  adkd  only  in  a  private 
 I  capacity  '?  ibid.  p.  21. 
 
 {b)  St.  Matth.  xiii.  25,  28,  39. 
 
TheDEDI  CATION,  xxxvii 
 
 With  what  view  therefore  a  late  eminent 
 prelate  made  fuch  prefling  exhortations  to 
 peace  and  union  with  that  party,  I  fhall  not 
 take  upon  me  to  guefs  :  but  while  the  old  le- 
 ven  is  ftill  fermenting  among  them,  and  fuch 
 principles  as  thele  are  openly  preach'd,  and 
 publiih'd,  with  the  undelerv'd  encouragement 
 of  feveral  editions,  I  leave  the  world  to  judge, 
 whether  any  true  churchman,  or  loyal  fubjed, 
 can  think  it  honeft  or  decent,  to  make  a  cla- 
 mour,  as  if  we  did  isorong  to  our  brethren^ 
 
 *  either  by  loading  them  v/ith  falle  accuiati- 
 '  ons,  by  aggravating  fome  leffer  matters,  or 
 '  by  an  undue  prolecution  of  real,  but  rcpent- 
 '  ed-of  (^)  faults  ' !  I  will  not  fay,  this  was  in- 
 tended as  an  indired  infinuation,  in  order  to 
 the  abolifhing  this  anniverfary  commemoration, 
 as  Ibme  others  have  more  directly  intimated: 
 but,  amongft  all  the  plaufible  realbns  offered 
 to  that  purpole,  I  think,  the  weakeft  is,  that 
 it  was  '  a  fad,    which  no  man  now  living 
 
 *  cou'd  poffibly  have  a  hand  [b^  in  '!  fincc 
 that  wou'd  be  a  much  ftronger  reafbn  for  abo- 
 lifhing (r)  another,  which  I  hope  even  thefe 
 gentlemen  themfelves  are  hardly  yet  bold  e- 
 jiough  to  venture  upon, 
 
 How- 
 
 {d)  Bp,  Burnetts  fcrm,  26  Nov.  1(589,  p.  45,  in  i6q  (h) 
 Dr.  Mich.  Hutchinfonh  icrrr:.  ac  Derbjt  50  Jan.  iji6»  p. 
 14.     (0  Goodfridaj. 
 
xxxviii  The  Dedication. 
 
 However,   that  I  might  offer  my  mite  to- 
 wards the  putting  a  flop  to  {o  contagious  a 
 difiem^er  (at  leaft  fo  far  as  the  holy  fcriptures 
 are  concern'd,)  and  in  hopes  that  I  might  in 
 Ibme  meafure  contribute,    either  to  freferve 
 the  minds  of  his  MajeftyV^tf^^  fuhjecis  from 
 fuch  infeciions^   or  reftore  and  recover  fbme 
 of  thofe  who  were  already  ^^,  infeBed^  by  the 
 notorious  abufe  and  perverfion  thereof,  I  took 
 the  courage  (rather  than  be  liable  to  the  im- 
 putation of  the  want  of  conjcience^  which  the 
 martyr  of  this  day  complains  of)  to  offer  to 
 the  publick,  A  Jhort  hiftory  of  the  Regal  Sue- 
 ceffion^    and  the  rights  of  the  jeveral  Kings 
 recorded  in  the  holy  fcripures :  wherein  it  a- 
 
 bun- 
 
 (a)  '  Until  fome  funher  order  be  taken  herein,  it  is  buc 
 
 *  necdr'u!,  chat  luch  trearifes  of  this  nature,  as  carry  weight 
 '  and   evidence   with   them,    fh  iu'd  be   pubhfli'd   to  the 
 
 *  world,  for  the  fettling  of  men's  judgtnencs  and  confcicn- 
 
 *  ces  aright,  as  concerning  the  great  du'ies  oi  chrifiian  one- 
 
 *  dience  and  fubjeftion,  and  for  the  preventing  oi  fuc^ 
 '  mifchiefs  as  mull  unavoidably  enfue,  where  thofe  fo  ne- 
 c  ceffary  poinis  are  either  mifreprelented  by  the  leaders,  or 
 
 *  mirunderi^oo:^  by  the  people  '.  Bp.  Sanderjon\  pref.  to 
 Abp.  Ufncr  of  the  power  of  the  prince,  c^f.  §  v.  For  '  he 
 «  that  has  a  mind  ro  deftroy  the  difcipJine,  the  order,  or 
 «  the  very  dodtrine  of  the  church  of  England,    fhall  quote 
 
 *  ye  twenty  texts  for't  ,•  and  as  many  precedents  (if  there 
 «  fliall  be  occaGonj  for  diverting,  or  cutting  otF  the  fuc- 
 <  ceffionj  nay,  for  depr-fing  the  King  himfelf,  and  chang- 
 
 *  ing  the  very  form  of  the  government.    This  is  no  more 
 
 *  than  what  has  been  adtually  done  in  the  memory  of  man. 
 '  — The  devil  himfelf  fillies  with  thefe  baits  ':  L'  Efir. 
 Cafe  put,  i6%o,  p.  4. 
 
The  Dedication,  xxxix 
 
 bundantly  appears,  how  far  the  republican 
 and  Erajitan  fchemes  are  from  being  warrant- 
 ed by  thofe  facred  records,  to  which  our  mo- 
 dern ajfertors  (as  they  call  themfelves)  of  th^ 
 rights  of  the  chriftian  churchy  and  of  the  //- 
 berties  of  the  feofle^  have  the  confidence  to 
 appeal  for  the  truth  of  them. 
 
 For  there  we  find  not  the  leaft  footftep  of 
 luch  a  fate  of  nature-,  as  Hobbes  and  his  fol- 
 lowers dream  of,  (when  men  are  pretended  to 
 have  been  born  free  from  any  yoke  of  go- 
 vernment^ that  is,  literally,  jons  of  Belial!) 
 no  popular  election  of  Kings  or  priefls !  no  o-/ 
 riginal  contract  between  the  governours  and 
 governed !    no  coertion  {a)  over  their  lacred 
 perlbns !  nor  any  refiftance,  rebellion,  or  even, 
 lelf-defence  againft,  much  lefs  any  depofition 
 or  murder  of,  the  Lord's  anointed,  (as  Tarfoiis 
 the  Jefuit,  and  the  dilciples  of  his  Doleman  do 
 contend  for,)    but  what  is  plainly  condemned 
 by  the  Holy  Ghoft.      But,    on  the  contrary 
 
 there 
 
 {a)  Ic  is  accordingly  declar'd,  in  the  8<ft  rhat  appoints  rhe 
 obfervacion  uf  chis  day,  chat,  hy  the  undoubted  and fundav,e7i~ 
 tat  Ia'WS  of  this  kivgdom,  neither  the  peers  of  this  realm,  nor 
 the  commons^  nor  both  together ^  in  parliament  or  out  <f  jmr" 
 liament,  nor  the  people,  coUeclively  or  reprejcntativety.  nor  a- 
 ny  other  per  fans  luhatfoever,  ever  had,  have,  or  on^ht  to 
 have,  any  coercive  poiver  over  the  perjofis  of  the  Kir.gs  of  this 
 realm:  ^w:,  xii.  Car.  [[.  ca,  30.  And  rliij  parliamentary  de- 
 claration did  not  [hen  firft  obtain  the  force  of  la//,  but  was 
 declarative  of  oar  origi:ial  co?jfittution. 
 
xl    The  Dedication, 
 
 there  we  find  evidence  as  clear  as  the  lun, 
 that  government  (and  even  the  monarchical 
 form  thereof)  was  originally  inftituted  by  God 
 himfelf :  that  the  liiccellion  thereto  was,  as 
 well  by  the  law  of  God  as  by  that  of  nature, 
 hereditary,  from  father  to  Ion,  and  fo  to  the 
 next  of  kin,  whether  male  or  female,  accord- 
 ing to  priority  of  birth  and  proximity  of 
 blood,  without  regard  to  other  perfonal  en- 
 dowments or  qualifications :  that,  tho'  fuch 
 Hicceffion  was  fbmetimes  defeated,  and  the 
 reins  of  government  put  into  other  hands, 
 yet  whenever  fuch  revolutions  happen'd,  they 
 were  always  held  as  unlawful,  and  ufurpati- 
 ons ;  unleis  they  carried  with  them  very  plain 
 evidence  of  their  being  the  Lord's  doing  (as 
 in  the  cafes  of  Sap:/,  D^vid,  and  Solomon:) 
 that  as  Kings  were  unaccountable  to  the  peo- 
 ple, for  their  adminiftration  in  the  ftate,  fb 
 were  the  high  pricfts,  in  the  church,  ablo- 
 lutely  independent  on  the  ftate,  in  relation 
 to  the  exerciie  of  their  Ipiritual  powers;  {o 
 that  a  fchifm  in  the  church  was  formed  a- 
 gainft  the  one,  in  the  fame  manner  as  a  re- 
 bellion and  ufurpation  in  the  ftate  were  form'd 
 againft  the  other  :  and,  in  a  word,  that  our 
 lawful  governours,  both  in  church  and  ftate, 
 and  they  alone,  (not  every  Oliver^  or  other 
 
 ufurper 
 
The  Dedication,  xli 
 
 Xifurper  or  intruder,  who  gets  pofTeffion  of 
 the  regal  or  epifcopal  throne)  are  intituled  to 
 our  obedience,  by  the  apoftolical  (^)  precepts. 
 
 While  the  firft  edition  of  that  was  in  the 
 prels,  another  book  happen'd  to  be  publifti'd^ 
 upon  the  fame  fubjed,  intituled,  SCRIP- 
 TURE POLITICKS,  or,  an  impartial  ac- 
 count of  the  origin  and  measures  of  govern- 
 menty  eccleflaflical  and  civil',  taken  out  of  the 
 books  of  the  old  and  new  tefiamenty  &c.  by 
 William  Whifton,  M.  A.  ^c,  1717. 
 
 This  raised  my  curiofity,  to  fee  how  far  I 
 had  the  happinels  to  agree  with  a  perlbn, 
 whofe  name  has  made  ib  much  noife  in  the 
 world.  But,  upon  the  perulal  thereof,  I 
 found  his  Serif  ture-Toliticks  and  mine  lb  ve- 
 ry much  unlike,  as  if  they  had  not  been  ta- 
 ken out  of  the  fame  record :  for  I  obferv'd, 
 that  gentleman  had  taken  a  great  deal  of 
 pains  to  make  his  Bible  a  warrant  for  the  re- 
 piblican  fcheme  of  government ;  whereas  my 
 oblervations  therefrom  were  dire^liy  to  the 
 contrary.  However,  I  had  fb  humble  an  o- 
 pinion  of  my  own  judgment,  that  I  brought 
 as  many  of  the  controverted  paffages,  as  my 
 time  wou'd  then  allow  me,  to  the  teft  of  the 
 Bible,  to  which  we  leverally  referr'd  ourielves^ 
 
 e  for 
 
 {«}  Rtfw.  xiii.  I.  Titui  iii.  i,  Behr,  xiii.  17.  i.  Vet.  ii.  13.' 
 
xliv  The  Dedication. 
 
 any  other  judicious  perlbn's  notice :  fo  that 
 hitherto,  as  Mr.  Whifion's  is  undefended,  fo 
 my  little  book  remains  unconfuted,  unan- 
 fwerM.  I  own  indeed,  that  I  met  with  fome 
 few  hints,  in  accidental  conversation,  which 
 convinc'd  me  that  I  was  too  Jhort  in  the  ex- 
 planation of  two  or  three  particulars :  but  I 
 never  yet  have  read  or  heard  of  any  thing 
 therein  miftaken  j  except  only  one  pafTage,  in 
 the  cafe  of  Jehoahaz^  the  Ion  of  Jqfiah-,  and 
 Ibme  few  trivial  errata  of  the  prels. 
 
 In  this  edition  therefore  (to  which  I  have 
 been  induc'd  by  feveral  motives,  needlels 
 here  to  be  mention'd)  I  have  not  only  taken 
 care  to  corred  that  overfight,  but  have  alfb 
 intermixed  remarks  upon  feveral  cafes,  as  I 
 had  opportunity  to  meet  with  them,  mifre- 
 ported,  by  Mr.  Whijion^  and  feveral  others : 
 tho*  in  truth  the  number  of  fuch  mifreported 
 cafes  is  fb  great,  and  thofe  writers  and  preach- 
 ers, who  have  laid  themfelves  open  to  cen- 
 lure  for  it,  fb  many,  that  I  had  not  room  and 
 opportunity  to  take  proper  notice  of  them  all. 
 I  might  add,  that  feveral  of  them  are  fb  very 
 high  in  place,  and  the  efteem  of  the  world, 
 that  it  might  have  been  more  for  my  own 
 private  interefl  (had  I  confulted  That  more 
 than  I  do  the  Truth)  to  have  let  them  quite 
 
 alone : 
 
The  Dedication,  xlv 
 
 alone:  but  whilft  our  controverfy  is  about 
 the  holy  Icriptures  (which  ought  to  be  the 
 rule  of  our  condud  in  every  thing,)  the  more 
 eminent  and  popular  the  perfbns  are,  who  ap- 
 pear on  the  other  fide  of  the  queltion,  ib 
 much  the  more  danger  is  there  of  infedion 
 therefrom,  and  confequently  ib  much  the 
 more  necellity  for  us  to  be  upon  our  guard  a- 
 gainft  it. 
 
 Perhaps  indeed  I  lliou'd  not  have  troubl'd 
 you  with  particular  remarks  upon  Mr.  Whiji^ 
 ton's  miftakes  in  Scrifture'^oliticks  (after 
 iiich  a  general  ceniiire  of  them,)  had  he  Itood 
 alone,  and  not  been  ieconded  and  iiipportcd 
 by  ibme,  whole  notions,  tho'  every  whit  as 
 pernicious,  are  not  ufually  read  with  ib  good 
 a  guard,  as  thole  of  Mr.  jVbijlon  j  and  there- 
 fore are  the  more  capable  of  doing  miichief. 
 Befides  which,  as  theirs  are  (moll:  of  them) 
 Icatter'd  abroad  in  many  different  pamphlets 
 and  lermons,  but  his  reduc'd  to  the  narrow 
 compafs  of  one  Book,  I  thought  that,  by 
 confuting  him,  I  Ihou'd  confute  them ;  (for 
 th^y  generally  argue  upon  the  fame  common 
 topicks :)  and  the  lame  anl\ver  that  you  meet 
 with  here,  to  his  folitkks^  w^ill  ferve  any  of 
 the  reft,  (whereibever  you  may  chance  to  find 
 
 them, 
 
xlvi  The  Dedication. 
 
 them,)  as  well  as  if  they  had  beeu  particular- 
 ly animadverted  on. 
 
 In  the  doing  of  which,  I  may  lay  of  Mr. 
 Whifton^  (as  a  late  reverend  and  pious  divine 
 faid,  in  a  like  cafe,  with  relped  to  another  of 
 the  fame  order,)  ^  I  have  examined  his  opini- 
 ons, with  the  fame  freedom  that  he  has 
 proposed  them ;  and  which  the  intereft  of 
 truth  and  righteoufnefs  require,  as  I  con- 
 ceive, in  this  cale :  and  this  freedom,  I  be- 
 lieve, will  not  be  offenfive  to  himfelf  For, 
 if  they  will  Hand,  it  will  give  him  further 
 opportunity  to  clear  them:  but,  if  they 
 will  not,  as  I  verily  think  they  will  not,  it 
 will  concern  all,  and  no  perfon  more  than 
 himfelf,  to  be  fhew'd  the  falfhood  of  (a) 
 ^  them  '.  And,  to  convince  Mr.  Whiflofty 
 how  free  I  am  from  any  prejudice  or  byafs 
 whatfoevcr  in  this  examination,  I  do  fincere- 
 ly  profefs  to  every  reader,  and  to  him  in  par- 
 ticular, (in  his  own  words,)  that  I  *  lay  afide 
 
 *  all  human,  all  uncertain  political  ichemes: 
 *'  I  don't  confider  even  the  leveral  advanta- 
 
 *  ge5  and  difadvantages  of  the  prefent,  or  a- 
 '  ny  other  government  now  in  the  world; 
 '  for  which,  or  againft  which,  I  properly 
 '  write  not :    but  I  endeavour  to   diicover 
 
 '  what 
 
 {a)  Kettleiu.  works,  vol.  ii.  fol.  19  7* 
 
The  Dedication,  xlvii 
 
 ^  what  is  truth,  and  what  is  right,  and  what 
 
 *  is  our  duty,  as  Chr/fliansy  in  thefe  impor- 
 '  tant  (a)  affairs  ';  always  remembring  that 
 wife  laying  of  a  very  learned  and  famous  fo- 
 reigner,  that  '  the  faithful  hiftorian  is  of  no 
 
 *  age  or  nation:  tho'   he  loves  his  country, 
 
 *  he  never  flatters  it  in  any  [b)  particular  '. 
 
 And  yet  I'm  not  inlenfible,  that  Ibme  there; 
 are  who  will  not  endure  found  [c]  doBrme^  and 
 wou'd  rather  go  on  in  a  by-way  of  their  own, 
 than  undergo  the  fmall  mortification  to  con- 
 fefs  that  they  had  millaken  the  right  road: 
 or,  in  plain  terms,  who,  notwithftanding  the 
 force  of  truth,  and  the  conviction  of  their 
 own  conlciences,  will  not  fuffer  their  practices 
 or  principles  to  be  queftion'd,  without  the 
 utmoft  impatience  and  refentment ;  but  treat 
 the  author  with  the  more  rage  and  malice, 
 the  lefs  they  find  themfelves  able  to  anfvver 
 him.  But,  let  fuch  learn,  from  the  famous 
 Dr.  Tillotfon^  that  '  all  dodrines  are  vehe- 
 ^  mently  to  be  fulpeded,  which  decline  trial, 
 
 *  and  are  fo  loth  to  be  brought  into  the  light  ^ 
 "*  which  will  not  endure  a  fair  examination, 
 «  but  magifterially  require  an  implicite  faith: 
 '  whereas  truth  is  bold  and  full  of  courage, 
 
 *  and 
 
 (a)  Whifi.  fcripc.  polici  dedic.  p.  xix.  {l>)  M.  dsFeziek» 
 pn  learn,  p.  i!^.         (c)  2  Tim.  iv.  3. 
 
xlviii  The  Dedication. 
 
 *  and  loves  to  appear  openly ;  and  is  fb  fecurc 
 
 *  and  confident  of  her  own  Itrength,    as  to 
 
 *  offer  herlelf  to  the  levereft  trial  and  exami- 
 f  nation.     But,  to  deny  all  liberty  of  enqui- 
 
 *  ry  and  judgment  —  is  the   greateft  injury 
 
 *  and  diiparagement  to   truth  that  can   be, 
 
 *  and  a  tacit  acknowledgment  that  fhe  lies 
 ^  under  Ibme  (a)  difadvantage  \ 
 
 For  my  own  part,  the  natural  inclination 
 of  my  genius  might  have  been  powerful  e- 
 nough  to  divert  me  from  hazarding  my  peace 
 and  quiet  by  fuch  an  engagement,  and  to  a- 
 void  the  fting  which  commonly  is  the  fate  of 
 him  who  difturbs  a  neft  of  Hornets:  but, 
 fome  cafes  there  are,  as  I  have  ihewn  before, 
 wherein  every  man  is  to  be  a  Ibldier,  and  e- 
 ven  filence  it  fclf  wou'd  be  crim.inal;  which 
 conlideration  alone  prevailed  with  me  to  buc- 
 kle on  my  armour,  not  regarding  the  hazards 
 I  might  be  perfonally  exposed  to,  for  doing 
 my  duty. 
 
 If  it  fhou'd  therefore  be  my  fate,  in  this 
 encounter,  to  meet  with  no  better  return 
 than  that  of  foul  (^)  language,   (as  many  o- 
 
 thers 
 
 {a)  TtUotf.  ferm."  4  Apr.  1^79,  p.  37,  38,  in  4to.  (b)  A- 
 raong  the  reft,  this  will  probably  be  call'd  the  making  a  fiep 
 towardi  Pofery;  and  that  indeed  with  as  much  propriety  as 
 the  aflerting  of  the  independency  of  the  church  upon  the  fiate, 
 at  to  its  powers  meerlj  Jpiritu^h  and  che  invalidity  of  lay-hap^ 
 
 tifm. 
 
The  Dedication,  xlix 
 
 thers  have  been  rewarded  for  much  better 
 performances,)  I  Ihail  patiently  bear  my  fhare 
 of  it,  whiift  he  who  throws  the  dirt  can't  e- 
 Icape  with  clean  hands,  out  of  the  kennel 
 from  whence  he  rakes  it :  and  it  will  be  fatis- 
 fadion  enough  to  my  own  mind,    '  if  I  may 
 
 *  fb  ftrike  the  favourable  opportunity  in  this 
 
 *  attempt,  as,  by  God'sbleffing,  toy/r^;/^/"/;^// 
 '  any  of  thofe  who  ftand  for  us,  he  If  the  wa- 
 
 *  vering  who  wou'd  otherwile  be  againft  us^ 
 
 *  or  rarje  uf  thofe  that  are  fallen  from  us  ^ 
 '  and  thereby  approve  my  fidelity  to  my  great 
 <  [a)  mailer  ',  under  whole  banner  I  am  lift- 
 ed, and  whole  cro'^s  I  have  not  yet  deferted. 
 
 It  was  a  heroic  laying  of  an  exemplary  pre- 
 late, in  times  of  danger,  that  he  thanked  God^ 
 he  never  much  knew  what  fear  was^  when 
 he  was  once  fathfied  in  the  goodnefs  of  his  jb) 
 caufe:   and  I  humbly  truft  in  God,   that,  io 
 
 f  long 
 
 ftfm,  have  been  boldly  call'd  fo  by  Bp.  Burnet  (feim.  7 
 Hov.  17 10,  p.  24.)  and  others:  whereas  '(is  eviden.r,  to  eve- 
 ry man  ot  common  learning,  chat  the  former  of  theie  do- 
 (3:nnes  is  older  thm  Fo^ery  ufelf,  and  the  latter  contrary  co 
 the  known  principles  and  practice  oj' rhe  Papijrs !  But  all 
 thefe  old  outcriei  and  no'ife  cf  Popery,  -^beft  luudej}  ajid  moji 
 clamorous,  are  *  as  lure  a  llgn  ot  fome  violent  afTault  from 
 
 *  Presbytery,  as  a  rutfian's  endeavcuring  to  divert  your  eyes 
 
 *  trom  himfelf,  betokens  his  intention  of  dabbing  you  in 
 [  the  back  '!  Walk,  fuff!  clergy,  pref.  fol.  x. 
 
 (a)  Stuh's  (crm.  4  O^nd.   1J02,  ep>  dedicat.     (i-)  B^- 
 Lake. 
 
1      The  Dedicatio 
 
 N. 
 
 long  as  I  have  the  holy  £Tiptures  for  my 
 foundation,  and  you,  true  churchmen  and 
 loyal  fiibje^Sy  for  my  patrons,  I  Ihou'd  not 
 have  been  much  dilcourag'd,  in  the  quelt  or 
 defence  of  the  truth,  tho'  I  cou'd  have  appre- 
 hended, that  I  was,  in  fb  doing,  necefFarily 
 to  wreftle  agahjl  frincij^alities^  againji  fow- 
 erSj  againji  the  rulers  of  the  darknefs  of  this 
 'world J  againft  fpritual  wickednefs  in  high  {a) 
 f  laces  ! 
 
 I  might  alio  prefume  upon  the  laws  of  the 
 land,  as  my  warrant :  but,  as  that  is,  at  pre- 
 lent,  out  of  my  Iphere,  my  concern  here  be- 
 ing wholly  with  thole  of  God,  and  this  my 
 undertaking  confined  to  Scrifture-Toliticks^ 
 I  fhall  leave  it  to  others  of  more  leifure  and 
 capacity,  to  clear  our  conftitution,  from  the 
 fufpicion  of  favouring  fuch  notions,  as  are  ut- 
 terly dellrudive  of  all  manner  of  government 
 in  the  world. 
 
 In  the  mean  time,  (fince  it  is  not  foreign  to 
 any  man's  office ^  ti^on  all  jujl  occafions^  to  in- 
 culcate fuch  doctrines',  as  tend  to  fettle  the 
 meafures  of  Chrijiian  duty'j  and  conlequently 
 to  pomote  the  haj^pnefs  of  htunan  \b)  fociety^ 
 I  cou'd  wilii  to  lee  a  colledion  of  our  national 
 
 laws 
 
 (<»)  'E^hej.  vi.  12.  {/>)  B.  Uoadtyh  {t\m.  29  Se^t.  1 705", 
 p.  18 i  and  ai  Mar.  1707,  at  the  end. 
 
The  Dedication.     li 
 
 laws  carefully  made,    by  a  skilful  hand,   and 
 fet  in  a  full  and  clear  light,   that  we  might 
 the  better  be  able  to  judge  in  this  important 
 affair,    whether  we  are  impos'd  on,    by  thofe 
 who  affirm,  that  the  im^'erial  crcmm  ^Eng- 
 land may  be  froifd^    even  from  onr  ftatnte 
 (a)  booky  to  be  derivdmmediately  from  Gody 
 (and  not  from  the  people,)  as  being  the  King 
 of  Kings^     and  fole  difpofer  of  all  earthly 
 crowns  and  kingdoms  \     and  that  the  fame 
 ought  to  defcend^   according  to  the  conr\e  of 
 inheritance,   by  inherent  birth-right y  to  him 
 who  is  lineally y  j^'^ftfy^  ^^-d  lawfully ,  the  next 
 and  fole  heir  of  the  blood  royal:  that  fach  as 
 have  heretofore  obtain'd  the  crown  in  any  o- 
 ther  way  are  ilil'd  only  pretended  Kings,   or 
 Kings  de  faBo,   and  ttfttr^'ers  \    and  that,  as 
 fnchj  their  aBs  are  held  to  be  of  no  force  in 
 law:    that  th^xQ  can  be  no  interregnum,    or 
 vacancy  of  the  throne,    but  immediately,  tip- 
 on  the  death  of  the  King,  his  next  heir  {who- 
 
 f  2  ever 
 
 {a)  The  Starures  uHially  rcfen'c]  »-o  a^erhus  noted,  t  Edii\ 
 III.  c.  1.  25  Edvj.  IJ[.  c.  2  \6  Hich.  II.  c.  5.  r  FJw.  iV. 
 C.  I.  24  Hen.  VIll.  C.  12.  25  Hen.  VUl.  c.  » 9,  21,  22.  2C) 
 H?T  Vlll.  c.  I.  37  He7i.  VIll.  c.  17.  I  Mar.  SciT.  ii.  c.  4. 
 2  Mar.  Seff.  ii.  C  i.  i  Eiiz.  c  I,  3.  5  E/iz..  c.  1.  13  E/»z,. 
 C.  2,  14..  I  Ja.  I.  c.  I,  7.  3  ya.  1.  c.  4.  12  Car.  II.  c.  12, 
 14.30.  13  Car.  II.  c.  1,  2,  4,  6.  13  Car.  U.  SgCC.  ii.  c.  1  = 
 1 3  and  14  Car.  il.  c.  3, 4.  beftdes  many  more  which  I  otnic. 
 
lii  The  Dedication. 
 
 euer  he  is)  becomes  King  in  the  fame  infiant ; 
 and  while  the  rightful  King  is  keft  out  of 
 ^ojfefton^  the  laws  are  fttfjy'ended^  and  have 
 no  operation:   that  the  whole  foveraignty  is 
 in  the  King^   and  all  the  forces  and  flrength 
 of  the  kingdom  his  fole  right  ^   and  he  is  not 
 accountable  to  his  feofle  for  his  adminifirati-  ' 
 on  thereof  J  much  lefs  pmifhable  by  them  for 
 his  abufe  of  it :   that  even  the  three  eflates 
 are  Jo  far  from  being  co-ordinate  withy  or 
 having  any  coercive  fower  over  their  Kingy 
 that  the  commons  were  but  petitioners  to  himy 
 for  the  making  his  lawsy   as  the  other  two 
 ejfates  (of  Lords  fpiiitual  and  temporal)  were 
 his  counfellors  to  advife  him  in  />,  6Cc.  Theie, 
 and  many  more  conclufions  of  the  like  ibrt, 
 have  been  frequently  drawn  from  our  acts  of 
 parliament,   by  men  of  great  reputation  for 
 learning:    but,   as  I  have  no  opportunity  at 
 prefent  to  examine  the  originals  with  the  care 
 and  caution  that  the  fubjed  requires,   I  fhall 
 leave  my  readers  to  judge  for  themfelves  • 
 whilft  I  content  my  ielf  with  oblerving,  that 
 the  fame  free  parliament,  which  attainted  the 
 regicides y   for  the  execrable  murder  of  their 
 lawful  King,  did  alio  exprefly  '  renounce,  a- 
 «  bominate,   and  proteft  againft  all  proceed- 
 
 \  ings 
 
The  Dedication,  liii 
 
 ^  ings  tending  [a)  thereto  ' ;  and  confequently 
 therefore  againft  all  thole  feditiotts  JermonSy 
 f^amfhlets,  and  jpeeches,  from  whence  (as  is 
 before  prov'd)  the  growth  and  increafe  of  the 
 then  late  troubles  and  disorders  did  in  a  very 
 great  meafure  proceed. 
 
 But  I  muft  not  forget  to  make  ibme  apolo- 
 gy for  my  lelf,  with  regard  to  the  ftile,  which 
 I  am  aware  may  be  liable  to  various  objedi- 
 ons ;  and  the  more  fo,  becaule  the  fubjed:  it- 
 felf  has  many  inveterate  enemies.  Some  of 
 theie  (whofe  fenle  of  feeling  does  not  lie  in 
 their  conlciences)  will  probably  cry  out  againft 
 me,  as  if  my  pen  had  been  too  iharp,  and  my 
 ink  too  full  of  gall :  but  upon  the  ftricteft  re- 
 view, I  can't  find  any  thing  dropped  that  way, 
 which  the  fubjed  does  not  require,  and  the 
 feaibn  fairly  excuie.  For,  who  can  treat  of 
 fjch  a  parricide,  or  the  proceedings  tending 
 to  it,  with  an  honeft  Englijb  heart,  in  fofter 
 terms  than  I  have  done?  nay,  wouM  not 
 fuch  an  unprecedented  ad  rather  juftify  the 
 fharpeft  expreflions  any  language  can  f  irnilh, 
 in  deteftation  of  the  adors  and  their  abettors  ? 
 whereas  I  have  chiefly  attacked  the  principles 
 only,   and  left  the  men  to  their  doom!    Re^ 
 
 belli  oily 
 
 (a)  Star.  12  Car.  II.  c.  30. 
 
liv    The  De dication. 
 
 hellion^  you  know,  is  compared  to  {a)  witch- 
 craft :  and  a  witch  muft  exped  to  be  leverely 
 icratch'd !  but  (to  be  ferious,  as  the  occafion 
 requires,)  I  doubt  not  but  to  be  acquitted  of 
 this  charge  by  all  true  loyalifts,  when  you 
 '  confider,  what  moderation  and  temper  a 
 ^  man  had  need  be  of,  that,  in  this  nation 
 ^  and  this  age,  Ihall  fpeak  againft  fadion  and 
 *■  rebellion,  without  extraordinary  (b)  leveri- 
 *  ty  '.  Were  the  tragedy  of  this  day  io  duly 
 and  thoroughly  repented  of,  that  we  cou'd 
 reafbnably  hope  God  wou'd  no  longer  vijit 
 us  with  his  judgments  on  that  account,  I 
 cou'd  be  content,  for  the  honour  of  the  ^ra- 
 tenant  name,  (which  hath  receh'd  fo  great 
 (e)  a  wound  and  ref  roach  by  it,)  that  it  were 
 buried  in  utter  oblivion:  but  that  can  never 
 be,  fb  long  as  principles  of  the  fame  dired 
 tendency  (not  to  iay,  the  fa£l  itfelf  alfo)  are 
 openly  maintained,  juftify'd  and  gloried  in  ' 
 and  I  can  vouch  even  the  moderate  Abp. 
 Tillotfon  himfelf  to  fhew,  that  we  muft  not 
 ufe  mildnefs  in  the  cafe  of  a  wilful  and  hei- 
 nous fin ;  effecially  if  it  be  exemplary ,  and 
 of  fublick  influence :  to  rebuke  gently  ufon 
 ftich  an  occafion,  is  rather  to  countenance  the 
 
 fault ; 
 
 (a)  I  Sam.  XV.  23.     (i)  Sprat's  ferm.  20  -^r.  1682,  ep. 
 dcdic.     (c)Siit.  12  Car.  II.  C  30. 
 
The  Dedication.    Iv 
 
 fault ;   and  feems  to  argue,  that  we  are  not 
 fenjible  enough  of  the  enormity  of  itj  and  that 
 we  have  not  a  due  dijlike  and  deteftation  for 
 (a)  ity  &Cc. 
 
 But,   whilft  I  am  thus  accumulating  my 
 vouchers,  I  am  more  jullly  apprehenfive  of 
 another  objedionj    that  my  whole  book  is 
 crowded  with  quotations.     This,  I  fear,  will 
 be  an  eye-lore  at  the  firft  light :    tho'  when 
 you  come  to  the  peruial,  and  obfcrve  to  what 
 purpole   they   are    feverally    produc'd,     the 
 queftion  will  be  only,  whether  they  are  per- 
 tinently apply 'd,  either  in  fupport  of  my  own 
 H/florj,   or  of  my  Remarks  upon  that  of  o- 
 thers :  for  if  they  be,  (as  I  hope  they  will  be 
 judgM,)  I  may  exped  a  much  Ibfter  cenfure, 
 for  my  fcrupulous,   tho'  unfafhionable,    ho- 
 nefty  (in  owning  whence  I  took  them,    fo 
 that  every  man  may   have  his  own  again,) 
 than  I  fhou'd  have  delerv'd,   if  I  had  pafs'd 
 them  for  my  own,  without  any  other  title  to 
 them,  than  that  pyratical  one  of  bare  poifeffi^ 
 on  only.     Belides,  by  my  quoting  them  thu^ 
 fully,  by  whole  periods,  the  reader  is  enabl'd 
 
 to 
 
 (a)  TtUutf.  concerning  the  education  of  children,  ferm.  2. 
 (as  I  have  him  quored  jj  but  I'm  not  certain  ch„c  ihefe  are 
 his  very  wordjj  oor  have  I  opportunity  now  co  examine  Cat 
 or/g'.na). 
 
Ivi  The  Dedication. 
 
 to  judge  of  the  ftrength  of  my  additional  e- 
 vidence,    drawn  from  perlbnal  authority,    as 
 well  as  of  the  force  of  my  arguments  againft 
 the  adverfary :    whereas,  if  I  had  laid  before 
 him  only  the  fubftance  of  what  has  been  oc« 
 cafionally  written  on  either  fide,  he  muft  have 
 depended  upon  my  judgment  and  impartiality, 
 more  perhaps  than  my  fmall  ftock  of  reputa- 
 tion wou'd  have  given  me  a  right  to  expect. 
 And  moreover,    by  thus  letting  the  opinions 
 of  many  of  the  principal  men  of  all  parties, 
 (when  they  were  not  prejudic'd  by  paffion, 
 nor  byals'd  by  intereft,)    as  it  were  in  one 
 view,  and  in  a  clear  light,  the  truth  will  the 
 more  naturally  be  difcover'd  among  them; 
 elpecially  where  they  all  concur  in  the  fame 
 common  lentiments :    and  that  which  their 
 own  greateft  favourites  have  ibmetime  delibe- 
 rately preached  for  found  dodrine,  '  I  hope, 
 '  will  not  be  thought  otherwife  now ;    for 
 '  truth  doth  never  alter,    nor  vary  with  the 
 ^  times,  whatever  the  profefTors  of  it  may  (a) 
 <■  do\ 
 
 However,  ft  cannot  be  deny'd,  that  fuch  a 
 mixture  of  various  paragraphs,  from  divers 
 hands,    and  on  different  occafions,   can't  but 
 
 render 
 
 {j)  Ja.  Ellejbfi  ferm.  30  Jan.  iCZ^,  pref. 
 
The  Dedication.  Ivii 
 
 render  the  Ityle  of  the  whole  fbmewhat  rug- 
 ged and  uneven  j  and  'tis  certain,  that  an  e- 
 ven  thread,  fine  finooth  language,  and  well- 
 turn'd  periods  wou'd  have  much  better 
 recommended  the  dilcourle  to  the  nicer 
 reader's  favour:  but,  as  I  always  thought 
 that  to  be  the  belt  exprelfion,  which  had  the 
 beft  efFeft  upon  the  judgment  and  pradlice 
 of  thoie  to  whom  it  was  addreis'd:  fo,  in  this 
 treatife  of  the  conftitution  of  the  Jew//b  go- 
 vernment, I  choie  to  exprcls  my  lelf  in  fuch 
 plain  modern  terms,  as  have  a  known  and  de- 
 termined ienle  and  meaning,  among  thole 
 whom  I  am  to  exped  for  my  readers-  and 
 therefore  I  perfwade  myfelf,  thityou  will  not 
 be  critical,  but  overlook  the  unpolifh'd  dreis 
 it  appears  in,  and  receive  the  truth  to  your 
 protection,  for  its  own  f\ke :  for  '  we  all 
 '  know,  that  'tis  not  v\^hat  is  artfully  pleaded, 
 
 *  but  what  is  fully  prov'd  •  not  what  may  be 
 <  faid  by  us,    but  what  the  law  lays,    that 
 
 *  ought  to  be  our  rule,  in  all  fuch  (a)  cales  '. 
 
 And  now,  what  remains,  but  that  all  of  us, 
 in  our  refpedive  Itations,  apply  our  felves 
 dutifully  and  diligently  to  the  putting  a  Itop 
 to  thole  pernicious  doctrines,  and  trait'rous 
 pradices,  which  have  heretofore  overwhelmed 
 
 g  both 
 
 (a)  Whijl.  fcript.  polic.  epift.  dedic  p.  xx. 
 
Iviii  The  Dedication. 
 
 both  our  church  and  ftate  in   one  common 
 ruin?   Wherein,  that  our  honeft  endeavours 
 may  have  the  better  efred,  ib  as  that  thofe  hor- 
 rid fins  which  we  have  this  day  renounc'dj  may 
 never  be  repeated,  at  leaft  in  this  our  nation, 
 let  us  learn,    before  it  be  too  late,   to  live  in 
 the  true  faith  and  fear  of  God^  in  true  loyal- 
 tj  and  obedience  to  his  Vicegerent^    and  in 
 brotherly  lo'ce  and  charity  one  towards  ano- 
 ther:   and  then  we   may,   with  the  greater 
 affurance,   addrefs  our  lelves  to  the  King  of 
 Kings^    and  gcrvernour  of  all  thi^igs  (in  the 
 words  of  our  moil  excellent  Liturgy,)  to  in- 
 fatuate and  defeat  all  the  fecret  counfels  of 
 the  ungodly ;   to  abate  their  fride-,   ajfzi'age 
 their  malice^  and  confound  their  de'vices ;   to 
 frengthenthe  hands  of  our  gracious  foveraigUy 
 'with  judgment  and  juftice^  to  cut  off  all  fiich 
 ijDorkers  of  iniquity^   as  turn  religion  into  re- 
 hellion^    and  faith  into  facfion ;    that  they 
 may  never  again  prevail  againft  us-,  nor  tri- 
 tmfh  in  the  ruin  of  the  Monarchy  and  his 
 Church  amongfl  ns]    which  is  the  conftant 
 prayer  of 
 
 Jour  hearty  well-wiffoer  and 
 
 Humble  Sevoantj 
 
 J-L. 
 
The   CONTENTS; 
 
 §  ^-jn  HE  Introdu^ion  Pag.  i 
 
 I.  X     A  Summ2LTy  o^anti'feriptural  Principles    2 
 
 II.  Government  of  divine  Inllitution  7 
 
 III.  monarchical  8 
 
 IV.  fucceOive,  according  to  i?^//>r;V^/  10 
 
 V.  yf^^wj's  Monarchy  political  17 
 
 VI.  • and  hereditary  20 
 
 VII.  Noah's  Monarchy  political  21 
 
 VIII.  The  Nations  divided  23 
 
 IX.  Nimrod's  Ufurpation  27 
 
 X.  The  Succefnon  of  Shem  30 
 
 XL  ■ Abram  3  2 
 
 XII. Ifaac  ^2 
 
 XIII. Jacob  Iz 
 
 XIV. Judah  57 
 
 XV.  Jojeph  40 
 
 XVI.  • Ephraim  41 
 
 XVIL   The  Law  of  Nature  41 
 
 XVIII.  Mofes  a  King  52 
 
 XIX.  abfolute  and  irrefifiible  53 
 
 XX.  the  firft  Lawgiver  58 
 
 XXI.  Law  of  Inheritance  in  general  58 
 
 XXII.  according  to  Proximity  of  Blood  ^q 
 
 XXIU. indefeafible                   .  60 
 
 XXIV.  Jojhua  an  abfolute  Soveraign  yx, 
 
 XXV.  Judges  rais'd  up  by  Godhimfelf  82 
 
 XXVI.  Kings  of  all  Nations  97 
 
 XXVII.  ■ hereditary  100 
 
 XXVIII. abfolute  10:; 
 
 XXIX. irrefiftible  1 06 
 
 XXX.  Saul's  election  divine  no 
 
 XXXI. his  power  abfolute  114 
 
 XXXII. and  irrefifiible  1 1  7 
 
 XXXIII.  David  d.  King  by  divine  Right  126 
 
 XXXIV. abfolute  and  irrefifiible  129 
 
 XXXV. yet  rcbeii'd  againft  by  his  Son 
 
 Abjalom  1^2 
 
 §  XXXVL 
 
The  CONTENTS. 
 
 t 
 
 §  XXXVI.  Jhfaloms  Revolution- Principles  cx- 
 
 pos'd  140 
 
 XXXVII.  David's  Reftoration  146 
 
 XXXVIII.  Shebah  Revolt,  and  fudden  Fate    150 
 
 XXXIX.  Solomon  a.  King  by  divine  Right     153 
 
 XL. ■ — -  and  irrefiftible  159 
 
 XLI.  The  Cafe  of  Solomon  and  Jbiathar  ^atcd  161 
 XLII.  Rehoboam*s  hereditary  Right  178 
 
 XLIII.  The  hereditary  SuccefTion  of  Abijah  182 
 XLIV.  — Jfa^  Jehofaphatjjehoram  3.ndAbaziabi  85 
 
 XLV.  Joajh  187 
 
 XLVI.  Jmaziab  i^j 
 
 XLVII .Uzziah  197 
 
 XL VIII. Jotbam,  Abaz,  Hezekiab,   Ma- 
 
 na£cb,  and  Amon  203 
 
 XLIX. Jofiab  206 
 
 L.  Interruption  of  the  Succeflion,  the  Caufe  of 
 
 Ruin  207 
 
 LI.  Hereditary  Right  the  ordinary  Rule   of 
 
 SuccefTion  among  God's  people  2og 
 
 LII.  AndpafTive  Obedience  their  indifpenfible 
 
 Duty  211 
 
 LIII.  The  Revolt  of  the  ten  Tribes  from  the 
 
 Heirs  of  David  212 
 
 LIV.  The  Grounds  of  that  revolution  examin*d2i3 
 LV.  Their  miferable  State  defcrib*d  in  general223 
 LVI.  And  in  particular,  under  Jeroboam  and 
 
 Nadab  225 
 
 LVII.  •  Baajha  and  Elab  243 
 
 LVIII.  •  Zimri  243 
 
 LIX. Omri^Abab^  Abaziab  and  Jeboram     243 
 
 LX. Jebii^  JehoabaZj  Joajhy  Jeroboam  and 
 
 Zacbariab  250 
 
 LXI. Sbailum  252 
 
 LXII. Menabem  and  Pekehiab  i^i 
 
 LXIII.  Pekab.  isz 
 
 LXIV. Hojhea  253 
 
 LXV.  Some  Hints  from  other  Nation*  255 
 
 A  pp  f-N  Dix,  relating  to  the  State  of  the  Cafe 
 
 under  the  Gofpel  258 
 
SHORT  HISTORY. 
 
 O  F    T  H  E 
 
 EGAL  Succession, 
 
 AVIN  G  oftentimes,  The  intro* 
 with  great  concern,  '^"^'°^" 
 obferved,  how  much  the  minds 
 of  his  Majefty's  fubjefls  are 
 diftraded,  by  the  various  glof- 
 fes,  which  artful  and  defigning 
 men  have  put  upon  the  fucceflion  of  feveral  of 
 the  Kings  recorded  in  the  holy  fcriptures  (eve- 
 ry one  of  them  endeavouring  to  make  the  word 
 of  God  ferve  his  own  turn,  whereby  plaufible  ar- 
 guments are  often  pafs'd  upon  the  unwary  rea- 
 der for  authentick  evidence  {a),  I  could  not  but 
 
 B  think 
 
 {>>.)  Whifi.  fcript.  polit.  dedicat.  p.  20.  Sec  alfo  the  remaiks 
 of  Mr,  G.  C.  (Geo.  Conway,  1  fuppofe)  in  bis  fermon,  i  z,  May, 
 1717,  entitled,  Juftice  done  to  the  facred  text,  8cc.  (foon  afrsr 
 Biftiop  Hoifdly*^  fermon  of  The  nature  of  the  khgdorn  or  Chunb  of 
 
 Chrijl.) 
 
%       The  Short  History^ 
 
 think  it  would  be  of  fervice  to  my  countrymen, 
 to  lay  before  them  A  Jhort  hijiory  of  the  Regal 
 SucceJfioHi  and  the  rights  of  the  fever al  Kings  in  thofe 
 facred  records.  And  as  my  only  end  in  this  pub- 
 lication is  to  prevent  a  delufion,  or  undeceive 
 the  deluded  ;  fo  the  beft  mean  thereto  is,  in  as 
 plain  and  fummary  a  manner,  as  the  nature  of 
 the  fubjed  will  bear,  to  continue  it  down  from 
 the  beginning  of  all  things,  fo  far  as  God's 
 people  (  the  Jews )  had  any  known  government 
 among  them  :  In  the  doing  of  which,  I  have  too 
 awful  a  regard  for  the  fubjeft,  to  prefume  to 
 deal  unfaithfully  with  it ;  and,  as  to  the  chri- 
 flian  reader,  I  have,  by  conftantly  quoting 
 chapter  and  verfe,  laid  my  felf  at  his  mercy 
 to  correft  me  wherever  I  may  happen  to  be 
 miftaken. 
 
 §  I.  It  has  frequently  been  lamented  by  ma- 
 ny eminent  and  judicious  authors,  that  multi- 
 tudes of  principles,  fuppofed  to  tend  to  the  fub- 
 verfion  of  government  in  general,  and  of  ours 
 in  particular,  have  from  time  to  time  been  in- 
 duftrioufly  diffeminated  amongft  us,  by  writers 
 
 and 
 
 Chrifl,)  *  Such  is  the  degeneracy,  fo  great  the  corruption  of  hu- 
 
 *  man  IXnd,  that  many  times  (fays  he)  even  the  fcripture  itfell  is 
 
 *  handled  with  a  deceitful  heart,  and  wilfully   mifconftrued  by 
 
 *  the  children  of  this  worlds  who  are  wifcr  in  their  generation, 
 
 *  and  craftier  to  eftablilh  their  iniquities  by  a  law,  than  the  chil- 
 
 *  dren  of  light  are  to  countermine  their  endeavours. '  p.  3.  in  8vo, 
 And  Dr.  Tmp'i  to  the  fame  purpofe,  on  the  Tame  lubjcft,  19 
 May,  I7»7>  p.  i.  in  8vo- 
 
the  RegalSuccession.       5 
 
 and  preachers,  of  divers  claffes,  and  feemingly 
 different  interefts  i  the  fatal  effeds  of  which  Tneed 
 not  here  to  {a)  mention  :  but,  forafmuch  as  the 
 holy  fcriptures  have  been  gravely  vouch'd  to  pa- 
 tronize them,  I  think  it  may  be  proper  to  open 
 the  following  hiftory  with  a  fummary  view  of  the 
 moft  confiderable  of  thofe  which  have  been  con- 
 troverted as  antifcriptural ;  fo  that  the  reader  may 
 be  the  better  prcpar'd  to  examine  them  by  the 
 feveral  cafes  hereafter  dated. 
 
 Now  the  principles,  which  come  moft  pro- 
 perly under  our  confideration  here,  with  any  re- 
 lation to  that  execrable  fa(5t,  to  which  this  whole 
 hiftory  is  diredlly  propos'd  to  be  applied,  are  fuch 
 as  thefe  ;  viz.  «  That  the  people  were 
 fJ^7Z1r.  '  all  at  firft,  bom  free  !  That  all  au- 
 vertedprin.  <  thority  was  Originally  vefted  in  them, 
 ^'^  ^'  *  and    derived    from     them,     as     in 
 
 *  whom  alone  is  the  plenitude  of  power,  and 
 «  abfolute  fovereignty  !    That  they  have  a  right 
 
 *  to  chufe  and  change   their   governours,   and 
 
 B  2  to 
 
 (a)  '  Thefe  are  principles,  which  to  give  them  that  honour 
 '  which  is  due  for  their  extradion  and  kindted,  were  firft 
 '  begotterj  by  the  Jcfuit  ("the  father  of  R%vilb.cs,)  then  nurfcd  up 
 «  by  Buchanan  (the  father  of  rebels,)  and  at  laft  adopted  by  the 
 
 *  Ltviatha?i  (the  father  of  Atheifts! )  And  it  is  impoffible  there 
 «  fliould  be  any  f.rm  peace,  or  lifting  fafety,  either  for  prince 
 <  or  fubje£l-,  in  any  kingdom  where  thefe  doflrincs  prevail; 
 '  which  have  been  all  along  defign'd  and  maintained  to  ruin  kings, 
 .  and  all  hereditary    monarchies."     Dr.   Edw.  Telling  i  ferm.   f 
 
 *  Sotemi.  168;,  p.  29. 
 
4       The  Short  History  of 
 
 *■  to  limit  them  with  laws  at  their  plealare!  That 
 '  they  have  a  coercive  power  over  their  Kings, 
 '  and  may  refiil,  arraign  and  depofe  them,  when 
 
 *  they  fee  caufe  1  That  the  fupreme  Power  is 
 '  not    in   the   King,    but    in   the   people  •,     nor 
 
 *  any  allegiance  due  to  Kings,  without  the  eIe<5lion, 
 '  fubmiflion   or   conient    of  the  people  !    That 
 
 *  their  concurrence  is  eflentially  necefTary  to 
 '  fovereign  authority  ;   the   voice  of  the  people 
 
 *  being  the  voice  of  God  !  That  the  King's 
 '  power  is  not  abfolute,  but  delegare  from  the 
 '  people  i  and  their  crowns  held  only  in  truft 
 '  for   the  commonwealth!  That  tho'  the  King 
 
 *  is  fupcrior  to  them  as  fingle  perfons,  he  is  in- 
 '  ferior  to  the  colleftive  body  1  That  there  is 
 '  a  mutual  compact  between  every  King  and  his 
 
 *  people ;  and  they  are  no  longer  bound  to 
 '  obey  him  than  he  performs  his  contrail !  That 
 '  allegiance  and  prote^lion  are  reciprocal  i  and 
 
 *  in  default  of  the  latter  the  former  ceafcs ! 
 '  That  felf.prefervation  is  the  fundamental  law 
 '  of  nature,  and  fuperfcdes  all  other  obligations, 
 '  whenever  they  fland  in  competition  with  it ; 
 '  the  people's  fafety  being  the  fupreme  law  ! 
 '  That  the  people  may  lawfully  convene  them- 
 '  felves,  or  their  reprefentatives  in  a  parliamen- 
 
 *  tary  way,  without  the  king's  writ,  and  make 
 '  laws  and  conrtitutions,  to  bind  the  body  of 
 '  the  nation,  by  their  own  authority  !  That  no 
 '  King  has  a  natural  right  to  the  crown  by  birth, 
 
 *  without  coronatibri,   and  the  people's  confent : 
 
 «  And 
 
the   Regal  Succession       f 
 
 and  the  next  heir  may  lawfully  be  excluded 
 from  the  fuccefiion,  for  the  fecurity  of  the 
 people's  liberty,  property  or  religion !  That 
 perfonal  merit  is  more  to  be  regarded  than 
 birth-right :  wickednefs  a  forfeiture  of  natural 
 right :  and  difference  in  religion,  a  juft  caufc 
 of  excluding  or  depofing  of  Kings  or  their 
 heirs  ;  dominion  being  founded  in  grace  !  That 
 the  magiftrate  is  the  minifterof  God  no  longer, 
 or  otherwife,  than  while  he  exercifes  his  office 
 
 ■  for  his  people's  good !  That  in  cafe  of  idola- 
 '  try,  herefy,  popery,   perfecution,  tyranny,  ar- 
 
 ■  bitrary  power,  or  any  mal-adminiftration,  the 
 
 *  people  lawfully  may  refift,  and  their  reprefen- 
 '  tativesare  bound  in  duty,  for  the  publick  good, 
 '  to  depofe,  yea  to  arraign  and  put  to  death, 
 '  any  the  moft  rightful  prince  ;  being  in  all  fuch 
 '  cafes  (of  which  alfo  they  arc  the  judges)  freed 
 '  from  all  fubjedion  and  allegiance !  That  fuch 
 '  refiftance  is  juftifiable  by  fcripture  in  cafe  of 
 '  necefTity  ;  and  there  is  no  obligation  to  paf- 
 
 *  five  obedience  in  fuch  Hke  cafes!    That  pofTef-. 
 
 *  fion  and  power  give  a  right  to  govern  ;  and 
 '  fuccefs  is  an  evidence  of  God's  fivour !  That 
 «  fubmiffion  to  powers  in  pofTefTion  (without  re- 
 '  gard  to  other  titles  )  is  due  by  the  law  and 
 «  gofpel,  becaufe  it  is  to  follow  the  conduft  of 
 
 *  divine  providence !  That  obedience  is  due  to 
 '  ufurpers,  as  much  as  to  the  moft  rightful  higher 
 '  powers  i  and  infurreftions  againft  the  one  as  war- 
 
 *  rantable  as  againft  the  other !  That  monarchy 
 ^  has  no  more  warrant  in    fcripture    than  any 
 
 other 
 
6      The  Short  History  of 
 
 <  other  form  of  government  1  That  evil  means 
 «  may  be  ufed  to  a  good  end !  That  oaths  ob- 
 
 *  lige  not  in  the  fenfe  of  the  impofer,  but  of  the 
 '  taker !  That  bifliops  may  be  depriv'd  of  their 
 '  fees  by  a  meer  lay-power,  ^c.  * 
 
 Thefe,  and  a  great  many  more  of  the  like 
 ftrain,  are  abundantly  interfpers'd  throughout  the 
 known  writings  of  Calvin^  Beza,  Knox,  Goodmany 
 SuareZy  Mariana,  Parfons,  Penry,  Buchanan^ 
 Leighton,  Burton,  Calamy,  Marjhal,  BradJJjaw^ 
 Milton,  Goodwin,  AJhcam,  Harrington,  Hohhes^ 
 Ludlow,  Baxter,  Owen,  Locke,  Sidney,  Hunt, 
 John/on,  Tutcbin,  and  others  of  the  Aflbciation, 
 as  well  Jefuits  as  Puritan-Rebels  and  Regicides  : 
 not  to  fpeak  of  fome  moderns  of  greater  note ; 
 whom  (as  a  learned  divine  fays)  « I  forbear  to 
 '  name,    both  to  avoid  the  lofs  of  time,  which 
 
 *  fuch  a  long  catalogue  would  take  up,  and  the 
 
 <  envy  which  would  fall  upon  me,   for  naming 
 
 *  fome  of  all  profeflions,  who  yet  live,  or  whofe 
 
 *  memory  is  yet  frefli  among  (a)  .  us. '    But  I 
 cannot  omit  Mr.  Whijlon  Cwhofe  fcripure  poli- 
 ticks 
 
 [a)  Hicks's  ferm.  ^c,yan.  i68r,  p.  25,  And  another  writer 
 of  reputation  (fpcaking  of  the  progreG  of  anti-monarchical  prin- 
 ciples, in  the  beginning  of  this  century  j  fays,  '  They  Cthefaflion) 
 '  have  had  their  weekly  fcri biers  (I  wifti  I  was  not  obliged  to 
 '  add  fome  pulpitsj  to  fpread  this  poifon  :  and  fo  far  had  the  infa- 
 '  tuation  prevail'd,  that,  a  few  years  fince — rebellion  was  eftcem'd 
 '  the  moft  neceflary  requifite  to  qualify  any  one  for  being  intruft- 
 
 *  ed  in  the  government — All  the  principles  of  1641  (and  even 
 
 *  thofe  of   1648)  have  been  plainly  and  openly  rcviv'd — And  I 
 
 *  have  often  queftion'd  with  myfelf,   whether  the  reafoniogs  of 
 
 <  the 
 
the  Regal  Succession.      7 
 
 ticks  will  fall  under  a  particular  examination  in 
 the  procefs  of  this  work  \)  who,  tho'  he  has  in- 
 deed very  fairly  diffented  from  thofe  authors,  in 
 feme  very  material  points,  has  however  unfortu- 
 nately entangled  himfelf  in  feveral  of  their  prin- 
 ciples, which,  I  am  perfuaded,  will  not  ftand  the 
 teft  of  fcripture  proof 
 
 §  II.  As  to  the  original  of  government  in  ge- 
 neral, he  is  fo  far  from  favouring  the 
 mint  of  popular  fcheme,  that  he  not  only  admits, 
 divine  in-  {^^t  afferts,  and  makes  it  his  firft  funda- 
 mental propofition,  that  '  all  juft  govern- 
 «  ments,  whether  ecclefiaftical  or  civil,  muft  be 
 '  originally  deriv'd  from  God and  they  do  all, 
 
 *  fome  way  or  other,  receive  their  fan(5lion  from 
 '  divine  (a)  authority.'  This  he  juftly  thinks  to 
 be  fo  evident  to  all  who  believe  a  God,  a  pro- 
 vidence, and  the  truth  of  the  fcriptures,  as  not 
 to  need  to  be  prov*d  in  particular  to  them.  And 
 '  as  for  thofe  Cfays  he)  who  fuppofe  government 
 '  to  have  originally  fprangupfrom  mere  human 
 '  compadts,  and  from  the  people,  independently 
 '  on  God,  and  without  any  regard  to  his  will  or 
 '  authority,  they  feem  to  me,    to  fuppofe  men 
 
 *  to  have  fprung  out  of  the  earth,    and  not  to 
 
 '  have 
 
 «  the  moft  celebrated  author  on  this  fubjeft  might  not — be  pa. 
 
 *  rallel'd,   paragraph  by  paragraph,  and  (hewn   out  of  the  books 
 
 *  and  pamphlets  of  thofe  times,  to  be  the  very  fame,  en  which 
 
 *  the  grand  rebellion  and  the  murder  of  the  king  had  been  de- 
 '  fended,  &c.  *  Walktr's  account  of  the  iuffering  clergy,  17 14. 
 pref.  fo).  xi. 
 
 (4)  }rJ}it/i.  fcript.  polit.  p.  I. 
 
8      The  Short  History  of 
 
 '  have  had  God  for  their  creator  :  and  alfo  to  fup- 
 '  pofe  that  all  government  has  no  higher  end  to 
 
 *  aim  at,  than  the  conveniencies  of  this  prefent 
 '  life,  both  which  things  are  entirely  contrary  to 
 «  religion,  and  utterly  inconfiilent  with  the  fa- 
 '  cred  hiftory  of  the  origin  and  primitive  exer- 
 '  cife  of  government  among  men.  So  that  this 
 '  cannot  deferve  a  ferious  confideration  under  the 
 
 *  prefent  argument  of  fcripture  politicks,  but 
 '  muft  be  left  to  the  irreligious  fchemes  of  the 
 '  atheifts  and  unbelievers, '  (a)  i^c.  So  evident  is 
 the  divine  original  of  government,  even  by  Mr. 
 H^bifl on' sown  argument.  From  which  hispropo- 
 fition,  it  neceflarily  follows,  that  no  government, 
 whether  ecclefiaftical  or  civil,  is  to  be  efteem*d  a 
 juil  government,  unlefs  it  can  be  origiraally  de- 
 riv'd  from  God,  or  doth,  fome  way  or  other, 
 receive  its  fandion  from  divine  authority. 
 Momr-  §  in.  And  as  to  the  particular  forms 
 chicaL  thereof,  whoever  believes  the  Mofaical 
 (h)  account  of  the  creation,  and  judges  imparti- 
 ally of  what  he  reads,  cannot  doubt  that  Monar- 
 chy was  the  firft  and  original  form  of  govern- 
 ment, and  that  too  inftituted  immediately  by  God 
 himfelf,  from  the  beginning  of  the  world.  For, 
 to  obviate  the  falfe  pretences  of  the  Sons  of  Be- 
 lial, 
 
 (a)  J^/;(/?.fcrip.poI.  {k)lf  they hearnotMofes,—- neither  willthey 
 be  perfuaded,  tho'  one  rofe  from  the  dead,  St.  Luke  xvi.  3  i .  And 
 'cis  weil  obfcrv'd  by  a  Modern  Hiftorian,  that  this  ofMofes  '  is  the 
 
 *  only  authentick  and  genuine  Hiftory  of  the  Crcatioa  which  has 
 
 *  been  left  u?,  and  carries  with  it  all  the  marks  of  truth  and  pro- 
 
 *  bability,  even  tho'  it  be  regarded  only  as  a  hunaane  compofition, 
 
 *  and  feparate  from  divine  authority. '  Univerf.  Hiji.  1 7  3  o>  fol-  3  5  • 
 
/^^  Regal  SirccESSioN.       9 
 
 I'tal,  we  read  there,  that  the  all- wife  Creator  made 
 but  one  man  at  firft,  and  ordaln'd  that  all  man- 
 kind (hould  proceed  from  that  one  ;  that  (as  St. 
 Chryfojtom  obferves)  he  ?mght  teach  the  world  to 
 he  governed  by  a  king^  and  not  by  a  jnultitiide :  nei- 
 ther was  the  woman  herfelf  created  at  the  fame 
 time,  but  afterwards,  out  of  the  man^  for  his 
 ufe,  and  as  an  help  meet  for  (a)  him  ;  thereby  to 
 fliew  her  dependance  upon,  and  fubjcdtion  to  him. 
 And  tho*  fome  profane  witlings  may  make  light 
 of  it,  this  is  the  very  argument  of  the  Holy  Ghoil, 
 ufed  by  St.  Paul^  to  prove  the  fuperiority  of  the 
 man  over  the  {b)  woman  ;  which  might  alone 
 fuffice  to  confute  the  Hohbifts.  But,  befides  this 
 foundation  in  nature,  it  pleas'd  God  to  add  his 
 pofitive  and  exprefs  command  and  inftitution  of 
 government,  when  as  yet  there  were  none  elfe 
 but  themfelves  two  :  for  (;as  the  learned  bifhop 
 Andrews  {c)  expreffes  it)  God  gave  the  man  a  fcep- 
 ire,  and  made  him  his  vicegerent  ;  faying  unto  the 
 woman,  thy  defire  fhall  be  to  thy  husband  (or,  as 
 it  is  in  our  margin,  fiibje^  to  thine  husband^  and 
 he  fhall  rule  over  thee  (d).  Which  laft,  being 
 fpoken  after  Adam  had  fmn'd,  plainly  fheweth 
 us  alfo,  that  his  dominion  was  not  founded  in 
 grace  ;  that  is  to  fay,  in  his  perfonal  virtue,  gvood- 
 nefs,  and  defert. 
 
 («)  Gen.  ii.  20,.  8cc.  {i)  1  T'nn  ii  ii,  12,  i;;.  and  r  Csr  xi. 
 7,  8cc.  (c)  Left.  fol.  96,  (J)  Gfn.  iii.  16.  which  is  the  vtry 
 law,  to  which  the  apoftle  refers^  i  Cor.  x'w.  54.  to  prove  thac 
 the  womtn  are  commnnded  :e  be  under  obedience. 
 
 C  §  IV.  When 
 
I  o    The  Short  History^' 
 
 §  IV.  When  God  had  bleflcd  them  with  chil- 
 S:ucf'j:ve.  ^^^^-i  ^^  pieas'd  him,  that  the  father. 
 Recording  to  by  his  paternal  authority,  was  fole  ruler 
 in.-rigjt.  ^j,  monarch  over  them,  and  all  that  pro« 
 ceeded  from  them,  during  his  life  -,  ruling  them 
 with  a  power  patriarchal,  regal,  or  imperial  (^), 
 as  every  father  would  and  might  do,  even  at  this 
 day  i  fuppofing  him  and  his  family  to  fall  into 
 any  places  which  were  not  governed  by  any  fu- 
 perior  lord.  '  For,  as  Adam  was  lord  of  his 
 '  children,  fo  his  children  under  him  had  a  com- 
 '  mand  and  power  over  their  own  children  j  but 
 '  flill  with  fubordination  to  the  firft  parent, 
 *  who  is  lord  paramont  over  his  children's  chil- 
 ^  dren  to  all  generations,  as  being  the  grand-fa- 
 '  ther  of  his  {b)  people. '  And  for  the  better 
 ordering  of  the  fens  and  their  families,  the  elder 
 was,  by  God  himfelf,  declared  ruler  over  the 
 younger.  For,  notwithflranding  Cain  was  a  ve- 
 ry wicked  man,  and  Ahel  z.  righteous  one,  info- 
 much  that  the  Lord  had  re[peU  unto  Abel,  and 
 his  offerings  hut  unto  Cain,  and  to  his  offerings  he 
 bad  not  refpeFl  (<:)  :  yet  even  to  this  very  wicked 
 Cain  it  was,  that  the  Lord,  fpeaking  of  his  good 
 brother  Abel,  faid,  unto  thee  Jhall  be  his  defire^  and 
 thou  (Imlt  rule  over  him  (d),  or  fas  it  is  in  the 
 margin)  thou  fhalt  have  the  excellency,  and  he 
 fhall  be  fubje6l  unto  thee  -,  fo  that  neither  was  his 
 dominion  founded  in  grace,   but  in  nature  only, 
 
 by  virtue  of  his  primogeniture. 
 
 Thus 
 
 (a)  Bifhop  OveraVs  convoc.  book,  lib.  i.  Cap.  i.     [h)  Filmer's 
 patriir,  p.  li.    (c]  G<n.  iv.  4,  ^.    (</)  vcr.  7. 
 
/Z?^  Regal  Succession,     ii 
 
 Thus  'tis  evident,  even  in  holy  fcripture,  that 
 the  very  firft  man  that  ever  was  born,  was  born 
 in  fubjedtion,  as  well  as  all  who  came  after  him  ; 
 that  is  to  fay,  fubjedl  to  him  who  either  was  na- 
 turally the  father,  patriarch  or  prince,  or  elfe  re- 
 prefentatively  fo,  by  right  of  primogeniture.  How 
 ridiculous  therefore  and  abfurd  is  it  in  men  of 
 liberal  education,  and  how  much  ftronger  are 
 their  prejudices  than  iheir  arguments,  who  can 
 gravely  talk  of  an  independent  ftate  of  mankind 
 by  nature !  of  all  men  being  born  equal  into  the 
 world  !  and  upon  fuch  rotten  grounds  build  an  ar- 
 gument, that  '  there  can  be  no  reafon,  why  one 
 
 *  fliould  have  dominion  over  the  reft  without  their 
 '  confent  (a)*  ^c.  I'm  willing  to  hope  that 
 Mr.  JVhiftoti  had  not  this  cafe  of  Cain  and  Ahel 
 in  his  thoughts,  when  he  exprefs'd  himfelf  as  fol- 
 loweth ;  We  have  not,  '  that  I  know  of,  one 
 '  example,  in  all  the  bible,  where  providence 
 '  gives  the  leaft  preference  to  the  eldefl:  fon,  in 
 '  point  of  government,   before  the  youngeft  :  I 
 
 *  mean  this  (fays  he)  barely  on  account  of  fuch 
 '  primogeniture,  and  without  regard  to  more 
 '  valuable  perfonal  qualifications  (h) : '  For  no- 
 thing can  be  more  clear,  than  that  the  more 
 valuable  perfonal  qualifications  were  Abel's  •,  and 
 that  it  was  barely  on  account  of  primogeniture, 
 that  the  preference  in  point  of  government  was 
 given  to  Cain  the  eldeft  fon.  And,  as  this  is 
 full   to  the  purpofe,   fo   it   ought   to   have  the 
 
 greater 
 
 (fl)  JVright'iz([.  fsrm,  at  Aikib.  i  $  M<»r.  1719,  p.  f,  ia  3vo. 
 b)  Script,  po'.it.  p.  13. 
 
I X    The  Short  Histor\-^ 
 
 greater  weight,  for  being  the  firft  and  general 
 rule  in  thofe  cafes  •,  efpecially  with  Mr.  Whlflon^ 
 who,  but  eight  pages  before,  has  himfelf  placed 
 this  very  cafe  among  the  (not  human,  but)  divine 
 laws  -,  where  he  owns,  that   '  it  feems  to  him  to 
 
 *  imply,  then  at   lead,    the    inferiority,   and   in 
 
 *  feme  degree,  the  fubjedtion  of  the  younger 
 '  children    to  the  elder,  while  they  were  under 
 
 *  their  parents  authority,  and  in  the  fame  family, 
 '  even  without  regard  to  their  virtue  {a),  * 
 
 This  is  a  full  conccflion,  that  there  was  fuch 
 a  law  or  rule,  in  the  beginning,  in  favour  of 
 the  eldeft  fon  againll  the  younger,  in  point  of 
 government,  barely  on  account  of  primogeni- 
 ture *,  and  that  too  not  human,  but  divine.  But 
 Mr.  IVhijlon  feems  neverthelcfs  to  make  it  a 
 queftion,  whether  that  law  did  continue  in  force 
 afterwards,  becaufe  of  Cain's  abufe  of  that 
 power?  And  whether  it  was  a  law  indeed,  or 
 only  a  particular  injunction  in  a  particular  cafe 
 (/?)  ?  Now,  that  it  could  be  a  particular  in- 
 jundion,  made  in  this  particular  cafe,  I  fee  no 
 reafon  to  fuppofe  :  For,  if  St.  PauPs  arguing  the 
 husband's  authority  over  the  wife,  from  the 
 cafe  of  Jciam  and  Eve^  be  a  juft  proof  of  its 
 being  a  general  law,  to  continue  in  force  af- 
 terwards, (as  doubtlefs  it  is,)  then  why  fliould 
 not  this  of  Cain  and  Md  be  allowed  to  prove 
 the  fame  of  the  right  of  primogeniture  ?  Nei- 
 ther can  I  imagine  how  that  author  (who  builds 
 
 fo 
 
 C«)  Script,  folit.  p.  ?.      (^;  ibid. 
 
the  RegalSuccession.     13 
 
 fo  much  of  his  fcripture  politicks  upon  the 
 foundation  of  perfonal  virtue,  goodnefs  and  de- 
 izvi)  could  fancy  that  Ca'in^  whofe  offerings  God 
 would  not  look  upon,  fliouid  neverrhelefs  be  fo 
 far  in  his  favour,  as  to  gain  the  preference  in 
 point  of  government,  before  his  younger  bro- 
 ther Ahel^  whofe  offerings  God  had  gracioufly 
 accepted  j  and  that  too,  at  the  very  time,  when 
 (God  knew;  he  had  premeditated  in  his  heart,  to 
 murder  his  more  righteous  brother,  on  account 
 of  that  very  acceptance  !  Is  it  polTible  for  him 
 to  fuppofe,  that  perfonal  virtue,  goodnefs,  and 
 dcfert  fhould  preponderate  with  God,  in  the  dif- 
 pofal  of  fuch  favours,  in  all  other  cafes,  and 
 yet  that  Cain  only  fhould  be  fingled  out  as  a 
 particular  objeft  of  the  divine  favour,  who  had 
 not  the  leafl  pretence  of  perfonal  virtue,  good- 
 nefs, and  defert,  to  entitle  him  thereto  ?  Nay, 
 who  was  deftitute  of  God's  countenance  and 
 favour,  as  St.  Chryfojlom  expounds  what  we  call 
 going  out  from  the  -pre fence  of  the  Lord  (a)  ?  But  I 
 leave  it  to  the  author  to  reconcile  this  contra- 
 didion !  And,  fince  there  is  no  reafon  to  think 
 this  to  have  been  only  a  particular  injunction 
 in  a  particular  cafe,  we  muft  receive  it  for  a  law 
 or  general  rule  j  and  conclude,  that  it  did  con- 
 tinue in  force,  notwithftanding  Cain's  abufe  of 
 that  power,  which  was  not  unforefeen  by  God, 
 when  he  declared  his  natural  right  to  the  pre- 
 rogative of  primogeniture.     But  there  feems  t© 
 
 me 
 
 (a)  Gcncf.  iv,  i6. 
 
14    The  Short  History  of 
 
 me  much  better  reafon  to  fuppofe,  that  God 
 Almighty,  foreknowing  the  many  objedions  that 
 worldly-minded  men  would  ftart,  in  oppofition 
 to  this  divine  law,  thought  fit  to  declare  and  af- 
 firm it,  even  in  the  cafe  of  the  worft  {a)  elder 
 brother  that  ever  liv'd.  For  God  does  not  here 
 beftow  upon  Cain  any  new  privilege,  but  only  con- 
 firms unto  him  what  was,  by  nature,  his  right ; 
 and  argues  with  him  the  unrealonablenefs  of 
 his  difcontent,  upon  principles  well  known  and 
 eftablilh'd  from  the  beginning  :  as  St.  Chryfojloin 
 moft  truly  expounds  it  •,  notwithjlanding  thou  haft 
 thus  greatly  finrCd  (viz.  in  not  offering  to  me  the 
 firft  and  bed  of  thy  fubftance,  as  thy  brother 
 j4bel  did,)  yet  I  have  not  deprived  thee  of  the  pri- 
 vileges of  thy  primogeniture  ;  but  he  fhall  fiill  hefuh- 
 je^  to  thee,  as  by  the  law  of  nature  is  thy  due. 
 Agreeably  to  which,  the  learned  Bifliop  Andrews 
 obferveth  in  this  very  cafe,  «  That  God  fhewed 
 
 '  plain- 
 
 [a)  Among  the  many  monPtrous  mifapplications  of  holy  fcrip- 
 ture,  we  have  feen  the  cafe  of  this  firft  wicked  murderer  ap- 
 plied to  the  juft  execution  of  notorious  rebels,  and  regicides,  by 
 undoubted  lawful  authority.  And  particularly,  a  pretended  loy- 
 alift,  of  a  new  edition,  prcfumes  to  fay,  '  that  the  earth  had  fcarce 
 
 *  well  drunk  in  their  blood,  ere  God  reviv'd  the  punilhment  cf 
 
 ♦  Cain  upon  him  that  {bed  ir,  to  make  him  a  fugitive  und  va- 
 '  gahond  on  the  earth,  £cc.  [BmSHry's  ferm.  5  Nov.  1711,  f. 
 19,  inSvo.]  As  if  there  were  any  parallel,  between  the  murder 
 of  righteous  ^oel.  and  the  legal  execution  of  Monmouth  and  the 
 other  worthies  (as  this  unconfecratcd  preacher  rails)  his  aflbciatcs ! 
 But  we  may  remember  others,  who  have  dar'd  to  call  thofe  who 
 fuffer'd  for  the  Rye-hottfe  confpiracy,  -very  innocent  men,  tho'  they 
 confefs'd  their  trcafon  at  their  deaths  | 
 
Z/:;^  Regal  Succession.      15- 
 
 <  plainly,  that  it  is  his  will,  that  in  and  by  the 
 
 *  fin  committed,  no  man  fhoiild  lofc  any  privi- 
 
 *  lege,  which  of  right  is  due  to  him,  and  which 
 '  before  he  had  ;  and  every  motion,  in  a  fupe- 
 '  rior,  to  fin,  doth  not  difcharge  him  of  his  au- 
 
 *  thority.  Which  is  contrary  to  that  falfe  opi- 
 '  nion  and  cenfure  of  them,  which  think,  that 
 
 *  even  princes  themfelves,  after  fin  committed, 
 
 *  lofe  all  their  prerogative  and  fupremacy  of 
 «  government   which  they  had  before,  and  that 
 
 *  their  fubjeds  are  not  bound  to  do  their   fer- 
 
 *  vice  any  longer  to  them,  but  that  ever  after 
 
 *  their  allegiance  fhall  ceafe  ;  which  is  falfe,  and 
 '  contrary  to  all  reafon,   and  not  God's  intent 
 
 *  and  will  here.     For  God   faith,  and   ratifieth 
 
 *  here,  that  Cain,  tho'  he  had  thus  finned,  both 
 '  againfl  God  and  his  Brother  ;  yet,  being  the 
 '  elder  and  firft-born.  and  fo   before  Mel,    fo 
 
 *  there  fhould   be  a  fuperiority    and  dominion, 
 
 *  that  he  fhould  fi:ill  retain  by  nature.  And  it  is 
 '  God's  aflTcrtion,  that  that  fuperiority  lliould 
 '  be  retained  fl:ill,  and  that  Abel  fiiould  not  feek 
 '  to  be  his  fuperior ;  neither  did  he  (a). '  How- 
 ever, as  this  dominion  of  Cain  over  his  brother 
 and  family,  was  in  fubordination  to  the  firll 
 parent  Adam,  whilft  he  liv'd  :  fo  when  he  died 
 Cain  himfelf  fucceeded  in  the  fovereignty,  in 
 his  own  right,  as  the  firft-born  ;  and,  after  him, 
 the   eldeft  furviving  branch  of   the  family,  by 
 
 virtue 
 
 [»)  Andrewi'i  left.  fcl.  400. 
 
1(5    The  Short  History  <?/ 
 
 virtue  of  proximity  of  blood.  fFor,  as  the  great 
 St.  Chryfojlom  obferveth,  the  hne  of  Cain,  and 
 with  it  his  primogeniture,  was  extind:  in  Lamech; 
 that  is,  at  the  flood,  and  not  till  then  :)  and 
 hence  it  came,  that  the  word  Elder  is  ufed,  as 
 well  for  magiftracy  and  power,  as  for  age  and 
 gravity,  almofl:  in  all  languages  ;  which,  no 
 doubt  (as  another  judicious  author  obfervethj  *  is 
 
 *  a  13gn  that  the  firfl  governours  were  the  fa- 
 '  thers  of  families,  and  under    them  the  eldeft 
 
 *  fons  {a). 
 
 From  hence  'tis  clear,  that  the  ftate  of  nature 
 ('  fo  much  talk'd  of  j  was,  from  the  beginning, 
 a  ftate  of  government  and  fubjeftion,  not  of 
 anarchy  or  independency  ;  and  that  ftate  of  na- 
 ture confirm'd  by  the  pofitive  inftitution  of  God. 
 For  the  firft  fovereign  rul'd  over  fubjedls  of  his 
 own  begetting  :  and  the  eldeft  fon  fucceeding 
 his  father  in  the  fupreme  authority,  acquired 
 thereby  the  title  of  father  of  his  people  ;  which 
 title,  being ufually  {h)  conferr'd  on  fovereign 
 princes  to  this  day,  diredlly  points  out  to  us  the 
 original  of  government,  and  of  monarchy, 
 founded  in  nature,  as  well  as  pofitive  inftitution. 
 And  here  our  republicans,  if  they  would,  might 
 
 plainly 
 
 (ff)  Sir  W4t.  Ralfigh,  fuu  1 5  r ,  i  ^  2,  {b)  Ab'mtlech  was  a  com  - 
 mon  title  of  honour  among  the  Kings  of  the  Fhiti/lines,  fignify- 
 ing  my  father  the  Kn^ :  and  Jofeph  in  E£ypt  was  proclaim'd 
 Abrech,  fignif)ing  the  King'i  father  fas  good  interpreters  aflure 
 us  ;)  both  which  import  the  fame  with  pater  patrti,  which  was 
 conferr'd  by  the  Romans  on  thofc  who  had  deferv'd  the  bcft,  an*^ 
 was  generally  ufed  by  all  their  Empcrers, 
 
the  Regal  Succession.      17 
 
 plainly  perceive,  that  the  patriarchal  authority- 
 has  a  '  foundation  in  nature,  fo  as  to  render  the 
 '  younger  brother,  upon  the  father's  death,  fub- 
 
 *  je6b  to  the  ia )  elder  j '  tho'  feveral  of  them 
 have  the  confidence  to  treat  it  with  fcorn,  as  an 
 abfurd,  imaginary  and  ridiculous  notion,  and  to 
 pervert  the  very  word  of  God,  in  hopes  to  prove 
 it  fo. 
 
 §  V.  T  H  u  s  we  fee,  that  Adajn''s  mo-  AdamV 
 narchy  was  not  only  oeconomical,  con-  "'^"«'"<^^;' 
 fin'd  to  that  one  little  family  which  was 
 at  firft  created,  but  political  over  a  fociety, 
 confiding  of  many  families,  which  were  to  de- 
 fcend  from  him,  during  his  long  life  of  nine 
 hundred  and  thirty  'jears  {b  ,;  (in  which  time  his 
 progeny  might  well  be  multiply'd,  fo  as  far  to 
 exceed  the  number  of  people  in  many  of  our 
 modern  kingdoms;  )  which  is  the  very  ground 
 and  foundation  of  political  government,  and  par- 
 ticularly of  that  form  thereof,  which,  from  one 
 fingle  perfon's  being  the  fupreme  and  chief  over 
 all  the  reft,  is  called  monarchy  ;  the  power  of 
 the  monarch  increafing  in  proportion  to  the  num- 
 ber of  his  defcendents  and  natiiral-born  fubjefts. 
 And  this,  by  the  way,  might  ferve  for  a  full 
 anfwer  to  the  feveral  aflt'rtion-s  of  Mr.  JVhiJlony 
 
 D  Thar, 
 
 (a)  Stephens's  form-  7.0  Jan.  169^.  p.  ^,  6.  {o)Oen.  v.  "5 . 
 The  learned  Mr.  ^huckford,  in  his  connexion,  vol.  i.  p.  36.  ol- 
 fervesthat  fjveral  authors  hiving  torm'd  calcuhrions  cf  the  peop'e 
 io  the  ante-ciiluvi;^n  world,  do  luppofc  i:  to  h^ve  contained,  '  at 
 
 *  Icaft  two  uiiilions  of  milliop.s  of  iouhj  which  they   think  is  :» 
 
 *  number  far  exceeding  that  of  ilic  ir.habicants  of  the  prefciir  c.r:b. ' 
 
1 8     The  Short  History  of 
 
 That,  '  before  the  flood,  we  have  no  dire<5l  ac- 
 
 *  count  of  the  form  or  manner  of  human  (a) 
 '  governments: '  as  well  as  to  that  of  Mr.  ^r/^/j/. 
 That  '  it  don't  appear,  whether  there  was   any 
 
 *  civil  government  at  all  (  before  the  flood )  or 
 
 *  no;  that  there  feems  to  have  been  none  for  ma- 
 
 *  ny  years  J  and  that  this  is  notorious,  that  God 
 
 *  no  where  appears  in  the  old  teflament,  to  have 
 
 *  concerned  himfelf  in  the  ordering  of  any  go- 
 '  vernment,  till  he  brought  the  Ifraelites  out  of 
 
 *  Egspty  under  the  conduct  of  {b)  Mofes :  *  and 
 to  that  of  Mr.  Ble?nierhayfety  who  affirms  for 
 certain,  '  that  God  has  ordained  government  in 
 'general,  without  fpecifying  any  particular  (f ) 
 «  mode :  '  as  well  as  to  the  appeal  of  another  more 
 celebrated  writer,  who  recommends  it  to  the 
 confciences  and  common  fenfe  of  the  chriftian 
 laity,  to  '  fearch  with  their  own  eyes,  and  fee, 
 '  whether  they  can  poflibly  find  a  plain  and  ex- 
 '  prefs  pafTage  of  fcripture,  in  which  God  infti- 
 
 *  tutcd  any  particular  form  of  human  govern- 
 '  ment,  for  any  nation  in  the  world,  unlefs  they 
 '  will  except  one  (d  '  i  of  which  in  its  proper 
 place.  In  the  mean  time,  I  beg  leave  to  appeal 
 to  the  confciences  and  common  fenfe  of  all  our 
 readers,  whether  this  is  not  a  much  more  plain 
 and  exprefs  paflage,  than  any  that  learned  and 
 fincere  Author  has  ever  yet  produc'd  either  from 
 
 fcrip- 
 
 (n)  Script.  po!it.  p.  9.  (6]  J.  Wrighii  aff.  ferm.  at  /Mtih. 
 I  <  hlar,  1719,  p.  6,  8.  {c^  B.enr.grh.  iem.  10  Jar,  17  14,  p. 9 
 fdj  rreferTat.  againft  ihc  Nonj.  by  S.  Ba'^or,    iri">  p.  i}- 
 
the  Regal  Succession.     19 
 
 fcripture,  or  the  laws  of  England,  in  favour  of 
 certain  of  his  dtrJing  {a  notions?  But  fuppofing 
 we  could  not  find  fuch  a  plain  and  exprefs  paf- 
 fage,  Tabfolutely  and  properJy !)  yet  however, 
 fince  I  have  abundantly  prov'd  from  divers  plain 
 and  exprefs  paflages  of  fcripture,  that  the  mo- 
 narchical form  of  human  government  was  found- 
 ed by  God  on  the  law  of  nature,  I  may  fairly 
 conclude  (in  the  words  of  the  excelleiit  Dr.  Hey- 
 lin,  againft  that  infamous  incendiary  Buj-ton^) 
 «  pofitive  laws,  I  trow,  are  of  no  fuch  efficacy, 
 <  as  to  annihilate  any  thing  which  hath  its  being 
 '  and  original  in  the  law  of  (b)  nature.  '  And 
 in  return  of  his  appeal,  I  may  prefume  to  put 
 the  whole  controverfy  upon  this  ilTue,  whether 
 he  can  poflibly  find  a  plain  and  exprefs  paflage 
 of  fcripture,  in  which  God  inftitutedany  other  form 
 of  human  government  for  any  nation  in  the 
 world,  but  only  that  of  monarchy,  which  he  in- 
 ftituted  in  paradife  •,  or  in  which  he  gave  authori- 
 ty to  any  people  to  chufe  their  own  governours, 
 or  to  alter  the  government  at  their  pleafure  ?  As  to 
 Mr.  JVhifion,  I  refer  him  to  his  own  fecond  general 
 propofition,  where  he  agrees  with  me  exprefly, 
 that  '  paternal  authority  over  the  children  of  a 
 
 P  ^  '  fami- 
 
 (a)  The  Rev.  Dr.  Innes  does  not  ftick  to  fay,  that  there  is 
 neither  goedfenfcnor  found  divinity,  in  any  or  a  I  of  t^,o^e  which 
 have  been  advanc'd  in  the  Jaw  prefervative  and  fermon,  but  that 
 they  are,  in  every  refpe£>,  fallacious  and  fophiftica!!  Innti^i  (crm. 
 of  church  authority,  i  Jnnt  1717,  p.  14,  m.  in  8^o.  And  the 
 reader  may  gratify  his  curiofity  further,  if  he  ple.fes  :o  confuk 
 the  late  Mr.  iMke  Wlilbcurnt*s,  Legacy  to  the  church,  &c.  vol.  ii 
 lyii.p.  33}    (^j  B.-icf  and  moder.  anfw.  1637,  p.  ?'.,  ^j.in  4;^. 
 
xo     The  Short  History  (^y 
 
 '  family,  was  the  only  form  of  human  govern- 
 '  ment,  among  fuch  asfprang  from  one  common 
 
 *  parent,  before  the  multiplication  of  mankind, 
 '  or  before  their  feparation,  one  from  another, 
 
 *  into  different  and  diftant  {a)  families :  *  And  in- 
 fills, that  '  this  is  fo  plainly  the  refult  of  the 
 '  Jaw  of  nature,  or  of  the  will  of  God,  declar'd 
 
 *  by  the  common  reafon  of  mankind,  and  con- 
 
 *  firmed  in  the  bible that  there  is  no  need 
 
 '  of  a  particular  proof.      Accordingly     fays  he) 
 
 *  authority,    both  ecclefiaflical  and  fecular,  was 
 
 *  at  firft,  in  the  fame  paternal  hands,  both  before 
 «  and  after  the  flood ;  and  this  for  a  confiderable 
 '  time  alfo  :  as  appears  in  every  inftance,  both 
 
 *  in  Genefis  and  J  oh  j  which  are  the  only  origi- 
 «  nal,  authentic  records,  of  thofe  firft  (h)  ages. ' 
 And  he-  §  VI.  A  s  to  the  dcfcendants  from 
 veditury.  Adam^  we  find  thofe  of  the  elder  branch 
 firfl  recorded,  in  a  dired;  line  down  to  the  {c) 
 flood,  wherein  they  were  all  extinguifh'd.  And 
 then,  as  if  there  had  never  been  an  elder  family, 
 the  genealogy  of  the  line  of  Seth  begins  again 
 with  the  hiftory  of  man's  [d)  creation,  tho'  that 
 had  been  deliver'd  before  •,  the  better  to  make 
 out  the  genealogy  of  Noah.,  who  was  to  continue 
 the  fuccefflon  after  the  flood,  as  thofe  had  done 
 before  it.     And  yet,  tho'  we  read,  that  the^^- 
 
 triarchs  (e) 
 
 f«)  Script,  pclit.  p.  3.     (i)  Ibid.  p.  4.     {c)Gen.  \v.   17,   Sec, 
 
 (^d) w .i,(^c.     (c}Thcre  are  fynonynaous  titles  :  as  is  plain  from 
 
 the  holy /'cripture;  wherein  King  ZJax"/*/ is  called  a /)^/r/«rc^,  [jiSis 
 ii.  19,1  as  the  fiuhx^h.  Abraham  is  call'd  a  mighty  Frif.ce ,  {Gen. 
 xxiii.  6.) 
 
the  Regal  Succession,    xi 
 
 triarchs   or    kings    feverally    begat     fons     and 
 daughters,  we  find  only  the^  names  of  the  eldeft 
 recorded,  as    the  heads  and  rulers  over  their  re- 
 fped:ive  families  and  people.     But  thefe  alfo  grow- 
 ing generally  degenerate,  through  their  intercourfe 
 with  the  wicked  race  of  Cain,  God  was  provok'd 
 to  deflroy  their  common  poflerity  ;  excepting  on- 
 ly   Noahy  who,  notwichftanding   the  fafhionable 
 wickednefs  of  the  world,  was  a  juft  man  and  per- 
 feoi  (a\    and  walked  with  Godj  fteadily  and  zea- 
 loufly,  fas  St.  Chryfojlom  exprefleth  it,)  not  keeping 
 fome  commandments  and  breaking  others^  hut  of  um~ 
 form  obedience  and  exa^  integrity  j  and  with  him 
 was  his  own  family  only  preferv'd. 
 
 §  VII.  Now,  as  before  the  flood  i^c^Vsm.- 
 Adam  had  been  the  univerfal  monarch  /'iirrhjpoU- 
 of  the  old  world,  and  as  fuch  had  the  ''"*^' 
 fole  property  of  all  that  was  in  it,  during  his  life, 
 and  after  him  his  heirs  in  duecourfe  of  fuccefllon  ; 
 fo,  after  the  flood,  Noah  was  vefted  in  the  like  in  the 
 new.  And  whatever  fhare  thereof  his  fons  after- 
 wards had,  it  was  all  derived  from  him,  and  held 
 by  his  donation  and  alotment,  as  being  the  foun- 
 tain of  all  honour  and  property  :  and  fo  the  fame 
 defcended  to  their  refpedive  poflerity  by  the  like 
 authority,  without  the  leaft  colour  of  their  making 
 anycontrad  or  terms  with  the  people  their  natu- 
 tural-born  fubjeds)  whom  they  were  to  govern, 
 and  confequently  without  being  any  way  limited 
 by  them. 
 
 Here 
 
 (^)  Gen.  V!.  p. 
 
21  The  Short  History  of 
 
 Here  then  it  is  far  from  being  fo  evident  as 
 fonie  men  of  charader  would  perfuade  us,  that 
 '  in  the  nature  of  the  thing  private  property  is 
 
 *  before  the  inftitution  of  a  fettled  government, 
 
 *  becaufe  (as  they  argue)  the  great  end  of  that  in- 
 '  ftitution  is  the  prefervation  of  that  {a)  property.* 
 But  I  need  not  engage  further  in  this  queftion,  af- 
 ter what  has  been  frequently  retorted  by  much 
 abler  hands,  and  well  warranted  by  the  holy  fcri- 
 pture.  All  therefore  that  I  fhall  fay  to  it  here  is, 
 that  the  right  (and  truly)  reverend  hi^oY^Sander- 
 fon^  occafionally  treating  of  the  pretended  con- 
 traft,  which  the  rebels  in  his  time  were  wont  to 
 plead  for,  as  an  argument,  that  all  government 
 was  originally  deriv'd  from  the  people,  (which  by 
 the  way,  he  fays,  never  yet  was  proved,  nor^  hi 
 dares  fay,  will  ever  he -proved,  while  the  world  jlandeth, 
 either  from  fcripture,  reafon,  or  (h)  hi/lory,)  toucheth 
 Tipon  this  queflion  of  property,  and  exprefleth  him- 
 felf  thus,    *  True  it  is,  that  a  meer  rationalift  (that 
 
 *  is  to  fay  —  an  atheift  of  the  late  edition^  who 
 *-  giveth  more  faith  to  fuch  heathen  philofophy 
 '  as  affirmeth  the  world  to  have  been  ab  (Bterno^ 
 '  than  to  divine  revelation  which  afTureth  us  it 
 '  had  a  beginning  ;  (and  fomeof  the  great  cham- 
 
 *  pions  of  the  opinion  we  now  fpeak  of,  have  gi- 
 '  ven  caufe  enough  of  fufpicion  that  they  are  little 
 
 *  better :)  fuch  a  one,  I  fay,  cannot  polTibly  folve 
 
 *  the  difficulty.  — —    But  to  us,  who  believe  the 
 
 «  fcrip- 
 
 {(t)  Prefervat.  againft  the  Nonjur.  by  '^.Bang.  p.  R8.     {b)  Pref. 
 to  A*chb,  Uyjer'i  power  of  the  prince,  &c.  fcdt.  xv. 
 
the  Regal  Succession    ag 
 
 *  fcriptures  and  acknowledge  a  creation,  the  folu- 
 
 *  tion  —  is  eafy :  if  we  will  but  follow  the  clue  of 
 
 *  the  facred  hiflory,  in  the  four  firft  chapters  of 
 
 *  Genefis^    it  will  fairly  lead  us  out  of  thefe  laby- 
 
 *  rinths  in  a  plain  way,    and  without  any  great 
 
 *  trouble  *.  And  then  he  dates  the  cafe  of  go- 
 vernment and  property,  to  the  effedl  before- 
 mention'd,  and  concludes,  upon  the  whole,  both 
 in  hypotheft^  that  Adam's  government  was  before 
 Cain's  property,  and  in  iheji,  that  undoubtedly 
 government  was    before   property.       '    And  fo 
 
 *  (fays  the  bifhop)  this  fuppofed  pad  or  contraft, 
 
 *  which  maketh  fuch  a  noife  in  the  world,  proveth 
 '  to  be  but  a  fquib,    powder  without  fhot,    that 
 
 *  giveth  a  crack,  but  vaniftieth  into  air,  and  doth 
 
 *  no  execution  (a).*     But,  to  return, 
 
 §.  VIII.  Noah,  Vmng  Three  Hundred  and  Fifty 
 years  after  the  flood  (b),  his  pofterity,  ac- 
 cording to  God's  bleffing  (0,  weredu-  ^tdeT"'' 
 ring  his  life,  grown  exceeding  nume- 
 rous :  infomuch,  that  it  was  become  neceflary 
 that  fome  branches  from  the  old  (lock  fliould  be 
 dipt  off,  and  tranfplanted  into  different  parts,  as 
 well  for  their  more  convenient  fubfiftence,  as  for 
 the  better  divifion  of  the  nations ;  each  of  them 
 having  authority,  to  be  ruler,  over  his  own  peo- 
 ple and  nation  ;   and  thus  of  them  was  the  whole 
 
 Earth 
 
 («)  Prcf  to  Archb.  Ujlm*s  power  of  the  prince,  &c.  fc(f>.  xviii. 
 Whoever  is  defirous  to  fee  this  fuhjcdt  treated  with  the  con- 
 tempt it  dcferves,  may  confult  a  dialogue  between  Timothy  and 
 Thllitthetu,  vol.  ill.  p.  1 17,  in  Svo.     {0)  Gen.  ix.  iS.     (f)   -ver.  i. 
 
14     The  Short  History  of 
 
 Earth  (a)  overfpread.  But  nevet-thelefs,  as  the  new 
 world  was  divided  and  peopled,  without  theinter- 
 pofition  of  any  human  means,  by  a  {h)  miracle, 
 to  demonftrate  it  to  be  the  a6l  of  God  himlelf  i 
 fo  was  it  done  with  the  greateil,  and  mod  exad: 
 order  imaginable  ;  '  Either  by  calling  of  lots,  or 
 
 *  chufing  according  to  the  order  of  their  birth- 
 
 *  right,  after  fome  furvey  taken,  of  a  fufficient 
 '  portion  of  the  earth,  and  portions  bordered  out 
 
 *  according  to  the  number  of  their  nations,  then 
 
 *  of  their  {c)  families,  i^c.  '  God  thus  turning 
 that  which  was  impos'd  as  a  judgment  on  them, 
 to  the  benefit  of  the  world :  for,  at  the  fame  time, 
 that  God  almighty  difperfed  the  people,  by  con- 
 founding their  tongues  at  Bahel,  he  did  not  leave 
 them,  every  one  to  fhift  for  himfelf :  but  it  pleas'd 
 him  to  give  to  every  feveral  tribe,   or  branch  of 
 
 them, 
 
 [n)  Gen.  ix.  1 9,  {b)  Mr.  Shuchfordhs.  very  ingenioufly  attempted 
 to  account  for  this  in  a  natural  way;  tho'(he  owns)  the  writers  ge- 
 nerally fuppofeit  to  have  been  the  efied  of  a  miracle.  Bur,  I  think^ 
 one  of  his  own  confiderations  is  enough  to  overthrow  ail  the  reft; 
 I'lZ..  that  *  Nothing  Icfs  than  a  very  extraordinary  miracle  cou'd 
 '  have  forted  them,'  in  fo  regular  a  manner  as  we  (hall  t:nd  they 
 were.  Sec  Shuckf.  conncifi-.  vol.  i.  p.  146,  {c)  Jof.Mede'svJoiki, 
 fol.  274.  The  learned  Mr.SeUen  mentions  a  tradition  generally  re- 
 ceived from  the  oriental  writers,  that  Noah,  (hiving  been  made 
 lord  of  the  whole  earth  by  God  himielf  ^  made  a  will  by  diredlion 
 from  God,  whereby  all  the  then  known  world  was  divided  among 
 his  fons  and  their  progeny.  {SilJen  dc  jure  nat.  &  gent.  torn.  i.  col. 
 606.  8c  de  Synedr.  tom.i.  col.  773.  J  And  further,  that  be  exaftcd 
 an  oath  of  theno,  that  none  of  them  (hould  ufjrp  upon  another's 
 right.  (Idem  de  jure  nat.  Sec.  col.  663.  Sc  de  Synedr,  col.  1053. 
 Idemetiam  in  mari  claifj,  tom.ii.  co!.  M95.  8c  de  fucccfllonibus, 
 col.  6jj  6i.  edit.  Wilk, 
 
/Z^^  Regal  SuccESSio  N.  ij- 
 
 them,  a  diflin6t  (a)  language  ;  fo  that  it  was  na- 
 tural for  them  to  fettle  together  for  the  benefit  of 
 converfation  and  commerce :  and  whoever  was 
 the  eldeft  of  the  tribe  was  of  courfe,  by  the 
 laws  of  God  and  nature,  the  head  and  ruler  there- 
 of; enjoying  that  honour  by  birth-right,  and  not 
 by  eledion.     *  For,  in  thofe  days,  they  knew  no 
 
 *  other  right  of  government,  buc  what  was  natu- 
 
 *  and  {h)  paternal :  '  fo  that  it  is  a  groundlefs 
 fuggeftion  of  a  late  author,  that  '  Perhaps,  in  fome 
 
 *  nations,  from  the  confufion  of  tongues,  it  was 
 
 *  the  people's  part,  to  chufe  who  fhould  rule  over 
 '  (f)  them*.  Nay,  the  Lord  himfelf,  interpofing 
 his  authority,  appointed  them  their  feveral  bounds, 
 as  well  as  their  rulers.  For,  as  Mofes  tells  us,  JVhen 
 the  moft  high  divided  to  the  nations  their  inheritance^ 
 when  he  feparated  the  fins  of  Adam,  he  fit  the  bounds 
 of  the  people,  according  to  the  nufnher  of  the  children 
 o/(J)Ifrael ;  or  fas  it  is  render'd  in  the  Greek,)  ac- 
 cording to  the  number  of  the  angeU  •,  meaning 
 their  rulers,  who  are  elfewhere  in  holy  fcripture, 
 frequently  ftiled  Gods:  To  alfo  the  fon  of  Syrach 
 afTures  us.  In  the  diviftons  of  the  nations  of  the  whole 
 earthj   he  fit  a  ruler  over  every  (e)  people  i    from 
 
 E  whence 
 
 («)  Mr.  Varkcr  reports  from  antient  authorities,  that  Eeber,  tha 
 fon  of  Jrphaxad,  not  confenting  to  the  building  of  Bfi>fl,  Wis 
 language  rcmain'd  unchang'd  5  fo  th^t  his  dcfceodants  always  re- 
 tain'd  their  proper  fpecch  and  di^ilefl  :  Biblioth.  Bih.  p.  178. 
 [b]  Sherlock's  fcrm.  29  Mny,  i68<;,  p.  6.  {c)  Difc.  of  God's  vaya 
 of  difpof.  of  kingdoms,  1691,  p  9.  {d)  Dtutcr.  \xy.\\.  8.  (c) 
 Eccluf.  xvii.  1 7.    And  here  'tis  rtmarkable,  that  thij  was  one  of 
 
 the 
 
z6    The  Short  History  ^y 
 
 whence  'tis  plain,  that  political  government  fand 
 that  too  under  the  form  of  hereditary  monarchies) 
 was  by  divine  inftitution,  as  I  have  already  ob- 
 fcrv'd,  tho'  certain  perfons  would  fain  perfuade  us, 
 that  forms  of  government  are  only  of  human  de- 
 termination !  For  from  thefe  rulers  fwhofe  names 
 are  recorded  to  the  number  of  fevenry)  their 
 refpedlive  kingdoms  defcended  in  an  hereditary 
 courfe  of  fucceffion.  Notvvithftanding  ail  which, 
 there  are  fome  not  afham'd  to  affert,  that  '  tho' 
 «  God  was  pleas'd  to  order  that  (difperfion  at 
 '  Babel)  we  do  not  find  the  lead  intimation  of 
 '  his  interpofing  to  fet  up  rulers  among  'em  ; 
 '  which  therefore  mud  be  underftood  to  have 
 *  been  left  to  their  own  {a)  choice  !  * 
 
 Thus  were  the  nations  of  the  earth  divided, 
 among  the  poderity  of  Noah,  every  one  after  his 
 tongue,  after  their  famiiles^  in  their  (b)  nations  :  ma- 
 ny of  which  nations  are  known  by  their  names 
 to  this  day  j  as  may  be  feen  by  comparing  to- 
 gether the  feveral  chapters  noted  in  the  (<:)  mar- 
 gin :  and,  in  all  thefe,  did  the  feveral  patriachs, 
 by  virtue  of  their  paternity  and  eldcrlhip,  exer- 
 cife  a  regal  power,  and  that  too  in  the  mod  full 
 and  abfolute  manner  ;  as  will  be  fliewn  hereafter, 
 in  its  proper  place.  Would  it  nor  therefore  raife 
 a  juft  indignation  in  any  one  who  pays  a  due  re- 
 gard 
 
 the  mod  general  traditions  among  the  Jetos,  defcending  from 
 father  to  Ton,  and  never  to  be  forgotten j  as  is  plain  from  D'Ht. 
 jxxi.  19,  8cc.  and  xxxii.  7.  [^)  J-  Ifrr^he's  fcim.at  yi:bs6.  if 
 Mat.  17 ic,  p.  7.  (b)  Gen.x.  <).  (c)  Gn?:. -a.  Ipi.hyu  Jer.  W. 
 Etek.  xxvii=  xxxviii. 
 
the  Regal  Succession.    a7 
 
 gard  to  the  word  of  God,  to  hear  the  children 
 of  this  world  ridiculing  this  natural  and  divine 
 order  of  fucceffion,  as  an  abfurd  opinion  !  a  fa- 
 tal fyftem  !  a  fantallical  fcheme,  i^c.  As  if,  ac- 
 cording to  this  patriarchal  fyftem,  no  prince 
 whatfoever  could  have  a  juft  right  to  government 
 unlefs  he  could  prove  himfclf  to  be  the  '  eldeft 
 '  Ion  of  the  right  branch,  even  from  (a)  Noah?  * 
 or  '  Adarn's  heir  in  a  dire6t  (b)  line  !  '  But  what 
 wifer  fchemes  do  they  give  us  in  the  room  of 
 thefe  ?  Why  j  they  lay  the  foundation  of  all  go- 
 vernment upon  no  firmer  ground  than  a  pretended 
 common  confent,  and  that  abfurdity  of  an  ori- 
 ginal contrad,  herein  before  exploded  :  '  but,  if 
 '  you  ask  them  when,  and  where,  and  by  whom, 
 
 *  or  how  this  pafl  or  covenant  was  made  or  con- 
 
 *  fented  to,  you  will  find  them  as  filent,  or  at 
 '  leaft  fpeak  as  little  to  the  purpoie  as  the  man 
 
 *  in  the  {c)  moon.  * 
 
 §  IX.  I  SHOULD  not  need  to  examine  Nimrod^f 
 the  fuccefilon  or  title  of  Nimrod^  and  «/«'-/'«^'<"». 
 the  other  Kings  of  the  nations  ;  my  prefent  en- 
 quiry being  chiefly  confined  to  the  holy  feed  of 
 Shem.    But,  fince  in  him  we  are  faid  to  find  '  an 
 
 *  intimation  of  the  origin  of  kingly  or  monarchic 
 
 *  cal  (^)  government,  *  I  think  it  may  be  proper, 
 
 E  %  aftef 
 
 [a]  Hoadlf%  ferm.  at  U^rtf.  li  Mar.  170?,  p.  i?,  in  Svp, 
 {J})  f.  Wright's  ftrm.  at  AiUtb.  ly  Mar.  17  19,  p  6.  {c  )  'Fort- 
 r.efs's  ferm.  at  Mar.ch.  9  S'pt.  16^3,  p.  13.  (r/j  fVliJi.  fTipt, 
 polit.  p,  10.  TIds  is  indeed  the  common  opinion;  but  (as  the 
 learned  Sglden  obferves^    '  there  is  realon   enough  to  conjecture, 
 
 *  that  tbc;c  vjcvz  kin?s  alio  Icn^  beioie  both  him  mi  the  flood.' 
 
 6^LU 
 
a8  ^The  Short  History  <?/ 
 
 after  what  I  have  already  faid  on  that  fubje^t, 
 to  obferve,  that  if,  '  at  the  firft,  the  fathers  of  na- 
 «  tions  were  as  Kings,  and  the  eldeft  of  famih'es 
 
 *  as  {a)  princes, '  as  is  own'd  by  the  author  whom 
 Mr.  Whijlon  himfelf  quotes  to  his  purpofe,  then, 
 by  confequence,  the  origin  of  kingly  or  monar- 
 chical government  could  not  be  in  the  perfon 
 of  Nimrod,  nor  from  the  people,  but  from  God 
 only.  No  doubt,  he  was  by  good  right,  and 
 juft  authority,  Lord  or  King  over  his  own  fa- 
 mily, as  the  other  heads  of  families  were :  but, 
 if  he  was  not  content  with  his  own  natural  fove- 
 reignty,  but  enlarg'd  his  dominion,  by  violently 
 invading,  andfeizing  on  the  rights  of  other  lords 
 of  families,  whom  he  thereby  drove  out  or  made 
 fubjedl  to  his  empire,  (as  *tis  generally  fuppos'd) 
 it  was  againft  all  natural  right  -,  and  confequent- 
 ly  can't  be  efteem*d  the  origin  of  kingly  govern- 
 ment, 
 
 S<?Z</.Tit!.ofHon.  1716,  vol.iii,  col.  iro.  Where  having triention'd 
 Cain's  building  a  city,  ^c.  and  quoted  authority  to  prove  that  Adam 
 himfelf  govern'dor  commanded  all  mankind,  as  long  as  he  lived,  ^c. 
 he  proceeds  thus  j  'andbefides  (fays  he)  we  fee  in  thofe  of  the  fol- 
 
 *  lowing  times,  who  have  left  us  fuller  teftimonies  of  particular 
 
 *  forms   of  government,    that  monarchy  hath  continually  been, 
 
 *  and  to  this  day  is,  not  lefs  generally  admitted  and  eftablifli'd  in 
 
 *  all  nations,  than  as  if  it  were  deriv'd  out  of  the  law  of  nature 
 
 *  which  doubtlefs  was  not  lefs  follow 'd  in  thofe  many  ages  before 
 
 *  Nimrod,  than  it  hath  been  fince  him  ; '  ibid.  col.  1 1 1.  Nay,  he 
 afterwards  pofitively  affirms   that,    about  the  time  of  Nimrod^ 
 
 *  there  was   fo  general  a  props garion  of  this  title  of  King  over 
 
 *  the  earth,  that  there  is  Tcarce  a  nation,  whereof  there  is  memo- 
 
 *  ry  in   thtfe  agcj,  without  a  king,  or  prince,  or  monarch  by 
 '  name  affigoed  to  it,'  i^c.  ibid.  coJ.  uy.      («)  Raleigh's  hid 
 fol.  151. 
 
//j^  Reg  AL  Succession.    r(^ 
 
 ment,  but  an  ufurpation  -,  which  our  author  may 
 make  a  precedent  of,  whenever  he  happens  to  have 
 occafion  for  fuch  a  one  !  And  as  to  jiis  fubfequent 
 obfervation,  that  *  this  fetrlement  was  not  made 
 '  by  any  particular   diredion  from  God,  bur  by 
 
 *  intereft,  and  defert,  and  abilities,  and  the  volun- 
 
 *  tary  fubmifllon  of  the  people,  (a)  &i.  '  I  fee  no 
 conrlufion  to  be  drawn  from  thence,  more  natu- 
 ral than  this,  that  fuppofing  a  prince  to  have  in- 
 tereft, and  defert,  and  abilities,  and  the  voluntary 
 fubmiflion  of  the  people  too,  (tho*,  by  the  way, 
 nothing  of  this  appears  In  Nif?irod's  cafe,  but  ra- 
 ther the  contrary  :  for  as  there  is  not  here  any 
 colour  of  proof  that  he  was  chofen  by  the  peo- 
 ple, fo  the  very  phrafe  of  calling  him  a  migbfy 
 hunter,  being    '  a    form   of  fpeech   among  the 
 
 *  Hebrews,  whereby  they  fignify  a  fpoiler  or  op- 
 
 *  prefTor  (h),  '  plainly  implies,  that  he  could 
 hardly  be  fo-much  entitled  to  their  favour-,)  yet, 
 if  he  be  fet  up  without  any  particular  direction 
 from  God,  and  againft  his  written  laws,  as  well 
 as  the  law  of  nature,  he  can  be  but  an  ufurper 
 ftill,  as  Nimrod  was.  And  therefore,  whether  he- 
 were  the  youngeft  fon  of  CuJJj,  as  Mr.  IFInfion 
 {c)  fuppofes,  or,  whether  he  is  mention'd  alone 
 (according  to  St.  Jugujlbie,  and  other  commenta- 
 tors only  as  being  the  mofl:  eminent  perfon,  and 
 to  take  occafion  to  touch  his  tyranny,  I  fhall  not 
 difpute  :    all  that  I  fhall  add,  is  a  remark  of  a 
 
 I  learned 
 
 {a)  Whifl.  fcript.  polif.  p.  10,  II.      (b)  Hity»nrd  igiin^  Dolt- 
 man,  p.  ap,  ;o.     (c)  TFhiJl.  fcript.  polit.  p.  u. 
 
3 o    The  Short  History  of 
 
 learned  modern,  that  *  this  Nimrod  was  for  cer- 
 '  tain  (a)  the  Beltis  of  the  antients  •,  and  this  com- 
 
 *  pellation,  molt  probably,  was  not  originally 
 '  from  his  birth,  bur  was  afterwards  given  him, 
 '  becaufe  of  his  rebellion  againft  Noah,  and  his 
 '  alteration  of  the  patriarchal  way  of  government, 
 
 *  with  the  true  old  religion :  for  he  was  pro- 
 '  perly  Tyannm  fine  t'ltulo  -,  as  could  be  made  ap- 
 '  pear,  on  feveral  accounts,  even  to  demonltra- 
 '  tion  :  whence  he  might  be  called  Bel  [ox  Baal) 
 '  for  his  dominion,  and  Nimrod  for  his  rebellion  ; 
 '  as  the  learned  Dr.  Prideaux  well  (b)  remarks. ' 
 
 However,  that  even  among  the  nations  too,  the 
 fame  authority  was  maintained,  according  to  the 
 law  of  nature,  or  common  confent  of  mankind, 
 will  appear  from  a  few  hints  laid  together,  before 
 we  come  to  the  clofe  of  this  Hiftory  ;  to  which 
 I  refer  the  reader,  whilfl:  I  proceed  here,  with 
 the  fucceffion  of  thofe  who  were  within  the  pale 
 of  the  church  :  among  whom  the  paternal  or 
 patriarchal  power  continu'd,  till  the  Egyptian 
 bondage  -,  where  the  exercife  of  the  patriarchal 
 jurifdiftion  was  intermitted,  only  becaufe  they 
 were  all  in  fubjeclion  to  a  ftronger  prince,  and 
 that  too  in  his  own  country. 
 
 §  X.  But,  to  be  fomewhat  more  particular, 
 Shem  we  find,  is  entitled  the  father  of  all  the  children 
 
 (a)  h\r.  Shuchf or d  [conned: .  vol.  i,  p.  i8i,  191,  ^1:.)  endea- 
 vours to  prove  Belus  rather  the  fucccflbr  ot  Ksmrod :  but 
 tb.it  1  fl.all  leave  to  the  criticks.  (h)  Parker's  bibiioth.bibl.  vol.  i, 
 p.  17  I,  171  j  whsre  he  quotes  FriJeaux's  ccnnc£l.  par.  i.  lib.  ii, 
 p.  100,  edit.  I. 
 
/Z;^  Regal  Succession,      gr 
 
 o/Eber  {a) :  whereby,  the  fcriptiire  informs  j,^^  ^^^ 
 uSf  (as  Sc.  Augitjtine  (b)  obferves)  that  he  cjfion  cf 
 was  reputed  the  patriarch  of  all  that  were  ^"^"'"' 
 to  defend  from  him,  fans,  grandfons,  great  grand- 
 fons,  &c.  And  St.  Jerom  [c)  notes,  that  from  his 
 fons,  who,  upon  the  difperfion,  became  heads, 
 feveral  large  nations  proceeded :  as  from  Elam^ 
 the  Elamites,  princes  of  Perfia  ;  from  Affur,  the 
 Aff^rians ;  from  Arphaxad,  the  Chaldeans ;  from 
 Lud,  the  Lydians  -,  and  from  Aram  the  Syrians 
 (whofe  metropolis  is  Damafus'  ;  all  great  mo- 
 narchies. It  does  not  therefore  feem  very  mate- 
 rial, whether  Shem  or  Japhet  was  the  eldefl  fan 
 of  Noah.  But,  becaufe  fome  people  take  it  for 
 granted,  (and  lay  great  firefs  upon  it,)  thsLiShem 
 was  preferr'd  before  his  elder  brother,  'tis  worth 
 our  notice,  that  the  text  (d)  on  which  their  ob- 
 jeftion  is  grounded,  inflead  of  Shem  the  brother 
 of  Japhet  the  elder  (as  we  have  it  in  our  tranOa- 
 tion)  ouoht  to  be  rendered  Shem  the  elder  brother 
 of  Japhet  (according  to  fome  very  good  criticks  y) 
 fo    that  it  will  be  clear,  that  Shem  #vas   niaximus 
 
 filiiis 
 
 (a)  Gen. -x.  11.  (^)  Civit.Dei,  1. 16,  c.  ?,  coI.4t7;  (c)Qux(i, 
 Hcbr.  col.  ^17.  Briides  which  the  learned  Mr.  Parker  before 
 quoted,  fhews  frRm  good  authorities,  that  from  Gormr  dcfcended 
 the  GiitnerenfesoT  Galat'tans ;  from  MWa/,  the  MetleszndSarma- 
 tians\  ^romjavan,  the  Jonisirisi  from  Tims,  the  Thracians  and 
 Trojans;  from  Canaan,  the  CanaaKitss ;  from  Se^.i,  theSa6eansi 
 fvom  sUon^  the  Sidonians  ;  from  Heber,  \.hzHs brews,  See.  fee  the 
 bibliotheca  biblica  on  Genejii,  compar'd  v/ith  Shtichford's  conne(flio-, 
 vol.  i  p.  i^i,  ^c.  who  has  given  us  a  curious  map  of  J^' feve- 
 ral countries  thus  peopled.     [(I)  Gen.  X.   :i. 
 
3  X    The  SnoRTHiSTORY^y 
 
 fliusNoss,  as  St.  Augtijline  and  others  exprefly  call 
 him.  But,  whether  he  was  the  fame  perfon  with 
 Melthifedec  King  of  Sale?n  (as  Mr,  Selden^  Brough- 
 ton^  and  others  do  afiertj  I  fhall  leave  to  the 
 more  curious  reader's  enquiry. 
 Of  \-  §  XL  In  this  genealogy,  is  plainly 
 bram.  deduc'd  the  defcent  of  (a)  Abram,  from 
 whom  the  ftream  of  fcripture-fuccellion  runs  on 
 in  an  opener  channel,  than  it  did  before  :  and 
 that  he  was  unqueftionably  a  monarch  by  divine 
 right,  appears  from  his  being  exprefly  call'd,  by 
 God  himfcif,  to  polTefs  a  kingdom  entaiPd  upon 
 him  and  his  heirs /or  e-ver  (b). 
 j.^  §  XII.  To  him  fucceeded  Ifaac  his  fon  and 
 
 hdr  of  all  that  he  had  {c).  And  yet  fo 
 indullrious  are  fome  people  to  feek  out  for  ob- 
 jedions  againft  the  doflrine  of  hereditary  fuc- 
 cefllon,  as  to  pretend,  that  the  very  cafe  now  be- 
 fore us  is  a  good  argument  againft  it  ;  becaufe 
 IJJjmael  was  born  before  Ifaac,  tho*  the  latter 
 was  preferr'd  before  him  :  for  the  better  colour- 
 ing of  which  *tis  urg'd,  that  probably  Hagar  was 
 tnarried  to  Abram,  and  her  fon  Ifhmael  w^j  horn 
 in  {d)  wedlock.  But,  fince  ^/zrjZ?  was  undoubtedly 
 married  to  Abra7n^  and  Hagar  (at  beft)  but  pre 
 |>ably  fo,  'tis  no  fufEcient  proof  that  IJhmael  had 
 the  right  of  inheritance  by  primogeniture.    Be- 
 
 fides 
 
 («)  Gen.  xl.  tf>.      (V  G'w.  xii.  i,  &c xlf.  i,   I  <,,  8cc. xv. 
 
 7,gcc. xvii.  8. xxvi  4.     ^Bsvn.s-     (f)  Gf».  xv.  4. 
 
 1 xvii.  ic,,  &C.- xxi.  12. XXXV.   5. xxxvi.  3,   &c. 
 
 id)  rage's  fcrm.  ^Q.Jan.  I'l^,  p.  7,  8. 
 
the  Regal  Succession.      3^ 
 
 fides  the  holy  fcripture  itfelf  exprefly  calis  Ifaac 
 the  onel-j  fen  of  {a)  Abraha?n:  which  mud  be  un- 
 derftood  of  the  only  Ton  bom  in  wedlock  ;  be- 
 caufe  he  had  feveral  other  Ions  Cbefides  Ifbmael) 
 born  oi  (h)  concubines,  meaning  for  certain  thofe 
 born  oiHagar  and  Keturah,  according  to  a  learned 
 (c)  annotacor :  and  moreover,  the  Angel  calling 
 Hagar  ftill  Sarab^s  (d)  maid,  and  commanding 
 her  to  fuhmit  herfelf  to  her  77iijlrefsy  feems  plain- 
 ly to  prove  the  fame.  But  fuppofing  IfJjmael 
 had  been  the  undoubted  natural  heir,  yet  'tis 
 plain,  that  Ifajc  v/as  prefcrr'd  by  the  exprefs 
 revelation  and  appointment  of  God  himfelf, 
 who  is  the  only  abfolute  fovereign  over  all 
 rights  and  laws  whatfoever  :  and  therefore,  tho* 
 we  dare  not  prefume  to  queflion  the  {e)  legaUiy 
 of  God^s  own  aof{Yj\itn  thus  manifeftly  reveal'd  ;j 
 yet  neither  does  it  feem  to  us  a  fufficient  warrant 
 to  do  the  like,  without  the  like  exprefs  authori- 
 ty from  God,  (any  more  than  the  known  cafes 
 of  Abraham  and  the  Ifraelites  would  warrant  us 
 to  facrifice  a  fon,  or  rob  our  neighbours  !;  and 
 much  lefs  therefore   can  it  be   agreed,  that   '  a 
 
 *  divine  example  is  not  only  a  fufficient  juftifica- 
 
 *  tion  of  our  acflions,  but  is  fct  down  for  our 
 '  imitation  ;  and  therefore,  iiot  to  imitate  it 
 «  would  be  (f)  fin, '  as  fome  new  cafuifts  would 
 perfuade  us.  Ifaac's  cafe  however  affords  us  a 
 much  better  argument  againlt  the  advocates  for 
 
 F  rcfi- 
 
 (4)  Gen.  xxi;.  2,  16.  (i)  G^w.xxv.  6,  (c)  Biblioh.bib.  p.  538, 
 (J)Geff.xv.  8,9.  (p)  Fp^ge's  fcrra.  lo  7« /.  17  i<,  P-j  7j  ^. 
 Cp  BUkeway'sieim,  171s,  p.;  5. 
 
:^4-    The  Short  History  of 
 
 f efidance  :  one  of  v.hom  having  obferv'd,  that 
 <  in  all  relations,  where  the  foundation  is  taken 
 '  away,  the  relation  and  the  obligations  arifing 
 •^  out  of  it  are  deftroy'd, '  proceeds  to  argue  thus  i 
 
 *  The  relation  of  children  to  a  parent  arifes  out 
 
 *  of  his  conveying  being  to  them :    but,  if  he 
 
 *  goes  about  to  defcroy  that  being,  they  are  ac- 
 «  quitted  when  they  defend  {a.  themfelves  ; '  that 
 is  to  fliy,  (if  he  means  any  thing    by  a  forcible 
 refiftance.     But,  to  fuppcfe  the  very  worft ;  in 
 cafe  a  parent   goes  about  to  deftroy  the   being 
 of  his  child,  does  that  take  away  the  relation  be- 
 tween them,  and  deflroy   the   obligation  arifing 
 out  of  it?    He  durft  not  fay  that:  and  therefore 
 fhuffles  it  off  with  an  apology  for  felt- defence  ; 
 which  no  body  denies,  provided  there  be  no  in- 
 jury or  violence  done  to  the  parent.     But  can  the 
 child,  even  in  fuch  a  cafe  of  the  laft  necefHiy,  be 
 acquitted,  if  he  kills  his  parent  for  his  own  de- 
 fence ?  Surely,  if  ever  any,  Ifaac  might  have  thus 
 been  acquitted :  and  yet  *tis  plain,  that  tho'  he 
 was  at  leafl  three  and  thirty  years  of  age,  and 
 fo  capable  of  making  Kh^  refiftance   againil  his 
 aged  father,  when  alone  with  him,  he  did   not 
 think  himfelf  at  liberty  to  refifl  his  authority,  but 
 fignaliz'd  his  love  of  duty  above  his  own  {c)  life  ; 
 for  which   he  is  juflly  extoU'd  by  the  primitive 
 fathers,  as  chufing  to  be  a  martyr,  rather  than  a 
 rebel.     And  if  the  authority  of  our  natural  pa- 
 rents 
 
 [ft)  S'^rnet's  firm,  at  5«///(5.  j*  Nbv.  17^'-,  p.  lo,  'n  Svo. 
 (i)  Hozvsl's  hifl.  of  the  bib.  vol.  i,  1716,  p.  54..  (c)  Biblioth. 
 bib.  p.  484. 
 
the  Reg  A  I.  Succession,      g;- 
 
 rents  be  fo  facred  and  irrefiftible,  it  feems  not 
 eafy  to  fhew,  how  that  of  our  natural  Tovercign 
 fhould  become  lefs  fo  -,  tho*  fome  of  our  modern 
 dodtors  would  make  children  and  fubjefls,  both 
 witnefles,  jurors,  judges  and  executioners,  in  their 
 own  caufe. 
 
 §  XIII.  To  Ifaac  his  eldeft  fon  Efau  was  heir 
 {a\  apparent  :  but,  as  he,  by  his  own  a6t, 
 and  that  too,  that  the  purpofe  of  God,  ac-  ^^^^ 
 cording  to  elsSlion  7mght  h)  Jiand,  did  transfer  his 
 birth»right  to  his  younger  brother  Jacob,  there  is 
 no  reafon  to  queflion  the  lawfulnefs  of  the  alie- 
 nation. Yet  we  do  not  read,  that  ever  Efau 
 paid  any  perfonal  fervice,  or  own'd  any  fub- 
 jeftion  to  Jacob:  but  on  the  contrary  we  lee» 
 that  Jacob  mecung  him,  bowed  himfelf  to  the  ground 
 [even  times,  calling  Efau  his  lord,  and  himfelf  his 
 fervant  (c) ;  in  token  of  a  natural  allegiance  by 
 birth,  even  after  his  fale  of  the  birth-right.  And 
 fo  we  read  of  eight  kings  of  the  poflerity  of 
 Efau,  who  reigned  in  the  land  of  Edom,  before 
 there  reigned  any  King  over  the  children  of  (d  Ifrael ; 
 whofe  fucceflbrs  were  conquered  by  David  (e)  of 
 the  houfe  of  judah,  as  had  been  if)  foretold  by 
 the  lord  :  and  thofe  were  fo  far  from  owning  any 
 fubjeftion  to  the  poflerity  of  Jacob,  that  they  re- 
 fufed  them  a  pajfage  through  their  (g)  dominions. 
 
 But,  be  that  as   it  will,  we  may  learn  by  tiiis 
 
 cafe,  that  Jacob  was  not  poffefs'd  of  the  prero- 
 
 F  2  gatives 
 
 (a)  Ccn.  XXV.  ^^,  &c.  [b]  Rem.  xi.  il.  (c)  Gen.  xxxiii. 
 (J)  Gen.  xxxvi.  31.  and  i  Chroft.  i.  ^i.  (e)  i  Siirf}.  viii.  I4. 
 (f]  Gtn  x'ix.  8.    {g)  Numb.  xx.  m. 
 
3(5    The  Short  History  ^y 
 
 gatives  of  primogeniture  meerly  by  the  provi- 
 dence of  God  (as  certain  people  affefl  to  call  it, 
 meaning  his  fecrct  will,  without,  or  contrary  to 
 his  revealed  will, j  but  by  the  exprefs  revelation 
 of  God,  attended  with  his  elder  brother's  grant; 
 and  that  too  confirm'd  by  their  natural  fuperiour, 
 the  patriarch  Ifaac  himfelf.  In  which  a6l  of  ra- 
 tification, 'tis  very  remarkable,  that  the  patriarch, 
 pronouncing  the  blefling  upon  his  firft^born  (as 
 he  intended  it,)  faid,  he  lord  over  th'j  brethren^  and 
 let  thy  mother's  fom  low  down  to  thee  [a) ^  &c.  And 
 tho'  he  was  afterwards  convinc'd,  that  he  had  mi- 
 ftaken  the  perfon,  yet  when  he  fays  of  Jacob,  who 
 was  then  confirm'd,  in  the  prerogative,  I  have  made 
 him  thy  lord,  and  all  his  brethren  have  I  given  to  hifn 
 for  ferv ants  {h),  &c.  itihews  what  was '  ftridly  and 
 <  diredly  the  jus  primogenili,  the  right  of  the  firft- 
 *  born  (c), '  tho'  then  alienated  as  aforefaid. 
 However,  as  this  purpofe  was  manifeftly  prior  to 
 either  of  their  births,  and  confequently  (as  the 
 apoftle  argues)  before  they  had  done  any  good 
 or  evil  (d),  it  is  plain,  that  God*s  dealing  in 
 the  cafe  can't  truly  be  faid  to  have  been 
 preponderated  by  perfonal  virtue,  goodnefs  and 
 defert  e,,  unlefs  v/e  could  fuppofe,  that  Jacob 
 was  perfonally  virtuous,  good  and  deferving  be- 
 fore he  was  born,  or  that  he  was  capable  oi pro- 
 curing by  his  good  behaviour,  or  his  brother  o^ for- 
 feiting 
 
 (a)  Ge;!?.  xxvii.  29.    (b) vcr.  37^     (c)BibHoth.  bib.p.;-84. 
 
 (</)  Ro/w.  ix.  II.    (<')  Wh'ifi,  icript.  polit.p.  11,  13. 
 
tide  Regal  SuccEasieN.    37 
 
 jilting  b-j  his  ill  condu^^  before  either  of  them 
 had  done  any  good  or  evil :  neither  did  it  pleafe 
 God,  that  his  elder  brother  (even  wicked  Efau) 
 fhould  be  adually  defeated  of  the  blefllng,  with- 
 out his  own  motion  and  voluntary  ad  ;  which  was 
 truly  and  properly  an  abdication  ('there  being  no 
 fufficient  force  {a)  put  upon  him,  to  oblige  him 
 thereto,)  concurrent  with  the  purpofe  of  God. 
 So  much  did  he  favour  the  claim  of  birth- right,  as 
 a  foundation  for  civil  fuperiority  and  dominion, 
 contrary  to  that  author's  obfervation. 
 
 §  XIV.  A  s  the  birth-right  {h)  was  thus 
 vefted  in  'Jacob  by  the  Lord,  fo  was  it  af- 
 terwards tranflated,  by  the  fame  authority,  from 
 Reuben,  his  eldeft  fon,  to  Judah  the  fourth  {c) ; 
 tho'  Judah  himfelf  was  an  inceftuous  perfon,  as 
 evidently  as  Reuben  ;  fo  that  his  dominion  was 
 not  founded  in  grace !  neither  can  it  be  faid 
 with  any  propriety,  that  inward  and  perfonal  vir- 
 tues obtain'd  for  Judah,  what  his  elder  brother 
 
 had 
 
 («)  Thus  the  famous  Bifhop  Burne*  explains  it,  when  (fpsaking 
 of  the  late  King  fames,)  he  fays,   *  certainly  the  withdrawing, 
 
 *  upon  the  apprehenfionef  danger  to  his  perfon,  could  be  no  more 
 called  an  abdicarion,  than  King  Charles  the  fecond's  going  be- 
 
 *  yond  the  feas  uhcr  Worcejitr  fight.  '  Serm.  at  Salisb.<)  Navem. 
 1710,  p.  12,  in  8vo.  (i)  Mr.  Sh^ckford  mentions  a  tradition 
 among  the  J  eves,  that '  before  the  tabernacle,  whilft  private  alrars 
 
 *  were  in  ufe,  the  eldeft  or  firft-born  was  the  facrificer  or  pried: 
 
 *  of  the  family, '  (when  the  father  himfdf  was  not  with  them :) 
 
 *  and  it  is  for  this  reafon,  that  Zfnu  was  called  prophnfie,  {Htir. 
 t  xii.  16  )  for  felling  his  birth-right,  becaufe  hefhewed  himfelf  to 
 
 *  have  but  little  value  for  that  religious  office  whicb  was  anncx'd 
 
 *  toit.'    Shuckf.  conned. p.  196.     [c]  Geu.rdx.  8. —  xxxnii.  iS- 
 
gS   jTVj^  Short  History  ^ 
 
 had  forfeited  for  his  zvickednefs  (a) :  unlefs  Jtidah^s 
 defiling  his  daughter  in  law,  were  a  virtue,  and  a 
 meritorious  ad:  in  him,  by  the  fame  law  as  Reu- 
 heii's  defiling  his  father's  concubine  was  an  un- 
 pardonable fin  !  And  befides,  fo  far  is  this  cafe 
 from  being  an  evidence  to  the  prejudice  of  the 
 primogeniture,  (as  our  popular  advocates  would 
 fain  perfuade  usj  that  this  very  forfeiture,  which 
 they  urge  againft  it,  plainly  implies  a  natural 
 right  to  the  preheminence  inherent  in  the  eldeft 
 by  birth,  till  fuch  forfeiture  ;  for  a  man  cannot 
 forfeit  any  thing  that  he  had  not  a  prior  right  to. 
 And  fo  doubtlefs  Mr.  IVhiJlon  himfelf  underftood 
 it,  when  he  faid,  that  Jofeph,  '  had  a  double  por^ 
 
 *  tion  allotted  him  by  his  father,  in  the  divifion 
 
 *  of  the  \?ir\do^  Canaan, — .  which  indeed  fhould 
 
 *  have  belonged  to  Reuben  the  firft  born  ib).  * 
 And  accordingly  we  find,  that  Reuben  is  fo  far 
 favour 'd  on  account  of  his  primogeniture,  that 
 he,  as  the  fird-born,  is  flill  honoured  by  their 
 father,  as  his  might,  the  beginning  of  his  ftrength, 
 the  excellency  of  dignity-j  and  the  excellency  of  fower 
 (c)  j  the  two  peculiar  chara^ers  o'i  {ovtxti^vw^ ,  -as 
 the  learned  archbifhop  f^ii  Oy^jfr  calls  them,)  and 
 in  regard  thereof,  he  and  his  fons  are  ufually  firft 
 named  in  the  [e)  genealogies,  and  that  too  with 
 a  reafon  grounded  even  in  nature. 
 
 But  here,  by  the  way,  I  muft  make  a  ftand,  to 
 admire  at  fome  men,  who,  v/ith  feeming  gravity, 
 
 tell 
 
 («)  Wh-4  Scnpt.  polit.  p.  M'  >  i"-  C^>  ^'°'^-  P-  ^^-  (0  ^^«- 
 xlix.  ;.  {')Ujher's  power  of  the  prince,  &:.  p.  14,  lyiO- 
 (e)  Exod.n.  14.    Numb.  i.  5,  ^o.     i  Chron.  v.  i. 
 
the  Regal  Succession     39 
 
 tell  us,  that «  a  right  by  law  Ihould  be  (if  pofll- 
 '  blej  more  precious  to  us  than  a  right  by  lac- 
 '  ceflion,  fince  fortuitous  birth  giveth  a  right  by 
 '  fuccelTion,  but  'tis  the  addition  of  heroic  merit  to 
 
 *  princely  birth  which  recommends  to  a  right  by 
 
 *  [a)  law  : '    and  would  perfuade  us,  that    '  God 
 
 *  himfelf  puts  little  value  upon  primogeniture, 
 '  or  the  like  accidental  privileges,  even  in  mat- 
 '  ters  of  government,  in  comparifon  of  thofe  in- 
 '  ward  and  perfonal  virtues,  which  make  men 
 «  worthy  of,  and  fit  for  fuch  important  ih)  eni- 
 '  ployments :  *  and  pretjCnd  to  fornewhat  of  a 
 national  ?ight^  as  being  more  divine  than  that  of 
 (c)  nature.  As  if  the  primogeniture  of  children 
 was  meerly  fortuitous  or  accidental !  or  as  if  the 
 author  of  nature  himfelf  did  not  know  better  than 
 we  (who  are  apt  to  judge  according  to  our  own 
 weak  notions,  firong  prejudices,  or  partial  inte- 
 refts,)  which  child  would  be  bell  fitted  for  fuch 
 imployments  as  he  defigns  them  to  by  their  re- 
 fpcdive  birth  and  fuccefiion !  or  as  if  there 
 could  be  any  right  more  divine  than  that  of  na- 
 ture j  except  in  cafes  where  God  himfelf  has  been 
 pleafed  to  maniieft  his  interpofition,  to  over-rule 
 that  by  his  exprefs  revelation.  Surely,  fince  chil- 
 dren are  an  heritage  of  the  Lord,  and  the  fruit  cf 
 the  zvomb  is  bis  id'  reward,  their  primogeniture 
 ought  not  to  be  cali'd  fortuitous  or  accidental, 
 by  men  who  regard  the  holy  fcripture:  at  leafc, 
 they  might  have  learnt  from  a  late  prelate  (whofe 
 
 (/f)  W.  Stephens's  ferm.  before  the  L.  Mayor,  t.^f.  1 6  ^pr.  i  690. 
 p.za.  in4to,  (i>]  ^/'A?/?.  fcript.  polir.  p.  I'j.  {c)  P<?jtMcrm. 
 20  Jafi,  i7M>  Ep-  ticdic.    (dj  Pfal,  cxxvii.  5. 
 
40     The  Short  History  of 
 
 judgment  is  of  great  authority  with  them  on  other 
 occafions,)  that    '  there  is  nothing   more  facred 
 
 *  among  men,  than  a  right  of  inheritance  :  but 
 
 *  for  the  derivation  of  that   right  to  their   per- 
 
 *  fons,  they  owe  it  only  to  God;  for  it  comes 
 «  to  them  by  their  birth,  and  they  ov/e  their  birth 
 <  only  to  {a)  God.  *  But,  to  return  to  the  cafe  of 
 Reuben-,  tho*  his  unnatural  tranigrcflion  render'd 
 him  juftly  liable,  before  God,  to  a  forfeiture  of 
 his  natural  privileges,  yet  wc  find,  that  he  was  not 
 defeated  of,  or  excluded  from,  his  hereditary  right, 
 by  his  brethren  or  neighbours,  much  Icfs  by  his 
 children,  fubjedls  and  fervants,  but  by  his  father 
 and  lawful  fovereign :  and  that  by  the  immediate 
 infpiration  of  God  Almighty  himfelf,  who  ex- 
 prefly  entail'd  the  fceptre  upon  Judah,  to  conti- 
 nue in  his  heirs  till  Shiloh  \h)  Ihould  come  ;  fo 
 that  this  cafe  can  be  of  no  ufe  to  the  patrons 
 of  popular  fchemcs. 
 
 §  XV.  Afte  R  this,  comes  in  ano- 
 ther of  Mr.  Whijion^s  objedlions  againft 
 the  divine  right  of  primogeniture;  tho*  I  need 
 but  juft  mention  it.  He  alTerts,  that  *  Jofepb 
 '  was  preferr'd  before  the  reft,  on  account  of 
 '  his  goodnefs,    and   particularly   his   unfpotted 
 
 *  chaftity,  by  divine  providence  ("<:),  iiJ'r. '  I  grant* 
 
 that 
 
 («)  B';fhop  Lloyd's  difc.  of  God's  wavs  of  difpofing  of  Kingd. 
 i/Spi.p.  i6,in  4to.  {i)  Gen.  xlix.  lo.  Shiloh  was  our  bkfTed 
 Saviour,  of  whom  this  was  an  acknowledg'd  prophefy.  Now 
 this  fceptre  was  given  to  David  of  tlic  tribe  of  JuJah,  i  Chron. 
 xxviii.  4.  and  ordain'dto  continue  hereditary,  from  Sc/owow  down- 
 wards, in  the  eldeft  Ton;  which  was  the  known  rule  JQ  that  king- 
 dom,    {c)  Script,  polit.  p.  15. 
 
/Zv  Regal'Successio  N.  41 
 
 that  hischaftity  was  very  eminent,  and  that  he  was 
 highly  favour'd  by  God  Almighty  :  but  cannot  fay, 
 that  he  was  by  divine  Providence  preferr'd  on  that 
 particular  account,  without,  in  fome  meafu.e, 
 impeaching  the  divine  right  oi  Solomon^  and  many 
 other  princes,  in  all  ages,  lefs  exemplary  for  that 
 excellent  virtue. 
 
 §  XVI  But,  to  proceed.  When  Jacoh,  by 
 divine  infpiration,  preferr'd  the  younger  ^ 
 of  Jofeph^s  children,  before  the  elder, 
 their  father  was  difpleas*d.  For  he  was  fenfible, 
 the  law  and  order  of  nature  could  not  be  alter'd 
 by  any  human  power,  and  he  did  not  then  per- 
 ceive, that  what  his  father  did  proceeded  from 
 the  Lord :  And  therefore  he  held  up  bis  father*^ 
 hand,  to  remove  it  from  Ephraim's  head  to  Manaf- 
 feh's  head',  and  Jofeph  y^fii  unto  his  father.  Not  fo, 
 7nf  father !  for  this  is  the  firfl-horn,  pit  thy  right 
 hand  upon  his  head  {a) ;  which  plainly  fhews  us 
 the  great  regard  that  was  due  to  the  primogeni- 
 ture in  thofe  days,  and  that  the  law  of  nature 
 and  natural  rights,  was  the  fame  then,  as  it  wa§ 
 before,  and  ftill  continues. 
 
 §  XVII.  Now,  this  law  of  nature  is  indeed  the 
 eternal  law  of  the  Creator,  infus'd  into  xke  tav 
 the  heart  of  the  creature,  at  the  time  "f  ^■'*^»^^- 
 of  the  creation  :  by  which  law  mankind  were  go- 
 vern*d  two  thoufand  years,  before  any  laws  were 
 written  ;  whereof  the  apollle  fays,  the  Gentiles 
 which  have  not  the  law,  do,  by  nature,  the  things 
 
 G  con- 
 
 ^a)  f..cri.  xlviii.   17,   i  2. 
 
4T    TZ/'i?  Short  'History  of 
 
 contained  in  the  law  •,  ihefe^  having  not  the  law,  are 
 a  law  unto  themfehes  (a). 
 
 Thus,  in  a  word,  nor  only  Adam,  but  all  the 
 fuccecding  patriarchs,  as  well  before,  as  after  the 
 flood,  had,  by  this  law  of  nature,  loyal  autho- 
 rity over  their  refpeftive  children,  and  exercifed 
 kingly  power,  in  full  and  ample  manner.  For 
 fo  we  find  them  raifing  armies  i  making  folemn 
 treaties  of  peace  ;  fending  fo.  mal  embaffies  on 
 negotiations  of  marriage  ;  adjudging  oIiend.TS 
 to  death  -,  and  granting  pardons  afcer  fuch  con- 
 demnation (b) :  and,  \h  remarkable,  that  in 
 Abrahain's  treaty,  with  the  fons  of  Heth,  for  a  bu- 
 rying-place  for  Sarah,  they  ilile  him  a  migbt'^ 
 prince  {c)  •,  as  indeed  he  was. 
 
 What  has  been  here  faid,  was  well  fumm'd  up 
 by  an  author,  who  had  formerly  been  juftly  cen- 
 fur'd,  for  what  he  had  partially  written  in  favour 
 of  fome  pretended  privileges  of  the  people.  *  The 
 «  original  law  of  nature  (fays  he),  as  all  politicians 
 
 *  and  divines  affert,  and  the  fcripture  manifefts, 
 '  at  firft  gave  every  father  a   magidratical  and 
 
 *  judicial  rule,  power,  over  his  children,  progeny, 
 'family,  and  made  him  a  king,  prince,  lord 
 '  over  them,  without  either  their  choice  or  call : 
 '  the  father,  and  firtt-born  of  the  family,  being 
 
 *  both  the  king,  prince,  lord  over  it,  and  prieft: 
 '  to  it,  from  the  creation,  till  the  law  was  given ; 
 '  as  is  generally  acknov;ledg'd   by  all   divines  ; 
 
 *  as  God  himfelf  is  king  over  all  the  earth,  world, 
 
 '  as 
 
 (;.')  Rom.  ii.  i^.  (ff)  Gen,  x:V. ::xi,  ;i.  — xrivi.  31, 
 
 • — xx:v,  1.  —  xxxviii.  14,  z6.         (r;  G.'-r-j.  xxiii.    6. 
 
/^^  Regal  Succession.    4.3 
 
 «  as  Creator  and  father  (a)  thereof*.  And  the  ce- 
 lebrated Mr.  Selden^  in  fewer  words,  tells  us, 
 that  '  civil  fociety  beginning  firft  in  particular 
 *  families,  under  oeconomick  rule,  reprefentmg 
 '  what  is  now  a  commonwealth,  had,  in  its  ftate, 
 '  the  husband,    father  and  mafter,  as  ■,}))  king,' 
 
 Since  then  'tis  fo  evident,  that  all  the  patri- 
 archs had  this  regal  power,  what  hinders,  but 
 that  they  fhould  be  efte.emed  kings,  ro  alJ  intents 
 andpurpofes?  nay,  and  as  abfolute  too,  as  any 
 have  been  fmce  ? 
 
 If  there  yet  remains  any  doubt  of  it,  let  us 
 hear  the  Lord  Chief  Jufbice  Coke  (that  great  ora- 
 cle of  the  law  !)  who  afiures  us,  from  moil  unex- 
 ceptionable authorities,  that  '  certain  it  is,  that 
 '  before  judicial,  or  municipal  laws  were  [c) 
 '  made,  kings  did  decide  caufes  according  to  na- 
 '  tural  equity,  and  were  not  tied  to  any  rule  or 
 '  formality  ot  law,  but  did  dare  jura  d  :  that 
 '  magiitracy  and  government  are  of  nature  [e-. : 
 '  that  it  appeareth  by  demonflrative  reafon,  that 
 '  ligeance,  faith  and  obedience  of  the  fubjed  to 
 '  the  foveraign,  was  before  any  municipal  or  ju- 
 '  dicial  laws  :  i.  For  that  government  and  fubjec- 
 '  tion  were  long  before  any  municipal  or  judicial 
 *  laws  i  2.  For  that  it  had  been  in  vain  to  have 
 G  2  '  pre- 
 
 (a)  Trynn's  plea  for  the  lords,  p.  lo,  v^here  he  proves  al!  rh:s 
 by  the  authorities  of  Arijiotle,  Boelinus,  Field,  SdJen,  and  the  holy 
 fcriptures.  [(>)  Selden's  works,  torn.    3.  col.  917.         (c)  Viz. 
 
 For  two  thoufand  years,  before  Mofes's  timej  as  before  in  p.  4I. 
 (d)  Coke's  reports,  part- 7. />''j'?'3/f?i,  C-j/w/'scafe,  6.Jac.  i.  fol.  13, 
 and  17,  b.        (c)  Uid.  fol.  15. 
 
44-   7^/^^  Sh  oRT  History  ^ 
 
 '  prefcrib'd  laws  to  any  but  to  fuch  as  ow'd  obe 
 
 *  dience,  faith  and  ligeance  before,  in  refpedt 
 '  whereof  they  were  bound  to  obey  and  obferve 
 '  them  (a) :  that  this  is  within  that  command- 
 '  ment  of  the  moral  law,  honora  ■patrem ;  which 
 '  doubtiefs  doth  extend  to  him  that  is  -pater  patricc 
 '  {l) :  that,  to  this  pater  patria:,  this  fovereign 
 prince  by  birth,  a  true  and  faithful  obedience  of 
 the  fubjed  is  due,  by  the  law  of  nature  -,  and  *  an 
 '  incident  infeparable  to  every  fubjed ;  for,  as 
 «  foon  as  he  is  born  he  oweth,  by  birthright,  11- 
 «  geance  and  obedience  to  his  foveraign  *  (c) : 
 And  that,  fuch  as  fhe  fays)  is  without  limitation^ 
 condition,  bounds,  or  referve  [d)  :  that  this  allegi- 
 ance is  due  to  the  King  ;  and  to  him  only,  and 
 (<?)  always  -,  and  that  in  regard  of  his  natural  per- 
 fon  C/),  and  not  by  reafon  of  his  ig)  crown : 
 that  this  law  of  nature  is  part  of.  the   law   *  of 
 
 *  Engla7id  [h) ;  where  the  King  holdeth  the  king- 
 '  dom,  by  birthright  inherent,  by  defccnt  from 
 
 *  the  blood  royal,  whereupon  fuccefTion  doth  at- 
 <  tend:  and   therefore,  it  is  ulually  faid,  to  the 
 
 *  King,  his  heirs,  and  fucceffors ;  wherein  heirs 
 '  is  firfl  named,  and  fuccelTor  is  attendant  upon 
 
 '  heirs : 
 
 (»;  Ibid.         [b)  Fol.  ii,b.         (c)  Ibid.  fol.  4,  b.  12.  b.  and 
 13.  {d)  Ibid.  fol.  10.  Ligeantin  namralis  fiullii  claujlris  cotr- 
 
 c'tur,  nullis  metis  refrAnasur,  nnllis  finibus  fremitur.  (e)  ibid. 
 fok  12.  (/)  Itid.  fo!.  10.  {g)  Ibid  fol.  II.  This  was  the 
 damnable  aid  damned  opinion  (as  our  author  calls  it)  of  the  Spftt- 
 cers,  upon  which  they  inferred  execrable  and  deteftabls  principles 
 (like  fome  of  thofe  ixicntion'd  in  §  i.) ;  all  which  -wen  condemned 
 by  two  parliaments,  under  K.  EJw.  II.  and  Edw.  III.  (h)  Ibid. 
 fol.  4,  b.  and  i,  b. 
 
/Z?^  Reg  AL  Succession.    45' 
 
 *  heirs :  and  yet  in  our  ancient  books,  fecceflion 
 
 *  and  fuccefibr    are    taken   for  hereditance  and 
 
 *  heirs —  :  but  the  Title  is  by  defcent.     (For  ex- 
 
 *  ampIeJ  by  Queen  Elizaheth*s  death,  the  crown 
 
 *  and  kingdom  of  Etigland  defcended  to  his  rrta- 
 '  jefty  (King  James,  tho*  then  out  of  this  kingdom)  : 
 
 *  and  he  was.  fully  and  abfolutely  thereby  King, 
 
 *  without  any  cflential  ceremony,  or  aft,  to  be 
 '  done  ex  poji  faff 0  ;  for  coronation  is  but  a  royal 
 
 *  ornament,    and  outward  folemnization  of  the 
 
 *  royal  defcent,  but  no  part  of  the  title  '  (a;  : 
 that  fuch    •  allegiance,  being  due  by  the  law  of 
 
 *  nature,  is  immutable,   inherent,  and  infepara- 
 
 *  ble  ;  and  cannot  be  refpited,  alter'd  or  chang'd, 
 '  much  lefs  taken  away  (^/  'i 
 
 This 
 
 {a)  iB'td.  fol.  10.  b.  As  was  clearly  refolded  by  all  the  judges 
 of  EngUndj  in  the  cafe  of  ^^''Atfitt  and  Clarke,  i  jfac  i .  And  ap- 
 peareth  evidently  by  infinite  precedents  and  book-cales  (here  cited 
 fol  II.)  by  which  it  raaoifcftly  appearetb,  that  by  the  laws  of 
 'EngUr.d  there  can  be  no  interregnum  within  the  fame.  And  {^> 
 Dr.  Burnet  fays,  of  the  form  of  the  coronation  of  K.  £</»-  VI. 
 
 *  he  being  declared  the  rightful  and  undoubted  heir,  both  by  the 
 
 *  laws  of  God  arid  man,  they  (the  people)  were  defir'd  to  give 
 '  their  good  wills  and  aflcnts  to  the  fame,   as  by  their  duty  cf 
 
 *  allegiance  they  were  bound  to  do.*  Bum.  hift.  reform,  vol.  i, 
 fo!.  13.  Which  further  illuilratcs  that  true  reading  of  Sr.  Rob. 
 Holbourne  upon  the  ftatute  of  treafons ;  who  fays,  tht  King  is 
 crown' d  bicaufe  he  is  a  King,  and  not  a  King  becaufe  he  is 
 erowfi'd.  (h)  Coke'i  Rep.  as  before,  fol.  4,  b.  7,  b.  ti.b.  i5,b. 
 Upon  thcfc  grounds  Dr.  Story  was  convidlcd  in  Q^  Elizabeth's 
 time,  tho*  he  pleaded,  that  he  had  tranjlated  his  allegtttnce  to  the 
 K.  of  Spairiy  and  therefore  was  not  her  fubjedt.  *  But  this  being 
 '  contrary  to  his  natural  allegiance,  which  he  could  never  fliake 
 
 •  off. 
 
4^*    The  Short  History  of 
 
 This  quotation,  from  fo  great  an  aflfertor  of 
 the  fubjefts  privileges  and  in  a  cafe  too,  which 
 was  'as  elaborately,  iubftantially,  and  judicioufly 
 
 *  argu'd,  by  the  lord  chancellor  and  all  the  judges 
 
 *  of  Englafid^    (none  of  which,  I  believe,    was 
 
 *  thought   to  be  popifhly-affedled)  as  ever  was 
 
 *  (^)any':  and  which  has  this  peculiar  to  it,  that 
 
 *  no  one  opinion,  in  all  our  books,  is  againfl: 
 '  this  judgment, '  [h)  cannot  need  an  apology  ef- 
 pecially  to  our  lawyers,  (among  whom  'tis  a 
 maxim,  that  no  man  ought  to  think  himfelj  wifer 
 than  the  laws:)  lince  it  has  given  us  fo  clear  a 
 light  into  the  law  of  nature  Cby  which  mankind 
 were  originally  govern'd),  in  relation  to  the  pa- 
 ternal and  regal  authority  of  the  patriarchs,  which, 
 has  been  fo  prophanely  and  abfurdly  ridicul'd  ; 
 and  of  which  I  may  fay,  as  Dr.  Sherlock  faid  of 
 
 non- 
 
 *  off,  he  was  found  guilty  of  treafon,  and  executed':  As  'tis  rela- 
 ted by  the  fame  Dr.  Burmt ;  ("who  had  good  reafon  to  Hudy  this 
 point.)  Hifi.  Reform,  vol.  a.  fol.  396.  For  'cis  rsuodiy  afisrted,  as 
 wcllby  divines  as  lawyers,  that  a  natural  bcrnfubjedt  'can  no  more 
 
 *  diflblve,  change  or  cransrer  this  obligation,  by  a  fubfequent  pro- 
 '  tcftarion  of  his  obedience  to  a  prince  or  ftate,  other  than  his  na- 
 
 «  tural,  than  he  could,  afore  he  came  into  the   worid,    chufe  of . 
 
 *  what  parents  he   would  descend,  the  country  where,  and  the 
 
 *  dominion  under  which  he  would  make  his  entrance  into  it. ' 
 TitzWdiiam^sk^m.  9.  Sept.  16??  3,  p.  16.  See  alfo  the  Act  of 
 Succeffton ^ik'd  in  Scotland^  ij  jiug.  16S1,  printed  mDi.  Hickes's 
 pref.  to  Jov'tun,  16S3.  All  which  may  fufficiently  fliew  the  igno- 
 rance of  Mr.  Rob^Tleming  (5mongft  other  of  the  like  ftamp,^ 
 who  never  yet  heard  of  any  fuch  method  of  reafoning  from  thg 
 law  of  nature,  ^c.  Hcred.  Rrght  from  diin  xoNero,  171 7,  p.  i<;. 
 
 [a]  Coke's  Rep.  as  before,  fol.  5,  b.  See  alfo  Moore's  Report  of 
 the  Pofimti,  fol.  790"        (^)  CcA-.;,  ibid.  fol.  z3. 
 
//:?d' Regal  Succession.      47 
 
 non-refiftance,  that  it  is  not  confuted,  hut  laught 
 out  of  countenance  (a).  Upon  fuch  and  fo  many 
 great  authorities,  we  may  without  offence  pre- 
 fume,  that  a  modern  prelate  was  miftaken,  when 
 he  exprefs'd  fo  many  terrible  fears  of  the  tenden- 
 cy of  thefe  principles,  and  venturM  out  of  his 
 element,  to  'affirm  of  fjch  ftate-maxims  as  thefe 
 «  are,  that  if  they  mufl:  be  efpous'd,  and  are  to 
 
 *  be  put  in  execution,  they'll  turn  all  the  govern- 
 
 *  ments  in  the  world  upfide  (J?j  down  ' :  whereas, 
 'tis  plain,  thofe  judges  were  convinc'd,  that  fuch 
 maxims  were  the  only  way  to  fet  government  firm 
 upon  its  juft  bottom.  Bur  whether  we  are  bound 
 in  charity  to  the  dead,  to  conclude,  that  the 
 learned  Dr.  Kennet  was  only  miftaken,  when  he 
 infinuated,  that  this fi range  flea  (as  he  caJl'd  that 
 of  the  patriarchal   monarchy,j  was  never  '  any 
 
 *  where  induftrioufly  fet  on  foot,  but  in  En^.and-, 
 
 *  nor — ever  in  England  ferioufly  advanced,  till 
 '  the  reign  of  King  (c)  Charles  II.  '  I  fhall  leave 
 to  the  readers  reflexion .  Dr.  Marfroal's,  notions 
 of  allegiance,  &c.  I  fhould  not  have  animadver- 
 ted on,  if  he  had  not  trefpafs'd  againfi:  the  com- 
 mon rules  of  logick  at  leaft,  if  not  alfo  of  law, 
 where  he  faid,  '  What  our  local  conftitution  in 
 '  this  point  is,  can  no  otherwife  be  known,  than 
 
 *  by  a  refort  to  (d)  fads ' :  for  he  could  not  but 
 
 know, 
 
 [a)  Shcrl.  csCc  of  refift.  ep.  dci.  (h)  Mr.  Fep'oe's  ferm. 
 at  L?ve'p.  II  y^/i.  171  5,  p.  14.  (c)  Kennet'i  ?d  leC'er  to  the 
 b'fhop  ct  C."-/y?p,  i7i7jp.  jT.  (Jj  liALMa^Jlmli  AtkacQ  or 
 oar  ccnfticaf.o; ,  2717.)  ?    I3^« 
 
4-8    The  Short  History  of 
 
 know,  thdit  from  fa5i  to  right  h  never  allow'd  to 
 be  a  good  {a)  argument.  As  to  Mr.  Wbijlon^s  pro- 
 pofition,  that  '  the  free  choice,  confent  or  recog- 
 '  nition  of  a  nation  is  the  proper  foundation  of 
 '  the  rights  of  (b)  princes*  j  and  his  affirmation, 
 that  it  appears  in  fcripture,    *  that  nothing,  in  or- 
 
 *  dinary  cafes,  but  the  free  choice  or  recogni- 
 «  tion  of  a  people,  gives  a  juft  right  to  a  prince 
 «  to  govern  {c)  them  '  ;  Ifhall  pafs  it  over  here, 
 becaufe  the  contrary  thereof  is  demonftrated  in 
 almoft  every  page  of  this  book.  But,  fince  io 
 much  clamour  has  been  rais'd  againft  the  ten- 
 dency of  principles  manifeftly  founded  in  the 
 laws  of  God  and  nature,  as  well  as  in  the  muni- 
 cipal law  of  our  land,  let  us  but  take  a  fair  view 
 of  thofe  on  the  other  fide ;  and  we  fliall  find  (as 
 Dr.  Burnet  obferv'd;  that  '  lefs  diforder  may  be 
 
 *  apprehended,  from  the  pretenfions  of  the  Roman 
 '  biiiiops,  than  from  thofe  maxims,  that  pOt  the 
 '  power  of  judging  and  controuiing  the   magi- 
 
 *  Urates  in  the  people's  hands  :  which  opens  a 
 '  door  to  endlefsconfufions,  and  indeed  fets  every 
 
 *  private  perfon  upon  the  throne,  and  introdu- 
 «  ceth  an  anarchy,  which  will  never  admit  of 
 '  order  or  rem.edy  ;  whereas  thofe  that  have  but 
 «  one  pretender  over   them,  could   more  eafily 
 
 *  deal  with  him,  and  more  vigoroufly  refift  {d) 
 
 *  him '.  And  we  are  aflbr'd  by  the  fame  unex- 
 ceptionable author,  that  '  the  refolving  all  power 
 
 '  in 
 
 (a)  A  faBo  »d  jus  mn  valet  argttmentum.  (i>)  rrhi/lAsr.pt. 
 poi  p.  S.  (cj  Ibid.  cp.  dcd.  p.  7.  {d)  Barmfi  vindication 
 uti  ciiurch  and  fiats  o\'  Hcedaut!  i<-''^.  p.  68,  Cp. 
 
the  R  E  G  A  L  S  U  C  C  E  S  S  I  O  N.       49 
 
 <  in  the  Jjeople  was  firft  taken  up  by  the  affer- 
 
 *  tors  of  the  pope's  depofing  power  ;  for  they  ar- 
 «  gu'd,  that  if  it  belong'd  to  the  people,  then 
 '  the  pope,  reprefenting  the  univerfal  church,  all 
 '  their  rights  did  accrue  to  him  ;  fothat,  in  their 
 
 *  names,  he  might  difpofe  of  crowns  as  he  {a) 
 '  pleas'd '.  But  'cis  no  wonder  that  dodrines  of 
 this  pernicious  tendency  prevail,  when  fome  of 
 the  party  are  advanc'd  to  that  height  of  blafphe- 
 my,  as  to  affirm,  that  God  himfelf  did  not  give 
 to  the  Jews  any  political  laws,  before  he  was  cho- 
 [en  to  he  their  King  by  the  exprefs  confent  of  the  (b) 
 people:  thus  audacioufly  making  God*s  own  go- 
 vernment ele,6live,  as  well  as  that  of  the  King  ; 
 and  both  equally  without  foundation.  Nor  is  it 
 ftrange,  that  men  who  patronize  fuch  barefac'd 
 infults  againft  God  himfelf,  fhould  dare  to  pro- 
 pagate others  of  the  like  fort  againft  his  vicege- 
 rent, to  pofTefs  the  unwary  reader  with  notions 
 utterly  inconfiflent  with  the  fundamental  laws  of 
 an  hereditary  monarchy,  and  to  juflify,  (as  well 
 as  they  can  j  the  worfl  fa<5l  that  the  worft  of  fub- 
 jefts  were  ever  guilty  of.  "Whereas  the  clergy 
 of  our  national  church,  in  convocation  alTem- 
 bled,  have  cenfur'd  this  as  a  great  (c)  error  :  nay, 
 and  even  the  people's  own  reprefentatives  in  par- 
 liament have  all  along  declar'd  exprefly  againft 
 fuch  republican  dodrines!  particularly,  in  one 
 of  our  lateft  inftances,  after  an  unnatural  rebel- 
 
 H  lion 
 
 («)  Burn.  Term.  %o  Jan.  1680.  [b)  Rights  of  the  chr. 
 church  afTerted,  p.  i  ■)  i ,  3 1  r .  and  dfcwherc.  c)  Bifliop  Oier/ii't 
 convoc.  book,  lib,  x,  can.  2, 
 
S-o    The  Short  History  of 
 
 lion  and  regicide,  ,and  the  lubfequent  excluflon 
 and  abjuration  of  the  right  heir,  the  people  in 
 convention  reprefentatively  aflembled,  confefs'd 
 and  acknowledged  to  the  world,  that  *  it  can  no 
 
 *  way  be  doubted,    but   that  his  majefty*s  nght 
 
 *  and  title  to  his  crowns  and  kingdoms  is,  and 
 
 *  was,  every  way  compleated,  by  the  dearh  of 
 
 *  his  mod  royal  father,  without  the  ceremony  or 
 
 *  folemnity  of  a  proclamation,  Cf^c.     And  there- 
 
 *  fore,  according  to  their  duty  and    allegiance, 
 
 *  they  unanimoully  declar'd  and  procIaim*d,  thai 
 
 *  immediately  upon  the  deceafc  of —  King  Charles 
 
 *  (^the  firji),  the  imperial  crown,    ^c.    did,    by 
 
 *  birthright,  and  lawful,  and  undoubted  fucceflion, 
 
 *  defcend  and  come  to  King  Charles  [the  fecond^ )  as 
 '  being  hneally,  juftly,  and  lawfully  next  heir  of 
 
 *  the    blood   royal  (a)  ^c.  *  And  all  this, 
 
 after  they  had  kept  this  next  heir  many  years  in 
 exile !  and  our  church,  in  the  forms  of  pray- 
 er compos'd  and  us'd  on  rhofe  occafions,  (and 
 which  are  alfo  part  of  the  law  of  the  land  even 
 at  this  day,)  does  acknowledge  in  the  prefence  of 
 God  himfelf,  that  the  King  was  innocent,  and  a 
 hleffed  martyr,  &c.  notwithftanding  all  the  po- 
 pery, and  tyranny,  and  arbitrary  power  the  rebels 
 charg'd  him  with  I  that  bis  Son  was  his  undoubted 
 heir,  and  our  then  mojl  gracious  fovereign,  and 
 that  the  throne  v^zs  his  right,  even  during  his  exile 
 and  pretended  attainder  !  that  he  was  not  chofen, 
 but  rejiofd  to  his  own  jujl  and  undoubted  rights ; 
 
 and 
 
 («)  Proclam.  8  May,  i65o. 
 
the  Regal  Suggession.     jx 
 
 and  as  fuch  promifeth  all  loyal  and  dutiful  allegi' 
 ance  to  the  King^  and  to  bis  heirs  after  him  (a).  Nay, 
 and  is  it  not  manifeft,  that  every  one,  who  has 
 obtain*d  or  attempted  the  pofieflion  of  this  crown 
 (whether  by  right,  as  King  Edward  the  fourth^ 
 or  by  ufurpation,  as  Henry  (h)  the  fourth,  Mon- 
 mouth, and  othcrsj  has  always  made  his  claim 
 to  it,  as  the  next  lawful  heir,  and  as  fuch  pretend- 
 ed to  afcend  the  throne  of  his  ancejiors?  How 
 then  is  all  this  hypocrify  before  God,  and  preva- 
 rication with  men,  to  be  accounted  for,  if  after 
 all  this  folemnity,  the  throne  be  denied  to  be  he- 
 reditary ?  And  what  colour  is  there  for  any  one  to 
 fay,  that  the  right  of  princes  depends  upon  the 
 choice,  confent,   or  recognition  of  the  people  ? 
 
 H  2  fo 
 
 [a)  See  thi  forms  of  pr»yer,  &c.  for  ;o  Jan.  and  19  M/^. 
 {i)  Dr.  Kennet  is  very  angry  with  certain  authors,  for  calling 
 Hitify  IV.  an  ufurper,  and  impuics  k  to  a  finguUt  fpite  to  kirn, 
 btc»ufe  he  VAt  a  Deliverer!  Ktnn.  3d  lett.  to  bp.  of  C*rl' 
 1 716,  p.  III.  Such  a  deliverer  I  own  (in  ibme  fcniej  is  he  who 
 delivers  me  of  all  my  money  on  ^bc  highway,  and  would  kill  me 
 for  endeavouring  to  recover  it !  and  fo  would  tAonmouih  have  been 
 ftii'd  a  deliverer,  if  he  had  got  the  power  of  conferring  honoufj 
 and  dignities  on  his  fawning  parafites!  But  as  to  the  hd:,  we  are 
 better  inform'd,  thst  this  fame  *  Htr.ry  IV,  tho'  he  was  of  the 
 
 *  blood-royal,  being  firft  cofin  unto  the  King,  and  lai  the  crown 
 
 *  refign'd  unto  him  by  Rich.  II.  and  confirm'd  unto   him  by  a& 
 
 *  of  parliament,  yet,   upon  his  death-bee^,  confefs'd,   that  he  bad 
 
 *  T,9  right  thereunto ;  as  Speed  w'ritcth.  '  Biftiop  Griff'.  Pf^illiam's 
 rights  of  Kings,  fol.  ii.  And  'tis  certain,  that  all  our  authentic 
 laws,  records  and  writings  did,  with  one  confent,  deem  him  a 
 notorious  ufurper,  till  fuch  men  arofe,  who  would  have  ufur- 
 pation thought  to  be  a  deliverance !  from  whom  and  which  liifra 
 nes  dom-m ! 
 
SZ    T/^^  Short  History  ^y 
 
 (o  direftly  contrary  to  all  the  authorities  of  fcrip- 
 
 ture,  hiftory,  law,  and  right  reafon  ! But,  to 
 
 proceed. 
 
 Mofes,  a  §  XVIII.  D  u  R I N  G  the  Ifraelites  fojourn- 
 *'«^«  ing  in  Egypt,  tho*  they  were  grievoufly 
 
 opprefs'd,  and  made  to  few e  with  {a)  rigour,  (that  is 
 to  fay,  depriv'd  of  their  liberty  and  property, 
 and  reduc'd  to  a  ftate  ot  abfolute  flavery,j  un- 
 der Pharaoh,  who  was  both  arbitrary  and  an  Ido- 
 lator  j  and  tho*  they  were  increased  and  multiplfd, 
 fo  that  they  were  more  and  mightier  than  (b)  the 
 Egyptians  -,  yet  God  fwho  knew  beft  what  was  fit 
 for  them  to  do,)  would  not  allow  them  to  deli- 
 ver themfelvcs  by  a  forcible  refiftance  of  their 
 lawful  foveraign,  or  fo  much  as  to  depart  out  of 
 the  land,  till  the  King  gave  them  leave  to  go. 
 In  this  their  diftrefs  all  their  arms  were  prayers 
 and  tears.     They  cry^d,  and  their  cry  came  up  unto 
 
 (c)  God:  who,    in  his  own  good  time,   rais*d  up 
 
 (d)  Mofes,  to  be  their  prince  and  deliverer  ;  who, 
 by  wonderful  miracles  from  heaven,  prov'd  his 
 commiffion,  and  procur'd  the  King*s  leave  for 
 them  to  go.  And  tho'  God,  in  his  providence, 
 had  determin'd  to  overthrow  Pharaoh  and  all 
 his  hoft  ;  yet  he  would  not  fuffer  the  Ifraelites 
 (moft  of  whom  had  been  his  natural-born  fubjed:s,) 
 to  lift  up  their  hand  againft  their  King,  even  in 
 their  greateft  diftrefs  j  but  took  their  caufe  into 
 his  own  hand,  and  made  them  fpedators  only, 
 
 not 
 
 [a]  Txoil  u  14.    {!>) veif.  9.     (c) ii.  23.     (</) iii. 
 
 10. 
 
the  Regal  Succession,    j'g 
 
 not  the  inftruments,  of  their  own  deliverance, 
 and  the  deftruftion  of  their  tyrannical  (^j  opprcf- 
 for.  And  now,  being  miraculoufly  brought  out 
 of  Egypt^  their  government  was  a  diftindl  and 
 independent  monarchy  in  the  hands  of  Mofes ; 
 who  was  King  in  Jefurun,  when  the  heads  of  the 
 people^  and  the  tribes  of  Ifrael  were  gathered  (b) 
 together.  But  fo  far  was  he  from  deriving  his  fo- 
 veraignty  from  the  choice  of  the  people,  that  he 
 had  not  fo  much  as  their  confent,  but  was  fet  over 
 them  againft  their  will ;  as  St.  Stephen  exprefly 
 telJs  us  :  This,  Mofes,  whotn  they  refused,  faying^ 
 who  made  thee  a  ruler  and  a  judge  ?  the  fame  did 
 God  fend  to  be  a  ruler,  and  a  {c)  deliverer,  &c. 
 
 §  XIX.  And  that  he  was  abfolute,  Abfslute  and 
 and  accountable  to  none  for  his  ad-  i'^f^M'^bU. 
 miniftration,  but  to  God  only,  the  facred  records, 
 in  many  inftances,  do  plainly  prove.  For,  as 
 lie  never  ask*d  the  people  for  their  advice  or 
 confent,  concerning  the  laws  which  he  gave  them, 
 fo  his  divine  right,  and  abfolute  authority,  were 
 remarkably  aflerted,  by  God  himfelf,  even  againft 
 his  own  brother  and  filler,  for  but  murmuring 
 againft  him  :  Wherefore  were  ye  not  afraid  ffaid 
 the  Lord  to  Aaron  and  Miriam)  to  fpeak  againft 
 
 m^ 
 
 {»)  Exocl.  xiv.  14.  {&]  Deut.  xxxiii.  5.  And  yet  the  author 
 of  the  rights  of  the  chrifl.  church  aJferteJ,  p.  ifi ,  has  the  aflurance 
 to  fay,  the  Jews,  when  they  came  out  of  the  Und  of  hondage* 
 were  under  no  fettled  govmimtnty  till  the  Horeb-contraH,  when,  he 
 pretends,  they  confent ed  to  take  Cod  for  their  King  I        (c)  jicls 
 
5*4  Tf^^  Short  History  of 
 
 nfjfirvant  Mofes  ?  and  the  anger  of  the  Lord  was 
 kindled  againji  (a)  them. 
 
 But  moft  exemplary  was  the  punifhment  of- 
 (h)  Korah^  Dathan  and  Abiram,  and  their  adhe- 
 rents, for  feditloufly  refilling  and  rebelling 
 againfl:  the  fame  authority  ;  '  upon  the  common 
 '  grounds  of  fuch  things,  viz.  ufurpation  upon 
 «  the  people's  rights,  arbitrary  government,  and 
 *  ill  management  of  [c)  affairs  *.  Neither  were 
 thefe  patriots,  or  affertors  of  the  fgood  old)  caufe, 
 of  liberty,  content  with  rebellion  againft  Mofes^ 
 their  lawful  prince,  but  they  alfo  prefum'd  to 
 invade,  ufurp,  and  intrude  upon  the  facred  office 
 of  Aaron  the  high-prieft  ;  who  had  been  folemn- 
 ly  fet  apart  and  confecrated  (d)  to  that  high  dig- 
 nity, as  Mofes  was  promoted  to  the  civil  fupre- 
 macy,  by  the  exprefs  command  of  God  himfelf, 
 without  any  intervention  of,  or  oontrad  with,  the 
 people :  as  if  Mofes  and  Aaron  had  only  exalted 
 
 them- 
 
 (a)  Numb.  xii.  8,  9.  {h)  This  Korah  was  bimrdf  a  priefit 
 and  the  very  firft  of  that  order  who  prefum'd  to  withdraw  his 
 obedience,  and  make  a  pparatioM  from  his  lawful  high-priejl  o^ 
 b'tfJ)op.  The  cffeft  of  this  his  fch'tfm  dcfervcs  tte  moft  fcrious 
 confideration  of  all  our  modera  feparatijisi  who  withdraw  thcm- 
 felves  from  a  canonical  fucceflion  of  undoubted  lawful  bifhops, 
 with  whom  they  pretend  to  agree  in  all  the /««</«/»^«r<j/ points 
 of  dofirine.  God  give  them  grace  to  avoid  the  htcoi  Korah,  hj 
 a  timely  repentance  and  return  to  unity  and  communion:  remcm- 
 bring  what  the  Apoftle  fays,  of  tbofe  who/or/aJtf  the  true  church, 
 and  break  her  communion,  for  things  not  deraonftrativcly  efftn- 
 tial  to  falv*tion  ;  viz.  if  we  fin  wilfully,  after  that  we  have  r«* 
 ctivtj  th»  knowledge  of  the  truth,  there  remaineth  no  more  facrl' 
 jicefor  fin  !  Hcb.  X.  t$^  r6.  (c)  Stillingfl.  fcrm.  ^o  Jan,  t668-, 
 p.  1 1.         {d)  Ltvit.  viii. 
 
the  Regal  Succession     jf 
 
 themfelvres  out  of  pride  and  ambition,  above 
 others,  who  were  equally  holy,  and  equally  wor- 
 thy !  Te  take  too  much  upon  you,  (fay  they)  feeing 
 all  the  congregation  are  holy,  every  one  of  them,  and 
 the  Lord  is  among  {a)  them  ;  wherefore  then  lift  ye 
 up  yourfelves  above  the  congregation  of  the  (h)  Lord? 
 whereas,  'tis  aIlow*d,  that  *  whoever,  fet  up  for 
 '  being  patrons  of  liberty,  fhould,  at  the  fame 
 
 <  time,  fet  up  for  patrons  of  religion  ;  for  other- 
 
 <  wife  the  more  liberty  we  have,  the  more  dan- 
 «  ger  we  iliall  be  in  of  being  (c)  undone ';  be- 
 caufe,  '  liberty,  unlefs  wifely  ufed,  feldom  proves 
 '  a  kindncfs  to  thofe  who  have  (d)  it*.  But  when 
 Mofes  call'd  for  Dathan  and  Abiram,  they  refus'd 
 to  come  up  ;  infolently  charging  him  with  arbi- 
 trary power,  tyrannical  adminiftration,  breach 
 of  truft  and  promife  {e),  ^c.  in  language  much 
 unbecoming  fubjeds  to  their  foveraign.  Which 
 treatment  of  him  (who  was  indeed  not  only  the 
 meekeji  (/)  man  upon  the  face  of  the  earth,  but 
 alfo  fo  ftridlly  juft  and  tender  of  their  rights, 
 that  he  had  not  taken  one  afs  from  them,  nor  hurt 
 one  of  (g)  them  ;  and  moreover  fo  great  a  bene- 
 faftor  to  them  all,  that  he  had  rcfcued  them  from 
 the  houfe  of  bondage,  by  a  multitude  of  miracles,) 
 may  well  make  us  cealc  to  wonder  at  the  like  ub- 
 
 duti- 
 
 («)  Thus  did  our  late  faints  cant.  Cod  with  tts\  e?cn  when 
 they  rcbeJl'd  againft  his  authority,  and  ufurp'd  the  rights  of  our 
 Mofes  and  Aatom  !  (i)  Numb.  xvi.  j.  {c)  Will'ti's  fcrm.  f  Ncv. 
 1705,  p.  I ^.  {d)  Sherlock's  ^o  Jan.  1691.  p.  17.  [t]  i^itmk 
 xvi.  13,  14.        (/)— — xii.  3,        ig)  -^r-xyi.  15. 
 
S6     The  Short  HiSTOitr  of 
 
 dutifulncfs  and  ingratitude  of  fubjedls  to  other 
 (and  commonly  even  to  the  very  beftj  Kings. 
 
 Upon  this,  MofeSy  as  he  was  commanded  by  the 
 Lord,    fpake  unto   all    the  congregation  of  the 
 people,  faying.  Depart,  I  pray  you,  from  the  tents 
 of  thefe  wicked  men,  land  touch  nothing  of  theirs,  leji 
 ye  he  confumed  in  all  their  fins  (a)  !  For  fuch  is  the 
 heinous  nature,  and  contagion,  of  thofe   fins  of 
 rebellion  and  fchifm,  that  the  deftruftion  of  the 
 adors  alone  was  not  a  fufficient  attonement  for  it : 
 but,  as  every  one  of  their  adherents  was,  in  rc- 
 fpe(5t  of  Mofes,  a  rebel,  and  in  refpedl  of  Aaron, 
 a  fchifmatiqk,  whoever  joined  with,  or  any  way 
 aflifted,  or  countenanc'd  them  in  their  fins,  was 
 therefore  liable  to  (hare  thepunifliment.  And  the 
 more  efFedually  to  deter  us  from  the  like  guilt, 
 we  find,  that  God  Almighty  wrought  a  miracle 
 to  deftroy  them  :    for  the  ground  clave  afunder 
 that  Was  under  them,  and  the  earth  opened  her  mouth, 
 and  fwallowed  them  up,  and  their  houfes,  and  all 
 the  men  that  appertained  unto  Korah,  and  all  their 
 goods :  they,  and  all  that  appertained  to  them,  went 
 down  alive  into  the  pit,  and  the  earth  clofed  upon 
 them  3  and  they  perijhtd  from  amongji  the  congrega- 
 tion. And  there  came  out  a  fire  from  the  Lord, 
 and  confumed  the  250  men,  that  offered  {h)  incenfe. 
 And  for  the  better  remembrance  thereof,  their 
 cenfen  were  preferv'd,  to  he  a  memorial,  that  no 
 f  ranger,  which  is  not  of  the  feed  of  Aaron,  come 
 near  to  offer  incenfi  before  the  Lord,  that  he  he  not 
 
 .  .    as 
 
 («)  ^umh,  xvi.  z6.       (b)  -^^n^jo,  c^c. 
 
/^^Regal  Succession.  77 
 
 as  Korah  and  as  his  company  ;  when  they  firove 
 againft  the  Lord  (a).  For  fo  they  may  juftly  be 
 faid  to  cto,  who  throw  off  thofe  obligations  of 
 religion  and  allegiance  which  God  and  nature  have 
 bound  them  in,  and  bind  themfelves  in  others  of  , 
 their  own  inventing  ;  there  being  indeed  no  other 
 way  of  rebelling  againft  God,  but  by  oppofing 
 his  inftitutions.  Nay,  when  others  of  the  people 
 prefum'd,  the  next  day,  but  to  murmur  againft 
 Mofes  and  Aaron^  for  the  lofs  of  their  brethren, 
 14700  more  of  them  were  deftroy'd  by  a  plague 
 (b).  By  which  we  may  perceive,  how  the  fins 
 of  rebellion  and  fchifm  are  more  provoking  to 
 God  Almighty,  and  more  fevcrely  punilh'd  by 
 him,  than  even  that  of  idolatry  itfelf ;  fmce  there 
 fell  of  the  people  but  ahout  3000  {c)  men,  in  that 
 their  firft  and  greateft  idolatry,  when  they  wor- 
 ihipp'd  their  golden  calf :  and  from  hence  we  may 
 conclude,  how  defperate  a  remedy  it  is,  to  rebel 
 again4l  lawful  authority,  for  fear  of  idolatry.  For 
 '  tis  well  obferv'd  by  the  learned  Stilling  fleet,  that, 
 '  let  the  pretences  be  never  fo  popular,  the  per- 
 '  fons  never  fo  great  and  famous  ;  nay,  though 
 '  they  were  of  the  great  council  of  the  nation,  " 
 '  yet  we  fee  God  doth  not  abate  of  his  feverity 
 *  upon  any  of  thefe  (J)  confiderations*. 
 
 I  Thus 
 
 [a)  iSiU!ni>.  ■xv'u  40.  and  xxvi.  9.  (/-)  — — verf.  49.  Thefe 
 proofs,  amongft  others,  may  fli»w  the  fallhood  of  the  author  ot 
 the  rights  of  the  chriftlfin  church  ajj'ertedy  p,  3iz.  where  he  fays, 
 God  did  HOt  tniraculbujly  iuterpofe,  even  among  the  Jews,  i'tli 
 they  -had  chofett  him  for  their  King ;  viz.  at  Horeb,  where  this 
 bla{phcme.pretcnds,an  Original-contract  was  madcbetweenCpi/ 
 and  the  people\  {c)  Exod.  xxxW.  28.  {J)  Stillinifi,  (cim,  }'> 
 J  AH.  1C68;  p.  34, 
 
y8    TheSnoRT  History  of 
 
 Thus  was  the  divine  authority  and  abfolute  ir- 
 refiftiblc  power  of  Mofes  unqueftionably  prov'd : 
 and,  '  left  this  fhould  be  thought  an  extraordinary 
 
 *  cafe,  Mofes  and  Jaron  being  extraordinary 
 «  perfons,   immediately  appointed  by  God,  and 
 
 *  governed  by  his  immediate  direction,  the  apoflle 
 
 *  St.  Jude  alledges  this  example  againft  thofe  in 
 
 *  his  days,  who  were  turbulent  and  fadious, 
 '  who  defpifed  dominions,  and  /pake  evil  of  dignities, 
 '  that  they  fhould  perijb  in  the  gainfaying  of  Core. 
 «  iai.    Which  he  could  not  have  done,  had  not 
 
 *  this  example  (as  the  late  Dr.  Sherlock  once  well 
 '  obferv'dj  extended  to  all  ordinary,  as  well  as 
 '  extraordinary  cafes  ;    had  it  not  been  a  lafting 
 
 *  teftimony  of  God's  difpleafure,  againft  all  thofe, 
 '  who  oppofe  themfelves  againft  the  lb vereign 
 '  (b)  powers  *. 
 
 Mci.  s  lU  §  XX.  A  N  D  as  Mofes  was  the  firft  law- 
 'ver.  giver,  or  writer,  of  Laws  in  the  World, 
 
 let  us  fee  how  his  laws  (or  rather  thofe  of  God 
 pronounc'd  by  him)  agreed  with  the  law  of  na- 
 ture, upon  this  fubjedl. 
 
 Lav^nf'n-  ^  XXI.  It  happen'd  that  Zelophehad 
 hcri:ancci«  (one  of  the  (^j  princes  of  the  half  tribe 
 general  ^j-  Mauafjeh)  had  no  fons,  hit  daugh- 
 ters :  and  thefe  (grounding  their  plea  upon  the  law 
 of  nature  J  fued  unto  Mofes  for  their  father's  inhe- 
 ritance for  the  land  was  divided  by  inheritance  ; 
 Our  father  (faid  theyj  died  in  the  wildernefs,  and  he 
 
 wj.s 
 
 a)  Jude  II.  (/)  Sherl.CiCe  of  refift.  p.  7.  (c)  His  pedi- 
 gree is  let  forth.  Numb.  >:xvii.  i.  and  Judg.  xvii.  3.  and  mere 
 largely  drawn  our  by  Mr.  Scldsn,  vc!.  i,  tol.  ^^i,  &c. 
 
/Z?^  Regal  Succession.    5-9 
 
 was  not  in  the  cojnpajty  of  them ^  that  gathered  them- 
 felves  together  againfi  the  Lord^  in  the  company  of 
 Korah,  but  died  in  his  own  fin,  and  had  no  fons ; 
 Wh'j  fhould  the  name  of  our  father  he  done  away 
 (a)  ?  &c.  Where,  by  the  way,  we  may  obferve, 
 that  the  whole  people  were  made  fenfible,  by  the 
 dreadful  judgment  of  God  upon  Rebels,  that  re- 
 fifting  Mofes  and  Aaron,  was  a  rebellion  againft 
 God  himfelf,  from  whom  they  receiv'd  their  au- 
 thority ;  and  that  they,  and  every  one  that  was 
 in  their  company,  had  thereby  forfeited  God*s  fa- 
 vour, as  well  as  the  right  to  their  inheritance. 
 Therefore  they  plead,  that  their  father  was  7iot 
 in  the  company  of  Korah  ;  and  thereupon,  Mofes 
 brought  their  caufe  before  the  ib)  Lord. 
 
 §  XXII.  Upon  this  occafion  there-  jcccrdhi^ 
 fore  (as  a  celebrated  modern  argues  in  to  pioximi- 
 another  (0  cafe),  'we  have  the  jufteil  '^f  ^^""'' 
 '  reafon  to  expeft  to  know  the  thoughts  of  Al- 
 '  mighty  God  concerning '  hereditary  right.  And 
 what  were  they  ?  Why,  the  Lord  did  not  only 
 adjudge  that  caufe  in  favour  of  thefe  daughters 
 ("which  might  upon  occafion  be  a  ftrong  and  in- 
 conteftable  authority  againft  the  Salique  law  in 
 France,)  but  made  it  a  ftaiute  of  judgment  (or 
 perpetual  law)  ;  faying.  If  a  man  die,  and  have 
 no  fon  (which,  by  the  way,  is  an  admiffion,  that 
 the  fon  had  a  natural  right  to  his  father's  inheri- 
 tance) then  ye  fhall  caufe  his  inheritance  to  pafs  unto 
 
 I  2  his 
 
 («)  Numb.  xxvi.  33,  53.  xxxiv.  18. xxvii.  3.     {b) 
 
 ' — verf.  5;        (c)  B.  Hoatlly's  ferm.  nHertfordi  li  Mur.  17  ©7. 
 
6o    The  Short  Hist OKY  of 
 
 his  daughter  ;  and  if  he  have  no  daughter,  then 
 
 unto  his  brethren  ;  and  if  he  have  no  brethren,  then 
 ~~^unto  his  father's  brethren  ;  and  if  his  father  have 
 
 no  brethren,  then ■  unto  his  kinfman  that  is  next 
 
 to  him  of  his  family,  and  he  pall  poffefs  it  (a). 
 
 Indefajj-      §  XXIII.  Her  E  we  fee  Almighty  God 
 ^'^'  taking  occafion  (as  the  laft  quoted  au- 
 
 thor exprefles  \t)  to  confirm  the  law  of  nature, 
 in  refped:  of  inheritances.  And  to  fhew  us,  that 
 it  is  not  in  our  power,  to  invert  the  order  of  na- 
 ture, or  (as  it  is  in  the  title  of  the  chapter;  that 
 the  firft  born  is  not  to  be  difinherited  upon  pri- 
 vate affection,  this  other  law  was  added  by  the 
 Lord ',  If  a  man  have  two  wives,  one  beloved  and 
 
 another  hated,  and  they  have  born  him  children : 
 
 and  ij  the  firjl-born  fon  be  hers  that  was  hated, 
 then  it  Jhall  be,  when  he  maketb  his  fons  to  inherit 
 that  which  he  hath,  that  he  may  not  make  the  fon 
 of  the  beloved  firfi-born,  before  the  fon  of  the  hated, 
 which  is  indeed  the  firft-born,  (or,  as  it  is  in  the 
 old  margin,  while  the  fon  of  the  hated  liveth  :) 
 but  he  fhall  acknowledge  the  fon  of  the  hated  for  the 
 firJl-born,  by  giving  him  a  double  portion  of  all  that 
 he  hath;  /or  (this  reafon,  that)  he  is  the.. begin- 
 ning of  his  ftrength,  the  right  of  the  firfi-born  is  (b) 
 his. 
 
 Now 
 
 {(t)  Nmnb.  xxvii.  S,  O'^-  Upon  this  law  it  was,  that  the  gre:t 
 archbifhop  Chtcheley  inc  ted  Henry  V.  to  aflert  a  title  to  the  erowa 
 oi 'BrMice :  affirming,  ..hat  *  if  any  human  !awshapp;n  to  crofs 
 c  upon  this  regulation,  they  lofe  the  force  of  their  obligation  5  in 
 
 *  regard  they  go  off  from  the  ftandard  of  juftice,  which  the  f^ - 
 
 •  veraign  legiflator  has  given  to  bis  own  people '.    Collier's  ecckC. 
 hift.  vol.  1 .  fol.  6  3  8.        (6)  Deut.  xxi.  1 5 ,  ^c. 
 
the  RegalSuccession.    6\ 
 
 Now  this  law  (fays  a  learned  author)  *  was,  and 
 
 *  ftill  is,  grounded,  i.  On  Gods  exprefs  com- 
 «  mand,  and  fo  it  is  a  judicial  law  of  God:  2. 
 '  On  natural  reafon,  and  fo  it  becomes  a  poli- 
 '  fitive  law  of  nature,   obliging  all  nations,  at 
 
 '  all  times,  to  the  obfervation  of  it.  • By  this 
 
 '  law,  Tas  my  author  proceeds)  it  is  undeniably 
 
 *  evident,  that  the  firft-born  fhould  ever  be  the 
 «  heir  of  his  father,  whether  the  faid  firft-born 
 '  were  good  or  bad,  beloved  or  hated.     And  the 
 
 *  reafon,  which  God  gives  for  that  law  is  this, 
 
 *  fcilicet,  becaufe  the  firft-born  is  the  beginning  of 
 '  his  father's  frengtb  ;  and  therefore,  the  right  of 
 «  the  firfi- horn  is  his  {a)  -,  that  is  to  fay,  the  right 
 
 *  of  inheritance  is  his.  So  that  this  law  of  inheri- 
 '  tance  by  primogeniture  is  not  only  a  pofitive 
 '  and  judicial  law,  made  by  God,  binding  the  peo- 
 
 *  pie  of  the  Jews:   but  it  is  alfo  a  moral  law, 
 
 *  founded  on  natural  reafon  ;  and  therefore  is  for 
 <  ever  obligatory,  and  at  all  times  binds  all  na- 
 
 *  tions  to  obferve  and  keep  it.  For,  if,  among 
 '  the  Jews^  the  firft-born  was  therefore  to  inhe- 
 '  rit,    becaufe  he  was  the  beginning  of  his  fa- 
 
 *  ther's  ftrength  :  then,  by  the  fame  force  of  rea- 
 
 *  Ion,  ought  all  firft-born  fons,  of  all  men  what- 
 '  ever,  to  inherit  their  father's  fubftance,  becaufe 
 
 *  they   all   are   the   beginning   of  their  father's 
 
 *  ftrength  ;  and  therefore  the  right  of  inheritance 
 «  is  theirs'  (b). 
 
 Agree - 
 
 («)  Deut.  xxi.  I :'.        {b)  Jenner's  prerog.  of  primog,  p.  z6, 
 ^7- 
 
.  6z    The  Short  History  of 
 
 Agreeably  to  which,  that  eminent  lawyer  above 
 quoted,  applies  all  to  the  kingdom  of  England-, 
 arguing  from  Arijlotle,  that  whatever  is  founded 
 upon  the  law  of  nature,  bath  the  fame  authority 
 arnongji  all  men.  Wherewith  (he  obferves)  our 
 lawyers  agree,  for  this  reafon,  '  for  that  God  and 
 
 *  nature  is  one  to  all,  and  therefore  the  law  of 
 '  God  and  nature  is  one  to  all  (a). '  And,  as 'tis 
 plainly  prov'd,  that  this  general  rule  of  fuccef- 
 lion  was  not  to  be  defeated  by  any  partial  favour 
 of  the  father  or  fuperior  ;  fo  much  lefs  was  it  to 
 be  done  by  any  pradtices  of  the  younger  bre- 
 thren, children,  or  other  inferiors.  For  as  a  pious 
 and  learned  prelate  notes,  upon  the  death  of  the 
 firfl-born  only,  and  not  of  the  fetond  or  third, 
 in  Egypt,)  '  we  may  with  profit  well  obferve, 
 '  how  the  differences  of  children  are  known  to 
 
 <  God :  which  may  yield  this  ufe,  never  for 
 
 *  any  child  to  go  about,  with  craft  and  fubtilty, 
 
 *  or  any  unlawful  invention  of  man,  to  thruft 
 '  himfelf  into  the  place  and  prerogative  thereof, 
 '  which  God,  in  his  providence,  hath  not  given 
 
 *  him,  but  to  abide  in  the  order  difpos'd  to  him 
 
 *  of  God,  and  to  trufl  in  his  mercy  who  fo  dif- 
 '  pofed ;    for  fear,  left  God,  who  knoweth  our 
 
 *  order,  feverely  punifh  us  for  breaking  his  or- 
 «  der.     He  eould  have  made  the  youngeft  the  el. 
 
 <  defl  if  he  had  pleas'd;  ^C' — Let  it  be  thought 
 «  on  (fays  he):    for  there  is  too  much  caufc  in 
 
 the 
 
 {a)  Coke's  Calvin's  cafe,  fol.  12,  13. 
 
/Z?^  Regal  Succession.      6^ 
 
 «  the  world  given  ;  and  fin  is  counted  [a)  wif- 
 '  dom'. 
 
 This  law  of  indefeafible  hereditary  right,  or 
 la-ix;  (for  fuccejjion)  of  inheritances,  Mr.  Whifion 
 owns  to  be  ^  certainly  a  plain  and  clear  law,  re- 
 
 *  lating  to  the  affairs  of  private  families  among 
 
 *  the  Jews :  but  how  this  belongs  to  the  affairs  of 
 
 *  publick  government,  or  fucceflion  of   Kings 
 
 *  or  princes,  he  does  not  (b)  fee'.  But  if  he 
 pleafes  to  open  his  eyes,  and  obferve  that  this  law 
 is  given  in  general  terms,  and  compare  it  with 
 the  judgment  pronounc'd  in  the  cafe  of  the  daugh- 
 ters o^  ZeIophebad(]u^  mention'd)  who  was  a  pub- 
 lick  perfon,  and  a  prince  of  his  tribe,  he  will 
 find  no  juft  ground  to  diftinguifh  in  this  cafe,  be- 
 tween publick  and  private  inheritances  ;  always 
 remembring  this  maxim,  that  where  the  law  it- 
 felf  does  tiot  diftinguifh,  we  have  no  authority  to 
 make  a  diftinEiion.  But  in  anfwer  to  this  objedlion, 
 and  to  put  it  out  of  all  queflion,  the  learned 
 divine    newly   quoted,    argues     thus ;    '  If  fuc- 
 
 *  ceffion  and  inheritance  be  eflablifhed  upon  the 
 
 *  firft-bornin  private  families,  becaufe  of  his  pri_ 
 
 *  mogeniture  j  then,  by  the  fame  law,  the  right 
 
 *  of  inheritance  and  of  fucccffion  unto  the  crown, 
 
 *  is  for  ever  fettled  upon  the  firfl-born  of  Kings : 
 '  for,  the  firft-born  of  Kings  are  the  beginning 
 
 *  of  their  royal  fathers  ftrength  ;  and  therefore^ 
 
 *  the  right  of  the  firft-born,  that  is  to  fay,  the 
 
 *  right  of  inheritance  and  of  fuccefTion  to  their 
 
 fa- 
 
 C«)  Bi(hop  ^ahmgWi^  works,  fol.  190.        {b)  Script,  polit. 
 p.  19,  20. 
 
(^4    The  Short  History  of 
 
 '  fathers  throne,  is  (a)  theirs  *.  And  a  much 
 greater  than  he,  even  our  Blejfed  Saviour  him- 
 felf,  in  anfwer  to  Ptlate^s  queftion,  {Art  thou  a 
 King  ?)  anfwer'd,  Thou  fayji  that  I  atn  a  King  : 
 to  this  end  was  I  (b)  born,  &c.  Thereby  intima- 
 ting, that  his  right  to  a  kingdom  was  by  birth ; 
 (according  to  that  of  the  wife  men,  JVhere  is  he 
 that  is  born  King  of  the  [c)  Jews  ?)  whereas  he  would 
 not  accept  of  a  kingdom  upon  the  eledlion  of  the 
 people,  even  when  they  were  eager  to  have  made 
 him  a  King  by  (d)  force. 
 
 In  the  cafe  of  the  fiubborn  and  rebellious  fon^ 
 tho',  upon  the  complaint  of  his  parents  to  the 
 magiftrates,  he  was  to  be  ftoned  to  death  by  the 
 people  (e) :  yet  we  do  not  find,  that  any  of  them 
 could  exclude  or  deprive  him  of  his  birthright,  or 
 the  prehemincnce  thereof;  no,  not  even  tho'  he 
 had  been  an  hater  of  right  and  righteoufnefs  ;  as 
 we  {hall  fee  more  at  large  by  and  by.  And  that 
 this  fentence  extends  to  all  fuch  as  commit  the 
 like  ofrence  againft  their  lawful  foveraign  (the  fa- 
 ther of  their  country,)  is  the  judgment  of  the 
 church  of  England,  clearly  exprefs'd  in  (/)  convo- 
 cation, as  well  as  in  her  catechifm,  ^c.  But  fas  *tis 
 urg'd  by  an  eminent  Civilian,againfl:the  JefuitP^ar- 
 fons,) '  What  if  thefather  be  arobber?Ifamurther- 
 '  er  ?  If  for  all  excefles  of  viilanies  odious  and  exe- 
 '  crable  both  to  God  and  man  ?  furely,  he  de- 
 fer- 
 
 (a)  Jcnn.  prerog.  of  prifnog.  p.  2S.  {I)  St..Johnxnn.  37. 
 ic)  St.  Matth.W.  2.  {d)  St,  John  vi.  is.  (*)  Dent.  xxi. 
 18^  &c.        (/■)  Bifliop  Over(tl'%  convoc.  book,  p.  aj. 
 
/-S^Regal  Succession.     6s 
 
 «  ferveth  the  highefl:  degree  of  punifliment : 
 «  And  yet  muft  not  the  fon  lift  up  his  hand 
 '  againft  him  ;  for  no  offence  is  fo  great  as  to  be 
 
 *  punifh'd  by  parricide.  But  our  country  is 
 «  dearer  to  us  than  ourfelves :  and  the  prince 
 «  is  the  father  of  our  country  ;  whofe  authority 
 «  is- greater  than  of  parents :  and  therefore  he 
 «  muft  not  be  violated,  how  impious,  how  impe- 
 
 <  rious  foever  he  (a^  be  *.  For,  as  the  fon  to  his 
 father,  (being  efTential  relatives  ;)  fo  alfo  '  the  fub- 
 «  je6l,  in  point  of  obedience  to  his  prince,  is  not 
 
 <  to  difpute  nor  queftion  the  virtues  or  the  vices, 
 
 *  the  religion  or  principles  of  his  prince  ;  but 
 «  folely  to  confider  that  efTential  and  indiflbluble 
 «  relation,  —  to  wit,  that  he  is  his  natural  and 
 
 <  lawful  prince,  and  therefore  mult  of  neceflity 
 *=  be  ih  obeyed '. 
 
 After  thefe,  we  find  another  law  made,  for 
 the  better  prefervation  of  inheritances  in  the  fa- 
 mily and  name  of  the  firft  born  ;  that  If  brethren 
 live  together^  and  if  one  of  them  die  and  have  no 
 child,  the  wife  of  the  dead  ftjall  not  viarr^  without, 
 unto,  a  ftr anger :  her  husband's  brother  (or,  as  it  is 
 in  the  margin,  his  next  kinfman;  Jhall  go  in  unto 
 
 her,  and  take  her  to  him  to  wife  i y^nd  it  Jhall 
 
 be,  that  the  firft-born  which  fJje  beareth,  Jhall  fuc- 
 ceed,  in  the  name  of  his  brother  which  is  dead,  that 
 bis  name  be  'not  put  out  of  Ifrael  ic)——.  "Which 
 law  is  alfo  explain'd  by  that  queftion  of  the  5"^^- 
 
 K  diicees 
 
 (a)  Sir  7-  HrjTsari's  anfwer  to  Jjclem.  p.  46.  where  he  quotes 
 ^uintiliaH^  Cicero,  Buldus,  and  the  holy  fcriptures.  (b)  JtTf.- 
 mr  qf  the  primogen.  p.  59.         (f)  Dettt.  xxv.  ',,  6. 
 
66    The  Short  History  of 
 
 dticees  to  our  Saviour^  in  the  (a)  gofpel ;  fo  that, 
 it  is  plain,  the  firfl,  fecond,  third,  and  other 
 brotliers  married  the  widow  fuccefllvely,  one 
 after  another,  according  to  their  priority  of  birth, 
 to  keep  up  the  name  and  honour  of  the  firft-born. 
 Nay,  and  our  Saviour  himfeJf  has  affirm*d  the 
 natural  right  of  primogeniture,  in  his  parable  of 
 the  prodigal  fon:  where,  in  the  firfl:  place,  he 
 fpeaks  generally  of  a  certain  (b^  man  Cto  fliew 
 that  it  was  not  peculiar  to  the  Jews,  but  the  com?- 
 mon   cafe  of  all  men  ;)  and  then  fays,    in  the 
 
 perfon  of  the  father,  to  the  eldeft  fon, Son,  thou 
 
 art  ever  with  me,  and  all  that  I  have  is  (c  i  thine  5 
 that  is,  by  right  of  birth,  as  my  eldeft  fon. 
 
 After  all  thefe  feveral  exprefs  laws  and  tefti- 
 monies  of  holy  fcripture,  I  muft  own  myfelf  ab- 
 folutely  at  a  lofs,  to  underftand  what  fome  of  our 
 modern  writers  (who  have  not  openly  renounc'd 
 fcripture-evidence)  do  mean,  when  they  tell  us, 
 that  *  the  right  of  primogeniture,  in  the  male 
 <  line,  is  fet  up,  above  any  other  (d)  right- * 
 that  hereditary  right  was  by  no  itnviutable  law  of 
 nature ;  much  lefs  by  any  exprefs  injlitution,  or  decla- 
 ration of  the  will  of  (e)  God :  that  the  indefeaftble- 
 nefs  of  it  is  by  no  means  agreeable  to  the  mind  of  God 
 in  the  if)  fcriptures :  that  *  no  man  can  fhew  any 
 *  fuch  open  and  exfflicit  declaration  to  have  ever 
 
 '  been 
 
 (a)  St.   Mettth.  xxii.  2^.  St.  Mark  xii.   20.   Sn  Luke  xx.  29. 
 
 (if)  St.  Luke  XV.  II.         (c)  verf.  31.        (d)  Hoadlys  krm^ 
 
 at  Hertf.  zi  March,  1707.  (t]  Kennet's  ^d  letter  to  biihop 
 ot  C.irl.  p.  54,  (^c.        (f)  Level's  fcrm.  if  ticy.  171/,  p.  li' 
 
the  Regal  SuccessiOxM.     6^ 
 
 *  been  given  by  {a)  God  * :  that  God  had.  a  mind 
 tt)  -put  a  contempt  upon  (b)  k :  in  fhort,  that  this 
 law  of  inheritances  never  appears  '  to  have  been 
 «  ordained  by  God,  nor  approved  by  him,  but 
 
 *  the  (c)  contrary  :  and  that  we  find  no  fuch  law 
 
 <  of  hereditary  fucceflioH,  about  the  fiate  of  the 
 '  civil  power,  among  the  Jews,  but  many  things 
 «  which  make  greatly  againft  {d)  it  *. 
 
 Now,  the  double  portion  was  not  the  only 
 right  of  the  firfi  born,  as  Mr.  Locke  {e)  pretends : 
 for,  we  find,  (as  bifhop  Babington  has  juftiy  ob- 
 ferv*d,)  that  *  the  preheminence  of  the  birth-right 
 '  was  this  ;  Hahebant  jus  facerdotii  ^  regni  in  fafni- 
 
 <  lia.  They  were  priefts  and  kings  in  the  family, 
 
 *  after  the  father's  death :    they  had  a  prehemi- 
 
 *  nence  above  the  reft,  in  the  diviiion  of  the  fa- 
 
 *  ther's  inheritance : — they  fucceeded  the  father 
 
 *  in  all  dignity,  principality,  and  honour :  they 
 
 *  had  authority  over  their  younger  brethren,  fo 
 '  that  they  rofe  up  at  their  prefence,  and  mini- 
 
 *  fter'd  to  (/)  them  %  ^c.  All  which  is  confefs'd 
 even  by  Mr,  Fleming,  who  *  pretends  to  give  us 
 
 *  a  more  full  and  cxadl  enumeration  of  the  ad- 
 
 *  vantages  and  prerogatives  included  in  the  pa- 
 
 *  triarchal  blefling  of  thofe  on  whom  the  birth- 
 
 *  right  was  fully  conferred,    than  has  yet  been 
 
 *  done  by  any  (g;  other  *. 
 
 K  2  As 
 
 (a)  Flemittg's  hift.  of  hered.  right,  pi  14.        (&)  ll>'id.  p.  i8. 
 U)  li^hijton's  fcripr.  polit.  p.  8,         (d)  Ibid.  p.  16.  [e)  Lock* 
 
 of  goveniment,   p.  148.         (/)  B;iiiin^tOft'i    wjrks,    fol.   109- 
 (s)  Fl«m.  hered ,  right,  p,  1 9, 
 
6S    The  Short  History  ^/^ 
 
 As  to  Kings,  more  particularly,  the  Lord  fore- 
 feeing^  *  that  the  Jews  would  in  time  grow  weary 
 '  of  his  Government,   makes  provifion  in  their 
 '  law  for  fetting  up  a  ia)  King ' :  where  we  may 
 note,  that  he  prefers  kingly  government  before  any 
 other  5  becaufe  he  did  not  make  provifion  for  arijio' 
 eracyy  or  democracy,    or   any   other  form  (which 
 their  law  makes  no  allowance  {h)  for),  but  monar- 
 chy only.     Nor  did  he  fuffer  the  people  to  med- 
 dle, or  concern  themfelves  at  all  in  the  election  ; 
 but  referv'd  the  choice  thereof  wholly  to  himfelf, 
 as  his  own  prerogative,  and  commanded  them  to 
 fcibmit  themfelves  therein  only  to  his  divine  ap- 
 pointm-ent:  faying,  When  thou  art  come  unto  the 
 land  which  the  Lord  thy  God  giveth  thee,  and  fhalt 
 po^ffefs  it,  and  fhalt  dwell  therein,  and  fhalt  fay,  I 
 willfet  a  King  over  me,  like  as  all  the  nations  that 
 are  about  me  ;    thou  fhalt  in  any  wife  fet  him  King 
 over  thee,    whan  the  Lord   thy  God  fhall  chufe  j 
 one  from  among  thy  brethren  fhalt  thou  fet  King  over 
 thee  ;  thou  mayfi  not  fet  a  Jiranger  over  thee,  which 
 is  not  thy  (c)  brother.    This  plain  text  a  preacher, 
 before  quoted,    confidently  refers  to,    to  prove, 
 that  God  '  left  the  people  free  to  chufe  any  one 
 '  from  among  themfelves  to  be  their  {d)  King*. 
 From  whence  he  draws  fome  conclufions  as  pre- 
 carious, as  his  premifes  are  evidently  falfe.    For 
 here  they  are  exprefly  bound  to  fet  up  ('or  recog- 
 nize) him  whom  the  Lord  himfelf  fhould  chufe. 
 
 After 
 
 («)  Shfrl.  cafe  of  refiO.  p.  zi.         (k)  ib'td.         [c)  D?«r.xvii. 
 ^A-        (.'^)  J'  f^ri^ht's  kitn.  at  AiLib.  if:  Mar.  17 ip.  p-  9' 
 
 1 
 
the  Regal  Succession.    6^ 
 
 After  which  he  lays  down  fome  {a)  rules  for  their 
 King  to  obferve  j  to  the  end,,  that  he  ma^j  prolong 
 his  days  in  his  kingdo7n,  he,  and  his  children^  in  the 
 midji  of  (b)  Ifrael.  *  By  which  words  God  plain- 
 '  ly  exprefs'd,  what  good  will  be  had  for  a  king- 
 '  dom,  and  that  an  hereditary  one,  and  for  the 
 '  right  poffefTor  of  it  and  his  heirs,  and  how  ad- 
 «  vantagious  the  continuance  thereof  would  be  to 
 
 *  the  (c)  people '.  And  further,  (as  the  fam&  au- 
 thor doth  well)  '  by  the  way,  obferve,  it  is  not 
 t  faid,  thou  fhalt  fet  under,  but  over ;  and  the 
 
 *  people  are  here  fpoken  of  in  the  lingular  num- 
 '  ber,  as  one  congregate  body  ;  fo  that  the  King 
 i  — ^was  to  be  to  the  whole  imbodied  focicty, 
 
 *  not  an  inferior  minifter,  but  a  fuperior  d  ma- 
 '  giftrate  *;  manifeftly  contrary  to  that  falfe  max- 
 im of  our  popular  demogogues,  that  the  King 
 is  ftnguUs  major ^   univerfts  minor ! 
 
 And,  here  alfo  we  may  perceive  an  evident 
 difl:in6lion  made  between  chufmg  a  King,  which 
 God  referves  to  himfelf,  and  fetting  up  a  King 
 over  the  people  when  fo  chofen :  which  latter 
 power  the  children  of  Ijrael  had  indeed,  but  not 
 the  former ,   it  being  God's  fole  prerogative  eli~ 
 
 gere, 
 
 [a]  Particularly  againft  /landing  armies,  arbitrary  tuxes,  Sec.  aS 
 *:is  explaia'd  by  Mr.  Blakeway,  ferm.  17 if,  p.  8.  {i>)  Deut. 
 xvii.  10.  (c)  Gijptrd's  fcrm.  at  Northamp.  I  Al^r.  1680,  p. 
 17.  Where  he  mentions  a  received  tradition  of  the  ^eres,  '  that  of 
 '  three  comn:)andj-,  which  God  gave  the  people  of  l/rael  to  exe- 
 
 *  cute,  3S  foon  as  they  were  well  fettled  in  the  land  of  Canaan 
 '  this  was  the  firft,  that  they  JJiohUI [(t  a  K'mg  over  them',  (t) 
 jiij,  p.  16. 
 
70  The  Short  History  of 
 
 gere^  the  people's  duty  recognofcere.  And  this 
 diftinftion  is  clearly  expounded  by  the  judicious 
 Hooker  \  fome  of  whofe  words  may  not  be  impro- 
 per to  be  here  inferted.     '  Heaps  of  fcriptures 
 
 *  (faith  he^  are  felcfted,  concerning  the  folemn 
 
 *  coronation  or  inauguration  of  Saul,  David,  So* 
 '  lomon  and  others,  by  nobles,  ancients,  and  the 
 
 *  people  of  the  commonwealth  of  Ifrael  j    as  if 
 
 *  thefe  folemnities  were  a  kind  of  deed,  whereby 
 
 *  the  right  of  dominion  is  given.  Which  ftrange, 
 
 *  untrue,  and  unnatural  conceits  are  fet  abroad 
 c  by  feed-men  of  rebellion,  only  to  animate  un- 
 
 *  quiet  fpirits,  and  to  feed  them  with  poflibi- 
 «  litics  of  afpiring  unto  the  thrones,  if  they  can 
 '  win  the  hearts  of  the  people,  whatfoever  here- 
 «  ditary  title  any  other  before  them  may  have, 
 '  I  fay,  thefe  unjuft  and  infolent  pofitions  I  would 
 '  not  mention,  were  it  not  thereby  to  make  the 
 
 *  countenance  of  truth  more  orient.     For  unlefs 
 
 *  we  will  openly  proclaim  defiance  unto  all  law, 
 '  equity,  and  reafon,  we  muft  (for  there  is  no 
 '  other  remedyj  acknowledge,  that  in  kingdoms 
 '  hereditary,    birth  giveth  right  unto  fovereign 
 
 *  dominion,  and  the  death  of  the  predecefTor 
 «  putteth  the  fuccelTor  by  blood  in  feifm  j  thofe 
 
 *  publick  folemnities  before  mentioned,  do  either 
 '  ferve  for  an  open  teflification  of  the  inheritor's 
 '  right,  or  belong  to  the  form  of  inducing  of 
 '  him  into  poiTelTion  of  that  thing  he  hath  right 
 '  unto.     Therefore,  in  cafe  it  does  happen,  that, 
 
 *  without  right  ot  blood,  a  man,  in  fuch  wife  be 
 '  pofTefled,  all  thefe  new  ele(^ions,  and  inveftings 
 
 <  are 
 
the  Regal  Succession    71 
 
 «  are  utterly  void ;  they  make  him  no  indefea. 
 «  fible  eftate,    the  inheritor  by  blood  may  dif- 
 
 *  poflefs  him  as  an  (a)  ufurper '. 
 
 This  valuable  authority  I  quote  the  rather,  be- 
 caufe  it  is  own'd  to  be  fo,  by  no  lefs  a  man  than 
 Sir  George  Trehy  ;    who  juftly  calls  Mr.  Hooker 
 
 *  one  of  the  beft  men,  the  beft  church-men,  and 
 
 *  the  moft  learned  of  our  nation  in  his  ib)  time' : 
 and  this  very  pafTage  (amongft  others)  was  open- 
 ly given  in  evidence,  by  the  learned  (c)  mana- 
 gers in  our  days,  before  the  higheft  judicature 
 then  in  our  nation.  So  that  this  diftindion  being 
 well  obferv'd,  will  help  us  the  better  to  under- 
 ftand  the  fcripture-phrafe  concerning  the  inftitu- 
 tion  of  Kings.  For,  tho'  we  do  fometimes  read, 
 that  the  people  made  fuch  an  one  King,  we  mu(t 
 not  apprehend,  that  they  were  the  original  of 
 regal  power,  or  that  the  kingdom  was  eleflive  ; 
 but  only  that  they  own'd  or  recogniz'd,  and 
 anointed  (d)  him  as  a  King  of  God's  making  ;  for 
 fo  were  Saul,  David,  and  Solomon  exprefly  fet 
 over  them.  But  when  that  immediate  defigna- 
 tion  of  their  Kings  from  God  himfelf  was  to  ceafe, 
 and  the  kingly  government  fettled  in  the  houfc 
 ofjudab,  according  to  7^f(?^'s  prophecy  (e\  then 
 was  the  kingdom  to  become  hereditary  ;  as  ap- 
 pears from  the  before  cited  (/)  conclufion  of  thofe 
 provifional  precepts  for  the  King  that  fliould  be 
 
 fet 
 
 (4)  Htok-r^s  ecclef.  pol.  B.  viii.  {h)  In  the  debate  about  ab- 
 dicanon,  i68S.  {b)  Sachtv.  trial,  fol.  Kig,  160.  U]  Sel- 
 /f»'s  works,  tom.  iii.  col.  234,  z^f.  e)  Cei.  xlix,  10.      /} 
 
 ViX"  in  p.  69. 
 
7x     The  Short  History  of 
 
 fet  over  them.  Agreeable  to  which  is  that  obfer- 
 vation  of  the  Jews^  that  '  it  was  ncceflary  to 
 «  anoint  the  firft  of  a  family  that  was  advanced 
 «  to  a  kingdom  ;  but  it  was  not  neccflary  to  anoint 
 
 *  his  children  that  fucceeded  him'U) :  that  is  to 
 fay,  unlefs  there  arofe  a  competition  for  the  crown 
 Cas  in  the  cafes  of  Solomon  and  Adonijah,  Joajh 
 and  Athaliah.)     For  '  the  eldeft  fon  of  the  pre- 
 
 *  decefTor  was  afterward  the  chofen  of  the  Lord : 
 «  his  birth-right  fpake  the  Lord's  appointment, 
 «  as  plainly  as  his  forefather's  undion  had  done, 
 '  and  invefled  him  with  the  title  of  the  Lord's 
 «  anointed  •,  as  we  may  fee  in  Jofiah  and  HezC' 
 '  kiahy  and  the  other  Kings  of  [h)  Judah  *. 
 
 Thus  much  of  the  laws  of  God,  pronounc'd, 
 and  recorded  by  Mofes.  And  we  do  accordingly 
 find,  that  in  all  the  regular  fucceflions,  as  well 
 among  God's  people,  as  among  the  nations,  the 
 royal  dignity  defcended  by  priority  of  birth  and 
 proximity  of  blood,  according  to  the  law  of  na- 
 ture :  except  only  in  cafes,  where  the  lineal  fuc- 
 cefllon  was  interrupted  by  the  exprefs  appoint- 
 ment and  revelation  of  God  himfelf -,  for  other- 
 wife  it  was  difown'd  by  God  as  a  violation  of  his 
 laws,  and  no  other  than  a  meer  ufurpation  ;  as 
 will  be  feen  in  the  proper  places.  But  I  mull  not 
 here  conceal  what  contempt  this  dofbrine  is  treat- 
 ed with,  by  certain  moderns ;  calling  it  '  a  new 
 '  invention  of  fome  modern  ic)  cafuifts !  a  flavifh 
 '  (d)  dodrine  !  contrary  to  (e)  fcripture !  abfurd 
 
 *  and 
 
 {a)  Vatrtck  on  i  Sam.-awi.  ri.  {b)  Edw.  Symmo»!'s  loyal 
 fubjeft,  1647,  p.  6.  (c)  Lovel's  ferm.  15  Nov.  I7^<y  P-  ^.^^ 
 C^)  l&U.  p.  51.         (e)  ikiJ.  p.  :5. 
 
/Z/^  Regal  Succession.  73 
 
 *  and(<^)  ridiculous !  magical  terms  and  (h)  diftin- 
 
 *  dions !  groundlefs  and  {c)  chymerical !   a  plain 
 
 *  oppofition  to  Icripturc,  reafon,  the  laws  and 
 '  hiftory  of  our  own  and  all  other  {d)  na- 
 '  tions ' !  ^c.  Thefe,  and  many  more  fuch  like, 
 are  words  of  great  found  :  and  perhaps  it  might 
 be  as  dangerous,  for  a  perfon  of  ordinary  abi- 
 lities, to  engage  in  clofe  controverfy,  AJvich  men 
 of  fuch  univerfal  knowledge,  as  it  would  be  to 
 take  up  the  champions  glove  at  a  coronation  !  I 
 fhall  beg  leave  therefore  only  to  give  my  reader 
 the  words  of  an  orator  of  no  mean  note,  in  a 
 fermon  preach'd  (not  many  years  ago  J  before  the 
 univerfity  of  Cambridge,  and  publifli'd  by  autho- 
 rity. '  The  chiefeft  arguments  which  I  have 
 '  hitherto  met  with,  for  excluding  a  popifli  fuc- 
 «  ceflbr,  on  the  account  of  his  religion,  are  ftolen 
 <  out  of  Doleman  the  Jefuit ;  which  book  was  writ- 
 '  ten  defignedly  to  hinder  King  James,  a  proteftant 
 
 *  fucceffor's  coming  to  the  crown.     I'letfere  fi  ne- 
 
 *  queunt  fuperos  I  And  I  do  here  publickly  declare, 
 '  what  was  always  my  judgment.^  that  I  do  be- 
 *■  lieve,  no  human  adls  or  power  in  the  world 
 '  can,  de  jure,  hinder  the  dcfcent  of  the  crown 
 '  upon  the  next  heir  of  the  blood,  which  is  his 
 
 *  unalterable  right  by  religion,  law,  hiftory,  and 
 '  {e)  reafon '. 
 
 L  As 
 
 («)    Level's  fcrra.  $  Nov.  171^,    p.  17^         (^)  I^i-'l-  P-   <^ 
 (c)  BUkeway's  fcrm.  1715,  p.  31.         (d)  ib'id.       {e)  Dr.  MiUt 
 Barne's  ferm.  9.  Scplem.  1633,  p.  iS.  It  feems  our  ii/Jjrps,  2cc, 
 were  of  the  fame  opinion  in  thcfe  days :  but  now  'tis  otherwifc. 
 
74^    The  Short  History  of 
 
 As  to  what  Mr.  PFbijIon  a.f[irms  of  the  appoint- 
 ment of  the  five fily  elders  or  magijira/es,  that  '  it 
 '  was  done  by  the  free  choice  o(  the  people ', 
 (a)  ^c .  his  own  book  may  confute  him-, 
 where  he  acknowledges,  that  it  was  neither  done 
 by  the  authority  of  the  people,  nor  of  Jetbro, 
 nor  of  Mofis:  but  *  when   Jethro  advifed  Mofes 
 
 *  to  make  judges,  it  was  only  on  fuppofition, 
 '  that  God  fhould  command  him  (b,  accordingly  * . 
 Nay,  and  the  very  texts  too  which  himfelf  has 
 quoted  in  the  margin,  to  make  good  his  afler- 
 tion,  do,  indeed,  prove  the  quite  contrary.  For, 
 as  it  v^-^sjelhro's  advice  to  Mofis  i  Tbou  Jhalt  pro- 
 vide out  of  all  tbe  people  able  men and  place  fucb 
 
 ever  them  [c)  &c.  fo  we  read,  that  it  was  not  the 
 
 people,  but  Mofis  chofe and  made  them  heads 
 
 &c.  that  the  Lord  commanded  him  to  make 
 the  eledlion,  and  he  made  it  accordingly  :  and 
 all  that  the  people  did,  or  were  requir'd  to  do, 
 was  to  fan cl if y  tbemfelves  againft  the  day  that  was 
 appointed,  for  Mofis  to  make  the  eleflion,  as  the 
 Lord  had  commanded  {d)   him.     And  what   if 
 
 *  here  no  right  of  families,  or  of  primogeniture, 
 
 *  can  be  at  all  {e)  pretended '  ?  Was  the  heredi- 
 tary fucceffion  of  inferior  magiftrates  ever  con- 
 tended for  ?  and  thcfe  'tis  plain  were  no  other  ; 
 for  the  fuprem.e  power  rem.ain'd  ftill  in  Mofis ; 
 
 to 
 
 {a)  /T/y(/?.  fcript.  polit.'p.   17.        {b}   Ihij.i^.  2,.  [c)  ExoJ. 
 
 Xviii.  ^\.         (J) verf.  -j",  i<i.  Karfb.  xi.  16,  5cc.  Deutcr.  i. 
 
 ,5,   i^j.  , xvi.  !8.         {e)  V/hijl.  fcripr,  polif.  p,  17. 
 
the  Regal  Succession.    75= 
 
 to  whom  the  final  appeal  Jay  in  all  great  mat- 
 ters (a), 
 
 %  XXIV.  But  Mofes^  being forewarn*d 
 of  his  death,  and  in  his  wifdom  forefee- 
 ing,  that  thefe  elders,  or  magiflrates,  iho'  there 
 were  feventy  of  rhem,  could  not  be  able  to  go 
 thorow  with  the  great  work,  nor  retain  the  peo- 
 ple in  due  obedience,  Vv'irhout  the  fupport  of  a 
 fupreme  governor,  prefented  this  petition  to  the 
 Lord,  to  fet  a  man  over  the  congregation^  which 
 may  go  out  before  them^  and  which  7nay  go  in  before 
 them,  and  which  may  lead  them  out,  and  zvhich  may 
 bring  them  in  ;  that  the  congregation  of  the  Lord 
 be  not  as  fheep  which  have  no  ib)  fhepherd.  And 
 thereupon  the  Lord  appointed  Jojhua  to  fucceed 
 him :  not  by  any  choice  or  nomination  of  the 
 people,  but  upon  the  immediate  defignation  of 
 the  Lord  himfelf,  and  by  the  mediate  authority 
 ot  Mofes  j  whom  the  Lord  commanded  to  lay  his 
 hand  upon  him,  and  to  give  him  a  charge  •,  and  to 
 put  fome  of  his  honour  upon  him,  that  all  the  congre- 
 gation of  the  children  of  Ifrael  might  he  obedient 
 (c).  And  fo  far  were  the  people  then,  from  claim- 
 ing it  as  their  right,  by  any  pretence  of  an  ori- 
 ginal contract,  to  ehufe  their  own  rulers,  or  to 
 cramp  their  autliority  with  limitations,  that  we 
 find  them  ready  to  hearken  unto  hiin,  and  to  do 
 as  the  Lord  coj7imanded  (d)  Mofes.  Nor  did  they 
 content  themfelves,  with  promifing  an  abfolute 
 and  unconditional  obedience  to  his  comtnands  in  all 
 
 L  2  things, 
 
 (a)  ExOiL  xviii.  zi,  z6.      {i>)  Numb.rxsW.  i6,  17.      {c)  — " 
 verf,  18.         {(l)  Dent,  xvxiv.  9. 
 
7(5    7"/^(?  Short  History^/ 
 
 things,  but  further  declar'd,  that  they  would  put 
 to  death  whofoever  fmuld  rebel  againft  his  com- 
 mandment, and  would  not  hearken  unto  his  wcrdsy 
 in  all  that  he  com?nanded  (a).  And  all  this  was 
 foon  after  ratified  by  the  Lord  himfeif,  when  he 
 magnified  Jofhua  in  the  fight  of  all  Ifrael,  and  the'j 
 feared  him^  as  they  feared  Mofes,  all  the  days  of 
 his  life  (b) . 
 
 But  there  foon  happen'd  a   remarkable  inci- 
 dent, which  well  deferves  a  place   here.     After 
 Jofhua  had  taken  pofTeflion  of  the  promifed  land, 
 and  difmifs'd  the  Reuhenites,  Gadites,  and  the  half 
 tribe  of  Manajfeh,  to  their  proper  inheritance  on 
 this  fide  of  Jordan,  they,  at  their  pajfage,  erefled 
 an  {c)  altar,    only  as  a  memorial  ot  their  rela- 
 tion to  the  other  tribes,  and  of  their  equal  right 
 to  the  worfliip  of  the  Lord  at  Shiloh  on  the  other 
 fide.     But  this  appearance  of  a  new  altar  feem- 
 ing  to  betoken  a  new  religion,  and  a  feparation 
 from  the  tabernacle  fet  up  {d)  at  Shiloh,  juftly 
 alarm'd  J^7^z/<^,  and  the  whole  congregation  ;  who 
 thereupon  immediately  prepar'd  to  go  up  to  war 
 againft  the  fuppofed  fchifmaticks.     But  firft  they 
 prudently  fent  an  honourbale  embafly,  to  expoftu- 
 late  with  their  brethren,  concerning  the  fin  and 
 
 danger 
 
 (;»)  J''^fl}-\'  i6.  Upon  which  a  learned  bifhop  judicioufly  ob- 
 ferves,  that  '  this  was  an  abfolute  government,  and  tfao'  martial, 
 
 *  yet  mod  excellent,  to  keep  the  people  within  the  bounds  of 
 c  their  obedience ;  —who,  daring  not  to  ftir  under  rigid  tyrants, 
 
 *  do  kick  with  their  heels  againft  the  moft  pious  princes'.  Bifliop 
 
 *  Grif  M^illiami*s  rights  of  King.%  (^c.  fol.  i8.         {i>)  Jofls.  iv, 
 14.         {() xxii.        {d)' xviii.  i. 
 
the  Regal  Succession.    77 
 
 danger  of  reparation :  upon  which  the  lufpefted 
 party,  knowing  themfelves  to  be  fubjeds  to  Jo- 
 Jloua,  (whom  therefore  they  could   not  lawfully 
 refift)  they  firll  fairly  fet  forth  the  juftice  of  their 
 caufe  to  his  ambaffadors,    and  then  made  their 
 humble  appeal  upon  it  to  God.     They  did  not 
 undutifully  refent  the  groundlefs  imputation  ;  and 
 fly  in  the  face  of  their  foveraign,  to  complain  ot 
 the  pretended  breach  of  privilege,  and  to  demand 
 reparation  for  their  injur'd  honour  !   much  lefs  did 
 they  prcfume  to  lift  up  their  hands  againfthis  law- 
 ful authority,  even  in  fuch  a  clear  cafe  of  felf-de- 
 fence  ;    tho'  they   might  have  fairly    made  that 
 plea,  and  were  ftrong  enough  (by  fituation  and 
 otherwifcj  to  have  forcibly  maintain'd  it.     But 
 their  hands  were  only  lifted  up  to  heaven,  and 
 their  only  arms  were  prayers  and  tears,  for  the 
 proof  of  their  innocence,  and  protection  againft 
 hafty  violence.     And  thus  it  pleas'd  God,  that 
 the  truth  was  manifefted,  the  innocent  clear'd, 
 and  their  brethren  fatisfied,  to  their  mutual  com- 
 fort:   whereas,   had  they  been  acfled  by  miOdern 
 politicks,  there  had  probably  as  fatal  a  feparadon 
 happen'd  then,  as  did  afterwards  under  the  con- 
 duft  of  Jeroboam. 
 
 And,  as  the  people  had  no  authoritative  hand 
 in  the  advancement  of  JoJIma  ;  fo  neither  did 
 they  prefume  to  fet  up  any  fuccefibr  after  his 
 death  ;  tho'  they  had  their  Sanhedrim  (or  parlia- 
 ment, as  fome  are  pleas'd  to  call  it,)  then  fitting  : 
 but,  finding  that  it  did  not  belong  to  them  to 
 chufe  themfelves  a  King,  or  fupreme  governor, 
 
 they 
 
78    The  Short  History  of 
 
 they  aik\i  the  Lord,  fa)ing.  Who  /Jjall  go  up  for 
 us  againjl  the  Canaanice  firjl,  to  fight  againjl  (a") 
 ibcin?  and  the  Lord  (b)  appointed  the  tribe  of 
 Jud'ah,  in  which  the  kingdom  was  afterwards  to 
 be  eflablifh'd.  But  now,  when  they  had  not,  for 
 fome  time,  any  one  civil  magiftrate,  fupreme 
 over  all  the  tribes,  every  feveral  tribe  feemsto  be 
 h^i  under  the  particular  government  of  its  pro- 
 per chief,  as  the  hereditary  princes  (c)  or  heads  of 
 their  refpedive  tribes :  for  this  government  was 
 originally  patriarchal,  and  defcendcd  by  primo- 
 geniture, as  hath  been  Ihevv'd  at  large.  But 
 the  common  principle  of  unity  amongft  all  the 
 tribes  was  the  high-priefl: ;  who  was  likewife  he- 
 reditary from  Aaron,  and  was  the  ultimate  judge 
 of  all  {d)  controverfiesj  even  in  civil  and  crimi- 
 nal affairs,  till  another  judge  was  rais'd  up  for 
 that  purpofe  by  the  Lord.  Yea,  and  even  then 
 too,  the  authority  of  the  high-priefl  was,  in  many 
 refpetfls,  fuperior  to  that  of  the  judge  himfelf: 
 as  appears  in  the  cafe  of  Eleazer  and  Jojhua ; 
 where  JoJJrua  himfelf  was  commanded  to  go  out, 
 and  to  come  in,  according  to  the  direftion  of  the 
 high-prieft,  after  the  judgment  cj  Urim  before  the 
 {e)  Lord.  In  fhort,  during  this  interval,  there 
 was  one  hereditary  prince  over  every  tribe,  and 
 one  hereditary  high-priefl  over  them  all,  to  de- 
 termine 
 
 [n)  Jidg,  i.  r.         [h)  ■ verf  i.    And  fo  he  did  again,  on 
 
 a  like  occalion,    againft  Benj^imin.  —  xx.  i  8.         (c)  Numi>,  i. 
 
 l6,  20,  &c, vii.  2. yxxiv.  i  3,  12,  &c.   i  CkroH.  xxvii. 
 
 i6,  a  a,  Sec.        (J)  Dc!4:.  ivii.   »,  Sec.         («)    N«w^.  xxviL 
 
ihe  Regal  Succession.      79 
 
 termine  differences  among  them,  or  any  cale  too 
 hard  for  the  princes:  but,  upon  emergent. occa- 
 fions,  God,  who  was  immediately  their  King,  in 
 this  theocracy  (as  'tis  therefore  call'd,)  took  care 
 of  them,  and  rais'd  up  deliverers  for  them  ;  as 
 will  appear  prefently.  If  this  fcheme  be  ob- 
 jeded  to,  by  the  popular  advocates,  as  inconclu, 
 five,  let  them  prove  a  better.  Sure  I  am,  that 
 if  they  contend  for  a  perfed  parity  among  the 
 feveral  tribes,  without  any  control,  'twill  rather 
 leave  us  room  to  conclude,  from  what  follows, 
 that  God  gave  his  people  a  tafte  of  the  miferies 
 naturally  attending  luch  a  flate  of  anarchy  (tho* 
 they  give  it  the  name  of  a  common-wealth  !j  that 
 they  might  be  the  more  defirous  of,  and  the  more 
 fenfible  of  their  future  happinefs  under,  monar- 
 chical government,  which  he  had,  from  the  be- 
 ginning, refolv'd  to  blefs  them  with.  Thus, 
 whereas,  afterwards,  under  their  lawful  monarchs, 
 they  were  always  fuperior  to  their  enemies,  till 
 fuch  time,  as,  by  their  repeated  fins,  they  had 
 provok'd  God  to  call  them  off;  here  we  fee  the 
 feveral  tribes  fighting  with  different  fortune  j  fome 
 conquering,  and  others  conquered.  For,  after  that 
 ihe  Lord  had  given  refi  unto  Ifrael  fro?n  all  their 
 enemies  (a)  &c.  they  (through  a  fatal  oblivion  \) 
 fuffering  themfelves  to  be  drawn  in,  firft  to  tole- 
 rate, and  then  to  unite  and  incorporate  themfelves 
 with,  the  people  of  the  nations,  the  Lord-left  thofe 
 who  remain'd,    to  be  fnares  and  traps  unto  them^ 
 
 and 
 
 (a)  f^f^i'  xxiii.  J, 
 
8o    The  Short  History  of 
 
 andfcourges  in  their  fideSy  and  thorns  in  their  e^es, 
 until  they  prijh'd  from  off  the  land  {a)  &c.  that 
 through  them  he  might  -prove  Ifrael,  whether  they 
 would  keep  the  way  of  the  Lordy  to  walk  therein, 
 (b)  &c. 
 
 Thus  we  read,  that  no  fooner  were  Jofhua  and 
 the  elders  dead,  who  had  feen  all  the  great  works 
 of  the  Lord  in  former  days,  but  the  next  gene- 
 ration forfook  the  Lord  God  of  their  fathers,  and 
 join'd  themfelves  to  the  heathens  and  their  idols  {c) : 
 whereby  having,  as  it  were,  put  themfelves  out 
 of  the  Lord's  protedlion,  he  delivered  them  into 
 the  hands  oj  fpoilers,  that  fpoiled  them,  and  expo- 
 fed  them  to  the  mercy  of  foreign  tyrants !  civil 
 wars !  and  all  the  other  mifchiefs  and  diforders 
 confequent  upon  irreligion  and  anarchy  {d) !  and 
 yet  they  were  not  quite  deflicute  of  government 
 fas  before  is  obferv'dj :  for  zealous  Fhineas  flood 
 lefore  the  ark,  as  high-priefl,  in  thofe  days ;  and 
 there  were  the  elders  of  the  congregation,  to  govern 
 them  in  the  {e)  commonwealth.  Notwithftand- 
 ing  which,  they  are  faid,  to  have  '  found  them- 
 
 *  felves  in  a  flate  of  nature  {or  rather  unnatural 
 
 *  confufwu)  where  will  and  power  were  the  only 
 '  meafure  of  their  adions :  {and  all  this)  becaufe 
 '  they   had  no  King,  no  fuprcme  magiftrate  in 
 
 *  (/)  Ifrael*.  They  wanted  a  monarch  ftill,  the 
 hreath  of  their  nojlrils  (gj,   without  whom    they 
 
 had} 
 
 (a)  Joflj.  xxiii.  13.       {b)  J»dg.  ii.  zs.       [c\  ii.  8,  ^r. 
 
 (</)— —  ii.i4-  —  iii-   8,   ii. iv,  2. vi.  i. x.  7,  9» 
 
 —  xiii.  I-  (e)  ymlg.  xx.zS. — xxi.  16,  (f)  B\(\\o^  Chattd- 
 ^er'sicrm.  30  yart.  1717.  P-  7-         ig)  Limmt.  iv.  i-O.       ' 
 
/Z?^Regal  Succession-.     8i 
 
 had,  as  it  were,  rieither  life  nor  {a)  foul  I  For  fo 
 it  is,  that,  after  the  repetition  of  their  fins  and 
 fufferings,  we  are  ufually  told  (as  a  reafon  there- 
 of, that.,  in  thofe  da\s  there  was  no  King  in  Ifrael, 
 hut  ever'j  man  did  that  which  was  right  in  his  own 
 eyes  {b  !  that  is  to  fay,  they  all  aded  without  any 
 law,  and  did  what  they  would  without  controul. 
 This  is  clearly  exemplified  in  the  theft  and  ido- 
 latry of  (c)  Micah  ;  the  rapines  and  idolatry  alfo 
 of  the  d)  Danita ;  the  beftialities  of  the  men  of 
 (e  Gibeah  •,  and  the  bloody  civil  wars  which  arofe 
 thereupon  between  the  Benjamites  and  their  f) 
 brethren  :  all  which  enormities  the  Holy  Ghoft 
 imputeth  to  the  want  of  a  King  and  regal  govern- 
 ment -,  tor,  as  a  learned  gentleman  obferves,  '  it 
 «  feems,  no  government  but  the  government  of 
 '  a  King,  in  the  judgment  of  the  fcriptures,  could 
 *  reftrain  men  from  doing  what  they  g  lifted  *. 
 And  yet  wc-  have  heard  even  this  very  ftate  of 
 anarchy  call'd  the  felicity  of  thoje  h  times!  and 
 the  people,  who  liv'd  under  it,  as  free  a  people  as 
 ever  liv'd  in  the  (i  world!  But  *tis  the  lefs  to  be 
 wonder'd  at,  in  fuch  men  as  thefe,  when  a  perfon 
 of  a  much  higher  fi:ation  was  not  afliam'd  to  tell 
 the  world,  that  he  always  reckoned  thofe  eight  years 
 (of  the  Oliverian  ufurpation  in  Scotland  a  time  of 
 
 M  great 
 
 (4)  ChJus  Xfitu,  quafi  inima  ^<p  mfnte  regerentur.  Luc.  Flor, 
 
 !.  4.  c.  5  {h)  Judg.  xvii.  6. xviii.  i. -xix.  i,  —  xxi. 
 
 2f.  (f)  y»dg.  xvii,  {d)  —  xviii.  [e  — xix.  (J)  — xx> 
 {g)  Filmer's  obierv.  on  Arifiot.  polit.  prtf.  (io)  Bradbury^  $  Kev, 
 i-ii,  p.  50,         li^  J.  iVtight'i  fcitn.  at  AiUfb.  l%  Mnr»  1719, 
 
 p.  y. 
 
great  peace  and  'a)  profperit^  !  By  this  however  v/e 
 may  fee  what  fort  of  freedom  and  liberty  fucikpeo- 
 ple  clamour  fo  much  for  :  but,  *tis  no  argument 
 of  their  being  the  Lord's  prophets  who  cry  peace, 
 peace,  when  there  is  no  (hj  peace  ;  but  rather  the 
 contrary :  fmce  one,  who  was  undoubtedly  infpi- 
 red,  fpeaks  of  fuch  a  ftate,  as  an  heavy  judgment  ; 
 faying,  in  the  perfon  of  the  I/radites,  - —  PFe  have 
 no  King,  hecaufe  we  feared  not  the  (c)  Lord. 
 ^  ,  §  XXV.  Neverthelefs,    amidfl:  all  their 
 
 Judges. 
 
 opprefTions,  no  fooner  did  they  become 
 fenfible  of  their  apoftacy,  and  turn  unto  the  Lord, 
 but  he  raifed  up  judges,  which  delivered  them  out 
 of  the  hand  of  thofe  that  fpoiled  {d)  them, 
 Q ,  . .  Thus   Othniel  was  rais*d   up,    by   the 
 
 Lord,  to  deliver  them  out  of  the  hand 
 of  a  foreign  i^e)  tyrant,  who  had  been  permitted 
 to  enflave  them  eight  years. 
 
 After  his  death,  being  again  without  a  gover- 
 nour,  their  relapfe  into  fin  provok'd  the  Lord, 
 to  fuffer  another  foreign  tyrant,  to  enflave  them 
 ,  eighteen  years  :  but,  upon  their  repentance, 
 the  Lord  rais'd  up  Ehud,  who  kill'd  the  ty- 
 rant in  cold  (/^  blood.  Which  ad  ("however  ex- 
 traordinary it  may  feem)  is  juftified  by  all  wri- 
 ters :  not  only,  becaufe  Ehud  had  that  exprefs  ap- 
 pointment and  commiffion  from  the  Lord,  to 
 deliver  his  people,  but  becaufe  Eglon  was  a  fo- 
 
 !a)  J5«r«fr  s  hiftory  of  his  own  Times,  fol.  6i;       {b)yere7n. 
 vi.14.  — viii.  II.     [c)Hoj.x.-^.     («')  7«^^.  ii.  1 6.         (0— »'. 
 
/Z^d*  Regal  Succession.     83 
 
 reigner  and  alien,  and  had  no  right  to  the  domi- 
 nion over  them,  except  (what  is  often  mifinter- 
 preted  or  miftaken  for  providence)  the  bare  per- 
 mifllon  of  God  j  fuch  as  even  the   devil  himfelf 
 has  often  had !  for  the  devil  had  full  as  good  a 
 commiffion  for  his  power  over  holy  (a)  Job,  and 
 others.     But  this  a6t  of  Ehud's,  however  juftifia- 
 ble,  for  the  reafons  before  given,  can  be  no  war- 
 rant for  others  to  do  any  violence  to  their  lawful 
 foveraigns :    becaufe    '  this  is  certain,     that   the 
 '  higher  powers  which  are  ordained  of  God  (and  as 
 '  fuch  to  he  ohefd,)  are  only  the  lawful  powers, 
 *  not  to  be  apply'd  to  [h>  ufurpers' . 
 After  him /'f)  Shamiar.  Bur  it  was  not  long    _. 
 before  the  people,  by  frefli  fins,  provok'd 
 the  Lord  to  leave  them  under  the  tyranny  of  ano- 
 tlier  foreigner  twentsj  years  :    till,  upon  their  re- 
 pentance, he  was  pleas'd  to  raife  up  (d) 
 Deborah,  and  to  deliver  the  opprefTor  in- 
 to the  hand  of  a  woman,  who  fjnote  hirn  to  death 
 [e],  where  he  thought  to  have  fiept  in  fecurity. 
 And   for   this  act  fhe  is  pronounc'd  blejfed  above 
 women  (/),    tho'   'tis  plain,    fhe  had  no  exprefs 
 commiffion  for  it,  nor  any  quarrel  againfthim  or 
 his  mafler  Jahin,  but  that  of  his  being  a  tyrant 
 without  title  ;  for  there  was  peace  between   him, 
 and  the  houfe  of  her  husband  (g). 
 
 Then  Ifrael  returned  to  their  fins,   and  were 
 
 therefore  given  up  to  other  foreigners,  who  ty- 
 
 M  2  ranniz'd 
 
 W  Tob.  i.   II.  —  ii.  6.     [b)  Burn,  ferrr;  ^  Nov.  1710,  p.  10. 
 
 (0  J'*<ig'  "i-     ?i.         {i)  '  iv.  4.  {«)  '  verf.    ii  . 
 
 (0 V.  J4.         {g)  iv.  17. 
 
84    The  Short  History  f://' 
 
 ranniz*d  over  them  feven   years  (^>,  till 
 ■ '  ^^°'    Gideon  was  rais'd  up  by  the  Lord,  to  deli- 
 ver them.     And  yet,  tho'  they  cry^d  unto  the  (b) 
 Lord  againft    their  opprefTors,  they  were  fo  far 
 from  being    ready     as  they  ought)    to  aflift   to- 
 wards their  own  dehverance,  that  they  would  have 
 put  Gideon  to  death,  becanfe  he  had  cajl  dcwn  the 
 altar  of  Baal,  and  cut  down  the  ^rove  that  was  by 
 it  [O.     And  fo  they    were  equally  flupid   after- 
 wards, in  the  cale  of  Sampfon  ;  as  fhall  be  fhcwn 
 in  its  proper  place.     However,  after  Gideon  had 
 deliver'd  them  from  their  enemies,  and  put  feve- 
 Tal  of  thofe  foreign  tyrants  to  death,  the  Tfraelites 
 ofFer'd  to  him,  and  his  heirs,  an  act  of  fettlement 
 (d  of  the  foveraignty  over  them  ;  faying.  Rule 
 thou  over  us^  both  thou^  and  thy  fon,  and  thy  fon^s 
 fon    (e)    alfo  :   But  he    utterly  refus'd   to   accept 
 thereof:  not  a.s  Mr  ffbijlon  fuppofes    'as  being 
 «  inconfiHent  with  the  prefjnt  (/   theocracy  ' ;  for 
 he  was  fenfible,  that  kingly  government  had  been 
 promis'd  the  Ifraelites,    as   one  of   their  greateft 
 bleffings,  and  provided  for  them    by   God  him- 
 iclf,  againft  luch  time  as  they  fliould   be  fettled 
 in  the  promifed  land  ^g) ;    but  becaulehe  had  no 
 y^arrant  for  it  in  the  law,    nor  any  particular  re- 
 velation from  the  Lord  ;  withott  one  of  which, 
 he  knew,  the  peoples  election  or  confent  could 
 give  him  no  right  or  title.     He  might,  'tis  true, 
 
 have 
 
 {a)  Judg.  vL  II.        (b) verf".  d.         {c^  vcrf.  30. 
 
 {d)  Morer*s  ferm    ip  M»y,   i6.;9,  p.  i^.         (e)   Jutig'  viii-  ii. 
 (/)  Script,  polit.   p.  23.  {g)   Ctn.xsu.  d,  i6.  —  xa:^.  10. 
 
 i^eut.  xvii.  14. 
 
the  Regal  Succession.    8j 
 
 have  pleaded  providence.,  and  the  people's  fub- 
 miffion  (2l%  others  have  done  fince; :  but  he  was 
 too  good  a  man,  fo  to  belie  God's  providence  ; 
 being  fenfible,  that  fuch  foundations,  alone,  are 
 too  fandy  to  build  a  lawful  govetnment  upon, 
 without  either  a  legal  title,  or  tile  an  exprefs  and 
 manifcft  revelation  from  heaven  in  his  favour ; 
 according  to  Mr.  IVhiJlon's  own  confefTion  above 
 taken  notice  of  a  . 
 
 Neverthelefs,  after  his  death,  Ahimelech  (his 
 baftard  fon)  taking  occafion  from  that  offer  of 
 the  people  to  his  father,  by  means  of  divers 
 popular  arguments  drawn  from  that  ftale  pretence 
 of  the  publick  good,  ufurped  the  government  as 
 King :  where  the  very  argument  which  he  made 
 life  of  to  influence  them,  fhews  plainly  that  mo- 
 narchy was  generally  efteem'd  more  beneficial 
 to  the  people,  than  either  democracy  or  ariftocra- 
 cy  ;  Whether  is  better  for  you  (fays  he,j  either  that 
 all  the  fom  of  Jerubbaal  (which  are  threefcore  and 
 ten  perfons)  reign  over  you,  or  that  one  reign  over 
 {h)  you  ?  And  this  inclined  their  hearts  to  follow 
 him:  fo  that,  having  been  furnifh'd  with  money 
 underhand,  he  therewith  hired  vain  and  light  per- 
 fons (or,  as  they  are  call'd  in  the  margin  of  the 
 old  tranflation,  idle  fellows  and  vagabonds)  which 
 followed  him  {c)  ;  by  the  help  of  which  mercenary 
 wretches,  fthe  mofl:  ufual  followers  of  fuch  a 
 mock-prince  \)  he  flrengthen'd  himfelf,  fo  as  to 
 be  able  to  fupprefs  an  infurreflion  made  againft 
 
 him 
 
 («)  Page  7.       (b)  Jtidg.  ix.  2,   3.        (0  — ■  verf.  4, 
 
26    The  Short  History  of 
 
 him  {a).  And  having  put  to  death  all  the  other 
 pretenders  (whofe  prior  rights,  by  birth,  he  was 
 jealous  of)  except  one  who  had  happily  efcap'd 
 {'^),  the  ufurper  vainly  fancy'd  himfclf  to  be 
 thoroughly  fettled,  and  thereby  to  have  acquir'd 
 a  right  to  the  crown,  '  ruling  all  things  accor- 
 «  ding  to  his  lull,  and  (as  is  ufual  with  fuch  as 
 
 *  come  unjuflly  by  the  power  ^  negleding  the  or- 
 «  dinances  and  prefcript  of  the  law,  and  hating 
 
 *  all  thofe  that  in  any  fort  were  maintainers  of 
 <  ic^:  equity  ' .  But  when  all  human  means  fcem'd 
 to  fail,  the  Lord  'who  '  will  never  want  means 
 '  and  methods  to  make  thofe  who  forget  him  re- 
 
 *  turn  to  themfelves  and  to  remember  {A)  him  '} 
 had  inftruments,  unthought  of,  to  execute  his 
 divine  vengeance  againft  him,  and  his  followers  ; 
 lirft  fending  an  evil  iei  fpirit  ithat  is,  the  fpirit  of 
 difcord,  or  the  devil,  v/hom  he  permitted  to  go 
 ^%  his  inftrument  of  vengeance^  between  him,  and 
 thofe  who  had  aflifted  him  in  his  ufurpation,  and, 
 at  laft,  beating  out  his  brains,  by  the  hands  of 
 a  weak  woman,  after  he  had  aded  the  King  three 
 •^ears  {f)  .  Thus  (fas  one  of  our  commentators 
 obferves)  '  v/e  fee,  that  the  union  among  wicked 
 *  men,  founded  in  fm,  continueth  not,  but  foon 
 
 <  breaketh  out,    through   God's  juft  judgment, 
 
 <  into  moft  deadly  enmity  :  and  again,  that  the 
 ^  moft  wicked  may  prevail  in  their  wars  for  a  time, 
 
 '  as 
 
 iii)Jiiilg.h.  34,  Sec.  (^}  — verf.  5,  Icr.  [c]  Jof^f?,  lib.  v. 
 cap.  9«  {d)  Burn,  fcrin.  23  Decern.  16S8,  p.  31.  [e)  fudg. 
 i*"  ^5*        (/)  —  V'^5'^*  -  ^>  and  /  5 . 
 
the  Regal  Succession    87 
 
 '  as  did  AVimelech^  for  the  punifiiment  of  other 
 '  wicked  j  themfelves  receiving  their  juft  reward 
 '  e'er  long,  as  he  alfo  ia)  did  *.  And  'tis  a  juft 
 remark  of  a  learned  divine,  that  '  v;herefoevef 
 '  the  fcriptures    mention    the  conftitution   cf  a 
 
 '  King   after  this  manner,  they  likewife  re- 
 
 '  cord  not  only  the  fruftrations  of  the  people's 
 '  endeavours,  but  alfo  that  they  were  fruftrated 
 '  by  fome  heavy  and  fudden  judgments  from  God, 
 '  both  upon  the  ufurper  (whereby  he  was  de- 
 '  graded  from  his  undue  honour,!  and  the  people 
 '  who  prefumed  to  confer  that  honour  upon  him 
 '  without  a  warrant  from  God,  and  fo,  by  thaE 
 '  means,  to  obtrude  a  deputy  upon  God,  of  their 
 
 *  own,  and  not  of  God's  {h)  eleftion '.  Which 
 is  enough  to  cxpofe  the  unwarrantablenefs  of 
 fuch  men's  reafonings,  as  'fuppofe  it  more  than 
 '  pofTible,  that  a  people  may  bind  themfelves, 
 
 *  and  convey  the  foveraignty  over  them,  to  a  per- 
 "^  fon  or  family,  exprefly  and  by  name  :  which 
 '  bond  or  conveyance  ratified  by  publick  faith, 
 '  contract  and  agreement,  they   look  upon  to  be 
 
 *  forthwith  facred  and  inviolable,  and  a  title  noc 
 
 *  inferior  to  an  immediate  nomination  from  (i-j 
 
 *  heaven'  ISc. 
 
 But  Mr.  Whifton^  after  this  manner,  would 
 infinuate,  from  Ahimelech's  courting  the  people  to 
 eled  him,  that  *  that  method  of  free  eleftion, 
 «  was  the  then  folemn  known  way  of  obtaining 
 
 '  fecular 
 
 {«;  Dr.  Mnyer.  {h)  Hujifonoi  gover.  p.  1 14.  {c)  Garmji. 
 ferm.  7  June,  171 6,  p.  6. 
 
88     The  Short  History  of 
 
 '  fecular  dominion  in  the  world*  {a)\  but  he  does 
 not  obferve,  that,  in  the  very  offer,  which  the 
 fame  pcopk  had  newly  before  made  to  Gideoriy 
 they  exprelly  acknowledge  the  natural  right  of 
 hereditary  fucceffion  -,  faying,  rule  thou  over  us^ 
 both  thoUy  and  thy  fon^  and  thj  foil's  fan.  Where 
 they  plainly  intimate,  that  if  the  father  were  once 
 lawfully  their  King,  the  fons,  and  other  defcen- 
 dants,  would  exped  to  fuccecd  of  courfe,  with- 
 out any  other  title,  than  that  of  their  birth  :  for 
 it  was  the  father  only,  to  whom  they  were  per- 
 fonally  oblig'd,  for  their  deliverance  from  the 
 hand  of  M'ldian.  Neither  is  it  fbrange,  that  one 
 who  had  no  other  means  of  gratifying  his  unjuft 
 ambition,  than  by  cajoling  the  mutinous  popu- 
 lace, fhould  encourage  them  to  believe  and  affert 
 more  power  than  they  truly  had,  when  he  knew, 
 that  whatever  extraordinary  ufe  they  fliouldmake 
 thereof,  it  would  the  better  anfvver  his  own  end: 
 as  if  he  had  faid  to  them,  /,  and  my  follo'xeri,  will 
 invejl  yoii^  in  your  Sanhedrim,  zvith  the  pretended) 
 foijuer  to  make  a  King^  that  I  viyfelf  may  he  the  man  / 
 However,  v/ere  it  as  he  fuppofes,  I  wonder  what 
 ufe  our  author  could  make  of  it,  or  how  he  can 
 be  confiflent  with  himfelf,  when,  at  the  fame 
 time,  he  tells  us,  '  that  yet,  the  exercifc  of  this 
 '  power  by  the  people,  when  done  upon  foolifh 
 
 *  motives,    contrary  to    other   obligations,    and 
 
 *  accompanied  with  blood  and  violence,  may  be 
 
 *  highly  criminal  before  God^  and  bring  down 
 
 *  feverc 
 
 (*)  I0}\ji.  Script,  pclit.  p.  2,  J. 
 
/Z;^' Regal  Succession.  89 
 
 '  fevere  judgments  from  :a)  him ' !  But  I  fhall 
 not  infill  upon  his  inconfiftencies.  'Tis  enough 
 for  me  that  our  popular  advocates  can  have  little 
 reafon  to  triumph  in  this  cale :  fince,  whatever 
 power  the  people  prefum'd  to  take  to  themfelves, 
 in  order  to  the  fetting  up  of  Jbimelech,  'tis  plain, 
 it  turned  both  to,  his  ruin  and  their  deftrudion  j 
 and  (I  have  the  authority  of  a   convocation  to 
 
 fay,)  that  *  if  any  man  fhall  affirm  ^ .that  the 
 
 '  fad  of  the  Sichemites  may  lawfully  be  imitated 
 *  by  any  chriftian  people,  <^c.  he  doth  greatly 
 '  {h)  err'. 
 
 Here   I  cannot   omit  the   parable  of  Jotham^ 
 
 whereby  he  endeavoured  to  open  the  eyes  of  the 
 
 deluded  people,   and  to  alienate  their  affeflions 
 
 from  the  ufurper  i  letting  them  know,  '  that  thofe 
 
 '  who  were  virtuous,  and  whom  reafon  and  reli- 
 
 '  gion  had  taught  the  fafe  and  happy  eftate  of 
 
 «  moderate  fubjeclion,  had  refufed  to  receive,  as 
 
 '  unlawful,    what  others  had  no  power  to  give, 
 
 '  without  diredlion  from  the  King  of  Kings ;  who 
 
 '  from  the  beginning  fas  to  his  own  pecuharpeo- 
 
 '  pie.)  had  appointed  them,  by  whom  and  how 
 
 <  to  be  govern'd.     This  he  taught  them  by  the 
 
 «  olive,    which  contented  it  fclf  with  its  fatnefs, 
 
 '  the  ^^-//Vi?  with  its  fweetnefs,  and  the  w?^  with 
 
 '  the  good  juice  it  had :   the  bramble  only,  who 
 
 '  was  moil  bafe,  cut  down  all  the  red,  and  ac- 
 
 '  cepted  the  foveraignty.    He  alfo  foretold  them, 
 
 '  by  a  prophetick  fpirit,  what  ihould  befal  them 
 
 N  in 
 
 (»)  Whifi.  fcripc.  pol.p.  £3,  14.    ib)  Bp.  Ovtral's  convoc.book, 
 lib.  2.  cap.  I  ?. 
 
50    T/^^  Short  History^ 
 
 '  in  the  end,  and  how  a  fire  fhould  come  out  of 
 
 •  the  hra?nUe^  and  confume  the  ccd.vs  of  Leha  • 
 
 *  non^  {a)',  fignifying,  that  not  only  the  common 
 people  fhould  be  deflroy'd  by  that  upftart,  but 
 the  nobles  alfo  who  had  a  hand  in  raifing  him  to 
 his  unjuft  power.  But  thefe  being  truths  too 
 plain  to  be  told  in  fuch  times,  no  fooner  had 
 Jothain  ended  his  parable,  but  he  ran  awa^y  and 
 fled  for  fear  of  (b)  Abimclech. 
 
 After  feveral  other  viciflltudes  of  fuming  and 
 deliverance  {c],  and  finning  again,  it  pleas'd  the 
 Lord  at  length  to  deliver  his  people  into  the  hand 
 of  the  Philiitines  fort^  (d)  years.  But,  the  Lord 
 having  foretold,  that  Sa?npfon  was  to  be- 
 gin to  deliver  Ifrael  out  of  their  (e)  handy 
 and  he  beginning  to  a6l  accordingly,  tho'  it  was 
 their  duty,  as  well  as  intereft,  to  embrace  all 
 occafions,  and  ufe  all  lawful  means,  to  free  them- 
 felves  from  the  foreign  yoke,  under  which  they 
 groan'd :  yet  they  bafely  refolv'd,  and  chofc  to 
 hind  and  betray  their  brother  into  the  hands  of 
 his  and  their  mortal  enemies,  the  Pbili/lines,  who 
 opprefs'd  them,  rather  than  contribute  to  their  < 
 own  deliverance,  by  embracing  the  opportunity 
 and  means  that  God  had  put  into  their  hands ! 
 And  all  this  too,  upon  a  mod  falfe,  as  well  as 
 flavifli  principle  :  Knoweft  thou  not  ffay  they) 
 that  the  Philiitines  are  riders  over  us?  What  is  this 
 
 that 
 
 a)  Juilg.  7  an^  Sir  IV^lt.  Raleigh,  fol.  i(>f).  (h)  Jttdg.  ix.  ji. 
 (c)  Viz.  by  Tolct^  Jstir,  Jrfhthah,  llzan,  Elon,  Aklon\  of  whom 
 mention  is  made  in  JfJies  x,  xi  and  xii.  [J)  J»dg.  xiii.  i. 
 {t) verf.  5. 
 
the  Regal  Succession.    91 
 
 that  thou  haji  dane  unto  us  {a)  ?  As  if  the  bare 
 pofTefllon  of  the  power  could  have  given  the 
 Philijtines  a  right  to  the  dominion  over  them  ! 
 Whereas,  they  could  not  but  know,  that,  by 
 their  law,  no  foreign  power  could  have  any  right 
 thereto  :  and  therefore  that  the  bare  pofleflion  of 
 fuch  power,  without  a  particular  revelation  from 
 God,  clearly  prov'd  in  its  favour,  could  be  no- 
 thing but  a  downright  ufurpation  ;  and  confe- 
 quently  was  of  no  manner  of  obligation  upon 
 their  confciences,  but  to  be  remov'd,  as  foon  as 
 they  poflibly  could  do  it. 
 
 'Tis  true,  fome  may  fay,  that  the  fuccefs 
 which  the  Philijlines  had  had  againft  Ifrael  was 
 '  an  evidence  of  God's  giving  them  a  right  of 
 '  dominion,  and  an  earneft  of  God's  good  will 
 '  to  them  1  That  God's  hand,  and  vifible  marks 
 '  of  his  providence  w^re  in  it !  That  it  was  the 
 *  Lord's  doing  !  '  ^c.  For  thus,  when  our  Ifrael 
 was  under  the  dominion  of  modern  PhiliJlineSy 
 and  our  rightful  and  lawful  King  driven  by  un- 
 natural rebels  and  regicides,  to  feek  his  bread  in 
 exile,  and  even  there  too  hunted  like  a  partridge 
 in  the  inountains  (b)  *,  when  our  inheritance  was 
 turn'd  to  firangers,  our  houfes  to  aliens !  our  necks 
 were  under  perfecution !  fervants  ruled  over  us, 
 and  there  was  none  (in  human  view)  to  deliver  us 
 out  of  their  hands !  (c)  &c.  Then  (I  fay)  did  thofe 
 falfe  prophets,  mod  audaciouHy  blafpheme  the 
 N  2  Lord 
 
 {a)  Judg.  XV.  ir.  {h')    I   $inm>  xxvi.    20,        (<■)  l/» 
 
 jnnt  V'.—— 
 
9 X   The  Short  History^ 
 
 Lord  of  Hofts  ;  ftiling  their  fuccefTes  againfl:  hid 
 
 anointed. '  The  glorious  accomphlhment  of 
 
 <  their  prayers ! God's  fentence  after  folemn 
 
 *  {a)  appeals !  • —  The  falvation  of  God  ' 
 
 *  The  deliverance  of  our  laws,  and  hberties,  and 
 '  birth-rights  !  ■ (and,  in  (hort)  the  greateft 
 
 *  demonftration  of  grace,  that  ever  heaven  made, 
 
 *  to  any  of  the  fons  or  daughters  of  men,  next 
 
 *  to  the  redemption  of  loit  man  through  Chrijl ' ! 
 (h)  To  fuch  an  high  degree  of  blafphemy  do  men 
 gradually  arife,  when  once  they  proflitute  their 
 pens  for  gain,  smd  let  out  their  tongues/or  hire(c)  ! 
 But  alas  1  '  whither  will  men  wander,  when  they 
 
 *  fcek  to  defend  what  themfelves  know  to  be  wick- 
 
 *  ed !  when  they  give  themfelves  up  to  the  drud- 
 
 *  gery'  of  writing  for  a  party,  which  they  muft 
 
 '    fup- 
 
 (.-»)  What  prpfumprlou'!  cpp'ication  has  been  made  of  fech  np- 
 pcals,  we  may  learn  (:.mongft  others)  from  a  late  reverend  divine, 
 who  informs  ir,  that  ihe  preachers  under  the  comniand  cf  the 
 rebel  Monmctith,  had  the  imp'idence  to  fippral  to  htavcn  for  the 
 JHJi'tce  cf  their  arms,  find  to  .challerge  God  to  duide  for  them  in 
 the  day  ef  battle.  Cha.  Button  &  ftrm.  tt  July,  i68c,  p.  z.  And 
 his  cenfure  of  them  for  it  is  very  juR;  ^"^,.  '  Thfv  invadi-d  our 
 '  land,  and  made  war  upon  their  lawful  prince,  and  fo  were  »e- 
 '  bels;  they  rraduc'd  his  royal  perfon  and  government,  awd  fo 
 
 •  were  flanderers  j   they  deceiv'd   the  peopl;;    with  innunicralle 
 
 *  fa'fe  ftories  and  legendary  tale?,  and  fo  vvcre  lyars;  they  robb'd 
 '  and  plundcr'd  their  ielow  fubjefts  of  thoir  proper  goods,  and  f^> 
 
 *  were  thieves;  and  lafilv  they  imbrued  their  hands  in  their  bre- 
 
 •  threns  blood,  and  fo  were  murderers'.  ©»£•.  ibid.  p.  13.  {h) 
 Speed'*  thankfg.  Term,  at  BriJloJ,  24  0£i.  i6f  i,  (for  the  defeat  of 
 the  KLing  at  Wcrcefter]  p.  i .  {c)  Mic.  iii.  11.  Bifhop  Burnet 
 truly  fays,  that  prayers  (or  thankfgivings)  are  aninjpious  profjna- 
 tion  ef  the  ttame  of  God-,  if  that  for  which  we  (pray  o:)  hi  fs  G&d 
 ie  uttUrcful.    Scrm.  at  Salub,  j-  Nsn.  1710,  p.  li. 
 
//j^  Reg  AL  Succession.    93 
 
 ^  fupport  right  or  wrong !    when  they  have  no 
 *  principles  left,  but  to  ferve  prefent  turns  * !  Then 
 with  a  moft  wicked    defign    to  make  rebellion 
 feem   meritorious,    were  good  names  put  upon 
 the  mod  damnable  actions :  as  refiftance  of  law- 
 ful authority  was   the  diftinguifliing  note  of  elec- 
 tion, whiift  obedience    for  confcience  fake  was  a 
 certain  mark   of  reprobation  !    to   be  peaceable 
 and  loyal  was  an  unpardonable  crime,  whiift  to 
 be  feditious  and  rebellious  was  a  cardinal  virtue ! 
 to  fight  againft  the  King  was  fighting  the  Lord's 
 battles !    murdering  bifliops  was  the  deflrudion 
 of  antichrijtl  pulling  down  churches  was  refor- 
 mation  from   popery !    plundering  the  royalifts 
 was   fpoiling  the   Egyptians !    fequeftring   men's 
 cftates  was  doing  themfelves  juftice,  fthey  being 
 the  faints,  and  the  earth  was  theirs,  with  the  ful- 
 nefs  thereof! )  and  hindmg  their  King  in  chains^  and 
 their  nobles  in  links  of  iron  was   helping  the  Lord 
 againft  the  mighty  &c.     '  For  by  this  time  the  flat- 
 '  terers  of  that  great  tyrant  had  learned,    by  a 
 
 *  nev/  device,  upon  the  bare  account  of  provi- 
 '  dence,  without  refpeft  to  the  juftice  of  the  title 
 '  Cthe  only  right  and  proper  foundation,  )  to  in- 
 '  terpret  and  apply  to  his  advantage  whatfoever 
 
 *  they  found,  either  in  the  fcriptures  or  in  other 
 '  writings,    deliver'd  concerning    the   power  of 
 
 *  princes  or  the  duty  of  fubjeds ;  profanely  and 
 '  facrilegioufly   taking  the   name  of  that  holy 
 
 *  providence  of  God  in  vain,  and  ufing  it  only 
 
 *  as  a  ftalking-horfe,  to  ferve  the  lufts  and  inte- 
 
 *  refts 
 
94    ^-^^  Short  History  of 
 
 *  refts  of  ambitious  {a)  men  *.  So  that  it  was  no 
 improper  allufion  of  a  late  witty  author,  who 
 compares  thofe  preachers  to  poppets,  who  *  figni- 
 
 *  fied  nothing  of  themfelves,    but  as   they  were 
 
 *  guided  by  the  mafters  of  the  machine,  from 
 '  under  the  ftage,  or  behind  the  (h)  hanging ' ! 
 And  if  Mr.  Bradbury  had  made  an  application  to 
 fuch  preachers  ('of  his  own  ftampj  and  to  fuch 
 times  as  thefe  here  before  us,  he  might  with  fome 
 propriety,  haveharangu'd  againft  a  fianding  arfny, 
 and  a  fawning  (c)  clergy  !  for  never  could  that  epi- 
 thet be  more  fuitably  apply'd,  than  to  fuch  a 
 pack  of  men  •,  whofe  fcandalous  perverfions  of 
 holy  fcripture  I  fhould  not  have  taken  this  notice 
 of  here,  had  we  not  feen  the  like  adopted  and 
 propagated,  by  fome  who  would  be  thought 
 golden  (d)  candlejlicks  in  the  church  of  Chriji ! 
 which  brings  to  my  mind  a  jufl:  refleftion  of  a 
 noble  author,  that  '  if  the  perfon  and  the  place 
 '  can  improve  and   aggravate   the  offence,    (as 
 
 *  without  doubt  it  doth  both  before  God  and  man,) 
 '  methinks  the  preaching  treafon  and  rebellion 
 '  out  of  the  pulpits,  fhould  be  worfe  than  the  ad- 
 '  vancing  it  in  the  market ;  as  much  as  poifoning 
 •=  a  man  at  the  communion,  would  be  worfe  than 
 «  murthering  him  at  a  tavern.     And,  it  may  be, 
 
 *  in 
 
 (/»)  Sanderf.  pref.  to  Ujlur,  p.  <),  6.  (b)  L'Ejlrange's  feafonj 
 memor.  1680,  p.  11.  (c)  Bradb.  ferm.  5  Niv.  i7ii,  p.  15. 
 (d)  Dr.  J»»g.f  obfcrves,  what  a  miifortune  it  ij,  that  x.\ic  Mttguard' 
 id  indulgence  of  the  church  (too  frodigal  of  her  favours)  inducts 
 her  fometimes  to  confer  eminent  and  facred  characicrs  undefrvedly 
 u^oH  mtn!  Serm.  2  June^  i7i7>  p*  13. 
 
/Z?d' Regal  Succession.      97 
 
 «  In  that  catalogue  of  fins,  which  the  zeal  of  fome 
 '  men  hath  thought  to  be  the  fin  againfl;  theHo- 
 «  ly  Ghoft,  there  may  not  any  one  be  more  rea- 
 «  fonably  thought  to  be  fuch,  than  a  minifter  of 
 
 *  Chrift  turning  rebel  againfl:  his  prince,  Cwhich 
 
 *  is  a  mod  notorious  apoftacy  againfl:  his  order) 
 
 *  and  his  preaching  rebellion  to  the  people  as  the 
 '  doctrine  of  Chjifc  j    which  adding  blafphemy 
 
 *  and  pertinacy  to  his  apofl:acy,  hath  all  the  marks 
 '  by  which  good  men  are  taught  to  avoid  than 
 '  fin  againfl:  the  Holy  (a)  Ghofl: '! 
 
 And  here,  by  the  way,  it  may  be  proper  to 
 ihew  the  notorious  fallacy  of  judging  of  any  caufc 
 from  its  fuccefs.  For,  as  misfortune  is  no  cer- 
 tain proof  of  a  bad  caufe  ;  fo  neither  is  fuccefs 
 a  proof  of  a  good  one.  '  For  thofe  who  have 
 '  a  very  jufl:  caufe  may  deferve  to  be  punilh'd  •,  and 
 «  then  God  may  juflly  punifh  them,  and  deliver 
 '  them  into  the  hands  of  their  enemies.  God 
 '  does  not  always  determine  what  is  right  and 
 '  wrong  by  the  events  of  war  :  for  he  is  the  fove- 
 
 *  raign  judge  of  the  world,  and  may  punifh  a 
 '  wicked  nation  by  unjufl  oppreflTors  ;  as  he  often 
 
 *  did  ihe  (a)  Ifraelites '.  And,  even  in  this  very 
 Look  of  Judges^  we  find  a  remarkable  inftancc 
 to  the  purpofe,  in  the  two  defeats  which  the  chil- 
 dren of  Benjamhi  gave  the  reft  of  the  tribes  of 
 Ifrael;  where  the  jufl  caufe  fufier'd  the  lofs  of 
 fort'j  thoufand  Ifraelites^  and  was  not  attended  with 
 
 fuccel^ 
 
 [a)  cUrend.  hift.  vol.  ii.  fol.  17,18,  19.  {h]  ShtrLfarn- 
 17  Jt4ne,  169 r,  p.  if. 
 
9<5    The  SkortHistory^/ 
 
 fuccefs  till  the  third  {a)  attack.     And  indeed,  the 
 whole  book  of  Judges  is  nothing  elfe  but  a  feries 
 of  hiftories  to  this  purpofe,  to  fhcw  us,  that  con  • 
 queft,    and  pofTeiTion,    and  fuccefs   alone,  never 
 gave  any  of  the  foreign  princes  a  right  to  the 
 dominion  over  Ifrael:  but  that  ftill,  in  due  time, 
 God  himfelf  provided  deliverers,  to  dcftroy  the 
 ufurpers    (whom  he  had  permitted  for  a  while, 
 to  tyrannize  over  his  people,  for  their  fins,)  and 
 to  reftore  them  to  their  jull  rights  upon  their  re- 
 pentance.    And  is  not  here  a  plain  diftinftion, 
 between  the  providence  of  God  and  his  permifTion, 
 that   whereas,    in  judgment   he  permitted   their 
 neighbours  to  fpoil  them,  in  his  Mercy  he  provid- 
 ed deliverers,  to  refcue  them  out  of  their  hands? 
 'Tis  true,  among  thefe  judges,  there  was  no 
 fuch  thing  as  any  hereditary   defcent  or  fuccef- 
 fion,  by  birth-right :  nor  was  it  necefTary,  fince 
 God,  who  v/as  himfelf  their  King,  rais'd  up  whom 
 he  thought  fit,    as  vice-roys,    magiftrates,    and 
 officers  under  him,  upon  extraordinary  occafions ; 
 letting  them,  between  whiles,  feel  the  miferiesof 
 an  Inter-regnum^  which  never  happens  in  heredi- 
 tary governments.  And  it  is  further  remarkable, 
 that  as  God  always  punifh'd  their  fins  by  foreign 
 ih)  inflruments,  fo,  whenever  he  was  pleas'd  to 
 deliver  them,  it  was  flill  by  the  means  of  fome 
 
 one 
 
 {a.)  Judg.  XX.  I  S,  5cc.  (b)  On  this  account  I  fuppofc  it 
 Was,  that  b'fhop  Burnet  reckon'd  among  the  iingular  bleflTings  of 
 God  upon  th'is  nauon,  '  the  prcferving  us,  during  cur  civil  wars, 
 
 *  from  being  made  a  prey  to  our  neighbours,  and  trom  ftrangers 
 
 *  getting  footing  among  us'.     Burn.  Icrra.  5  Xffv.  1689,  p.  4.  . 
 
the  Regal  Succession.     97 
 
 one  of  their  own  countrymen,  unexpeftedlyraii'd 
 up :  and,  as  he  permitted  fix  leveral  tyrants  to 
 opprefs  them,  fo  (to  fliew  how  much  he  delights 
 in  mercy  more  than  judgment)  he  provided  twice 
 as  many  [a)  judges,  in  their  diftrefs,  to  dehver 
 them.  But  neverthelcls,  thofe  frequent  inftances 
 of  his  uncovenanted  mercy  ought  not  to  make 
 us  prefume  upon  the  like  extraordinary  delive- 
 rances, whenever  we  raflily  and  rebellioufly  plunge 
 ourfelves  into  difficulties  and  dangers. 
 
 §  XXVI.  H I T  H  E  R T o  the  government  ^^  ^ 
 of  Ifrael  had  been  a  'Theocracy  :  that  is,  of  all 
 God  himfelf  was  their  King  after  a  peculiar  "'"""^^• 
 manner,  and  ruled  them  by  viceroys  of  his  own 
 more  immediate  nomination,  and  according  tolaws 
 of  his  own  making  -,  the  laft  appeal  or  dernier  re  fort 
 being  always,  in  extraordinary  cafes,  to  himfelf, 
 by  means  of  the  miraculous  Urim  and  'Thummim, 
 But  now  the  people,  dcfiring  a  King  by  fucceflion, 
 rather  than  by  deputation,  we  Ihall  find  them  go- 
 vern'd  after  another  {h)  manner :    namely,  by  a 
 
 O  race 
 
 {«)  Viz.  Othnsel,  EhutJ^  Shfim^ar,  Dehor  ah,  Gideon,  Tola,  Julr^ 
 Jephthah,  Ic/zstn,  Elon,  Abdon,  and  Sampfom  (b)  The  difie- 
 rence  between  the  Kings  and  Judges  is  v.cll  defcrib'd  by  Mart. 
 Becanus  the  Jefuir,  in  thefe  three  circumilsnces :  i.  The  judges 
 tvere  rah'd  up  by  God,  /'«  /»«  extraordinary  munner,  to  deliver  his 
 people  in  times  of  diftrefs  :  but  the  Kmgs{ihit.  is,  of  Judah,  down- 
 wards from  Solomon)  rugr.'d  by  right  of  fucce ffion  ;  and  govern' i 
 as  well  in  times  of  peace  as  of  war.  z.  The  judges  did  not  Juccted 
 one  another  immidiatdy,  but  after  feme  tnterzal  of  ^ime,  as  the  pea- 
 pie's  fiecejjities  reqttir'd,  and  th>:ir  repentarce  procurd  them,  a  deli- 
 verance :  but  when  one  Kmg  died,   another  fuceeeded  immediately. 
 
 3.  The 
 
^8     The  Short  History  of' 
 
 race  of  hereditary  monarchs,  fucceedlng  one  ano- 
 ther,  according  to  the  natural  lav/  of  primogeni- 
 ture -,  except  in  two  or  three  of  the  firft  inftances, 
 before  the  government  was  thoroughly  fettled ; 
 as  I  fliall  fliew  in  due  order. 
 
 For,  after  the  death  of  Eli  the  high-prieft,  Sa- 
 muel the  prophet  judgffd  Ifrael  all  the  days  of  his 
 (a)  liff:  but,  when  he  was  old,  he  made  his  fons 
 judges  ;  who  walked  not  in  his  ways,  but  turned  afide 
 after  lucre^  and  took  bribes^  and  perverted  judgment 
 (^j.  Under  pretence  of  which  grievances  and 
 mal-adminiftration  (for  '  when  men's  difcontents 
 »  grow  ripe,  there  feldom  wants  a  plaufible  oc- 
 '  cafion  to  vent  (c)  them ')  the  people,  who  are 
 too  naturally  prone  to  revolutions,  and  changes 
 of  government,  grew  weary  of  judges,  and 
 long*d  for  the  completion  of  God's  promife  ;  de- 
 firing  a  King  to  judge  the?n  like  all  the  (d)  nations: 
 By  which  laft  words,  we  may  perceive,  that  in 
 thofe  days  all  the  nations  were  govern'd  by  Kings  •, 
 
 whereas 
 
 3.  The  judges  themfelves  Were  not  fo  properly  the  rulers  of  the  pec- 
 pky  as  God  himjdf  who  raisd  them  up  :  but  the  Kings  vers  rulers 
 in  their  own  right,  as  well  as  by  God's  authority.  Becani  analog, 
 vet.  5c  novi  teftam.  c  xvi.  q.  i.  To  WiSich  I  may  add  another, 
 from  the  learned  bifhop  Morton,  that,  in  the  time  of  the  Kings, 
 
 *  ncitbcr  d.d  the  judicial  laws  retain  their  full  force,  neither  did 
 
 *  God  himfelf  appoint  caprains  over  the  armies,   [as  its  the  time 
 
 *  of  the  judges)  but  all  was  done  according  ro  the  will  and  com- 
 
 *  mandment  of  the  Kings;  who,  although  they  did  keep  the  ju- 
 
 *  dicial  law  in  part,  and  for   the  great  extremities  in  war,  ask'd 
 
 *  counfel  of  God,    yet  they  were  free  in  both  tbefe  rcfpefts*. 
 Morton's  Solomon,  or  kingdom  of  Ifrael,  1/96,  p.  14,  in  4to. 
 
 («)  I  Sam.  vii    i<,.        (b)  —  viii.  i,  (^c.         (t)  Still'wgfl» 
 fcrm.   13  Nov.  1678,  p.  7.        (</)  I  Sam.  viii.  5. 
 
tloe  Regal  Succession.     99 
 
 whereas  commonwealths  were  never  once  heard 
 of,  either  in  the  laws  of  God  or  nature,  but  be- 
 gan (^J  by  rebellion  and  ufurpation.  For,  (as  Dr, 
 Sherlock  truly  obferv'd,^  '  Anflocracies  and  T>e- 
 '  mocracieswevQa.  defedlion  from  regal  power,  oc- 
 
 *  cafion'd  by  the  ill  government  of  princes,  or  by 
 '  the  giddinefs  and  licentious  humour  of  thepeo- 
 '  pie,  who  are  fond  of  liberty,  power,  and  innova- 
 
 *  tions:  but,  tho' God  by  his  providence  permit- 
 '  ted  fuch  changes  of  government,  he  never  by 
 
 *  a   vifible   authority  and  diredion  form'd   and 
 
 *  modelPd  a  commonwealth  as  he  did  the  Jewi/b 
 '  (b)  monarchy'.  And  Mv.  Sddsn  proves,  that 
 '  although  divers  of  the  chiefeft  ftates  of  the 
 '  old  Grecians  (and  I  think  only  of  the  Greciarj 
 
 *  in  the  elder  ages)  were  in  their  moft  flourifliing 
 '  times  Democracies  or  Opti7nacies :  yet  the  more 
 '  ancient  ftates  there  were,  m  every  place,  {c) 
 '  monarchies*.  Yea,  and  bifhop  L^)i<i  hi mfelf  ad- 
 mits, there  was  no  fuch  government  as  a  free- 
 ftatc  or  commonwealth  known  in  the  world,  in 
 David's  {d)  time.  All  which  would  incline  us  to 
 conclude,  with  another  learned  author,  that 
 whenfoever  the  firft  was  erefted,  it  had  neither 
 other  foundation,  than  rebellion^  murder  and  ufiirpa- 
 tiofiy  nor  other  author  than  the  (e)  devil!  And  fur- 
 ther too  we  may  learn,  that  when  the  people  ask-d 
 a  King,  as  othernations  had,  they  '  meant  thereby 
 
 O  2  '  prin- 
 
 t's) viz..  among  the  Grecians.  (6)  Sherl,  ftrm.  29  Mny,  ifiSj-, 
 p.  9,  10.  {c)  Seld.  (Tit.  of  hon.)  vol.  iii.  co!.  ii8.  (./) 
 Difc.  of  God's  ways  of  dilpof.  of  kings,  idyi,  p.  16,  (?)  Hud- 
 fon  of  governor.  1647,  p.  90. 
 
loo    *The  ShortHistory^ 
 
 <  principally,    that   fuch  their  Kings   might  by 
 «  fucceflion  govern  them,  'io  as  one  being  dead, 
 *  they  might  ftill  have  (a)  another'. 
 „    ,.  §   XXVII.  For  that  thofe  Kings  of 
 
 Hereditary.       /  .  ,,,•,• 
 
 the  nanons  were  all  hereditary  too,  not 
 ele<5live,  we  might  rcafonably  conclude,  if  we 
 had  no  better  proof")  fmce  we  find,  that  the  Ifrae- 
 lites  were  not  then  grown  prefumptuous  enough, 
 to  undertake  fuch  a  revolucion  on  their  own  heads, 
 and  to  proceed  to  an  election  of  a  King  by  their 
 own  authority  (in  which,  doubtlefs,  they  would 
 have  been  as  forward  to  imitate  the  natiom,  if  it 
 had  been  their  pradlice,  as  in  the  having  of  one) 
 tho*  all  ths  elders  of  Ifrael  had  gathered  themfehes 
 together  in  convention  (b).  But  they,  dreaming 
 of  no  fuch  power,  much  lefs  attempting  to  ufurp 
 it,  applied  themfelves  to  (c)  Samuel,  that  by  his 
 authority,  or  intercft  (whom  they  knew  to  be  a 
 prophet  of  the  Lord,  as  well  as  their  judge)  they 
 might  have  a  King  fet  over  them  ;  faying  to  him, 
 ftow  make  us  a  King  to  judge  us,  &c.  Yet  neither 
 would  he  take  upon  himfelf  to  do  it,  but  was 
 difpleas'd,  and  prayed  unto  the  Lord  for  his  {d)  di- 
 jedtion. 
 
 Here  it  feems  moft  proper  to  obviate  that 
 common  objection  which  is  made  by  certain  re- 
 publicans, againft  kingly  government.  Samuel 
 himfelf  alone  was  not  difpleas*d  with  their  defire 
 to  alter  his  government,  but  he  tells  'em  alfo, 
 ihat  their  wickednefs  was  great  in  the  fight  of  the 
 
 Lord, 
 
 (a)  B^.  Over/si's  convoc.  book,  ].  i.  c.  14.  (6)  i  5^/w.  viii.  4, 
 (c) verf.  5.        {d)  —~  verf.  6. 
 
the  Regal  Succession.    loi 
 
 hord,^  ifi  asking  a  Kifig  *  and  the  people  themfelves 
 acknowledge,  that  they  had  added  unto  all  their 
 fins  this  evil,  to  ask  them  a  {a)  King.  But  good 
 interpreters  agree,  that  their  fin  was  not  in  their 
 asking  a  King  (for  that  I  have  lliewn  (h ,  to  have 
 been  agreeable  to  the  revealed  will  of  God,;  but 
 in  the  circumflances  and  manner  of  their  doing 
 it.  Viz,  In  their  not  asking  for  fuch  a  King  as  fliould 
 fear  the  Lord,  and  govern  them  in  equity,  accor- 
 ding to  the  law  of  [c)  God ;  but  out  of  a  prepo- 
 llerous  defire,  only  that  they  might  be  like  unto 
 other  nations:  in  their  inordinate  askii^g  a  King, 
 without  firft  asking  God's  advice  about  it,  in  the 
 ^Uow'd  method  of  the  Uri?n  and  the  {dj  Thummira: 
 doing  it  out  of  a  difcontent  with  their  prefent  hap- 
 py condition,  and  an  inconllant  humour  of  change  : 
 out  of  an  ungrateful  and  rebellious  difpofition 
 againft  Samuel,  who  had  dons  fuch  great  things 
 for  them,  and  never  injur'd  (ej  them  :  out  of  a 
 diftruft  of  God,  and  a  bafe  fear  (/)  of  their  ene- 
 mies, from  whom  they  had  been  often  deliver'd  ; 
 proceeding  in  the  trad  of  their  former  rebellious 
 (g)  pra6lices,  fo  highly  difpleafing  to  God :  out 
 of  a  foolifh  affeftion  to  be  like  all  the  {-h)  nations, 
 without  confidering  whether  it  was  good  or  bad  : 
 under  a  fpecious  pretext  uV  of  mal-adminiftration  ; 
 of  which  they  were  not  competent  judges  :  with- 
 out waiting  God's  time  to  give  them  a  King,  or 
 
 exped:- 
 
 {a)  I  Sam.  xii,  19.        {b    P.  40,   6S,  and  6^.         (c)  peut_ 
 xvii.  19.         (J)   Exod.  xxviii,  50.  [e)   \  Sam.  xii.  i.  Sec. 
 
 (/)  ■ —  verf.  It.         [g)  —;  viii.  8.         [h)  — =  verf.  ^,  ^c. 
 (i)  Ibid, 
 
lox    The  Short  History  of 
 
 cxpeding  the  death  of  Samuel,  whom  he  had  kt 
 over  them  ;  but  reje^l'mg  (a)  the  one,  and  thereby 
 in  confcquence  (as  much  as  in  them  lay)  depofing 
 the  other,  through  a  difafFedlion  to  that  govern- 
 ment which  himfelf  had  appointed  them,  and  a 
 wcarinefs  of  his  immediate  eledlion  and  defigna- 
 tion  of  their  governours :  and  audacioufly  perfift- 
 ing  in  their  mutinous  demand,  even  after  it  ap- 
 pear'd  difpleaftng  to  {h)  Samuel ;  on  which  accounts 
 God  look'd  on  it  as  a  reje^ing  of  him  more  than 
 Samuel,  fince  he  had  appointed  him.  However 
 he  commanded  him  to  hearken  unto  [c)  them  in  all 
 that  they  /aid',  but  withal  to  Jhew  them  the  manner 
 for  right  j  of  {d)  Kings ;  that  they  might  not  after- 
 wards have  any  pretence  to  complain  of  their 
 prerogatives  and  abfolute  power,  or  think  to  cad 
 them  off  again  at  their  pleafure.  Where  likewife 
 we  may  obferve,  how  abfolute  all  the  Kings  of 
 the  nations  originally  were  ;  among  whom  there 
 were  no  laws,  hut  the  King's  will  and  (e)  pleafure, 
 
 §  XXVIII. 
 
 (a)  I  Sam.  xii.  verf.  7-       (^)  verf.  19.      (c) vcrf.  7. 
 
 (d)  -™—  viii,  9.  {e)  Vopulus  ttullis  legihus  tenebatur,  fed 
 ariitria  regum  pro  Ugibus  erant.  Juftin.  hift.  p.  i .  Mr.  StUen 
 rejects  this  teftimony  as  ridiculous  ;  and  takes  notice  of  an  obfsr- 
 vation,  that  Homer,  writing  of  the  heroick  times,  hath  not  the 
 word  vi/uod  i.  e.  a  prefcribed  law,  but  only  f^'ifxis,  /'.  e.  art 
 arbitrary  rule:  thir,  he  fays,  is  falfcj  for  proof  of  which  he  cites, 
 lu\o[xm  and  vo>ec  a'/«c  in  Homtr;  and  tells  us  of  Talus,  his 
 laws  in  Crete  written  in  brafs,  before  Horner'^  time,  ^c.  Seldea 
 tom.  3.  col.  93  s.  But  that  learned  gentleman  is  feverely  animad- 
 verted on  for  it,  by  another  j  who  obferves,  that  by  vo>oc  aJ'iit 
 Homtr  means  the  jufl  menfure  of  riming,  but  never  yfetb  »o',««c 
 
 lor 
 
the  Regal  Succession    103 
 
 b§  XXVIII.   What  this  manner  (or    ^y^^^^^^^ 
 right)  of  the  King  was,  we  have  exprefs'd 
 by  Samuel^  thus.  He  will  take  pur  fons,  and  ap' 
 
 point  them  for  himfelf  for  his  chariots^  and  to  be 
 his  horfemen^  and  fome  fhall  run  before  his  chariots ; 
 and  he  will  appoint  him  captains  over  thoufands^ 
 and  captains  over  fifties^  and  willfet  them  to  ear  his 
 ground,  and  to  reap  his  harvefi,  and  to  make  his 
 infiruments  of  wary  and  injiruments  of  his  chariots : 
 and  he  will  take  your  daughters  to  be  confe^ionaries, 
 and  to  be  cooks,  and  to  be  bakers :  and  he  will  take 
 your  fields,  and  your  vineyards,  and  your  olive-^ 
 yards,  even  the  beft  of  them,  and  give  them  to  his 
 fervants :  and  he  will  take  the  tenth  of  your  feedy 
 and  of  your  vineyards,  and  give  to  his  officers,  and 
 to  his  fervants :  and  he  will  take  your  men-fervantSy 
 and  your  maid-fervants,  and  your  goodliefl  young 
 men,  and  your  affes,  and  put  them  to  his  work :  he 
 will  take  the  tenth  of  your  Jheep  ;  and  ye  fhall  be 
 his  fervants  {a).     Where  I  mail  obferve,  by  the 
 
 way, 
 
 for  the  fetlavpof  living:  and  befides,  that  there  were  many  ages^ 
 and  many  Kings,  before  Homer*s  time,  and  before  Talus,  Minos, 
 Radamanthus,  or  any  other  law-maker ;  yea,  even  before  Mofes 
 himfelf,  who  was  the  firft  that  either  gave  laws  or  invented  let- 
 ters. •  And  therefore  (fays  he)  Mr.  Selden,  vi  veritatis  viBust 
 «  confclTeth  (i^id.)  that,  in  the  firft  times,  in  the  beginning  of  ftates, 
 '  there  were  no  laws,  but  the  arbitrements  of  princes,  as  Pompo^ 
 *  nius  fpeaketh.  Bifliop  Griffl  JVslliams's  rights  of  Kings,  1662, 
 fol.  78,  79.  which  agrees  with  the  authorities  herein  before  cited 
 (p.  43.)  from  Coke's  reports  i  as  well  as  with  the  opinion  of  the 
 judges,  in  the  great  f/i/e  del  union,  reported  by  Sr,  Fran.  Moore, 
 fol.  790,  no  one  opinion  in  all  our  law-books  contradiAing  it^  as 
 before  is  obferv'd,  p.  46. 
 {»)  I  Sam,  viii  .11,  &c. 
 
104     T^^^Short  History  of 
 
 way,  that  the  word  fervants  is  to  be  underftood, 
 «  not  as  fervants  fignifies  flaves  and  vaflals,  but 
 «  fubjedls,  who  owe  all  duty  and  fcrvice  to  their 
 «  prince  as  far  as  he  needs  [a)  them  :  according  to 
 that  of  our  bleffed  Saviour   himfelf,    where  he 
 fays,  if  m'j  kingdom  were  of  this  world,  then  would 
 my  fervants  (h)  fight.    But,  fince  it  is  made  a  great 
 queftion  armong  the  learned,  whether  this  fpeech 
 of  Samuel's  fliews  what  the  King  had  a  juft  right 
 to  do,  or  only  what,  by  a  ftretch  of  his  power, 
 he  would  do ;  whether  it  defcribes  '  fome  of  the 
 many  fore  calamities   which  are  too  probable 
 confequences  upon  the  eftablifhment  of  abfolute 
 monarchy  in  any  nation,  and  which  may  all  be 
 fumm'd  up   in    one   comprehcnfive  word   (c) 
 flavery ';    or  whether  all  thefe  were  not  intole- 
 rable, but  fuch  as  have  been  born,  and  are  fo 
 ftill,    by   free  confent  of  the  fubjefts  towards 
 their  princes,  and  what  fubjeds  ought  with  pa- 
 tience to  bear  at  their  foveraign's  (d)  hand',  I 
 fhall  beg  leave  to  lay  before  the  reader  thefe  fol- 
 lowing obfervations :     i.  That   the  Greek  word 
 S'lKclicoiJ.a,  (ufed  in  the   Sepuagint,)  and  the  Latin 
 word  j«j,  are  never,  in  the  infpired  writings,  taken 
 in  the  more  rigorous,  but  in  the  more  moderate 
 fenfe  ;  that  is,  not  for  power,  but  for  authority 
 or  right :    2.  That  there  is  nothing  here  fet  down 
 by  Samuel  that  is   fimply   forbidden  by  the  law 
 of  God,  bui;  what  the  beft  of  Kings  may  do,  as 
 
 the 
 
 (a)  Sherh  of  refift.  p.  14.  [b)  Sf.  Jshn  xviii.  36.  (c) 
 B.  Homdl,  ferm.  at  fiertf  a 2  Unr.  1707.  (^)  Kiii'''gh'6  hift» 
 'ol.  393» 
 
the  Regal  Succession.   105* 
 
 the  publick  occafions  (a)  require.  3.  That  thefe 
 were  plainly  the  prerogatives  of  the  Kings  of  all 
 the  eajlem  nations^  whom  the  Jews\7tvt  here  de(i- . 
 rous  to  be  like.  4.  That  this  place  is  not  to  be 
 underftood  of  a  tyranny,  but  of  the  natural  ftate 
 ot  the  kingdom  ;  as  may  appear,  where  Samuel 
 telleth  Saul,  that  he  need  not  fet  his  mind  on  his 
 ajfes  that  were  (b)  lojl,  '  feeing  whatfoever  was 
 
 *  good,  prctious,  and  to  be  defired  in  all  IfraeU 
 
 '  it   did  belong,    in  fome  fort,    to  him  • ; 
 
 '  {meaning  that  it  was  now  the  pare  of  all  the 
 '  people  to  contribute  even   of  their  bed  things 
 
 *  to  the  King's  ufes,  and  the  fetring  forth  of  his 
 '  Majefty  ;  yea,  and  that  the  King  might  law- 
 '  fully  exad  of  them  things  needful  for  thefe  ic) 
 
 *  purpofes '.  This  does  not  therefore  feem  to  be 
 (as  a  celebrated  preacher  before  quoted  contends) 
 fuch  '  a  very  fad  and  lamentable  account  of  the 
 '  miferies  and  unhappineiTcs  peculiarly  belonging 
 
 *  to  abfolute  monarchy,  and  confequent  upon 
 '  the  eftabliihment  of  it,  as  muft  be  a  demon- 
 :  ftration  to  all,  who  have  not  the  mofl  unwor- 
 «  thy  notions  of  Almighty  God,  that  he  could 
 '  have  no  original  defign  of  appointing  fuch  a 
 '  form  of  government,  as  the  belt,  or  as  his  own 
 
 *  inftitution,  facredly  and  inviolably  to  be  kept 
 
 *  up  in  any  nation,  much  lefs  in  all  the  nations 
 '  of  the  (d)  world '.  That  this  was  not  fo  il 
 fay  j  as  he  infifls,  needs  no  other  proof,  than  what 
 
 F  is 
 
 [a)  B  niop  Gr'f.  rVtUiam>*s  rights  of  Kings,  &c.  fol.  81.     (l) 
 I  Sam.  in.  20.      (c)  Bifhop  Msrm/'s  Solomon,  p   57,  jT^.      (</) 
 
 Bifliopi-Z*;!^/)',  as  be- ore. 
 
lo6    TZ/'d*  Short  History  ^^y 
 
 is  already  herein  before  made  of  the  divine  infti- 
 tution  of  this  very  form  of  Government:  and 
 that  too  originally  defign'd,  and  promifed  by  God 
 to  his  own  chofen  people,  the  Jjraelites,  even  be- 
 fore they  had  any  being  as  a  nation  -,  and  no 
 other  form  of  government  ever  once  inftituted, 
 promifed,  or  provided  for  them  •,  and  confequently 
 as  being  the  hejl  for  all  the  nations  in  the  world. 
 For  *  it  were  impiety,  to  think,  that  God,  who 
 '  was  careful  to  appoint  judicial  laws  for  his  cho- 
 
 *  fen  people,    would  not  furnifli  them  with  the 
 
 *  befl  form  of  {a)  government'.  But  for  any 
 perfon  to  affirm,  that  'all  the  reft  ("except  thego- 
 
 *  vernment  of  xh.Q  judges)  can  plead  no  more  than 
 '  ih)  permiffion  ',  is  an  offence  both  againft  truth 
 and  modefty. 
 
 ^-.,,  §  XXIX.  And  how  facredly  and  invi- 
 olably  It  was  to  be  kept  up,  if  not  fuffi- 
 ciently  prov'd  already,  will  plainly  appear,  upon 
 perufil  of  the  words  wherewith  the  prophet  con- 
 cludes this  account  of  the  right  of  Kings,  fay- 
 ing,   Te  fuall  cry  out   in   that  day,    bccaufe  of 
 
 your  King,  which  ye  jhall  have  chofen  you,  and  the 
 Lord  will  not  hear  you  in  that  (c)  day :  '  that  is, 
 
 *  God 
 
 (a)  Tilmer's  ^rt?  to  the  ^fir^^^y  of  limit,  woftarchy.  Where 
 the  fame  learned  author  well  obferves,  that '  it  is  a  (hanie  and  Tcan- 
 '  dal  for  us  Chrifiiam,  to  fctk  the  original  of  government  from 
 
 *  the  invcnticnf  or   hdions   of  poets,  orators,  phiiofophers,  and 
 
 *  heathen  hiftorians,   who  all  liv'd  thoufands  of  years  after  ihe 
 
 *  creation,  and  were  ('n  a  manner)  ignorant  of  if;  and  to  negle6l 
 «  the  fcripture.%  which  have  with  more  authority  moll  partiru- 
 '  lariy  given  us  the  true  grounds  and  principles  of  government*. 
 il)  Br(itli>,  ferm.  <  Nov.  1711.  p.  i:.      [c)   i  Sam.  viii   iS. 
 
/^^  Regal  Succession.     107 
 
 <  God  will  not  alter  the  government  for  you  again, 
 '  how  much  foever  you  may  complain  of  it.  This 
 
 *  is  a  plain  proof,  that  their  Kings  were  invefted 
 '  with  that  foveraign  power,  which  mud  not  be 
 '  refifted,  though  they  opprefs  their  fubjeds  to 
 '  maintain  their  own  (a)  ftate'  ^c.  So  that  whe- 
 ther Samuel  here  defcribes  a  King  or  a  tyrant, 
 it  is  all  one  in  this  point :  for  'tis  plain,  the  peo- 
 ple had  nothing  to  do,  but  to  obey  their  King  ; 
 and  in  cafe  of  his  tyrannizing  over  them  (fmce 
 he  was  their  undoubted  lawful  Kingj  they  were 
 to  have  no  remedy,  but  (fuch  as  the  primitive 
 Chriftians  had  in  thofe  cafes)  prayers  and  tears. 
 
 '  This  is  that  do6lrine  of  pafTive  obedience, 
 '  which  of  late  hath  had  fo  ill  a  found  among 
 '  many  of  us:  but,  I  dare  fay,  for  no  other  rea- 
 '  fon,  but  becaufe  it  may  have  been  by  fome 
 '  {h)  mifreprefented '.  It  has  been  calPd,  the  'ab- 
 
 *  folutely   concluding  whole   nations  under  mi- 
 
 *  fery  and  flavery,  without  hopes  of  (c)  redrefs^! 
 It  has  been  ridicul'd,  and  refledled  on,  in  divers 
 pamphlets,  fpeeches  and  fermons,  as  a  pernicious 
 and  enjlaving  tenet ;  inconfijlcnt  with  the  law  of 
 reafon,  with  the  law  of  nature^  and  zvith  tht  -pra- 
 Uice  of  all  ages  and  countries  \  firjt  invented  to  fnp- 
 port  arbitrary  and  defpotick  power  :  and  a  brand  of 
 indelible  (d)  infamy  has  been  requir'd  to  htfajlen^d 
 
 P  2  on 
 
 (a)  Sherl.  cafe  of  refill,  p.  15.  (l^)  Archbifhop  Sharp's  ferm. 
 30  y4«.  1699,104(0.  p.  19.  {c)  B.  Ho/itUy's  krtn.  iff  Sept. 
 170?,  in  4to.  p.  9.  («')  No  wonder,  fome  mea  are  lb  for- 
 ward to  ifratid  the  do£irin£s  ot;  o\u  hltifsd  redeemer,  when  we 
 
Io8    The  Short  History  ^/ 
 
 on  it  !    As  if  it  could  not  be  of  God,  becaufe  it 
 fuits  not  with  every   man's    notions   of   libert'j ! 
 nay,  we  have  been   told,    with  great  afTurance, 
 that  'a  pafllve  obedience  would  appear,    upon 
 ^  examination,  to  be  a  much  greater  oppofition 
 *  to  the  will   of  God,    than  the  (a)  contrary  '. 
 But  thefe   learned  perfons   have  not  yet  prov'd 
 how,  and  where,  it  would  appear  fo  ;  nor  fhew'd 
 us  when  it  was  firfi  invented.     In  fuch  queftions, 
 we   are  not   to  have   recourfe    to  Dutch  cafuifts 
 and  politicians ;  but  io  the  law  and  to  the  ih)  tefti- 
 mon-j  :    for  where  can   we  learn  the  will  of  God, 
 but  in  his  own  revelation  of   it  by  his  infpired 
 writers  ?    If  they  look  only  into  this  very  place 
 here  before  us,  (which  fome  of  them  would  have 
 to  be  the  very  original  ft  andard,  orfirftinflitution 
 of  kingly  government,)  they  will  find  a  quite  dif- 
 ferent declaration  of  the  will  of  God:  and  if  they 
 look  further,  they  will  find,  that  their  own  no- 
 tions of  liberty  were  not  known  either  in^^)  Job^Sj 
 or  Solomon'^s  days  -,  but  that  as  paflive  obedience 
 ynder  lawful  authority  is  the  exprefs  doftrine  of 
 
 the 
 
 find  others  fo  blafphemoufly  audacious,  as  ro  declare  in  print,  that 
 the  holy  jcriptures  were  cf  the  clergies  own  ifjz'cutifig  ;  and  that  if 
 Jefus  Chrift  laid  thifouitdatioHofthofe  powers  (which  thefe  worfi 
 than  Jews  or  Infidels  are  averfe  to,)  '  the  old  Rotnavs  did  him  right 
 •  in  punifhing  him  with  the  death  of  a  Slave!'  See  an  account 
 cf  the  growth  cf  deifm  in  England,  1696,  p.  7.  (commended  by 
 the  author  of  the  rights  of  the  chriflian  church  ajferted,  p.  iS-j.) 
 as  I  find  them  both  quoted,  with  a  iuft  abhorrence,  in  tlae  Jeccnd 
 fart  of  the  wolfflript,  &c.  (by  Mr.  L'-flie)  1707,  ?•  >4>  a""^  34* 
 {a)   B.  Hoadly,  as  before.  (6)  Ifa.  viii.  zo.  (c)    7*^ 
 
 ;cxxi7'  18.  Prov.  xx.z.  Ecclef.sii\.  2,,  &c. 
 
the  Regal  Succession.    109 
 
 the  old  (a)  teftament ;    fo  it  is  «  the  doftrine  alfo 
 '  of  Jefus  Chrijl,  and  that  a  neceflary,  indifpen- 
 «  fable  one  {b)  too  *j  and,  as  fuch,  was  the  fra5iice 
 and  example  of  our  great  majler  himfelf,    and  of 
 his  hlejfed  apojlles  ;    from  whofe  <  unerring  prafti- 
 «  ces  and  precepts,  all  true  Chriftians  muft  take 
 '  the  meafures  of  their  actions,  and  the  rules  of 
 '  their  life  *;  as  thofe  firft  converts  did,  fo  long  as 
 Chriftiamly  continued  pure  and  (c)  unallafd.     And 
 indeed,  it  feems  very  reafonable  to  believe,  that 
 God  Almighty  did  not  lay  before  the  people  that 
 long  lift  of  the  regal  prerogatives,  in  order  to 
 deter  (d)  them  from  defining  the  government  of 
 abfolute  monarchs,   as  the   Kings  of  all  nations 
 were  (as  the  celebrated   {e]  preacher  frequently 
 quoted  infmuates,)  but  rather  to  Ihew  us,    that 
 when  we  in  our  worldly  wifdom,  and  under  pre- 
 tence of  publick  good ,  take  upon  us  to  murmur 
 at,  and  caft  off,  fuch  government  and  governours 
 as  the  Lord  had  appointed  us,  inftead  of  better- 
 ing ourlelves  by  fuch  revolutions,  we  may  rea- 
 fonably   expe6t  tyrants  to  rule  us   with  rods  of 
 iron  ;  as  has  been  frequently  verified  in  moft  na- 
 tions of  the  world  ! 
 
 Never- 
 
 (a)  Stradl.  ferm.    30  Jatt.   1574,   P-  '5*  C^)  Archbifhop 
 
 Sharpty  as  before.  (c)  Burnet  s  fertn.  6  Du.  1674.  (</) 
 There  are  two  powers  of  Kings  piainly  kt  forth  in  God's  word- 
 The  former  is  potejlas ;  what  he  may  and  ought  to  do,  in  equity, 
 Deut.  xvii.  The  latter  is  potentla  j  what  he  may  do,  with  impu- 
 nity, I  Sum.  viii.  The  former  is  the  King's  rule  far  his  own 
 conduft,  for  which  he  is  anfwerable  to  God:  the  latter  is  the 
 people's  rule  for  their  obedience,  for  which  they  arc  anfwerable 
 both  to  God  ard  ;he  King  ;  as  is  obferv'd  by  divers  good  author*. 
 (f)  £.  HoaMy's  ferra.  at  Hertf.  zi  M^r.  1707. 
 
no    The  Short  History  of 
 
 Neverthelefs,  the  Ifraelitei  ftill  perfifting  in 
 their  fuit,  Sa7nucl  proceeded  to  the  providing  a 
 King  for  them  -,  but  (to  take  away  all  colour  of 
 the  people's  having  any  hand  in  it,)  he  firft  dif- 
 folv'd  their  unauthoriz'd  (a)  convention. 
 
 Sim's  tlcc-  §  XXX.  Now  the  Lord  had  told  Sa- 
 tion  dtv'tne:  muel  iH  hts  ear,  a  day  before  Saul  ca77ie, 
 that  he  would  fend  him  a  man,  to  he  captain  over 
 his  (b)  people:  and,  when  he  did  come,  Samuel 
 was  fo  far  from  making  him  King  even  by  his 
 own  authority,  that  (tho*  he  was  both  a  prophet 
 and  a  judge  of  Ifrael,)  he  did  not  fo  much  as 
 know  him,  any  otherwife  than  by  faith,  till  the 
 Lord  faid  unto  hijn,  behold  the  man  whom  I  fpake 
 to  thee  of;  this  fame  jhall  reign  over  my  (c)  people. 
 Accordingly  Samuel  took  Saul  (apart  from  all  the 
 people :)  and  when  they  were  alone,  anointed  him 
 in  the  name  of  the  (d)  Lord.  And  when  he  again 
 called  the  people  together  unto  the  (e)  Lord,  he  did  it 
 not  for  their  confent  or  approbation,    but  only, 
 
 by 
 
 (4)  1  Sum.  viii.  II.  [b)  jx.   1^.  (f)  verf.  17. 
 
 Where  the  original  word  (which  we  tranflate  to  reign  ov^r)  pro- 
 perly figniCes  (as  the  margin  notes,^  to  refiraln  in:  as  if  it  had 
 been  faid,  this  fumt  fiall  retrain  my  people.  For  reigning  is  re- 
 ftraining:  and  fo  is  all  government  a  reftraint  cf  lawlcfs  liberty  ; 
 which  doubtlefs  is  the  reafon  why  the  fons  of  Beliel  are  never 
 cafy,  under  even  the  mildeft  of  governours.  («/)  i  Sam.  x.  i. 
 The  Hebretvs  think,  that  SmU  was  not  anointed  with  the  fame 
 oil  wh:rewith  David  and  Solomon  were  anointed :  for  that  was 
 mken  out  of  the  tabernacle^  but  this  was  not ;  and  that  was  poqr'd 
 out  of  a  hortt,  denoting  the  durable  ftate  of  their  kingdom,  but 
 this  only  out  of  a  brittle  vml,  deaoting  a  ftort  continuance.  («) 
 X  Sam,  X.  1 7. 
 
/Z;^  Reg AL  Succession,     m 
 
 by  the  folemn  cafting  of  the  lot  fas  is  commonly 
 fuppos'd,  tho*  that  does  not  appear  in  the  text,) 
 or  by  fome  other  means  of  revealing  or  decla- 
 ring the  divine  defignation,  to  let  them  7^^  him 
 whom  the  Lord  had  [a)  chofen. 
 
 Here  it  is  very  remarkable,  and  ought  for  ever 
 to  filence  all  the  clamour  of  our  fanaticks  and 
 republicans,  on  this  head  ;  that,  in  all  this  tranf- 
 aftion,  we  do  not  find  the  leaft  evidence,  in  any 
 of  thefe  conventions,  or  general  afTemblies,  of 
 the  people's  ordering  or  refolving,  or  in  any 
 manner  ading  or  afTifting  in  this  affair :  further 
 than  this,  that,  after  the  Lord,  Qwho  has  the  whole 
 difpofing  (i?)  thereof  had  caufed  his  lot,  or  other 
 mark  of  defignation)  to  fall  upon  the  fame  per- 
 fon,  whom  he  had  before  anointed,  and  had  di- 
 re6led  the  people  to  find  him  where  he  had  hid 
 himfelfy  all  the  people  JJjouted,  and  /aid,  God  fave 
 the  (c)  King !  as  doubtlefs  they  would  have  done, 
 whofoever  had  been  the  perfon,  fmce  the  having 
 a  King  was  what  they  only  wanted  and  longed 
 for.  Nay,  the  very  words  of  the  text,  they 
 (that  is  the  people)  ifiquired  of  the  Lord  (di  further, 
 (or,  as  it  is  in  the  feptuagint,  Samuel  inquired  fur- 
 ther of  the  Lord)  ilrongly  imply  fomc  more  direft 
 and  immediate  application  to  the  Lord  in  the  whole 
 tranfadion  ;  at  leaft,  I'm  fure,  it  plainly  proves, 
 that  nothing  was  done  therein  without  his  exprefs 
 direction.  Befides,  that  Saul  was  not  fo  popular 
 a  man,  as  to  have  the  common  fuffrage,  and  to 
 
 be 
 
 [a)  I  Sam.  x.  verf.  ?.j:         {h)   Trox:  xvi.  3  J.  {c)  I  Sam 
 
 X,  2,4.     (J)  vcrf.  ii. 
 
Ill    The  Short  History  of 
 
 be  ele(5tcd  by  the  voice  of  the  people,  appears  in 
 this,  that  the  children  of  Belial  'who,  by  the  way, 
 are  oftentimes  the  majority;  mocked  and  defpi- 
 fed  him,  inftead  of  promoting  his  eledlion.  Nei- 
 ther was  the  renewing  the  kingdom  afterwards  in 
 Gilgal  (a)  any  more  than  the  people^s  being  fum- 
 mon*d  again  by  Samuel,  to  pay  their  duty  of  ho- 
 mage and  allegiance  to  Saul,  who  was  already 
 their  King  by  right  divine.  For  Saul  was  both 
 nominated  and  confirm'd  King,  and  had  alfo  ta- 
 ken the  exercife  of  the  government  upon  him, 
 and  ifTued  a  more  peremptory  proclamation  or  (b) 
 decree  before  this  folemnity  :  and  St.  Paul  him- 
 felf  declares  the  fame,  where  he  fays,  they  defired 
 a  King,  and  God  gave  unto  them  [c)  Saul. 
 
 And  yet,  for  all  this,  certain  perfons  are  flill 
 pleas'd  to  infifl,  or  infinuate,  from  this  very  cafe* 
 ftho'  nothing  can  be  more  clear  to  the  contrary,^ 
 that  *  God  fubmitted  Saul  to  their  (the  people's) 
 '  eledtion,  in  giving  them  the  liberty  to  chufe 
 '  the  tribe  and  perfon  by  (d)  lot ' !  that  *  he  did 
 '  not  compel  the  people  to  accept  him ;  having 
 '  before  left  them  free  to  chufe  any  one  from 
 '  among  themfelves  to  be  their  (e)  King*!  that 
 
 *  the  people  have  an  intereft  in  agreeing  to  the 
 '  form  of  their  government,  or  eleding  the  per- 
 
 *  Ion  that  is  to  reign  over  (f)  them !    that  Kings 
 
 *  ought  not  to   be  fet  Up  over  any  people,  but 
 
 *  by  their  own  confent,  and  at  their  own  defire  ; 
 
 *  and 
 
 {a)   I   5/zw.  xl.   14.       [b)  ' 7.  C^)  ^^j  xiii.  21.       {d) 
 
 BUr;ew«y'i  fcrm.  Novemb.  1 71  5,  p.  1 9.         (0  J*-  ^righii  feaii. 
 at  AiUib,   M  ^^^-r'  i7iy,  P-  9-        (/)  J^'b'Ji.  ichpt.  pol.  p.  16. 
 
Z.^^Regal  SuccESSio^i.    113 
 
 «  and  upon  fuch  foundations,  as  they  themfelves 
 «  folcrnnly  agreed  (a)  to'!  that  when  a  King  is 
 fet  over  any  people,  there  is  not  *  any  obligation 
 
 *  of  their  continuing  under  fuch  a  form,  any  lon- 
 '  ger  than  the  life-time  of  that   King  to  whom 
 
 *  they  voluntarily  {abje6ted(b)  themfelves *' i^r, 
 nay,  and  one  there  is,  who  (notwithftanding  his 
 great  pretences  to  modern  loyalty)  has  the  affu- 
 rance  to  affirm,  that  '  Saul  had  no  more  than 
 
 *  heaven's  (c)  connivance'!  and  will  not  allow 
 him  fo  much  as  even  the  new-invented  title  of 
 providence!  Strange  doflrines  thefe !  when,  noc 
 to  infift  upon  its  being  cenfur'd  by  a  convo- 
 cation, as  a  great  error  (d),  the  Holy  Ghoft  him- 
 fclfhas  infpired  the  fcripture-hiftorian  exprefly  to 
 affure  us,  that  the  form  of  government  was  ori- 
 ginally appointed  them  by  the  Lord,  without  the 
 people's  confent,  agreement  or  defire,  nay,  and 
 even  before  they  were  a  people,  that  they  were 
 exprefly  forbid  to  fet  up  any,'  but  him  whom  the 
 Lord  himfelf  JJjould  chufe ;  that  this  very  King 
 was  fet  up  over  them  by  God  himfelf,  without 
 their  having  the  leaft  knowledge  of  him,  or 
 where  to  find  him  ;  that  by  the  provifional  pre- 
 cept above-mention'd,  the  people's  obligation  of 
 obedience,  is  not  to  determine  v/ith  the  life  of 
 their  King,  but  to  continue  to  his  children  after' 
 him  ;  and  that  (as  to  Saul)  Samuel  knew  no  more 
 of  him  than  the  reft  of  the  people  did,  but  af- 
 
 Q^  fures 
 
 {*)  Wh!Ji.  fcrlpf.  polit.  p.  27.      {b)  li>ij.y,  z6.        c]  BraJ^. 
 y  Nov,  1 : 1 1,  p.  1 1.     (^}  Bp.  Overal's  convoc.  book,  l.i.  c.  13* 
 
114    ^^-^^  Short  History  of 
 
 lures  us  himfelf,  that  the  Lord  had  chofen  and 
 fet  him  King  over  them ;  as  hath  been  here  be- 
 fore particularly  proved.     Nay,  Mr.  IVhiJion  has 
 himfelf  unwarily  anfwer'd  this  objeftion,    where 
 he  quotes    fcripture  to    prove,    that  'during  all 
 '  the  life  of  Samuel,  Saul  never  thought  his  au- 
 '  thority  fufficiently  fafe  and  facred,  but  when  it 
 '  was  owned  and  fupported  by   {a)  Samuel*  the 
 prophet  of  the  Lord.     A  plain   evidence  to  me, 
 that  he  knew  his  title  and  authority  depended  en- 
 tirely upon  God  alone,  and  not  upon  the  people  *, 
 nothing  being  more  natural  (as  experience  tells 
 us,)   than   for    princes  to  depend  upon  thofe  for 
 their  fafety  and  fetclement,  from  whom  they  re- 
 ceiv*d  the  fovereign  power. 
 His  power       §  XXXI.  A  ND  as  the  Lord  had  given 
 abfoUitt.       ^^^^  ^  K\ng,  fo  he  alfo  gave  them  {h) 
 laws,  whereby  they  were  to  be  govern'd  by  him  ; 
 not  to  limit  the  King's  prerogative,  or  debafe  the 
 fovereign  power,  fo  as  to  make  him  accountable 
 to,   and  depofable  by,  the  people  :    for  he  was 
 veiled  with  that  abfolute  power,  which  the  judges 
 had  alfo  enjoy'd  before  him,  that  whofoever  fhould 
 difobey  him,  a.nd  not  Jyearken  unto  his  fentence  or 
 judgment,   fhould  be  put  to  (c)   death:  which  be- 
 ing fo  agreeable  to  that  of  Samuel,  where  he  de- 
 clares the  right  of    the    Kings  and  the  duty  of 
 fubjeds,  as  is  before  recited,  plainly  teaches  the 
 duty    and  necefTuy    of  unconditional  obedience 
 
 (either 
 
 (n)  ffh'Ji.  fcript.  polit.  p.  2  7-     (})  i  Sam.-x.  K.    (<■)  Deut. 
 xvii.  tz. 
 
the  Regal  Succession.      Jl^f 
 
 (either  a6live  or  paffive)  to  lawful  princes,  and 
 the  unwarrantablenefs  of  refifting  their  perfons 
 or  authority.  And  indeed  (fays  one  of  our  emi- 
 nent hiftorians)  '  if  pradice  do  Ihew  the  greatnefs 
 '  of  authority,  even  the  beft  Kings  of  Judah  and 
 «  Ifrael  were  not  fo  tied  by  any  laws,  but  that 
 «  they  did  whatfoever  they  pleafed  in  the  greateft 
 '  things,  and  commanded  fome  of  their  own 
 «  princes,  and  of  their  own  brethren,  to  be  flain, 
 '  v/ithout  any  tryal  of  of  law,  being  fometime 
 
 *  by  prophets  reprehended,  fometime  {a)  not* -, 
 but  as  I  may  add  from  another  author)  never 
 by  the  Sanhedrm,  or  ftates  of  the  {h)  realm.  Yea, 
 and  Mr.  Stephens  himfelf  confefTes,  that  *  even 
 '  in  fuch  a  cafe  as  this,  there  can  be  no  legal  ju- 
 '  rifdiftion  pretended  to;  no  judicature  remains, 
 '  to  judge  of  the  prince's  {c)  adions  :  nothing 
 '  being  more  ridiculous,  than  that  a  prince,  in 
 '  whom  'tis  confefs'd  by  all,  the  whole  executive 
 «  power  of  the   law  is  lodg'd,    fhould   become 
 
 *  legally  accountable  to  his  fubjeds,  and  anfwer- 
 '  able  to  that  juftice,  which  he  alone  has  the  right 
 
 *  of  (J)  adminiftring'.  But,  becaufe  there  are 
 many  amongft  us,  who  give  too  little  credit  to 
 holy  fcripture  and  the  opinions  of  divines,  in 
 thefe  controverfies,  I  ihall  add  this  obfervation 
 from  Sigonius,  that  the  power  and  authority  of 
 Kings  did  proccedy  votfo  much  from  the  laws^  as  from 
 the  arhitrement  and  will  of  the  King :  for  they  un- 
 
 Q^  2  derflocd 
 
 («)   Ralcighhh\^    fol.  593.  (i)  StiU'm^fl    ferm.   50  Jan. 
 
 »66?,  p.  38.      (f)  W.  Stfph.  ferm.  10  Jm.  1693,  p.  16.      {.i) 
 'ibli.  p.  I  ^. 
 
11^     The  Short  H'isTORY  <^y 
 
 derjlood  a  King  according  to  Ariftocle'.f  fcnfe,  who, 
 leing  free  from  laws,  might  govern  with  the  moft  ple- 
 nary \^a)  right.  And  Herodotus  tells  us,  that  the 
 Egyptians,  '  as  a  modeft  admonition  to  their  fuc- 
 
 *  ceflbrs,  did  fit  folemnly  in  judgment  upon  their 
 
 *  Kings,  after  they  were  dead  :  before  tl>ey  put 
 
 *  them  into  their  fepulchres ;  a  furvey  was  made 
 '  of  their  paft  reigns,  and  accordingly  there  pafs*d 
 '  a  fentence  of  honour  or  difhonour  on  them  ; 
 '  but  to  do  it  while  they  liv'd,  is  fo  prefumptu- 
 
 *  ous  an  abomination,  as  that  nothing  was  able 
 
 *  to  provoke  them  to  (b)  it'.  All  which  I  would 
 recommend  to  the  ferious  confideration  of  the 
 advocates  of  refiftance,  who  exclaim  againft  the 
 principles  of  obedience  as  unnatural  andfervile;  as 
 well  as  to  Mr.  PVhifton,  who  feems  to  infmuatea 
 fort  of  a  contract  between  Saul  and  the  {c)  people. 
 A  flrange  fort  of  a  contract  this !  whertin  the 
 King  was  abfolutely  at  his  liberty  to  do  what  he 
 pleas'd,  and  the  people  had  no  redrefs  for  their 
 greateft  grievances,  but  to  cry  unto  the  Lord 
 (the  only  ruler  of  princes!)  by  whom  he  was  fee 
 over  them,  and  to  whom  alone  he  was  accounta- 
 ble for  his  adminiftration  !  tho',  by  this  way  of 
 arguing,  that  fcripture-politician  may  perhaps 
 prove  the  people  guilty  of  breaking  the  original 
 
 con- 
 
 ffi)  C:ir  S'lroHttis,  de  r^  pnbl.  Hehncr.  1.  7.  C  ^.  — Potctas  at- 
 t\'jc  audloritas,  nusc  non  tam  a  legibus,  qusm  ab  arbitno  &  vo- 
 luncate  regis  pickrta  fit:  nam  rcgem  ipll  intellexetuiit  rrnvre  /it'fto- 
 teiis,  qui  folutus  leg. bus  pleniffimo  ju''e  rcgriaret.  {h)  Me^^ot's 
 fetm.  lojart.   167J,  p.   14.  (r)  W,aJL  fcr^pt.   polit.    p-  2.6. 
 
the  Regal  Succession.    117 
 
 {a]  contract,  whenever  they  rebel  againft  or  refift 
 their  lawful  prince,  or  ufe  any  other  arms  againft 
 him  than  prayers  and  tears,  and  cr-^'ing  to  the 
 Lord  i  which  I'm  perfuaded  is  not  his  aim  ! 
 
 §  XXXII.  B  u  T,  to  proceed.  Amongft  And  irre- 
 other  paflages  of  holy  fcripture,  which  f'fi*^^"- 
 are  wrefted  in  favour  of  the  dodrine  of  refiftance, 
 great  ftrefs  is  laid,  by  fome  zealots,  upon  that 
 where  we  read,  that  Saul  having,  by  a  rafh  vow, 
 fentenc'd  his  eldeft  fon  Jonathan  to  death,  the 
 people  refcued  Jonathan  that  he  died  (b)  not.  But 
 how  groundlefs  this  argument  is,  appears  in  thefe 
 feveral  confiderations.  i.  That  the  people  were 
 fo  far  from  a  rebellious  difpofition,  that  when  their 
 foveraign  had  adjured  them  not  to  eat  any  food  un- 
 til eveni?7g,  they  all  religioufly  obey*d  him,  tho* 
 they  were  diftrefs'd  and  (c)  faint ;  and  were  ready 
 to  do  whatfoever  feemed  good  unto  (d)  him.  2.  They 
 do  not  appear  to  have  us'd  any  violence  or  force 
 whatfoever,  to  refcue  the  fon,  or  refift  the  father: 
 
 but 
 
 («)  An  enaioent  iawjer,  on  a  late  fo'emn  occafion,  hearing  aa 
 original  contract  urg'J,  to  enforce  the  legality  of  refiftance,  exprefs'd 
 himfelf  thusj  '  When  the  original  contraft  was  made,  that  learn- 
 
 *  cd  gentleman  did  not  think  fit   to  inform  u  .     Was  it  befoie 
 
 *  Magnu  Chtfta?  If  fo,  why  not  corrprii'd  in  it? 1  never 
 
 *  met  with  it  in  any  of  our  law-bcokj. I  never  heard  it  urg'd 
 
 *  in  any  court  before.  I  never  heard  it  pleaded  to  any  iodidl:- 
 
 *  ment  for  high-treafon. And  therefore,  till  the  legiflature  have 
 
 *  declat'd  what  the  original  contrail  is,  and  derermin'd  whit  a(fl 
 
 *  of  the  fupreme  execu:ive  power  (hall  amount  to  a  difiblution  of 
 
 *  that  original  contract ,  the  law  ftands  ftill  upon  the  foot  of 
 
 *  the  ijth  of  Edvoard  HI.'  gcc.  Mr.  Phipjis,  in  Dr.  Sachev.  trial, 
 
 fo\.  144,  i^^.        {^]   I  Sam.xW.  47.       (c)  verf.  24,  and 
 
 iS.        {d)  verf.  36, 
 
Il8     TVj^  Short  History  ^i?/' 
 
 but  all  their  arms  were  (a)  prayers,  entreaties,  and 
 rational  arguments,  reprcfenting  to  Saul,  what  a 
 happy  inftrument  Jonathan  had  been  to  Ifrael,  in 
 their  obtaining  fo  great  a  deliverance  thai  h.  day  ; 
 which,  together  with  the  confideration,  that  Jo- 
 nathan had  not  heard  when  his  father  gave  that  f) 
 charge,  was  enough  to  prevail  with  any  man  to 
 repent  of  a  rafh  vow,  and  refciie  an  innocent  per- 
 fon,  tho'  lefs  dear  to  him  than  fuch  a  worthy 
 fon.  3.  If  the  people  had  prefum'd  to  prefs  upon 
 him  forcibly  or  mutinoufly,  *tis  confefs'd,  they  had 
 therein  been  guilty  of  {d)  fin  ;  and  confequently 
 this  cafe  can  be  nothing  to  the  purpofe  which  it 
 is  quoted  for,  in  either  light. 
 
 However,  Saul  not  being  the  promifed  King 
 of  the  houfe  of  Judah,  the  Lord  (not  the  people) 
 rejected  {e)  him,  ^or  decreed,  that  the  Iceptre  ihould 
 be  transferr'd  from  his  family  to  that  of  David:} 
 tho'  not  for  tyranny  over  his  fubjedls,  but  rather 
 for  too  much  clemency  to  his  (f)  enemies,  whom 
 the  Lord  had  devoted  to  utter  dejlru^ion ;  and  for 
 
 his 
 
 [a)  The  original  word  which  we  tranflate  refcued  is,  by  the  fe- 
 vcnty,  interpreted  TfOfrilt/^atTOj  which  in  other  places  of  holy  fcrip- 
 turc  IS  us'd  for  fuch  humble  and  devout  prayen  ss  are  put  up  to 
 God  himfcif:  as  in  A£isw\n.  ij".  —  ix.  40.  —  xx   36,  &r  {h) 
 
 I  Sam,  xiv.  45.         (c)  ■ vcrf.  17.         {d)  P.  Martyr  in  ioc. 
 
 (e)   I  Sam.  xv.   13  and  26.  —  xvi.  i.         (f )  xv.  3,  O'c 
 
 Here  I  muft  take  notice  of  2  republican  teacher,  who  triumphs 
 on  Samuel's  killing  ji^ag :  not  for  his  doing  it  in  pursuance  of 
 God's  commandment,  but  becaufe  Agag  was  a  King!  and  there- 
 fore (in  his  ferife)  '  there  could  not  be  a  nobler  conclufion  to  the 
 «  publick  adions  of  the  judges,  than  to  hcvo  a  tyrant  in  ^'HC:i  be- 
 '  fore  the  Lord' I  Bradbury  iivm   f  Nov,  171 1,  p.  2.4. 
 
the   Regal  Succession     119 
 
 his  prefuming  to  offer  the  (a)  hurtit-offering  of  his 
 own  head,  without  waiting  for  Samuel,  And 
 therefore  the  Lord  fent  Samuel  to  the  houfe  of 
 Jeffe ;  and  gave  him  particular  inftrudions  to 
 anoint  David  there,  whom  he  had  provided  for  his 
 ib)  King.  Not  that  David  was  hereby  invefted 
 immediately  with  the  kingly    power:    «  but  this 
 
 *  anointing  was  only  a  defignation  of  him  to  fuc- 
 '  ceed  Saul  after  his  death.  So  David  always  un- 
 '  derftood  it ;  looking  upon  Saul  as  the  Lord's 
 '  anointed,  as  long  as  he  lived  ;  that  is,   as  the 
 
 *  King  of  ic)  Ifraei*.     Thus  Saul  being  hencefor- 
 ward only  tenant  for  life  of  the   kingdom,  and 
 David  (as  the  lawyers  term  it)  reverfioner  in  fee, 
 the  common  intereft  of  God's  people  was  there- 
 fore,   in  an  extraordinary  manner,    included  in 
 David's  fafety  j  and  he  was  oblig'd  to  preferve 
 himfelf,  for  the  publick,  as  well  as  his  own  pri- 
 vate welfare.     And  befides,  Saul  now  degenera- 
 ting daily,  grew  jealous  of  David,  and  fought  by 
 any  means    to  take  his  life ;  hunting  him  from 
 place  to  place,  Y\k.Q  a  partridge  in  the  [d)  mountains  -, 
 and  moreover  having  mdi^sicvcd  four fc ore  and  five 
 priejls  of  the  (e)  Lord,  as  if  he  had  defign'd  an 
 utter  extirpation  of  God's  publick  worfhip  :  yet, 
 notwirhftanding  all  his  perfonal  dangers  and  pro- 
 vocations, tho'  he  had  not  only  felf-prefervation 
 to  engage  him  to  a  refiftance,  but  alfo  the  com- 
 mon rights  of  all  the  kingdom   (and  particularly 
 
 thofe 
 
 (a)  1  '^am.  xiii.  «,  8cc.        (i)  xvi.  i,  0«c.       (c)  Patrick's 
 
 commeat.        [d)  i  Sam.  xxvi.  zo.        (f)  xxii.  17,  18. 
 
I lo     The  Short  FIistory  of 
 
 thofe  of  God's  true  religion  to  challenge  his  pro- 
 tedion,  and  wanted  no  courage  to  defend  or 
 avenge  himfelf,  in  any  caufe  that  was  good,  he 
 religioufly  avoided  all  occafions  of  exerting  it 
 againfl:  his  foveraign,  and  fliew'd  himfelf  moft 
 eminent  in  the  pracftice  of  non-refiftancc.  For, 
 when  he  had  Said  twice  ("as  it  were  by  miracle; 
 in  his  power,  and  could  at  the  fame  time,  by  one 
 blow,  have  fecur'd  himfelf  of  the  kingdom,  as 
 well  as  his  life,  he  abfolutely  refus'd  to  hurt  his 
 facred  perfon,  or  to  fuffer  his  lefs-confcientious 
 followers  to  do  it ;  faying,  Dejlroy  him  not!  for 
 who  can  Jtretch  forth  his  hand  agaijijl  the  Lord's 
 anointed,  and  he  (a;"",  guiltlefs?  Surely  David  might 
 (in  thefe  circumftances,)  or  t\^t  no  body  may  ! 
 but  he  was  fo  far  from  being  illuminated  with  our 
 new  lights,  that  his  confcience  check'd  him,  and 
 his  heart  fmote  him,  becaufe  he  had  cut  off  Saul's 
 {h]  fkirt  (tho'  he  did  that  only  to  convince  him 
 how  much  more  he  had  in  his  power  to  have  done  *,) 
 whereas  our  modern  faints  have  no  fuch  qualms 
 about  the  cutcing  off  their  King's  head !  Yea, 
 David  told  Abner  and  his  guards,  they  were  wor- 
 thy to  die,  {c)  becaufe  thcj  had  kept  their  majler  no 
 better  :  and  he  actually  put  the  Ainalekite  to  death, 
 who  faid  he  had  lent  an  hand  to  1  J;  flay  him,  tho' 
 at  his  own  requeft. 
 
 And 
 
 {a)  I  Sum.yiTivi.  9.        {l>)  xxiv.  <>.  Lyranm  ttl!s  us,  :t 
 
 is  to  this  day  a  tradition  among  the  Jczos,  that  DJivid  was  pu- 
 nifh'd  in  his  death  rerpeftive!y  to  this  lin,  that  no  cloaths  could 
 keep  him  warm.  And  indeed  there  feems  to  be  feme  ground  for 
 This,  I  Kin.  i.  i.    (c)  i  S-tm.  xxvi.  16.     (i)  2  Sam.  i.  14,  Sec 
 
the  Regal  Succession,    m 
 
 And  yet,  notwithftanding  all  this,  many  po- 
 pular writers  and  preachers  take  the  liberty,  to 
 infift  upon  the  lawfulnefs,  and  even  the  necejfity  of 
 felf- defence,  and  of  dire5f  reftjlance,  of  private  fub- 
 je^fs  to  their  Kings,  in  cafes  oj  extremity,  &c.  (as 
 Mr.  Whifion  has  obferv'd,  and  rebuk'd  one  of 
 them  for).  '  Perhaps  (Tays  he)  there  may  be  fome 
 
 *  cafes,  in  which  this  felf-defence  may  not  be  un- 
 
 *  lawful :  however,  I  can  hardly,  I  confefs,  find 
 '  this  matter  clear  enough  in  fcripture,  to  war- 
 «  rant  a  Chriftian's  practice  upon  that  foot  ^;*. 
 Thus  far  Mr.  Whifton,  But  a  worthy  Re5ior  of  SL 
 Peters-poor,  hondon,  goes  much  further  in  his  cen- 
 fure  of  this  Dodrine  ;  and  fays,  '  were  I  to  fet  up 
 '  for  a  publick patron  of  wickednefs,  I  hardly  know 
 '  a  villany  in  nature  fo  black  and  monftrous, 
 '  which  I  could  not  more  plaufibly  recommend 
 
 *  to  men's  reafon  and  confciences,    than  this  of 
 
 '  refiftance  againft  lawful  authority,  which  is 
 
 '  enough  to  naufeate  any  confcience,  but  a  de- 
 
 *  vil*s  (hy.  And  a  truly  reverend  bifhop  of 
 5^rz^wdid  not  fcruple  to  fay  of  this  popular  pre- 
 tence, that  *  it  is,  in  refped:  of  policy  and  go- 
 '  vernment,  what  the  fin  againft  the  Holy  Gbofi 
 '  is  to  c)  religion*.  And  indeed,  tho'  it  would 
 not  be  fo  ftrange  in  others,  yet  for  thofe  who  ap- 
 pear in  the  habits  and  orders  of  the  Church 
 of  England,  to  fly  fo  openly  in  the  face  of  her 
 
 R  known 
 
 (a)  Script,  polit.  dcdic.  p  ivr.  {b)  Dr.  Scott's  ferm.  i6  Juk 
 168 J-,  p.  14,  in  4^0.  \c)  Dr.  JVard's  Term.  5  Nev,  1661,  p, 
 5;,  io4to. 
 
izz    TheSnoRT  History^ 
 
 known  (a)  dodlrines,  is  very  furprizing.  For, 
 bleffed  be  God,  our  church  hares  and  condemns 
 this  doftrine,  from  what  hand  foever  it  come, 
 and  hath  eftablilhed  the  rights  and  authority  of 
 princes  on  fure  and  unalterable  foundations, 
 enjoyning  an  entire  obedience  to  all  the  lawful 
 commands  of  authority,  and  an  abfolute  fub- 
 mifllon  to  that  fupreme  power  God  hath  put  in 
 our  foveraign's  hands.  This  dodlrine  we  juft- 
 ly  glory  in  :  and  if  any,  that  had  their  bapcifm 
 and  education  in  our  church,  have  turn'd  re- 
 negades from  this,  they  prov'd  no  lefs  enemies 
 to  the  church  herfelf,  than  to  the  civil  autho- 
 rity :  fo  that  their  apoftacy  leaves  no  blame  on 
 our  church  ;  which  glories  in  nothing  more 
 than  in  a  well-cemper'd  reformation,  from  the 
 later  corruption  which  the  dark  ages  brought 
 in,  to  the  pure  and  primitive  dodrines,  which 
 our  Saviour  and  his  apoftles  taught,  and  the 
 firft  Chriftians  retained  and  pradlifed  for  many 
 Ih)  ages'.  And  fo  our  Homilies,  approv'd  by 
 the  articles  of  our  religion,  for  godly  andwholeform 
 do^rine,  and  necejfary  for  thefe  (r)  times,  do  ex- 
 prefly  deny  the  lawfulnefs,  as  well  as  neceffity,  of 
 either  refiftance  or  felf-defence  againft  the  lawful 
 power :  and  that  too  grounded  upon  this  very 
 cafe  now  before  me  ;  arguing,  that,  tho'  '  King 
 '  Saul  was  not  of  the  belt,  but  rather  of  the 
 
 '  worft 
 
 {d)  That  paflive-obedience  and  non-refiftance  are  toe  doftrines 
 of  the  church  of  Efigland,  was  fully  given  in  evidence,  at  the 
 trial  of  Dr  Sacheverely  fol,  15-4,  c^f.  {b)  Dr,  B«r7/p;'s  ferm. 
 6  Dec.  167^,  (reprinted  1710)  in  8vo,  p.  47.         (c)  Art.  xxxv. 
 
tloe  Regal  Succession,     ixg 
 
 '  worfl:  fort  of  princes,   as  being  out  of  God's 
 
 <  favour, and  fought  the  deflrudion  of  Bavid 
 
 '  by  all  means  polTible  ;  and  tho'  David  yjzs  then 
 
 '  the  very  belt  of  all  fubjedls highly  and  fin- 
 
 '  gular  in  the  favour  of  God, as  well  as  of 
 
 '  the  people  - —  and  by  God  appointed  to  reign 
 *  after  Said:  yet  (for  all  this;  he  would  not  even 
 «  fave  his  life  by  rebellion  or  any  refi (lance,  but 
 '  by  flight,  and  hiding  himfelf  from  the  King's 
 
 <  f/z'  fio-hc ',  ^c.  Much  lefs  did  he  ever  *  feizc 
 «  upon  him  to  carry  him  prifoner,  to  be  tried  by 
 '  the  Sanhedrin :  nor  is  there  any  foundation  for 
 '  any  fuch  power  in  the  Sanhedrin,  over  the  per- 
 '  fons  of  their  fovereigns  ;  it  neither  being  con- 
 '  tained  in  the  grounds  of  its  inftitution,  nor  any 
 «  precedent  occurring  in  the  whole  flory  of  the 
 '  bible,  which  gives  the  leafl  countenance  to  it» 
 '  Nay  feveral  paflages  of  fcripture  utterly  over- 
 '  throw  it  :  for,  how  could  Solomon  have  faid, 
 '  where  the  word  of  a  King  is,  there  is  power,  and 
 «  who  ma-j  fay  unto  him,  what  dojl  thou  (h:  ?  if, 
 '  by  the  conftitution  of  their  government,  the 
 «  Sanhedrin  might  have  controlled  him,  in  what 
 ^  he  faid  or    c)  did '  ? 
 
 There  were  not  wanting  fome  about  him,  to 
 infinuate  unto  him,  that  providence  had  put  the 
 King  into  his  power,  that  by  his  deftrudion  the 
 throne  might  be  vacant  for  himfelf  to  afcend ; 
 Behold  the  day  of  which  the  Lord  faid  unto  thee, 
 
 R  2  he 
 
 (i»)  Homily  againft  wilful  rebellion,  fecond  fart.  (b)  IccUj, 
 viii.  ^.        (cj  Sdlliv^fi.  fe:m.  30  7««.  i66§,  p.  37. 
 
114   The  SnoRr  "History  of 
 
 behold  I  will  deliver  thine  enemy   into  thine  hand, 
 that  thou  may  ft  do  to  him  as  it  Jhall  feem  good  unto 
 
 thee  (a  . God  hath  delivered  thine  enetny  into 
 
 thine  hand  this  day  yb).    And  fome  of  our  modern 
 poliricians  would  probably  have  told  him,  that 
 
 *  tamely  to  fit  ftill  —  is  a  tacit  confent  to  the 
 
 *  ruin   and   milery  of  mankind,    whofe   publick 
 '  peace  and  happinefs  is  the  fole   end  of   {c)  go- 
 
 *  vernment  *.     And,  *tis  certain,  David   *  might 
 ^  have  pleaded  neceflity  and  providence  as  much 
 '  as  ever  any  could  {d)  %  when  he  was  thus  per- 
 fecuted  by  Saul^  and  the  perfecutor  ftrangely  de- 
 iiver'd  into  his  hands ;  and  might  efpecially  have 
 imputed  all  his  fufferings  to  the  advice  of  evil 
 counlellors,  while  Doeg^   the  Edomite    e  ,    was  at 
 the  King*s  ear  :  and  yet  we  find,  he  had  another 
 opinion  of  the  perfon  and  authority  of  even  a  bad 
 King,  and  other   notions  of  God  and  his  provi- 
 dence i    and    therefore   afted   upon   this,    which 
 *  mufl:  be  a  fettled  principle,  that  the  providence 
 "  of  God  will  never  juflify  any  adion  which  his 
 «  law  'f)  forbids '.  But  he  *  was  not  fo  well  tutor'd 
 ^  in  the  art  of  rebellion,  as  to  fecure  himfelf  this 
 ^  way,  and  wanted  fome  of  our  new  mafters  to 
 '  inftrud  him  in  {g)  it'!    For,  looking  upon  it 
 only  as  a  trial  and  probation  of  him,  and  that 
 nothing  could   be  neceflTary  for  him  to  do  that 
 was  not  lawful  in  itfelf  j  and  likewife  '  knowing 
 
 «  full 
 
 (a)  I  Sam.  XXiv.  4.         (b)  xxvi.  8.  (e)  B.  Hoadly's 
 
 fercn.   z^  Sept.    i7'^5,  p-  »?>in  4'0'         {d)  StilUn^fi.  Term.    ?o 
 Jan.  J  668,  p.   36.         (e)    '  Sam   xvii.  9,   Sec.  (f)  Shetl. 
 
 cafe  oi  rdift.  p.  3?.    {g)  Hcylin's  rebels  (aechiim,  164.5,  p.  iv 
 
the  Regal  Succession,    its 
 
 «  full  well,  that  the  bar^  predidion  of  this,  did 
 »  not  authorize  him  to  execute  it,  without  a  com- 
 '  mandf^y,  The  Lord  forbid  (fa.\d  he')  thai  I  Jljould 
 do  this  thing  unto  m-j  majler,  the  Lord's  anointed, 
 toftretch  forth  mine  hand  againft  him,  feeing  he  is 
 (tho'  not  a  good  King,  yet  ncverthelefs)  the  anoint- 
 ed of  the  {b)  Lord. — IVickednefs  -proceedeth  from  the 
 'ujicked,  hut  mine  hand  fhall  not  he  upon  thee  {f). 
 
 As  the  Lord  liveth,  the  Lord  fJoall  fmite  him^ 
 
 or  his  da^  fhall  come  to  die,  or  he  fij all  descend  into  hat- 
 tie  and  perifh  ;  the  Lord  forbid,  that  I  fJjould  Jlretch 
 forth  mine  hand  againft  the  Lord's  anointed  (d)! 
 Thereby  clearly  intimating,  that  as  the  Lord 
 had  fet  Saul  in  the  throne,  fo  it  muft  be  the  a6l 
 of  the  Lord  alone  fand  not  that  of  man  <  which 
 was  to  make  the  throne  vacant.  In  a  word;  as 
 Saul  had  not  the  kingdom  given  him,  nor  any 
 condition  impos'd  upon  him,  by  the  people ;  fo 
 neither  could  his  tranfgreflions  be  deem'd  a  for- 
 feiture of  his  foveraignty  to  them  :  and  therefore, 
 even  after  Samuel  had  denounc'd  his  rejedion  in 
 the  name  of  the  Lord,  and  it  was  publickly  (<?) 
 known  that  David  was  anointed  to  be  his  Succef- 
 for,  Samuel  continued  to  pray,  and  to  mourn,  for 
 Saul,  and  to  do  him  honour  as  ufual  before  his 
 if)  people.  *  He  did  not  forget  fas  fome  of  us 
 ?  do^hisown  do6lrine  of  paflive-obedicnce,  which 
 '  r^)  formerly  he  had  preach'd  unto  f^j them ';  and 
 
 much 
 
 (a)  Ryeh  treat  agaiml  the  nenjur.  vol.  J,  p.  635.      {l>)   i  Sam. 
 
 xx\v.6.         (c)  — —  verf.  13.         (d)  xxvJ.    to,  ii.         (<) 
 
 •  XXV.  30.        (/)  XV,  31,  8?c>         {g)  — :"  viii.  18. 
 
 (h)  Symmofti'sloy.fyb).  1645,  p.  56. 
 
Ji6    The  Short  History  of 
 
 much  lefs  did  he  incite  them  to  relieve  themfelves 
 by  refiftance  :  but,  what  he  had  before  laid  down 
 by  precept,  he  now  taught  them  by  his  own  ex- 
 ample ;  in  obedience  to  which,  Said  was  ftill  re- 
 fpedled  as  their  undoubted  foveraign  (by  David 
 as  well  as  by  all  the  people,'  till  God,  his  only 
 fuperior,  depriv'd  him  at  once  of  his  life  and 
 kingdom.  After  all  which,  I  can't  but  admire 
 at  thofe,  who  would  infinuate  a  diftinclion  between 
 the  reftftance  of  private  and  puhlick  perfons,  and  be- 
 tween private  and  puhlick  injuries  ;  as  if  our  church 
 in  her  homilies,  had  condemn'd  the  one^  hut  deter- 
 mined nothing  in  cafe  of  the  (a)  other  I  Surely,  Da- 
 vid was  more  than  a  private  perfon,  and  the 
 injuries  before-mention'd  to  be  committed  by 
 Saul,  were  more  than  meerly  perfonal  and  pri- 
 vate ;  and  therefore,  as  our  church  has  largely 
 iet  forth  that  cafe,  as  an  example  of  that  obe- 
 dience which  fhe  requires  of  fubjeds  to  their  law- 
 ful-ibveraigns,  we  can't  fairly  deny  that  Ihe  has 
 condemn'd  refiftance  of  authority,  without  any 
 fuch  diftindions  as  would  render  all  obedience  arbi- 
 trary or  precarious. 
 
 David  A  §  XXXIII.  Now,  after  God's  provi. 
 Xwgbydsm  dence  had  open'd  the  way  to  it,  and 
 v'n«  f'gk*-  made  the  throne  vacant,  by  the  death 
 of  Saul,  then,  and  not  before,  was  David,  by 
 the  Lord's  exprefs  {h)  direflion,  anointed  King  in 
 Hebron^  where  he  reign'd  over  the  houfe  of  Judah 
 
 feven 
 
 («)  Nat.  Marjjl  def.  of  our  conftit.  p.  141.       {b)  t  Sam. 
 M,  I,  &c. 
 
^7:76' Regal  Succession.     1x7 
 
 feven  'jears  and  fix  months  (a) :  but  the  reft  of  the 
 tribes  for  iome  time,  adher'd  to  IJhboJheth,  the 
 next  known  heir  of  the  family  of  Saul  (for  Me-* 
 pbibojheth,  the  fon  of  Jonathan,  was  not  to  be 
 (h)  found, )  as  of  courfe  to  fucceed  to  the  throne, 
 according  to  the  law  of  nature ;  till,  becoming 
 thoroughly  fenfible  of  the  Lord's  exprefs  defigila- 
 tion  of  David,  they  came  together  to  him,  and 
 anointed  htm  King  over  Ifrael  '0  alfo.  And  this 
 was  undoubtedly  the  true  reafon,  why  Mephibo- 
 Jheth  never  difputed  David*s  title,  and  not  a  dif- 
 regard  to  his  own  natural  right  of  inheritance, 
 which  he  knew  muft  yield  to  an  exprefs  title  from 
 God  himfelf.  But  Abner's  condudl,  in  this  great 
 affair,  is  worth  our  ferious  reflexion.  He  had 
 been  captain  of  Saul'j  {d)  hoft,  and  was  alfo  his 
 near  kinfman,  and  a  moft  valiant  (e)  man.  But, 
 upon  the  death  of  Saul,  tho*  he  well  knew  of 
 David's  divine  appointment  to  the  fucceffion,  yet 
 his  own  ambition,  or  other  private  motives,  in- 
 duced him  to  fet  up  IJhboJheth  as  King  over  all 
 (f)  Ifrael,  and  to  maintain  a  long  and  bloody 
 war  even  againft  what  he  knew  God  had  engag'd 
 himfelf  to  bring  about :  and  yet,  no  fooner  did 
 a  private  quarrel  happen  between  Ifhhofheth  and 
 
 him^ 
 
 (a)  2,  Sam.  ii,  1 1.  But  this  is  not  to  be  underftood,  as  if  David 
 had  fo  long  raigii'd  over  Judah  only  j  for  Ijljbojheth  reign'd  bet 
 tvo  years,  and  after  bis  death,  all  J/r«e/ came  in  to  David:  but 
 I  reckon  thefe  feven  years  and  fix  months  from  his  fettling  at 
 Hebron,  till  his  conqueft  and  removal  to  Jtrufalem.      (^)  i  Sanu 
 
 ix.  3,4.         (cj — V.  i.&c.         {d]   I  Sam  xiv,<)0.         (a 
 
 -— xxvi.  If,        if)  iSam.iu   8. 
 
ir8    T*/;^  Short  History  of 
 
 him,  but  then  prefcntly,  So  do  God  to  Abner,  and 
 viore  alfo,  except  as  the  Lord  hath  fvjorn  to  David, 
 even  [o  I  do  to  him-,  to  tranjlate  the  kingdom  from 
 the  houfe  of  Saul,  and  to  fet  up  the  throne  of  {a) 
 David,  &c.  Thus  he  could  do,  out  of  refent- 
 menc,  what  he  would  not  do  for  religion.  Which 
 confirms  a  jufl  remark  of  an  eminent  doftor, 
 that  '  no  obligations,  tho'  the  moft  fignal  and 
 '  divine,  will  hold  men  in  obedience  and  peace, 
 
 *  if  their  ambitions  or  interefts  look  another  way  : 
 '  and  if  at  any  time,  prefent  advantage,  or  an 
 '  expectation,  or  fome  pafTion,  do  incline  them 
 
 *  to  fiek  David  their  King  ;    yet,  the  appearanc 
 
 '  of  a  change  of  intereft,  that   expectation  de- 
 
 *  fcated,  or  a  crofs-animofity,    will   burft   thofe 
 
 *  bonds,  unlefs  religion,  and  communion  in  wor- 
 '  (hip,  help  to  twift  ib)  them  *. 
 
 Now,  when  all  the  tribes  of  Ifrael  came  to  Da- 
 vid unto  Hebron,  we  read,  that  King  David  made 
 a  league  with  (C)  the??i,  which  fome  people  have 
 miftaken  for  an  original  contract,  yet  we  cannot 
 nnderftand  it  fo,  or  of  his  fubmitting  to  any  terms 
 or  limitations,  to  cramp  his  authority  :  but,  as 
 the  Lord  had  faid  to  David,  'Thou  fhalt  feed  m'^  -peo- 
 -ple  Ifrael,  and  thou  Jhalt  be  ruler  over  my  people 
 Ifrael,  therefore  came  all  the  elders  of  Ifrael  to  the 
 
 King  to  Hebron  according  to  the  word  of  the 
 
 Lord  by  Samuel  {d)  ;  not  to  ele6t,  nor  to  confirm, 
 but  only  to  recognize  his  divine  right,  andco  pay 
 
 their 
 
 («)  I  Sam.  iiJ.  9.  &c.  {6)  Allejir,  ferm  vol.  I,  1684, 
 fo).  iji.  [c)  X  Sam.  V.  i,  £cc.  {d)  ibid,  and  i  Chron- 
 XI.  2.. 
 
//^^Regal  SuccEssioisr.    li^ 
 
 their  homage  and  allegiance  to  the  Kings,  as  the 
 ordinance  of  God:  and  David  perceived  that  the 
 Lord  (not  the  people)  had  ejlablijhed  him  King  over 
 Ilrael  (a)  ;  and  accordingly,  the  Lord  faith,  / 
 have  found  David  m^  fervant^  with  my  holy  oil  have 
 I  anointed  him  (J?). 
 
 After  all  this,  with  what  colour  of  fcripture, 
 reafon,  or  good  fenfe,  David  can  be  laid  to  have 
 been  *  call'd  to  the  throne  by  God,  and  the  voice 
 '  of  the  people  (c) ',  I  own  myfelf  at  a  lofs  to 
 underftand  i  fince  nothing  can  be  plainer  than 
 that,  neither  the  Lord,  nor  his  Prophet,  ever 
 once  asked  the  people's  voice  or  confent,  nor 
 defir'd  their  concurrence  thereunto :  nay,  and 
 further,  that  David  was  fo  far  from  being  popu- 
 lar, that  even  when  he  offer'd  himfelf  afterwards 
 to  fight  in  the  common  caufe  againft  Goliah,  nei- 
 ther the  King  himfelf,  nor  his  General,  knew  fo 
 much  as  whofe  fin  he  (d)  was,  till  they  were  told 
 by  his  own  mouth. 
 
 §  XXXIV.  And  tho' D^vi J  had,  Ahfoiute  and 
 thro*  human  frailty,  (or  perhaps  thro'  '""^/V^^^^"?- 
 the  advice  of  evil  counfellors !)  fallen  into  the  grie- 
 vous  fins  of  adultery  and  (e)  murder,  each  of  which 
 alone  was  capital,  in  ordinary  perfons,  by  the 
 law  of  (f)  God  himfelf  i  yet  we  don't  find  the 
 leaft  attempt  made  by  the  people,  to  call  him  to 
 account  for  it  j  nor  any  of  the  Lord's  prophets 
 
 S.  de- 
 
 (/»)  i  Sftm.  V.  12.  {b)  Vftt.  Ixxxix.  2  0.  [c)  Dr.  Chandl. 
 ietm^Tjune,  1716,  p.  j,  in  Svo.  (</)  i  Sam.  xv'n.  <s^.  {e) 
 t  Sawi  jfU  (/}  J^evit,  XX,  la.  DiHt,  xxii.  2.Z.  Nnmb.  xxxv, 
 51,  5cc. 
 
IJO    The  Short  History^ 
 
 declaring,  that,  upon  his  falling  into  fin,  he 
 had  forfeited  his  right  of  dominion,  and  ought 
 to  be  deposed,  as  our  modern  fanaticks,  and 
 fome  of  the  word  of  papifts  do  pretend.  Had 
 David  liv'd  in  our  days,  and  committed  fuch 
 fins,  (unlefs  he  had  been,  on  other  accounts,  a 
 particular  favourite  of  the  party,  j  it  would  pro- 
 bably have  been  aflerted,  that  '  that  governour 
 
 *  who —  is  not  a  terror  to  evil  works,  hut  to  goody 
 
 *  who  is  not  the  fninijler  of  good  to  the  virtuous, 
 
 *  and  of  vengeance  to  the  wicked  only,  and  who 
 '  is  not  continually  watching  for  the  good  and  hap* 
 '  pinefs  of  humane  fociety,  is  not  the  governor 
 
 *  — -  (to  whom  obedience  is  due  ;)  and  much  lefs, 
 
 *  if  he  manifellly  aft  contrary  to  the  only  end 
 
 *  of  his  ia)  inftitution  : ' that   governours 
 
 *  cannot,  in  fuch  inftances,  be  call'd  God*s  vicc- 
 
 *  gerents  without  the  highefl  prophanenefs  ;  and 
 '  therefore  to  oppofe  them,  in  fuch  cafes,    can- 
 
 *  not  be  to  oppofe  the  authority  of  God  (b) '!  ^c. 
 How  nearly  the  clofe  application  of  this  might 
 have  affefled  a  prince,  who  had  broke  through 
 the  exprefs  laws  of  God,  to  gratify  his  own  vici- 
 ous appetites,  is  manifefl  enough.  But  fuch  doc- 
 trines were  not  then  taught  by  the  Lord's  pro- 
 phets :  neither  is  there  the  lead  colour  of  proof, 
 that  the  Sanhedrim  (or  ftates  of  the  nation)  ever 
 pretended  to  any  right  to  take  cognizance 
 of  thcfe  things ;  for  '  it  is  ridiculous  to  think, 
 
 *  that  high  court  could  controul  their  {c)  King ', 
 
 And 
 
 [a)  b:  Hoadly*s  fc-rm.  29  Sept.  I70<,  p,  7.        (^)  Ui^»  p.  13. 
 {()  Patrick,  on  i  Sam.  vii'.  x8. 
 
the  Regal  Succession.     131 
 
 And  yet  we  find,  that  princes,  tho'  not  accounta- 
 ble to  their  fubjedts,  have  however  a  fuperior, 
 to  whom  they  muft  render  a  flrid:  account  of 
 their  adminiftration,  and  who  will,  here  or  here- 
 after, feverely  chaftife  the  mightiefi  of  them,  for 
 all  abufes  of  their  power  and  his  authority  -,  which 
 is  enough  to  keep  the  greateft  tyrant  in  {a  awe  \ 
 Thus,  in  the  cafe  before  us,  the  Lord  himfelf 
 takes  the  matter  into  his  own  hand,  and  fends  the 
 prophet  Nathan  to  David,  to  fummon  him  before 
 himfelf  as  his  judge,  and  to  denounce  a  (b)  fen- 
 tence  adequate  even  to  the  very  circumftances  of 
 his  crimes.  For,  whereas  *he  had  dared  to  take 
 '  to  his  bed  the  wife  of  another  man,  the  prophet 
 
 *  plainly  tells  him,  another  fhould  go  to  bed  to 
 
 *  his  wives  ;  whereas  he,  a  publick  perfon,  had 
 
 *  fecretly  done  fo  foul  an  ad:,  the  prophet  tells 
 '  him,  his  wives  fhould  be  adulterated  openly, 
 '  before  all  Ifrael,  and  even  i?t  the  fight  of  the  fun  f 
 
 *  yea,  whereas  hehaddar'dby  an  unjuftyw(?r^  to 
 '  flay  a  fubjed:,  God  fends  him  word,  I'hefwordfhall 
 '  never  depart  from  th^j  houfe!  and  indeed  all  this 
 '  was  verified  in  his  rebellious  darling,    in  his 
 
 *  lovely  fon,  his  fon  (c)  Jbfalom\  And  yet, 
 when  this  meffagehad,  by  God's  grace,  throughly 
 rous'd  David,  and  awaken'd  his  confcience,  to 
 bring  him  to  a  fincere  repentance ;  even  then, 
 in  his  penitential  eonfelTion  to  God  Almighty, 
 he  fays,  againji  thee,  thee  only,  have  I  finned,  and 
 
 S  2  done 
 
 {a)  Satis  illi  erit  ad  poeaam,  quod  Deum  habaat  ultoren^,  Br;i(3, 
 See  alfo  mjdom  vr.  r.  Sec.  {b)  z  Sam.  xii.  i,  &c,  {o)  J, 
 AUmgton*%  fcrm.  6  A^r^  x66o,  p.  7,  ?. 
 
l^z     The  Short  History  ^y 
 
 done  this  great  (a)  evil !  not  that  he  can  be  fup- 
 pos'd  to  have  been  infenfible  of  his  fin,  with  re* 
 iped  to  the  innocent  and  loyal  Uriah  in  particu- 
 lar, or  to  the  whole  people  in  general,  by  the 
 fcandal  of  his  fZ?^  example  :  but  becaufe  he  knew, 
 that,  being  a  lawful  King,  he  was  fubordinate 
 only  to  God,  and  accountable  to  him  alone,  in 
 refpedl  of  punifhment.  '  If  therefore  we  own 
 '  the  fcriptures  for  our  Guide  in  all  doubtful  and 
 '  important  points  as  all  of  us  Jlill  pretend  to  do,) 
 '  here  is  an  inftance  to  guide  us  in  a  matter  of 
 
 *  this  great  and  weighty  {c)  moment  *.     But  alas! 
 
 *  tho'  the  good  a6tions,  and  their  rewards,  arc 
 «  enroU'd  for  our  imitation  ;  the  evil,  and  their 
 
 *  punifhment,  for  our  terror  :  yet  have  we  feme 
 
 *  in  our  times,  that  feem  to  have  been  converfant 
 
 *  with  the   facred  fcriptures,  only  to  learn  how 
 
 *  to  be  confcientioufly  wicked,  and  to  fin  by  pat- 
 '  tern  ;  that  weed  out  the  worft  deeds  of  men 
 '  there  mention'd,  to  be  a  fcheme  for  their  prac- 
 
 *  tice .  A  pregnant  inftance  of  which  is  the 
 
 <  unnatural  rebellion  mention'd  in  this  and  the 
 f  fubfequent  feclions,  and  its  exafl  agreement  with 
 ^  our  times  -,  it  fceming  to  be   a  hiftory  of  our 
 
 *  days  under  borrow'd  (J;  names'. 
 
 §  XXXV.  David,  having  thus  happily  wafli'd 
 away  thofe  heinous  fins,  by  a  true  repentance  and 
 humiliation,  he  is  recorded,  in  the  holy  fcripture, 
 10  have  executed  judgment  Oind  jujlice  unto  all  his 
 
 ■peo- 
 
 (.«)  P/*.  li.  4.  [i)  B.egis  ad  exvn^Ium,  &c.  (c)  P.  La. 
 iham's  icxxn.  19  Jujii,  1683,  p.  3:,  (d)  T.  Hey  ricks  fctm. 
 16  jful.  1685,  J),  i. 
 
lioe  Regal  Succession,    igg 
 
 {a)  people ;  hecaufe  he  did  that  which  was  right  in 
 the  e'jei  of  the  Lord,  and  turned  not  afide  from  an'j 
 thing  that  he  commanded  him  all  the  dap  of  his  life^ 
 Cave  only  in  the  matter  of  {b)  Uriah  :  and  as  fuch  is 
 proposed  as  a  pattern  for  his  fon  Solomon  to  walk 
 (c)  by,    and  made  the   ftandard   by    which  the 
 fucceeding  Kings  were  judged.    How      ^^^  ^^^^^^.^ 
 ver,  there  wanted  not  anenemy,  even    agamjlbyhis 
 of  his  own   blood,    to   rebel  againft   /'"'Abfalom. 
 him,  and  ufurp  his  kingdom.     For  Abfalom^  his 
 fon,  was  forwarded  by  his  own  ambition,  to  con- 
 fpire  againft  him  j  and  made  ufe  of  the  common 
 arts  and  fpecious  pretences  of  rebels,  to  jleal  the 
 hearts  oj  the  men  of  (d)  Ifrael  from   their  lawful 
 King.     In  order  to  which,  having  prepared  cha- 
 riots and  horfes,  he  fets  about  to  render  himfelf 
 popular  •,  declaring  to  every  one  who  came  to 
 the  court  for  juftice,  that  his  caufe  was  good  and 
 right,  hut  there  was  no  man  deputed  of  the  King  to 
 hear  (e)   him:    thereby    traiteroufly   infinuating, 
 that  there  were  many  and  great  defedls  in  his  fa- 
 ther's adminiftration  !  that  the  King  regarded  not 
 to  do  his  fubjed:s  juftice  !  that  there  was  great 
 caufe  of  complaint  given  !  but  withal,  how  care- 
 ful and  diligent  he  himfelf  would  be  to  redrefs 
 all  grievances,    if  once  he  had  it  in  his  power. 
 Oh  ffaid  he;  that  I  were  made  judge  ('meaning  the 
 fupreme  judgej  in  the  land,  that  every  man,  which 
 hath  any  fuit  or  caufe,  might  come  unto  me,  and  I 
 would  do  him  if)  jujlice !  but,  the'  the  giddy  po- 
 pulace 
 
 («)  1   Sum.  wiii.  i^.          {6)   i    Kit*,  xv.    5.          (c)    z    Chron. 
 »ii.  17,  «8.    (d)  z  Sam  xv.  6.     («) verf.  5.     (/) vcrf.  4. 
 
Ig^    ^^^^  Short  History  of 
 
 pulacc  Twho  are  too  fond  of  revolutions,)  did 
 not  fee  through  the  fallacy,  it  was  plain  enough 
 by  his  addrefs  to  them,  and  not  to  the  King  him- 
 felf,  that  his  real  defign  was  only  to  fupplant 
 his  father  in  their  affedlions,  in  order  to  ufurp 
 his  throne :  and  what  good  can  reafonably  be 
 expected  from  thofe,  who  will  do  wrong  to  one, 
 under  pretence  of  having  thereby  an  opportunity 
 of  doing  right  to  {a\  others? 
 
 To  this  pretence  of  publick  good,  on  the  one 
 hand,  the  fubtle  Ahfalom  added  that  of  religion 
 and  liberty  of  confcience,  on  the  other.  He  told 
 che  King,  he  had  made  a  vow  to  ferve  the  Lord 
 in  Hebron,  and  prafd  his  leave  to  go  to  perform 
 (h)  it :  whereas,  in  truth,  it  was  only  to  get  the 
 better  opportunity  to  fend  fpies  throughout  all  the 
 tribes  of(c)  Ifrael,  to  have  his  rebellious  adherents 
 in  readinefs  to  attend  him.  Thus  that,  which 
 teacheth  nothing  but  the  moll  dutiful  obedience, 
 is  perverted  to  fandify  downright  rebellion  ;  till 
 
 at 
 
 (a)  It  was  an  excellent  remark  (worthy  of  its  reputed  author,) 
 
 *  that  a  good  aim,  much  Icfs  a  good  pretence,  cannot  juftify  a 
 
 *  bad  aiflion:    and  therefore  we  ought  to  be  as  foil icitous  about 
 
 *  the  lawfulnefs  of  the  mean?,  as  about  the  goodnefs  of  the  end. 
 
 *  It  is  a  maxim  in  morality,  that  bonwn  oritur  ex  integris;  and 
 
 *  in  Chriftianity,  that  we  wuji  rot  do  evil  that  good  may  come  of 
 
 *  ft :  and  we  may  poflxbly  refcue  ourfdves  from  future  coufenage, 
 '  if  we  examine  the  lawfulnefs  of  every  circumftance  leading  to 
 '  the  end  propounded,  before  we  are  tickled  and  tranfpor ted  with 
 
 *  the  beauty  of  the  pretence*.    Modern  policies  taken  from  Ma- 
 
 *  chiavel,  (^-c  16^3,  in  8vo.  p.  31.  (fuppos'd  by  Tit,  Sun  croft  ^ 
 afterwards  Archbifhop  oi  Canter bnry^)  reprinted  1690,  in  4COJ 
 p.  7.       (b)  2,  Saw.  XV.  Zj  8.       (f)  ' •  verf  lo. 
 
the  Regal  Succession     135- 
 
 at  length  the  poor  deluded  people  become  as  de- 
 voutly wicked,  as  thofe  (intimated  by  an  ingeni- 
 ous writer  j  who  could  *  fire  apiflol  in  their  prince** 
 
 *  face,    whilfb  they  were  repeating  the  fifth  {a) 
 
 *  commandment ' !    But  this  is  not  flange :    for 
 
 *  they,  who  level  at  the  government,  always  dif- 
 
 *  guife  thofe  aims  with  the  fair  and  fpecious  co- 
 
 *  lours  of  maintaining  endanger'd  religion,  li- 
 '  berty,  and  property  ;  while  they  have  no  fenfe 
 
 *  of  the  firft,  intend  to  opprefs  the  fecond,  and 
 
 *  feize  on  the  Q))  third '. 
 
 Neverthelefs,  by  thefe  and  fuch  like  artificies, 
 the  confprac^  hccd.m e  Jirong  and  general :  for  the 
 people  increased  continually  with  Abfalom  *,  tho* 
 many  of  them  went  with  him  in  their  fi?nplicity^ 
 and  knew  not  any  {c)  thing  they  were  to  do,  or  at 
 leaft  never  confider'd  the  fatal  confequences  of  what 
 they  were  engag'd  in.  Among  thofe  who  join'd 
 in  this  unnatural  expedition,  the  principal  was 
 Achitophel,  one  of  David^s  counfellors,  (  *  or  the 
 '  prefident,   fJ)  it's  poflible,  of  that  honourable 
 
 *  board'-,)  whofe  name  will  therefore  be  infa- 
 mous to  all  pofterity,  next  to  that  of  Judas,  of 
 whom  he  is  not  improperly  faid  to  be  a  (^)  type. 
 As  for  the  reft,  in  general,  they  may  be  fuppos'd 
 to  have  been  the  very  dregs  of  the  people  j  fince 
 rebellion,  properly  fo  call'd,  is  fitly  compar'd  to 
 a  common-fewer,  into  which  all  the  kennels  of  the 
 nation,  naturally  (/");'«;/. 
 
 («)  Lezolt\  fcourge,  no.  5.  {b)  Dr.  J.  Fitz-TFilHam's  ferm_ 
 9  Sept.  1683,  p.  15.  (c)  3.  Sam.  xv.  11,  12.  (J)  Achitofkeis 
 policy  defeated ;  aferm.  9  5^/>r.  1685,  p.  10.  (e)  T.  Long's  fervti. 
 9  Sept.  1683,  p.  $.    {f)Dt.Scott'sl'eTva.z6  jnly.,l6S'^yTp.j.'),z6. 
 
1^6     The  Short  History  of 
 
 Thus  Darjid,  by  the  fudden  increafe  of  his  etie-* 
 mies,  and  the  bafe  defcrtion  of  fome  of  his  mofl: 
 obliged  friends,  was  reduc'd  to  the  neceffity,  not 
 only  to  abdicate  the  government,  but  even  toj?^^ 
 for  his  life,  and  to  efcape  beyond  {a)  Jordan  :  and 
 the  good  King  zvepi  as  he  went  up^  and  had  his 
 head  covered,  and  he  went  barefoot^  and  all  the 
 ■people  that  zuas  zv'ith  (h)  him.  And  well  he  might 
 be  thus  aifeded.  For  tho*  he  had  been  train'd 
 up  from  his  youth  in  the  fchool  of  afHidion 
 (wherein  many  princely  virtues  are  beft  to  be 
 (c)  learn'dj  and,  even  after  he  was  anointed,  was 
 not  admitted  by  God  to  the  exercife  of  his  king- 
 ly power,  till  he  had  fpent  fome  years  under  this 
 difcipline  •,  tho'  the  evils  which  comp&fs^d  him  about 
 were  (d)  innujuerable ;  and  his  enemies  who  hated 
 him  wrongfully  were  (e)Jirong  and  mighty,  and  more 
 than  the  hairs  of  his  (f)  head  ;  tho*  he  was  revil'd 
 by  people  of  all  forts,  from  the  graveft  who  fate 
 in  the  gate  ("or  place  of  judicature,)  and  [pake  againfi 
 him,  down  to  the  very  drunkards^  who  made 
 fongs  (and  libels)  upon  (g)  him:  yet  nothing  ot 
 all  this  touch'd  him  fo  home,  as  when  his  own 
 fiefh  and  blood  confpir'd  his  ruin  ;  when  his  own 
 familiar  friend  in  whom  he  trujled,  which  did  eat 
 of  his  hr^adf  had  lift  up  his  heel  againjt  (h)  him  ; 
 
 which 
 
 («)  1  Sattj.  XV.  14,  — -xvii.  11.        {b)  XV.  30.        (c) 
 
 The  learned  bifhop  Morley,  ipeaking  of  David  being  a  mun  nfttt 
 Coi'i  ovH  heart,  fi)'s,  •  perhaps  it  was  his  breeding  in  rhis  fchool 
 '  that  made  him  to  be  fo'.  Morlefs  ferm.  at  the  coron.  of  King 
 Charles  II.  1661,  p.  5  3,  in  4to.  (d)  Ff.  xl.  iz.  («)  —  xxxviii. 
 19.        (/)— lxix.4.        (^)— verl.  u.        (fe)— xli.  9- 
 
the  Regal  S If ccESSioN,    137 
 
 which  he  elegantly  conplains  of  {a)  j  '  where  he 
 '  bemoans  his  own  prefent  diftrefs,  and  the  perfi- 
 '  dioufnefs  of  his  own  principal  fervants  and 
 '  counlellors,  who,  with  Abfalom^  fought  his  life 
 
 *  and  (Jo)  crown  *. 
 
 Upon  this  abdication  or  deferrion  of  his  throne 
 (if  that  may  be  fo  call'd  (c^  which  was  occafion'd 
 by  a  juft  apprehenfion  of  danger  to  his  -perfin^^ 
 Ahfalom,  with  his  party  came  to  (d)  Jerufalem^  and 
 was  permitted  by  God,  for  the  fins  of  the  nation, 
 to  take  polTelTion  of  the  vacant  throne,  and  of 
 the  whole  kingdom,  from  Dan  even  to  [e]  Beer-fhe- 
 ha  ;  fo  that,  for  fome  time,  the  ufurper  had  every 
 thing  but  God  and  jufticc  on  his  fide,  and  the 
 loyalifts  had  not  force  fufficient  to  make  head 
 againft  him,  in  behalf  of  their  exil'd  King!  but, 
 to  their  immortal  honour  let  it  be  remember'd:, 
 that  Zadok  (f)  and  Jhiathar,  and  all  the  priefts 
 and  levites  rerain'd  their  natural  allegiance,  and 
 continued  fledfafl  in  loyalty  to  their  foveraign 
 David.  '  They  had  not  learnt  the  new  dodrine  of 
 '  refiftance,  nor  did  they  aft  by  the  politick  rule 
 '  of  our  modern  LaodiceanSt  who  really  neither 
 '  efpoufe  the  King's  caufe,   nor  the  fadion  of  his 
 
 *  enemies  ;  but  ftand  aloof  ofi\,    till  they  may, 
 
 *  with  difcretion^  join  thcmfelves  to  the  fironger 
 '  fide.     Zadok  a.nd»j^biatbar  v/ere  as  wife  as  they, 
 
 *  but   more  honeft  i    and  tho'  they  were  God's 
 
 T  '  priefis,, 
 
 (a)Pf4.W.  Ji,  tzc.  (^)l3fliop  SheUiu's  CcTiT).  iS  yuKP^ 
 1660,  p.  8.  [c)  liJhop  Burnet  lay?,  certainly  tt  c\tniot  be  cr.lU 
 eJ  fo;  IS  I  have  noiid  upon  p.  37.  {J,  ;.  Sim.  xvi.  1  r, 
 (0  xvii.  II,       (/;- X'.  i/\. 
 
1 3 8    The  Short  History  ^p/' 
 
 '  priefts,  yet  continued  the  King's  loyal  fubje^ls 
 «  in  his  greateft  diftrefs  and  utmoft  extremity. 
 «  —  I  wifh  that  feme  who  term  themfelves  mini- 
 *  Jlers  of  the  gofpel  would  acquit  themfelves,  in 
 «  this  refpeft,  as  well  as  thefe  (howfoever  defpis'd) 
 «  priejis  of  the  (a)  law  '  /  for  this  their  loyalty  was 
 perhaps  the  main  human  caufe,  that  this  rebel- 
 lion of  Abfalotn  (as  well  as  that  of  Sheba,  which 
 foon  followed  itj  was  of  a  fhort  continuance  ;  God 
 having  fo  guarded  the  government  of  his  own 
 people,    by  a   ftrid  conformity  and  uniformity, 
 .that,  without  a  fchifm  in  the  church,  no  rebel- 
 lion againfl  the  King  could  long  continue. 
 .     Now,    when  treafon  rode  triumphant  among 
 ^the   multitude,    and  faith  was  but  to  be  found 
 among  the  few,  the  treacherous  Zf^^  took  his  op- 
 portunity to  betray  his  loyal   mafler  {b)  Mephi- 
 bofJjeth  ;  and  the  foul-mouth'd  Shi?nei  prefum'd  to 
 caft  Jiones  at  his  foveraign  Lord  the  King,    and 
 to  curfe  (c)  him   even  to  his  face !    It  docs  not 
 appear,  that  this  mifcreant  had  received  any  per- 
 fonal  injury,  or  any  juft  provocation,  thus  to  in- 
 fult  his  lawful  foveraign  in  his  diftrefs  •,  and  there- 
 fore we  may  fairly  fuppofe,  that  the  corruption 
 of  his  own  heart  was  the  only  reafon,  that  he  took 
 the  advantage  of  the  times,   (as  other  time-fervers 
 are  apt  to    do,)    which   then   did  favour   every 
 one  that  would  be  the  King's  enemy.     But  if  he 
 had  been  (o  provok'd,  the  law  of  God  was  very 
 
 exprefs 
 
 (a)  Athuopheh  policy  dcfca'ed;  A  ftrm    9  Sfpt.  1683,  p   16, 
 17.         (^;  I  Sam.  xvl.    i,  5ic:,         {c\  — •  vtrf.  5,  6- 
 
/>&^  Regal  Succession.    139 
 
 (a)  exprefs  againft  reviling  the  Lord's  anointed ;  ' 
 which  in  the  holy  fcriptures  is  call'd  (b)  hlafphein-j :  ^ 
 and  therefore,  tho'  David  himfelf  (through  the 
 clemency  natural  to  lawful  Kings)  was  fo  graci- 
 ous as  to  forgive  him,  yet  God  Almighty,  who 
 looks  upon  any  injury  done  to  them  as  done  to 
 himfelf,  fwhofe  authority  they  have, J  would  not 
 hold  bim  guihlefs,  but  returned  his  wickednefs  up07t- 
 his  ozvn  head-,  and  brought  it  down  to  the  grave 
 with  (c)  blood.  And  yet,  '  for  one  Shimei  in  Da- 
 *  i;/^'stime,  we  have  a  {d)  thoufand  in  our  days*.- 
 But  it  is  remarkable,  that  immediately  upon  this 
 happy  reftoration,  this  blafphemer  of  the  Lord, 
 and  of  his  anointed,  was  among  the  very  frjff 
 who  hajled  (e)  to  make  a  formal  fubmifllon  to  the 
 King,  and  addrefs  him  for  mercy  ;  which  fhow- 
 ever  undeferved)  he  readily  obtain'd  of  him.  For 
 tho'  David  return'd  upon  hfs  own  terms,,  yea, 
 even  in  conquefl,  with  the  fword  in  his  hand, 
 and  might  have  juftly  made  many  examples  of 
 his  vengeance  ;  yet,  like  a  true  father  to  them,  he 
 pafles  an  a^  of  indemnity  to  all  his  people,  and 
 would  not  ftrike  off  this  very  wretch,  who  had  fo 
 highly  try'd  his  patience,  tho'  fome  about  hini 
 had  pii?fs'd  him  earneftly  to  do  it.  Upon  which 
 cafe,  I  find  a  remark  of  a  modern  divine,  which 
 
 T  2  I  think 
 
 {*)  Ea:oJ,  xxij.  18.       (b)  i  Kin.  xxi.  10,  15.       {c)  ■ ii.  9 
 
 {J)  Heyrick's  ferm.  xdjuly,  168 <,  p.  4.  And  (as  Sir  J.  H^ywatd 
 it.h  the  Jefuic  Farjom,)  Shimei  diJ  not  half  fo  cruelly  rurfe  or  rt-. 
 lile  holy  David,  as  thcfe  do  vho  charge  him  vrith  rejifiance  aguiujl 
 Saul  ;  which  he  detefied.  Hayw^  anTw.  to  Dolemnn,  1603,  p.  (/9. 
 (<>}  1  Sam.  xix.  16,  &c. 
 
140    7^/:?^  Short  History  ^ 
 
 I  think  well  worthy  of  remembrance.  Speaking 
 of  Sbimeih  curfing,  and  David*s  patience  under 
 it,  as  if  the  Lord  had  not  only  permitted,  but 
 cxprefly  bidden  him  do  it  ;*and  his  pious  confidence 
 that  the  Lord  would  requite  him  good  for  (a)  it  ;  he 
 
 *  offers  ittobe  confidcr'd,  when  the  provocations 
 '  of  a  people  are  fo  very  clamorous  and  impor- 
 
 *  tunate,  that  nothing  can  befal  them   but  as  a 
 
 *  pointed  providence,  and  they  can  never  be  to 
 ^  feek  why  God\s  hand  is  upon  them  •,  whether, 
 
 *  in  cafe  their  Prince  lliould  abufe  his  power,  it 
 ^  would  not  become  them,  inftead  of  medita- 
 ^  ting  refiftance,  to  fay  rather,  let  him  alone ^  for 
 «  God  has  bidden  him:  and  I  will  be  bold  to  add, 
 '  that  they  may  fay  this,  with  at  leaft  as  good 
 '  reafon,  as  David  could  of  Shimei  i  fince  it's  io 
 *■  very  plain,  that  even  evil  princes  are  the  ordi- 
 '•  nance  of  (b)  God,  *  &c. 
 
 Aj,Au«,'c«,  -  §  XXXVI.  This  revolution  Ctho' 
 hiuo'i  -  priFicipiei  in  truth  a  moft  unnatural  rebellion 
 txposd.  ^^^  treafonable  ufurpation,  and  re- 
 
 ported asfuch  in  the  facred  records, ) had  neverthe- 
 lefs  its  falfe  prophets,  impudent  enough  to  impute 
 it  all  to  God's  providence,  and  the  Lord's  doing ! 
 "The  Lord  ('faid  Shi?}iei)  hath  delivered  the  kingdom 
 into  the  hand  of  /Ibfalom  thy  (c)  fon.     Such  as  he 
 
 could 
 
 f«)  2  Sam.  xvi.  10,  ?.:c.  (^b)  Mr.  BOylys  £cxm. itBtth,  17 
 Srpt.  1710,  p.  20,  in  4:0.  (c)  z  S^m.  xvi.  8.  Several  of  our 
 bre  eminent  divines  haviig  taken  occafion  to  apply  this  cafe  to 
 rhat  of  a  later  A&fitlom  (which  was  happily  fupprefs'd.)  have  cle- 
 ganrly  defcrib'd  the  confcqucnces  naturally  attending  fuch  rebel. 
 
 lien 
 
the  Regal  Succession.    141 
 
 could  behold  God's  band,  and  vifihle  marks  of  pro- 
 vidence in  all  this !  flike  thofe  rnilerable  interpre- 
 ters of  God's  word  herein  before  (a)  mention*di) 
 whereas  'tis  certain,  his  inceft  and  ufurpation 
 were  equally  from  God's  permiflion,  and  the  Lord 
 was  no  more  the  author  of  the  one  than  the  other: 
 nay  fas  a  late  popular  writer  frankly  obferves^ 
 '  there  is  as  plain  and  as  legible  (b)  fcripture,  to 
 '  entitle  him  to  the  bloody  French  and  Iri/h  maf- 
 '  facres,  as  there  is  to  make  him  the  fetter-up  of 
 
 '  divine  (_c)  ufurpers! To  deny  God's  provi- 
 
 '  dence,  is  to  fhut  him  out  of  his  own  world  ; 
 
 *  but  to  afcribe  wicked  adions  to  the  divine  pro- 
 '  vidence,  is  the  greater  injury  of  the  two.    For 
 
 *  the 
 
 lion,  whenever  ft  is  permitted  to   fucceed :  how,  *  God  fnould 
 '  have  been  entituled  the  author,  and  be  mock'd  with  a  thaiikf- 
 
 *  giving  day  for  the  fuccefs !  the  sdiors  had  been  honour'd  as  pa- 
 
 *  triots  and  faints !  the  proteftant  reh"gioD  hid  —received  another 
 «  indelible  blot !  and  —  herefy,  hypocrify,  and  regicide  been  made 
 
 *  the  publick  profcflioh    and  religion  of  th=  nation'!  T.  Lotig*s 
 fcrm.  9  Sept.  1683,  p.  3<,  56.     '  We  had  quickly  feen  a  flou, 
 
 *  ringing  kingdom  fciz'd  on,  eaten  up  by  lice  j  by  a  fwarm 
 
 *  of  the  bafeft  and  moft  infamous  vermin  that  ever  bred  cut  of 
 
 *  the  filth  of  a  nation!    we  had  fecn  ihe  Athicft  glutting  his  iuft 
 
 *  with  the  rapes  of  our  wives  and  daughters,  and  quaffing   the 
 
 *  tears  of  widows    and  orphans !  we   hsd  feen   the  beggar  on 
 '  horfeback  flaunting  in  the  Tpoils  of  our  fortunes,  and  triumph- 
 
 *  ing  on  the  heads  of  our  nobles  and  gentry  !  in  a  word,  we  had 
 
 *  feen  cur  lav^s  trampled  on,  our  liberties  cr'fln''ci,  and  our  yet  ja- 
 '  cred  and  virgin  throne,  to  our  cverlafting  infamy,  deflowcr'd 
 
 *  and  profan'd  by  a  fpurious  illegitimstc  ifTue'!  Dr.  Scott'i  iernrt. 
 x^July,  s68<,  p.  z6,  a?. 
 
 (a)  Page  91.  {b)  The  lord  killeth,  and  tnahsth  alivt.  i  Sum. 
 ji.  6.  (c)  Sam.  John[,  argum.  proving  the  abrogat.of  K,  James, 
 >69i,  pref.  p.  15. 
 
14^    The  Short  History  of 
 
 «  the    Englijh  of   God's   providence   is,    as   God 
 
 <  would  have  it.  Now,  when  this  is  applied  to 
 '  ufurparion,  which  is  robbery  and  wrong  in  the 
 «  higheft  degree,  - —  'tis  to  fay,  that  robbery  is 
 '  as  God  would  have  it,  and  opprefiion  is  as  God 
 '  would  have  it!  but  this,  all  the  world  knows,  is 
 '  contrary  to  God's  known  and  revealed  will  j 
 '  and  therefore  as  the  Atheifts  deny  God,  fo 
 '  thefe  men  make  him  to  deny  {a)  himfelf '.  And 
 what  lefs  violence  do  thofe  offer  to  the  divine 
 majeflry,  who  prefume  notorioufly  to  wreft  the 
 holy  fcriptures,  (and  particularly  the  cafe  here 
 before  us,  j  to  favour  fuch  refi (lance  as  is  there- 
 in exprefly  condemn'd  ?  Yet  fo  did  the  trum- 
 peters of  rebellion,  within  the  memory  of  man, 
 endeavour  to  juftify  their  own  party  by  the  mif- 
 applied  example  of  David,  and  condemn  their 
 King's  condudl  under  the  perfon  of  Jhfalom :  as 
 if  Ahfalcm''?,  fm  had  only  confifled  in  his  rifing  up 
 againft  the  (h)  righteous  (as  they  prefum'd  to  call 
 
 them- 
 
 (a)  Ibid.  v.  ^9,  40.  [b]  Sa  Gibfon's  ferm.  24  Sept.  i64f, 
 
 p.  34.  But  brcaufe  this  prophane  prracher  has  here  alfo  caft  his 
 odious  refledions  upon  the  folemn  prayers  which  all  the  ortho- 
 dox members  of  our  church  conftantly  put  up  for  our  lawful 
 Ibveraign,  I  {ball  tranfcribe  what  the  learned  Dr.  Comber  fays, 
 in  his  commentary  on  the  coIUB  for  the  King.    *  His  friends  are 
 
 •  our  friends,  and  his  enemies  our  enemies  ;  for  whoever  ct:empts 
 
 •  to  finite  the  flj:fherd,  feeks  to  deflroy  the  fliecp,  and  is  a  mor- 
 
 •  tal  foe  to  the  whole  nation  If  it  be  a  foreign  prince  that 
 
 •  oppofeth  our   King,  he  is  a  robber,  and  unjuft,    to  invade  his 
 
 •  neighbour's  rights:  if  he  be  a  fubjedl  that  rifeth  againft  his  fo- 
 
 <  veraign,  he  hath  renouoc'd  chrift  aairy  with  his  allegiance,  and 
 '  is  to  be  elleera'd  a  troublcr  of  our  Jfraeh  Therefore,  whofe- 
 '  ever  they  be  that  are  encmia  to  the  King,  or  whatfoever  the 
 
 •  pre- 
 
/Z?^  Regal  Succession.     145 
 
 themfelvcs !)  whereas  it  was  manifeftly  his  rifing 
 up  againft  his  lawful  foveraign  -,  without  any  re- 
 gard to  David's  perfonal  righteoufnefs,  but  only 
 to  God's  authority,  under  which  he  was  facred 
 and  irrefiftible.     But  fuch  preachers  muft  be  fup- 
 pos'd  to  have  forgot  the  ffih  commandment ;  which 
 containing  an  exprefs  promife  of  long  life  to  thofe 
 who  honour  their  parents,  whether  natural,  fpi- 
 ritual,   or  political,    doth  confequently  imply  a 
 threatning,  that  thofe  who  do  it  not,  (and  much 
 more  then,  thofe  who  aflually  rebel  againft  them 
 all,  as  the  ufurper  here  before  us  did,)  fhall  be 
 cut  off  fliort :  and  we  can't  believe,  that  the  mod 
 zealous  Achitopheh  would  be  content  with  fuch  a 
 revolution  in  their  own  families,    to  be  infulred 
 and  turn'd  out  of  doors  by  their  own  children 
 and  fervants  ;  and  much  lefs  that  they  would  own 
 it  to  be  the  Lord's  doing.     'Tis  true,  the  great 
 revolutions  of  government  are  attributed   to  a 
 particular  providence  of  God  j  who  is  the  judgL\ 
 and  putteth  down  one,  and  fetteth  up  (a^  another. 
 Yet  ftill  this  '  doth  not  found  any  right  of  domi- 
 '  nion  (as  fome  fancied,  till  the  argument  from 
 '  providence  was  return'd  with  greater  force  up- 
 «  on  themfelvesrj  but  it  fhews,    that  v/hen  God 
 '  pleafes  to  make  ufe  of  pcrfons  or  nations  as  {b) 
 
 '  fcour- 
 
 *  pretence  be,  we  wilTi  they  may  never  prcfper  in  that  black  im- 
 '  piety  of  unjuft  invafion  or  unchriftian  rebellion'.  As  I  find 
 him  quoted  in  Avindic.  of  Jome  among  ourjelves,  See.  1691,  p, 
 
 [a)  Pfi.  Ixxv.  7.         [h]  'Tis  well  obferv'd,   that  God,   To 
 
 *  prevent  the  cavils  of  unreafonable  mer,  has  provideatialiy  iaii 
 
 ;  oprn 
 
144    7"^^^  Short  History  ^/ 
 
 *  fcourges  in  his  hand,  to  punifh  a  people  with  -, 
 <  he  gives  them  fuccefs  above  their  hopes  or  ex- 
 «  peflations ;  but  that  fuccefs  gives  them  no  («) 
 
 *  right.  And  if  God  gives  no  right  to   him 
 
 '  v/hom  he  fets  up,  then  it  remains  dill  in  him 
 
 *  whom  he  has  put  down  ;  fo  that  he  is  rightful 
 '  King  ftill,  though  he  is  out  of  pofTeflion,  and 
 '  the  other  is  but  an  ufurper  that  is  in  {h)  pof- 
 '  feflion'. 
 
 And  that  the  people's  choice,  confent  or  fub- 
 miffion  was  another  of  Ah[alom\  pretended  titles, 
 we  may  perceive  by  Hujhai\  mentioning  that  in 
 particular,  as  one  of  the  reafons  for  his  feeming 
 to  come  over  to  his  intereft ;  faying.  Whom  th^ 
 Lordf  and  this  people.^  and  all  the  men  of  Ifrael, 
 chufe^  his  will  I  be,  and  with  him  will  I  (c)  abide  ; 
 which,  by  the  way,  is  the  firfl:  time  that  we  hear 
 of  that  fallacious  principle,  vox  poptili  vc>:  Dei ! 
 that  the  voice  of  the  people  is  the  voice  of  God! 
 tho'  here  it  was  not  made  ufe  of  as  a  maxim, 
 
 but 
 
 *  cpcn  h"s  conduifl-  ii  thofc  mofi:  remaikable  word',   T/lr,   x.  5, 
 
 *  O  Ajsrian,  the  rod  of  mlr.e  t^riger,  and  tks  fi;iff  in  his  hand  (or 
 '  thw  power  I  have  arm'd  him  wub)  is  mlfts  irdgnittioK :  I  vill 
 ^  fend  him  a^ninj}  an  fypccr:tical  tiation,  atid  agaiftjl  the  f:ofie 
 '  of  my  vr:fih  vcill  I  give  him  »  charge  to  fake  the  ffoil.     AnJ 
 
 *  thcfi  it  tcliowj,  V.  7.  Hovebeit  he  meaneth  net  fo,    neither  doth 
 
 *  his  he  Art  thir.k  fo,  but  it  is  in  his  heart  to  dcflray,  »r,d  cut  off 
 "  nations  not  ti  fezv.     And    we  learn  from   the  lath  verfe^  thit 
 
 *  when  the   man  had  ptrformM  all  this  vprk,  God   wou'd  pur.ifjj 
 
 *  him  forvduchehadU'jHc'.  Mr.  D*0;/;.'s  icim  r.  Bath,  17S.pt. 
 1710,  p.  lo,  in  4ro. 
 
 [a J  Siillmgfl.  ferm.  ix,  b!o-j.  1678,  p.  17.  (»)  Billiop  Lloy^fi 
 ^ifc.  of  God'o  ways  of  dilpof.  of  tCm^d.  1691,  p,  56.  (0 
 2  Sam.  XV'.  ;8. 
 
the RegAl  Succession,    j^ j» 
 
 but  mcerly  as  a  colour-able  complement  to  the 
 humour  of  the  party  :  for  Hujhai  was  fo  far  from 
 being  a  revolter  in  his  heart,  that  he  was  David's 
 (a)  co?npamon,  and  remarkably  his  friend ;  which 
 made  Ahfalom  at  firft  admire  at  his  fuppofed  {h) 
 defertion.  But  he  was  exprefly  authorizM,  and 
 commanded  by  King  David  himfelf,  to  make  his 
 court  to  the  ufurper  in  this  manner,  in  order  to 
 defeat  the  coufifel  of  Achitophel,  and  to  give  him 
 notice  of  what  {c)  pafs'd  j  which  he  happily  ef- 
 feded.  How  far  fuch  infincere  profeffions  may 
 be  juftifiable  in  human  policyj  I  fhall  not  take 
 upon  me  to  determine.  'Tis  plain,  he  went  a 
 great  length  in  his  compliance  ;  not  only  faluting 
 jibfalom  in  the  proper  ftile  of  foveraignty,  God 
 fave  the  King,  God  fave  the  King!  but  in  fuch  fur- 
 ther terms  as  were  underflood  as  a  promife  of 
 true  allegiance  :  but  then,  as  he  did  not  prefume 
 to  take  the  name  of  God  in  vain  by  any  oath,  and 
 he  had  Davids  own  authority  for  what  he  did,  his 
 cafe  appears  in  a  different  light  from  that  of  thofe 
 who  fcruple  no  terms  of  compliance  with  any 
 other  Ahfalom^  or  Oliver,  who  hath  power  to  re- 
 ward them. 
 
 And  yet,  notwithflanding  all  thefe  his  pretend- 
 ed titles,  grounded  upon  the  King's  abdication, 
 the  people's  eled:ion,  his  own  fuccefs,  and  full 
 pofifefTion,  and  (^what  is  ftill  more)  the  providence, 
 that  all  this  happen'd  according  to  what  the  Lord 
 had  foretold  to  David  by  the  prophet  Nathan  > 
 
 U  Abfa^ 
 
 [a)  I  Chrott.  xxyji.  53.        (l>)  z  Sttm.X'ti.  ifi,  17.         (f) 
 
14-6    The  Short  History  of 
 
 jibfalom  was  never  the  more  their  Kino-,  but  a 
 fturdy  rebel,  and  his  enterprize,  even  when  it 
 was  in  its  height,  is  by  the  Holy  Ghoft  branded 
 with  the  foul  name  of  a  {a)  confpirac'j  :  and  Da- 
 vid, the*  out  of  pofTefTion  and  in  exile,  is  every 
 where  acknowledg'd  to  be  their  only  lawful  and 
 rightful  King  (as  I  have  fhewn  our  (b)  foveraign 
 was  in  a  like  cafe ;)  and  as  fuch,  in  God's  good 
 time,  happily  reftor'd  to  his  repenting  fubjeds. 
 David'j  re-  §  XXXVII.  *  Now  thc  men  both 
 fiorati»n.  c  of  j^^^ah  and  Ifrael,  they  were  all 
 '  convinced  •,    they  all  very  well  knew,  that  the 
 
 *  feat  of  the  kingdom  was  David*s ;    knew  M- 
 
 *  falom  to  have  no  title  but  what  the  fword  made 
 «  him  ;  knew  the  right  of  the  throne  belong'd 
 '  to  him  who  was  fled,  to  him  who  was  out  of 
 c  the  land  :  and  therefore,  if  they  would  have 
 «  peace  and  government  built  upon  the  founda- 
 <  tlon  of  righteoufnefs,  they  could  not  but  con* 
 '  elude,  the  King  himfelf  mud  have  his  right ; 
 
 *  he  who  was  unjuftly  banifht,  muft  in  righteouf- 
 
 *  nefs  be  call'd  (c;  home  ',  i^c.  And  yet  none  of 
 thefe  confiderations  would  weigh  with  them,  till 
 after  they  had  tafted  of  the  calamities  of  war, 
 and  felt  the  fmart  of  arbitrary  government  under 
 a  prevailing  fadion  :  but  when  they  found  them- 
 felves  adually  fubjed  to  that  tyranny,  under  ai\ 
 ufurper,  v/hich  they  were  only  afraid  of  under  theii 
 King,  then  they  became  fenfible  of  their  folly  anc 
 madnefs,  in  having  made  fo  fatal  a  revolution 
 
 an( 
 
 (-7)  1  Sam.  XV.  12.         {h)  Page  $0.        (c)  JJUrigtoti'i  fer 
 6  /4^r.  1660,  p.  J  8. 
 
the  Regal  Succession,      J4.7 
 
 and  therefore  after  a  bloody  battle,  and  the  death 
 of  the  ufurper,  they  bethought  themfelves,  that 
 it  was  their  true  intereft,  as  well  as  their  duty,  to 
 call  home  David  again,  rather  than  prefume  to 
 fet  up  another  Abfalom,  and  be  confequently 
 forc'd  to  keep  an  army  on  foot  to  fupport  him  in 
 his  ufurpation.  For  (as  'tis  well  exprefs'd  by  a 
 divine  before  quoted,)  '  a  King,  it  feems,  is  one 
 
 *  of  thofe  good  things,  whofe  want  doth  bed 
 '  commend  them  :  for  whilll  David  was  at  home, 
 
 *  and  in  the  city,  the  citizens  would  not  ftrengthen 
 
 *  his  hands,  would  not  ftand  to  him,  for  he  was 
 
 *  fain  to  fly  ;  but  now,  when  out  of  the  land, 
 '  then  they  begin  to  confider  the  feeling  and  fen- 
 '  fible  diilance  between  an  ufurper  and  a  father, 
 '  between  an  Abfalom  and  a  David.     And  then 
 
 *  they  find  there  was  as  much  difference  between 
 '  the  King  and  his  ufurper,    as   is  between  an 
 
 *  husband  and  an  adtlterer:  for  as  the  one  takes 
 
 *  a  woman  for  his  love,  and  th.^  other  for  his  luft, 
 '  even  fo  do  they  take  crowns,  the  King  to  pro- 
 
 *  mote,  the  ufurper  to  make  a  prey  on  it ;  the 
 '  King  he  loves,  the  ufurper  he  lufts ;  the  King 
 
 *  ftudieth  the  advance,  peace  and  improvement 
 
 *  of  his  people ,  but  the  ufurper  he  lludieth 
 
 c  how  to  advance  himfelf,  how  to  build  up  his 
 <■  houfe  {ay  ^c.  Thus  God,  who  alone  is  able 
 to  bow  the  hearts  of  men,  and  to  tirrn  them  whi- 
 therfoever  (^jitpleafes  him,  having  providentially 
 jHfluenc'd  thefe  revolters,  they,  as  it  were  with 
 
 U  2  one 
 
 (*)  AlUngtAtxm,  6  Jpr.  1660,  p.  33.         (b)  frav.  xxi,  i. 
 
148     T*^^  Short  History  ^ 
 
 ©ne  heart,  fent  this  word  unto  the  King,  Re- 
 turn thou  and  all  thy  (a)  fervants  ;  and  con- 
 tended fiercely  among  themfelves,  which  of 
 them  fhould  be  the  firjt  in  bringing  him  Q?)  back  ! 
 which  manifefts  the  truth  of  that  propofition, 
 that  '  juft  authority,  however  deprefs'd  for  a  fea- 
 
 *  fon,  ufually  recovers  and  gets  up  again,  and 
 <  unjuft  ufurpation,  however  high  and  fuccefsful 
 
 *  for  a  while,  feldom  holds  out  long  againft  a 
 
 *  righteous  (c)  title  *.  And  the  reafon  thereof 
 feems  very    convincing.     For    *  while  any   man 
 
 *  holds  and  claims  only  by  unrighteoufnefs,  he 
 
 *  doth  not  hold  of  God,  nor  doth  God  look  up- 
 
 *  on  the  thing  he  holds,  as  his,  till  fome  way  of 
 
 *  right  makes  it  fo  :  whilft  he  holds  it  by  wrong, 
 
 *  he  rates  him  not  as  the  owner,  but  ufurper, 
 
 *  and  therefore  bids  him  reftore  the  right  owner 
 
 *  his  own  again  ;  and  that  is  all  any  man  ever 
 «  gets  with  him  by  meer  unrighteous  pofTeffion  ; 
 «  viz.  no  property  therein,  but  only  guilt  and 
 <  punifhment,  and  a  neceflity  of  making  reditu- 
 
 *  tion  (d) !  *.  And  this  reafoning  holds  good, 
 more  efpecially  with  relation  to  kingdoms  and  na- 
 tions, which  'are  therefore  either  rewarded  or pu- 
 '  nifh'd  in  this  world,  becaufe  they  fhall  not,  as 
 '  fuch,  be  judg'd  in  the  other :  and  the  fame 
 '  may  be  faid  of  their  rulers  too.  "When  the  great- 
 
 *  eft  monarch  goes  down  into  the  grave,  all  his 
 '  pomp  and  power,  his  titles  and  miajefty  perifli 
 
 '  toge- 
 
 (a)  1  Sam  xix.  14.         {b)  vcrf.  9,  and  45.         [c]  Ford's 
 
 ferm.  28  Junt,  1660,  p.  7.  [d)  Kettlewelfs  works,  vol.  2. 
 fol.  2  13.  See  alfo  Bevtridgt's  /cxfu.  of  rcftitution. 
 
the  Regal  Succession.    149 
 
 ^  together  with  him  ;  and  he  fliall  (land  in  judg- 
 
 *  ment  in  the  fame  undiilinguifh'd  rank  with  the 
 '  meaneft   of  his   fubjedls  :    whatfoever   reward 
 
 *  therefore  God  fhall  pleafe  to  give  to  fuch  a 
 ^  one,  as  a  King,  it  muft  be  all  in  this  prelent 
 ^  {a)  life'. 
 
 But  before  I.leave  this  remarkable  cafe,  I  cannot 
 but  ftop  to  compare  the  modefty  of  this  King  de 
 faofo^  Abfalom,  with  the  unwarrantable  affurance 
 of  our  EngliJJj  protestor,  Oliver ;  where  I  can't: 
 iind  the  lead  footftep  of  any  oath,  covenant  or 
 engagement  to  Abfalom^  much  lefs  any  abjura- 
 tion of  the  titles  and  pretentions  of  David,  the 
 King  de  jure,  tho'  he  v/as  then  in  exile,  and 
 thereby  diverted  of  the  exercife  of  his  foveraign 
 authority.  And  therefore  not  finding  any  thing 
 of  that  here  (in  which  our  late  Englijh  ufurpers 
 fo  far  outwent  thofe  Jews,)  I  fhall  not  prefume  to 
 determine,  whether  in  cafe  fuch  oaths,  or  cove- 
 nants, or  engagements  had  been  requir'd  in  Jb- 
 falom's  cafe,  the  people  of  Ifrael  (h)  could  with 
 a  good  confeience  have  taken  them  ;  nor  whether, 
 if  they  had,  by  whatever  inducements,  been  pre- 
 vail'd  withal  to  take  them,  fuch  oaths,  or  cove- 
 nants, or  engagements  had  oblig'd  them  to  any 
 thing  but  repentance  and  reftitution  ;  nor  whether 
 fuch  people  had  been  bound  in  confeience,  upon 
 
 the 
 
 («)  WAkc'iCcxm,  i6  Nov.  1691,  p.  19.         {h)  A  zealous  mo- 
 dern is  very  pofitive,  that  *  no  eedcfnftical  wafh  can  hide  the 
 
 *  crime  of  abjuring  the  perfon,  whom  I  believe  my  foveraign, 
 
 *  and  profefliDg  allegiance  to  another  whom  I  think  an  ufurpcr'. 
 *Tho.  BradSurfs  (erm.  f  Nov.  17 if,  p.  2.6. 
 
15*0     The  Short  History  of 
 
 the  firft  convidion  of  their  illegality,  to  have  re- 
 verfed  and  difclaimM  them  ;    nor   particularly, 
 whether  Joab^  who  {a)  thrujt  three  darts  through 
 the  heart  of  Ah^dAom^  the  ufiirper,  had  been  guilty 
 of  treafon  •,  nor  whether  he  could  have  juftified 
 himfelf  in  fo  doing,  by  virtue  of  his  natural  alle- 
 giance to  David,  the  King  de  jure.  Thefe,  I  fay, 
 are  queflions,  that,  not  being  refolv'd  in  the  cafe 
 before  me,  I  fhall  norprefume  to  determine  i  but 
 refer  them  to  be  difcufs'd  at  leifure,  by  the  help 
 of  the  feveral  eminent  authorities  here  (^^  quoted, 
 whilft  I  proceed  in  my  hiftory.     However,  with 
 refpeft  to  that  other  cafe,  to  which  this  is  applica- 
 ble, in  our  EngUftJ  hiflory,  I  muft  obferve,  that 
 the  reprefentative  body  of  the  nation,  in  a  free 
 parliament  affembled,    declar'd  thofe  oaths,    co- 
 venants, and  engagements  which  were  impos'd  up- 
 on the  fubjedts,  as  well  as  all  other  the  a6ts  and 
 ordinances  made,  during  the  late  grand  ufurpa- 
 tion,  to  have  been  *  unlawful,  and  impos'd  againft 
 
 *  the  fundamental  laws  and  liberties  of  this  king- 
 
 *  dom  ;    to  have  had  in  themfelves  not  the  lead 
 
 *  colour  of  law  or  juftice  to  fupport  them  ;  and 
 
 *  (therefore)  to  have  been  null  and  void  to  all  in- 
 
 *  tents  and  purpofcs  (c)  whatfoever '. 
 Sheba-.r,w..        §  XXX VIII.    Absalom    being 
 
 mnd  his  fiidden    fent  to   his  Place ,    and  the  men  of 
 •^'"**  Jfrael  being  difcontented,  that  thofe 
 
 of 
 
 (a)  2  Sam.  xviii.  14.  (b)  See  Bidiep  HaII'&  propofitions ; 
 Sa»der[oh*s  cafes  of  oaths  i  The  whole  duty  of  man  ;  Wnke's  dif- 
 courfc  of  fwearingi  and  other  cafuifts.  (o  Stat.xiii.  Car.  i- 
 c.  I. 
 
the  Regal  Succession     lyi 
 
 of  Judah  had  been  more  a6tive  in  the  King's  re- 
 ftoration  than  themfelves,  ever'j  man  of  Ifrael  went 
 up  from  after  David,    and  followed  Sheha  -,    who 
 embracM  that  occafion  to  ufurp  the  ten  tribes  (a) 
 himfelf.     He  blew  a  trumpet^  and  faid,  IVe  have 
 m  part  in  David,  neither  have  we  inheritance  in 
 the  fon  of  Jejfe  ;  every  man  to  his  tents,  O  Ifrael  \ 
 as  if  he  had  plainly  profefs'd,  in  behalf  of  him- 
 felf and  his  party,  that  '  unlefs  they  might  have 
 «  the  crown  land,  they  were  rather  for  a  war  thar^ 
 '  a  fettlement,  rather  for  confufion  than  a  King  5 
 '  they  valued  a  King  at  no  more  than  was  their 
 '  own   intereft  and   their  own     {b)   advantage*. 
 But,  he  foon  met  with  his  reward,  being  purfu'd 
 to  death  by  certain  loyal  (c)  fubjedls :  and  then 
 all  the  people  return'd  again  to  their  true  allegi- 
 ance.    In  which  cafe  it  is  obfervable,    that  tho» 
 this  ufurper  had  alfo  all  the  tribes  of  Ifrael,  while 
 David  had  but  the  loyal  tribe  of  Judah  with  him, 
 he  was  never  once  termed  a  King,  but  a  man  of 
 Belial;    which,   (as  a   learned  prelate  obfervesj 
 
 *  in  effedt  is  as  much  as  if  it  had  been  faid,  that 
 
 *  he  was  of  his  father  the  (d)  devil  M 
 
 Here  it  may  be  proper  to  take  notice  of  the 
 fpawn  of  old  Leviathan,  who  would  perfuade  us, 
 that  dominion  is  founded  in  power  •,  and  that  tho^ 
 the  right  of  the  foveraign  is  not  entinguijh^d  by  a 
 profperous  invafion  or  rebellion,  yet  the  obligation  of 
 the  fubje^s  is :  fo  that,  when  our  lawful  King  is  not 
 
 ahk 
 
 («)   1  Sam.  XX.  I,  1,  {b)   Allington^s  fcrm.    i^Jiine, 
 
 1660,  p.  54.         (c)  i  Sam.  XX.  2i.        (</)  Archbiftiop  U/ker 
 of  obedience  of  fubj.  p.  115. 
 
1 5*  1     The  Short  History  of 
 
 able  to  prote^  uSy  we  are  at  libdrty  t&  feek  it  any 
 ixihere  ;  and  are  hound  to  defend  him  who  has  the 
 pojfejfion^  and  power  to  prote5i  us,  fo  lotig  as  we  are 
 able.  But  all  this  may  well  be  anfwer'd  as  a 
 facetious  and  popular  writer  does  it.    '  It  is  true 
 
 *  indeed  (Tays  hej  what  a  right  reverend  preacher 
 '  faid,  that  pojfeffion  is  eleven  points  of  the  law : 
 '  but  where  is  the  twelfth  ?  we  want  the  point  of 
 '  right ;  without  which  the  eleven  points  of  law 
 '  are  like  the  verdidl  of  eleven  jurymen,  for  re- 
 '  cciving    of  which.     King    Alfred    heretofore 
 
 *  hanged    one   of    his   {a)  judges.  Suppofe 
 
 '  any  man,  by  forcible  entry,  gets  pofleflion  of 
 '  the    mannor-houfe,    is  he  thereupon  Lord   of 
 
 *  the  mannor,  or  has  he  a  right  to  the  rents  of 
 
 *  the  tenants  ?    it  intitles  him  to  nothing  that  I 
 
 *  know  of  but  to  be  follow'd  by  a  writ  of  ejedt- 
 
 *  rhent ;  for  the  right  and  the  eftate  are  for  ever 
 
 *  infeparable  :  for  tho'  the  right  owner  be  not 
 «  in  the  eflate,  yet  the  eftate  is  always  in  C^)  him'. 
 However  this  is  plain,  from  the  cafe  here  in  our 
 view,  that  '  the  publick  peace  being  once  bro- 
 '  ken,  it  is  impoffible  for  them  that  begin  a  ci- 
 '  vil  war,  to  flop  where  they  will,  or  end  it  when 
 '  they  pleafe,  or  even  to  judge  what  their  own 
 '  refolutions  will  be,  as  the  ftate  of  things  alters 
 
 *  or   advances  :    new  men  will   graft  upon   the 
 
 *  fchemes  and  fucceffes  of  the  prime  defigners ; 
 '  and  they  that  are  once  engaged,  will  gradually 
 «  advance  to   the  higheft  villanies,    rather   than 
 
 '  quit 
 
 {a)  Sam.  Johnfon's  notes  on  the  phoenix  edition  of  the  paftoral 
 letter,  1^64,  p.  lo.         {b)  Ibid,  p   tf. 
 
the  Regal  Succession.   15-3 
 
 ^  quic  che  game,  or  fufFer  it  to  be  played  out  of 
 '  their  (^a)  hands*. 
 
 §  XXXIX.  As  to  Solomon^  it  is  soioifion 
 granted  that  he  was  King  by  a  divine  i^J^'ngbydu 
 rights  in  the  Jlri£left  fenfe  of  the  [b,  word.  ""'"^  "^^*' 
 For,  tho'  he  was  a  younger  fon  of  David,  and  confe- 
 quently  indeed  could  not  be  the  next  heir  by  birth, 
 as  himfelf  acknowledg'd  to  his  mother,  concerning 
 Adonijah,  faying,  Ask  for  him  the  kingdom  alfo  ; 
 for  he  is  mine  elder  (c)  brother,  (where,  by  the 
 way,  we  may  obferve,  that  Solomon  himfelf,  who 
 did  not  ufe  to  fpeak  improperly,  affirms,  that, 
 by  the  ordinary  right  and  courfe  of  fucceffion, 
 the  Kingdom  was  to  have  gone  according  to  the 
 natural  law  of  primogeniture ;)  yet,  as  he  was 
 the  perfon  who  was,  exprefly  and  by  name,  pro- 
 mis'd  to  be  eftablilh'd  in  the  throne,  by  the  Lord, 
 even  before  his  (dj  birth  ;  of  which  David  was 
 alfo  put  in  mind  (e)  afterwards :  therefore  (and 
 for  that  reafon  only)  it  was,  that  Solomon  was  im- 
 mediately fet  upon  the  throne,  by  David's  order 
 according  to  the  word  Of  the  (/)  Lord. 
 
 This  is  further  manifefled  both  by  David  and 
 Solomon  himfelf.  For  David,  inflruding  Solomon 
 in  God*s  promifes,  and  his  duty,  tells  him,  The 
 word  of  the  Lord  came  to  me,  fafing,  A  fon  fhall 
 
 he  born  to  thee, his  name  fijall  be  Solomon  ;  — 
 
 and  I  will  efiablifh  the  throne  of  his  kingdom  over 
 
 X  Ifrael 
 
 (4  Dr.  €ha»Jl.  ferm.  7  yane,  1716,  p.  aj*  (i)  f.  Ar- 
 cher's ferra.  at  Tunh.  8  Au^.  1714,  p.  27.  {c)  i  Kituii,  zt, 
 (d)  X  S/tm^  y'll  lit  (e)  i  Kin,  u  ii,  ScCo  Cf)  — -  |?, 
 Sec. 
 
I5'4'    T'^^Short  HisroRY  ^ 
 
 Ifracl /o/-  (a)  ever:  and  ia  a  fet  fpeech,  wherein 
 he  declar'd  both  his  own  and  Solomon's  divine 
 right,  he  fays,  The  Lord  God  of  Ifrael  chofe  me 
 lefore  all  the  houfe  of  my  father^  to  be  King  over 
 Ifrael /6>r  ever  —  ;  and  of  all  my  fons,  he  hath  cho- 
 fen  Solomon,  my  fon^  to  fit  upon  the  throne  of  the 
 kingdom  of  the  Lord  over  Ifrael ;  and  he  faid  unto 
 
 fne, /  will  eftablijh  his  kingdom  for  (b)  ever. 
 
 And  again  he  faith,  Solomon  my  fon,  whom  alone 
 God  hath  (c)  chofen,  &c.  Thus  Solomon  alfo  him- 
 felf  fays,  The  Lord  hath  performed  his  word  that 
 he  fpake,  and  I  am  rifen  up  in  the  room  of  David 
 my  father,  and  fit  on  the  throne  of  Ifrael,  as  the 
 Lord  (d)  promifed :  and  again  Solomon  faid  unto 
 God,  Thou  hajl  fhewed  great  mercy  unto  David  f«v 
 father,  and  hajl  made  me  to  reign  in  his  {e)  ftead^ 
 In  full  convidlion  whereof,  and  to  put  his  title  out 
 of  all  ddubt,  all  the  V rimes,  and  the  mighty  men^ 
 and  all  the  fins  Ukewife  of  King  David,  fubmitted 
 ihemfelves  unto  Solomon  the  (f)  King. 
 
 'Tis  true,  Adonijah  (his  cldeft  furviving  bro- 
 ther) at  firfl:  made  a  parry,  to  fecure  his  natural 
 right  of  fucceflion.  And  fuch  was  the  univerfal 
 refpe6t  to  the  law  of  primogeniture,  that  all  If- 
 rael fet  their  faces  on  him,  that  he  fhould  (g)  reign : 
 but  he  foon  was  convinc'd,  and  acknowledg'd, 
 that  the  kingdom  was  his  brother  Solomon's  from 
 the  (b^  Lord ;  who  alone  has  the  power  and  pre- 
 rogative 
 
 («)  I  Chron.  xxii.  8,  8cc.       {h)     <  xxviii.  4,  See.      (c) 
 
 xxix.  I.         {d)  I  Kin.  viii.   to.         (e)  z  Chron.    i.  {?r 
 
 (/)  I  Chron.  xxix.  2+.         (g)    i    Km.  it.    15.         (h)  llnd. 
 
//j^  Regal  Succession.    iS'T 
 
 rogative  to  difpenfe  with,  and  fuperfede  his  own 
 laws,  and  thofe  of  nature. 
 
 Here,  tho'  the  cafe  is  plain  enough  in  itfelf, 
 yet  I  find  it  neceflary  to  add  a  remark,  with  re- 
 fped  to  the  infinuation  of  JVTr.  IVhifion*  He  ad- 
 mits, that  Adonijah  was  the  eldejl  [on  then  (a) 
 alive,  but  infinuates,  that  neverthelefs,  Adonijab 
 himfelf  '  does  not  yet  deny,  that  the  confent  of 
 
 *  the  people  was  alfo  requifite  in  fuch  a  cafe  ; 
 '  and  that  when   God  turned  the  hearts  of  the 
 
 *  people  to  recognize  Solomon,  that  recognition 
 
 *  was  a  fufficient  title  to  the  throne,  even  in  barr 
 
 *  to  chat  primogeniture  itfelf  {hy.  In  anfwer 
 to  which,  and  to  demonftrate  the  fallacy  thereof, 
 it  is  obfervable,  that  Adonijah  affirms  fand  ap- 
 peals even  to  Solo?non's  mother  for  the  truth  of 
 it)  that  the  right  of  fuccelTion  was  his  :  Thou 
 knoweft  ("fays  he;  that  the  kingdom  was  mine  (mean- 
 ing by  the  natural  right  of  primogeniture:)  as 
 if  he  had  faid,  according  to  Peter  Mart'^r,  This 
 is  fo  notorious  and  mamjeft,  that  it  is  impojfihle  you 
 Jhouldhe  ignorant  of  'ci  it-,  for  (as  Adonijah  pro- 
 ceeds) fo  fully  fenfible  was  every  body  of  that 
 my  inherent  right,  by  virtue  of  the  laws  of  God 
 and  nature  (which  alfo  they  knew,  to  be  abfo- 
 lutely  indefeafible  '^',  without  the  manifeft  and 
 apparent  interpofition  of  God  himfelf,  and  that 
 too,  not  by  doubtful  events,  which  fome  affe6t 
 to  call  the  appearance  of  God  hy  his  providejice  ; 
 bup  by  an  exprefs  and  clear  revelation  of  his  di- 
 
 X  2  vine 
 
 {*)  Script.  poHt.  p.  29.         {b)  16U.  p.  30.         (c)  p.  Mart, 
 ^in  loco.        {d}  Deut.  xxi.  15-,  8<;c. 
 
1S6   The  Short  History^ 
 
 vine  will,  for  that  purpofe,)  that  they,  even  all 
 Ifrael,  fet  their  faces  on  me,  that  I Jhould  reign,  as, 
 being  their  King's  eldeft  fon  :  but  when  it  appear'd, 
 beyond  all  doubt,  by  fuch  publick  revelation, 
 to  be  the  will  of  God  to  alter  the  entail,  then 
 fand  not  before  they  acknowledg'd  xhz  kingdom 
 to  be  turned  about  to  Solomon,  becaufe  it  was  his 
 from  the  Lord:  and  as  AdoniJAh  himfelf  (being 
 Jikewife  made  fenfible  of  God's  excrcifing  his  pe- 
 culiar prerogative  in  that  cafe)  readily  fubmitted, 
 and  waved  his  claim  to  the  crown,  there  was, 
 from  that  time,  no  other  pretender  in  view,  and 
 confequently  no  colour  for  any  one  to  fcruple  the 
 recognition  of  Solomon,  whom  God  himfelf  had 
 fo  unqueftionably  appointed,  and  even  nam'd  to 
 be  their  King,  as  before  is  demonftrated. 
 
 Neverthelefs,  fo  far  was  that  recognition  from 
 being  a  fufficient  or  indeed  any)  title  to  the  crown, 
 jnuch  lefs  a  harr  to  the  primogeniture  (as  that  \Q.d.rTi' 
 ed  fcripture-politician  pretends]  that  the  very  word 
 recognition  neceffarily  fuppofes  a  prior  right  inhe- 
 rent in  the  perfon  recogniz'd,  and  implies  an  ac- 
 knowledgment of  that  prior  right,  not  the  giving 
 of  a  new  one  :  befides,  I  appeal  to  the  confciences 
 and  common  fmfe  of  all  mankind,  whether  any 
 thing  can  be  found  more  clear  in  the  whole  bible 
 than  this,  that  the  people  look'd  upon  it  as  their 
 indifpenfible  duty,  to  recognize  the  right  of  the 
 eldeft  fon,  according  to  the  known  laws  ;  till  be- 
 ing made  thoroughly  fenfible,  that  God  had 
 openly  difpens'd  with  his  own  laws  fin  that  par- 
 pcular  cafe)  and  declar'd  himfelf  in  favour  of 
 
 Solomon 
 
the  Regal  Succession.    177 
 
 Solomon  by  name,  and  that,  to  make  It  the  more 
 siotorious  to  them,  Adonijah  himfelf  had  alfo  wav'd 
 his  pretenfion  to  the  crown  ;  the  people,  then 
 having  no  room  left  to  difpute  the  title,  readily 
 recogniz'd  him  whom  the  Lord  had  fo  exprefly  no- 
 minated, and  to  whom  Adonijab  himfelf  had  as 
 exprefly  fubmitted. 
 
 It  did  not  therefore  require  any  great  depth 
 of  judgment  to  obferve  from  this  cafe,  that  he-. 
 reditary  right  has  hecii  interrupted,  and  that,  '  not- 
 
 *  withftanding  fuch  an  interruption,  yet  the  eflate 
 
 *  of  the  people  of  Ifrael  was  very  happy  under 
 '  Solomon's  {a]  government*!  .for,  when  God 
 Almighty  did  thus  exprefly  interpofe  to  chufe  a 
 King  for  them,  and  they  had  not  provok'd  him 
 by  any  rebelHous  ads  at  that  time,  to  give  them  a 
 King  in  his  Q?)  anger,  'tis  no  wonder  that  the  peo- 
 ple ihould  be  as  happy  under  fuch  a  King,  as 
 under  one  of  their  own  chufing  -,  nay,  I  believe,  it 
 would  puzzle  this  learned  author  to  find  out  any 
 one  inftance  'at  lead  in  the  fcripture-hiftory,;  of 
 |:heir  ever  having  been  happy  under  any  King  of 
 their  own  chufing :  and  whereas  he  obferves, 
 that  *  after  Kings  have  been  anointed  with  oil, 
 '  their  perfons  have  been  always  accounted  facred, 
 '  and  reckon*d  to  be  God*s  vicegerents,  and  the 
 
 *  fupreme  heads  of  the  ^c)  people',  a  little  more 
 reading  idj  would  have  taught  him,  that  the  roy- 
 al undlion  is  but  a  ceremony,  which,  like  that  of 
 coronation,    is  no  part  of   the   title  i    and  that 
 
 many 
 
 (a)  T.  Page's  fcrm.  2,0  yan.  17  14,  p.  l,  3.         (^)  Hcf.  x;if. 
 II.        (c)  T,?tige,  as  betore.        (A)  Seep.  45,  and  71. 
 
JS'S    The  Short  History  0/ 
 
 many  Kings  were  never  anointed,  who,  never  the 
 lefs  for  that,  were  as  facred,  and  as  truly  God*s 
 vicegerents,  as  thofe  who  were. 
 
 But,  after  the  beft  inquiry  I  can  make  into  the 
 cafe  before  us,  I  can't  difcover  the  lead  colour 
 of  fcripture,  to  warrant  Mr.  IVhifton^s  obfervation, 
 that  God,  in  this  preference  of  Solotnon,  had  re- 
 fped  to  his  perfonal  virtue,  goodnefs,  and  (a)  de- 
 fert.  He  ventures  indeed,  tho'  without  authority, 
 to  call  Solomon  the  better  fon,  and  Adonijah  the 
 (h)worfe:  but  he  will  have  much  ado  to  prove 
 that,  efpecially  at  the  time  when  God  reveal'ci 
 his  refolution  to  eftablifli  Solomon  in  the  throne  -, 
 unlefs,  as  he  did  in  the  cafe  of  Efau  and  Jacobs 
 he  will  pretend  to  diftinguifli  the  better  from  the 
 worfe,  before  they  were  born,  or  were  capable 
 of  doing  either  good  or  {c)  evil  j  which,  with 
 fubmiffion,  does  not  become  him  to  judge  of.  I 
 fuppofe,  he  does  not  think  Solomon  was  {op'eferr'd 
 on  account  of  his  chajiit'j,  as  he  fays  Jofeph  (d) 
 was!  and  much  lefs  can  we  imagine  it,  on  the 
 account  of  his  idolatry,  tho'  that  was  forefeen  by 
 God  Almighty,  even  when  he  entail'd  the  crowa 
 upon  him. 
 
 However,  we  may  fee  the  neceffity  of  thofe 
 fpeeches  which  David  and  Solomon  made  in  main- 
 tainance  of  their  divine  right ;  that  the  people 
 might  perceive,  by  apparent  proofs,  that  the 
 fundamental  laws  of  nature  were  not  alter'd  by 
 them,  without  the  exprefs  revelation  and  appoint- 
 ment 
 
 (t>)  Script  polit.  p.  li,  13.         (^i)  Ihitl.  p.  ip-        (0  ten. 
 «.  II.        C«/j  See  p.  40,  41. 
 
the  Regal  Succession.     lyp 
 
 inent  of  the  Lord ;  which  alone  fuperfedes  all 
 other  legal  qualifications  whatfoever.  Upon  which 
 account  (and  no  other)  j^domjah^  and  all  who  had 
 heJp'd  him  to  exalt  himfelf  againft  the  Lord's 
 exprefs  ordinance,  were  guilty  of  ufurpation  and 
 treafon,  and  thereby  forfeited  their  liberties,  eftates 
 and  lives,  as  well  as  their  employments,  to  So- 
 lomon's mercy. 
 
 And  as  Adonijah  himfelf  had  a  pardon,  or  a  re- 
 prieve only,  upon  condition  of  future  good  {a) 
 behaviour,  (and  therefore  loft  his  life  afterwards, 
 asfoonas  the  King  judged  the  condition  broken;) 
 fo  Ahiathar  his  life  was  fpared  by  King  Solomon^ 
 for  his  former  good  fervices  to  King  David,  but 
 the  priefthood  is  fa  id  to  have  been  taken  from 
 him,  and  reftored  to  Zadok,  that  he  might  fulfil  the 
 word  of  the  Lord^  which  he  fpake  concerning  tht 
 houfe  of  Eli  in  (J?)  Shiloh  ;  of  which  I  fhall  treat 
 more  particularly  by  and  by. 
 
 §  XL.  In  the  mean  time,  I  muft  take  notice, 
 how  manifeftly  King  Solomon  himfelf  violated  the 
 law  which  God  had  given  for  the  rule  of  the  King's 
 condud,  as  before  io  is  intimated,  God's  law 
 was  exprefs,    that  ^-?  fhall  not  multiply     Andirreji- 
 
 horfes  to  himfelf \    neither  fhall  he    fi'^^^e- 
 
 multiply  wives  to  himfelf  that  his  heart  turn  not 
 away  ;  neither  fhall  he  greatly  multiply  to  hi?nfelf 
 filver  and  (d)  gold:  and  yet  Solomon  did  multiply 
 horfcs  to  a  very  great  [e)  number,  and  had  them 
 
 fetcht 
 
 (a)  1  Kings  \.  5z.  — —  ii.  23,  Scc.  {b)  I  Stim.n.  35.  *  Kill, 
 ti.  17.      [c)  P.  109.      {d)  Dtfip.  xvii.    l6,  17.         (tj  I  Kin£s 
 
 iv. 
 
i6o    TbeSaoKT  History  ^ 
 
 fdcbt  up  and  brought  forth  out  of  [a]  Egypt,  cori- 
 trary  to  the  fame  law  :  he  mukiply'd  wives  alfo, 
 to  the  prodigious  number  of  feven  hundred  that 
 were  princejfes,  and  three  hundred  {bj  concubines  j 
 many  of  which  too  were  Jlrange  women^  oj  the  na- 
 tions which  they  were  abfolutely  {c)  forbid  to  in- 
 ter-marry with :  he  likewife  multiply'd  filver  and 
 gold,  infomuch  that  be  exceeded  all  the  Kings  of 
 the  earth  for  [d)  riches :  and  moreover,  in  his  old 
 age,  his  ftrange  'wives  turned  away  his  heart  after 
 other  (e)  Gods.  So  that  the  people  might  very 
 plaufibly  have  been  told,  that  '  they  were  a  free 
 
 *  people  ;  that  Solomon  invaded  their  liberties  and 
 '  privileges  -,  that  therefore  they  did  but  them- 
 «  felves  juftice,  if  they  took  the  caufe  into  their 
 
 *  own  hands,  and  righted  themfelves ;  that  their 
 
 *  King  was  a   favourer   of  idolatry  ;   that  they 
 
 *  were  God's  people,  and  therefore  ought  to  fe- 
 
 *  cure  God's  rights  as  well  as  their  own,  and  not 
 
 *  fuffer  any  innovation  to  be  made  in  religion  ; 
 
 *  that  their  taking  up  arms  therefore  would  not 
 
 '  be 
 
 Iv.  2,6.  It  is  faid;  that  he  had  forty  thof.fmtd  Palls  of  hor- 
 fefor  his  chariots,  And  tvelvt  thottfuftd  horfemcn.  But  this  is,  by 
 good  Jnrcrprettis,  thought  to  be  a  fault  cnpt  into  the  origirial  6y 
 the  negligence  of  tranfcribers;  and  the  rather,  bccaufe  2  Chroi:. 
 jx.  2.^.  it  is  only  faid,  that  Solomon  had  four  thoufand  flails  for 
 hofes  and  chariots :  which  indeed  is  the  aiore  probable,  becaufc 
 we  find,  I  Kin.  x.  i6.  and  2.  Chron.  i.  14.  that  he  had  no  m©re 
 than  one  thoufand  atd  four  hundred  chariots  t  and  the  chariots  of 
 war  did  not  commonly  confift  of  more  than  two  borfes. 
 
 {a)  I  King's  x.  18,  and  1  Chrtn.  i.   16,   17. ix.  i8.     {l>) 
 
 I  Kings  xi.   J.         (0  vcrf.  i,   2.  Exod.  xxxiv.   16.         C</j 
 
 —  X.  13.         le)  I  Kings  %\.  4. 
 
/Z?^Regal  Succession.    j6i 
 
 «  be  rebellion •,  that  their  King,  and  thofe  that 
 
 '  adher'd  to  him,  had  fallen  off  from  God,  and 
 <  diercfore  had  forfeited  all  their  propriety  in  the 
 «  government  and  the  (a)  land*,  ^c.  according 
 to  the  dodlrine  of  the  late  times  here  expos'd. 
 And  yet,  for  all  this  his  idolatry,  and  other  tranf- 
 grefhons  of  the  known  law,  tho*  God  (who  was 
 his  only  proper  judge)  was  highly  provok'd,  and 
 threatned  to  rend  the  kingdo??i  from  (h)  h'lm^  there 
 is  not  the  lead  fuggeftion,  that  there  was  a  jufti- 
 fiable  occafion  for  his  fubjedls  to  rebel  and  fet 
 up  another  King  \  becaufe  '  he  was  accountable 
 *  to  no  earthly  fO  tribunal '. 
 
 §  XLI.  And  now  I  fhail  endeavour  ^^e  '^^Z* 
 to  fet  forth  a  fair  ftate  of  the  cafe  of  f^/^'^/tbi'a- 
 Solomon  and  Abiathar,  becaufe  I  find  ihzx  fluted. 
 great  advantage  taken  therefrom,  by  certain 
 Eraflian  writers  ;  among  whom  it  is  become  a 
 Handing  argument  for  the  fuppos'd  right  of  the 
 civil  magiftrate,  to  deprive  bifhops,  and  other  ec- 
 clefiaflical  perfons,  from  their  ecclefiaftical  func- 
 tions, or  at  leaft  from  the  exercife  thereof,  upon 
 mere  civil  or  ftate  crimes  :  as  if  they  were  in. 
 deed  no  other  than  (what  a  presbyterian  author 
 would  make  the  friefu  of  old  to  have  been)  the 
 
 '  menial  or  houfhold  fcrvants  of  the  King to 
 
 *  order  things  appertaining  to  the  King's    tabk 
 '  and  fervice  ;  and  over  all  dicfe  the  high-prieft, 
 
 Y  '  as 
 
 (tt)  W/tgfl.  ft-rm.  9  5iept.  i63j,  p.  4^  <;.         (i'   i  K'uf^s  xi,  u, 
 (c)  Sherl  ot'rcfift.  p.  38. 
 
l6i    The  Short  History  of 
 
 «  as  lord  higli-fteward  and  lord  high  chamber- 
 '  Jain  (ay\ 
 
 Thus  an  eminent  prelate,  here  frequently  quo- 
 ted, calls  this  'fo  plain  and  fo  unexceptionable 
 «  an  inftance  againft  the  adver/ariei  of  lay-depriva- 
 
 *  tiofis,  in   this  very  point  of  deprivation,    that, 
 
 *  he  thinks,  their  own  anfwers  Ihcw  the  impolH- 
 '  bility  of  geting  clear  of  (b)  it '.  And  to  put 
 the  better  colour  upon  his  argument,  he  makes 
 bold  with  the  work  of  God,  and  affirms  that » So- 
 
 *  lomofi  depriv'd  one  of  the  exercife  of  his  func- 
 
 *  tion,  to  which  he  had  been  appointed  according 
 
 *  to  the  inftitution  of  God  himfelf,  and  the  fame 
 '  Solomon  appointed  another  to  fucceed  (c)  him*. 
 And  upon  this  he  flourifhes,  after  his  manner, 
 and  triumphantly  demands,  *  what  can  be  a  more 
 «  exprefs  parallel  than  this,  of  the  fupreme  civil 
 '  power  depriving  one  ecclcfiaftical  perfon,  and 
 
 *  putting  in  another,  upon  the  fole  confideration 
 '  of  the  intereft  of  the  (d)  (late  '  ?  Now,  as  it  is 
 not  my  bufinefs  here  to  follov/  him  out  of  my  own 
 road,  I  fhall  not  purfue  him  through  his  feveral 
 turns  of  reafoning  upon  it,  but  Cick  dole  to  the 
 faifls,  as  1  have  them  warranted  by  the  holy  fcrip- 
 tures  :  and  the  rather  becaufe  I  find  the  late  reve- 
 rend Dr.  Nat.  Marjlall  affirming,  that  'what  is 
 '  luog:efl:ed  of  Solomon^s  reftorinp;  Zadok,  who 
 '  was  the  rightful  high-pricfl:,  as  being  of  the  elder 
 '  fiimily,  is  a  precarious,  unfupported  alTertion, 
 
 '  in 
 
 [a)  Flfm'ing'^  h'ft.  of  hered.  r'^hf,  1^17,  p.  19.  (^)  B.  E/ta- 
 ^"'S  p>c;i(;rv.  agauii't  the  No'jnr.  p.  43,  edit.  4,  1717.  ^c)  /^»/ 
 U)  loid. 
 
the  Regal  Succession.      kJj 
 
 *  invented  meerly  for  a  falvo  to  an  h^pothefts 
 <  which  muft  fink  without  it,  contrary  to  the 
 '  tenour  of  the  a)  hiftory  ! '  ^c  But,  tho'  I  will 
 not  be  fo  bold  to  fay  fas  Mr.  JVhifion  does,)  than 
 thefe  writers  '  treat  upon  this  fubjed  of  govern- 
 '  ment,  both  ecclefiaftical  and  civil,  as  if  there 
 
 *  were  hardly  any  fuch  book  as  the  bible  among 
 '  (i')us'!  yet  I  prefume  to  think,  there  is  enough 
 to  be  colledted  from  the  tenour  of  the  hiflory 
 to  manifeft,  that  this  inftance  is  nothing  to  the 
 purpofe  for  which  it  isfo  frequently  cited. 
 
 For  in  thofe  facred  records  we  have  plain  proof, 
 that,  after  the  death  o^i  Nndab  and  (f)  Abihu  (the 
 two  eldeft  fons  of  Aaron^)  the  furvivors  were 
 Eleazar  and  (d)  Ithamar,  who  minijler^d  in  the 
 priejls  office  in  the  fight  of  Aaron  their  (e)  father  j 
 Eleazar  hei'ng  the  chief  over  the  chief  of  the  (f)  l^e- 
 vites :  that,  upon  the  death  of  Aaron^  Eleazan 
 as  the  eldefl  fon,  immediately  fucceeded  him  in 
 the  office  of  high-prieft  (which  was  hereditary, j 
 and  was  folemnly  invefled  as  fuch  by  Mofes^  as 
 the  Lord  (g)  commanded :  that  upon  the  death  of 
 Eleazar,  his  fon  (h)  Phineha s {ucc^cded  in  the  fame ; 
 unto  whom,  and  his  Jeed,  was  given  the  covenant 
 of  an  everlafling  (i)  priejlhood,  or  (as  it  is  in  other 
 interpreters;  the  priefi's  office  for  ever  by  a  covenant  -, 
 
 Y  2  for 
 
 {a)  ^i  Mar/Jj.def  cf  conftit.  1717.  p.  41.  (t>)  MlJft.  fcript. 
 poiit.  dedicat.  to  B.  Bangor,  1717,  p.  xvii,         {c)  Levit,  x.  i,  i- 
 
 Numb.  iii.  4. xxvi.  61,  and  1  Chrott.  xxiv.  i.         [d)  Exod. 
 
 vi.  2.5 xxviii.  I  Chron.  vi.  3.  —  xxiv.  1,       [e)  Num^.m. 
 
 4-        (/)  verf.  31.        (g) XX.  iS.         (h)  JiuW.  xx. 
 
 2-8.         (f)  Kuvib.  XXV.  13. 
 
1 54     Tije  Short  History^ 
 
 for  (as  the  fon  of  Sirach  exprefifes  it,  j  there  was  a 
 covenant  of  -peace  made  with  him,  • —  that  he  and 
 his  pojlerity  Jhould  have  the  dignity  of  the  priejlhood 
 for  (a'  ever :  that  accordingly  wc  have  the  line  of 
 the  high-priefts  from  Aaron,  through  Eleazar, 
 Phinehas,  &c.  in  a  diredl  hereditary  defcent,  down 
 to  the  (^)  captivity  :  that  in  this  facerdotal  line  or 
 pedigree,  we  find  Zadok  exprefly  regiller'd  as 
 high-prieft  -,  but  not  one  of  the  race  of  Ithamar 
 nam'd  therein.  All  which  proves  from  the  tenour 
 of  the  hiftory  (written  by  divine  infpirationj 
 that  Zadok  had  the  only  natural  and  proper  inhe- 
 rent .right  to  the  high-priefthood,  and  did  not 
 owe  it  to  any  human  appointment,  as  thefe  Gen- 
 tlemen infinuate. 
 
 'Tis  true  indeed,  that,  about  the  time  of  the 
 Judges,  the  houfe  of  Ithamar  feems  to  have  en- 
 croach'd  upon  that  of  Eleazar,  and  to  have  taken 
 the  advant.ige  of  thofe  licentious  times,  to  ex- 
 tend their  jurifdidion  beyond  their  proper  bounds. 
 For  Eli  the  prieft",  who  defcended  from  Ithamar, 
 is  faid  to  have  judged  Ifrael  forty  {c)  years:  and 
 his  lioufe  enjoy'd  fuch  ftate  and  power  afterwards, 
 
 *  as  only  could  regularly  be  claim'd  by  the  true 
 i  high-prielliOf  the  family  of  Eleazar;  fo  that 
 '  they  have  commonly  pafs'd  for  the  fole  high- 
 
 ♦  priefts  of  that  nation  for  fome  (d)x\mt\  Thus 
 we  read  of  Abia,  the  fon  of  Ahiluh,  the  fon  of 
 Fhinehas,  the  fon   of   Eli,     the  Lord's    prieft  in 
 
 Shiloh, 
 
 (a)  Ecclus  xlv.  14.       [h]    i  Chron.  vi,  j,  8cc.  Lz-ra  vii.  i,  tic. 
 (c)  I  Sam.  iv.  18.         (ti)  fF^ifi.  fcript.  jpol.  p.  59,  ico. 
 
the  Regal  Succession.    \6s 
 
 (a)  Shiloh  ;  and  of  Ahimelech,  the  fon  of  Ah'ituh^ 
 at  (h)  Nob  ;  who  was  maflacred  by  Sauly  with  all 
 his  houfe,  except  only  his  fon  Jbialbar,  of  whom 
 we  are  here  treating.  But  whatever  ftate  any  of 
 thefe  might  have  taken  upon  themfelves,  'tis  cer- 
 tain, that  not  one  of  them  being  regifter'd  by  the 
 Holy  Ghofl:  in  the  line  or  pedigree  of  the  higli- 
 priefts,  we  ought  not  to  reckon  them  lawful  and 
 rightful  high-priefts,  as  we  do  Zadok  and  the  reft 
 of  the  elder  family  of  Eleazar.  So  that,  even 
 fuppofing  Jbiatbar  h3.d,  de  faofo^  been  in  the  fole 
 pofTefTion  of  the  high-priefthood,  and  had  indeed 
 been  depriv'd  of  it  by  Solomon,  ('both  which  the 
 advocates  for  lay-deprivations  take  for  granted,) 
 yet,  fince  'tis  pjain^  that  he  had  no  right  to  it, 
 according  to  its  divine  inflitution,  with  what  pro- 
 priety can  it  be  faid,  that  Solomon  depriv'd  one 
 of  the  exercife  of  his  funfVion,  to  which  he  had 
 been  appointed  according  to  the  inftitution  of  God 
 himfelf?  or  what  advantage  would  it  be  to  their 
 fcheme,  to  grant  (for  argument  fake  only,)  that 
 Solomon  had  aftually  depriv'd  one  who  plainly 
 had  no  right,  to  make  way  for  him  who  had  the 
 only  proper  right  to  it  ?  'Tis  not  neceffary  to  in- 
 fill, that  Solomon  was  undeniably  the  lawful  fove. 
 raign,  and  therefore,  as  fuch,  did  not  want  fuf- 
 ficient  authority  to  do  any  a(5t,  that  was  not  un- 
 
 juft 
 
 \a)  I  Sam.  xiv.  3.  'Tis  v/ell  obferv'd  by  Mr.  Selden  (com.  ii. 
 Col.  93.)  that  thefe  v/ords,  the  Lord's  prhfi  in  Shilch,  muft  refer 
 to  Eli,  not  to  j^hia,  becaufe  Gai  had,  before  Ahia'i  time,  for- 
 f-iken  the  tabernacle  p/ Shiloh.  Vfti.  Ixxviii.  6Cj  and  i  Sam.  iv.  ii. 
 (^^  xxi,  and  xxii. 
 
l66     The  Short  History  of 
 
 jufl  in  itfelf,  even  ufofj  the  fole  conftderation  of  the 
 interefi  of  the  flat e  :  for  fvvith  fubmifTion,  I  fhould 
 think^  not  only  the  fupr erne  civil  power^  but  any 
 perfon  whatfoever  v/ho  is  able,  might  be  well 
 warranted  in  the  ufe  of  all  lawful  means,  in  order 
 to  the  difpoirefTing  an  unjuft  invader  of  another's 
 property,  and  the  imitating  that  divine  charadler 
 of  helping  them  to  right  that  fuffer  (a)  wrong. 
 
 But,  if  we  examine  this  cafe  ftill  further,  we 
 fliali  find,  that  when  Eli  was  in  the  height  of  his 
 flate,  and  his  fons  (thofe  fons  (b)  of  Belial !)  were 
 making  themfehes  {c)  fat  (as  unjufb  poflciTors  are 
 apt  to  do,  j  with  the  fpoils  of  God*s  people,  info- 
 much  that,  by  their  unreflrain'd  licentioufnefs, 
 they  were  not  only  become  perfonally  fcandalous, 
 but  are  faid  to  have  made  the  Lara's  people  to  tranf- 
 grefs,  and  even  to  abhor  the  offering  of  the  {^d  Lord, 
 there  came  a  man  of  God  unto  {e)  £//,  denouncing 
 terrible  judgments  againft  his  houfe,  and  among 
 the  refl:,  that  his  pollerity  Ibould  be  reduc'd  to 
 a  low  ftation  and  great  diftrefs,  whilfl:  a  faithful 
 friefl  fmuld  be  raised  up,  who  fliould  walk  before 
 the  Lord's  anointed  for  ever  ;  all  which  was  foon 
 after  confirm'd  to  him  by  the  prophet  if]  Samuel. 
 And  in  purfuance  of  this  account,  we  read,  that 
 when  King  David  had  brought  the  ark  of  God  to 
 Jerufalem,  to  fet  it  in  the  tabernacle  that  he  had 
 pitched  for  (g)  it,  Zadok  and  Abiathar  were  the 
 
 priefts 
 
 (a)  Tfa.  cxlvi.  6.  o'd  tranO.        {I)    i  Saw.  ii.  xz.         ic) 
 
 verf.  1^.         {d)  verf.  14,  and  17.       (c)  verf.  17,   &c. 
 
 (f) iii.  II,  £vc.         ig)  1  Sam.  vi.  17.  and  i  Chren.  xv.  i. 
 
the  Regal  Succession     \6^ 
 
 (a)  priejls  who  had  the  principal  charge  of  it  : 
 and  in  the  divifion,  which  he  made  of  the  fons 
 of  AaroHy  into  four  and  twenty  orders,  or  courfes, 
 according  to  the  number  of  the  chief  men  among 
 the  fons  of  Eleazar,  there  were  fix  teen  chief  men  of 
 the  houje  of  their  father  s^  and  eight  among  the  fons 
 of  Ichamar,  according  to  the  houfe  of  their  (h)  fa- 
 thers: and  David  diftributed  them^  both  Zadok  of 
 the  fons  oj  Eleazar,  and  (c)  Ahimelech  of  the  fons 
 of  Ithamar,  according  to  their  offices  in  their  (d) 
 fervice  ;  by  which  we  may  learn,  that  Zadok 
 at  leaft  was  over  the  fixteen,  and  Ahimelech  at 
 moft  but  over  the  eight.  Thus  we  fee  the  houfe 
 of  Ithamar,  Eli,  or  Abiathar  (for  it  is  all  the 
 fame)  was  already,  in  David's  time,  but  half  fo 
 confiderable  as  that  of  Eleazar:  and  fince,  'tis 
 certain,  there  was  one  high-priefb,  properly  fo 
 caird,  over  all,  we  can't  doubt  but  Zadok  had 
 a  primacy,  or  metropolitical  jurifdidlion  (as  we 
 call  it)  over  all  the  Jews  in  general,  and  what- 
 ever particular  jurifdidlion  Abiathar  had  over  his 
 own  divifion,  it  mufl  have  been  ftill  fubordinate 
 
 to 
 
 a)    T    CPjron,   xv.     ri.  {h)    i    Chron.   xxiv.    4.  (c) 
 
 Here  the  reader  is  to  be  advertis'd  (from  rhe  learned  ueldcn,  de 
 fucceffione  inpontificat.  Ebraorum,  torn-  ii.  col.  94.)  that:  Ab'tnth^r 
 is  fometimes  cali'd  Ahimelech  or  Ahimelech,  as  his  father  Ahime- 
 lech is  alfo  fometimes  cali'd  Abiathar  i  pariiculaiiy  in  St.  Mark  ii. 
 z6.  which  being  compar'd  with  i  Sam.xxl,  and  xxii,  will  difco- 
 ver  the  truth  ot  this  obfervation  to  the  meaneft  capacit; ;  And 
 this  will  alio  fhew,  that  where  we  read  Ahimelech,  the  fon  of 
 Abiathar,  1  Sim.  viii.  17,  and.  I  Chron,  xviii.  16.  it  fl.ou'.d  be 
 Abiarhar,  the  fon  oi  Ahimelech.  But  CTis  I  leave  zo  the  Critftks- 
 J)  I  Chron.  xxiv.  3. 
 
i68     The  ^no?.T  FIiSTORY  of' 
 
 to  Zadok.     And  moreover  we  always  find  Zadok, 
 as  the  fuperior,  plac'd  before  Ahiathar  (or  AH- 
 melech,)  wherever  they  are  mention'd  {a)  together, 
 as  well  in   David's  time,  as  in  that  of"  Solomon: 
 yea,  Zadok  alone  is  call'd  the  ruler  oj  the  houfe  of 
 \h^  God  J  and  the  ruler  of  the  (c)  Aaronites,  even 
 before  Abiathar*s  treafon,  as  Phinehas,   the  fon 
 of  Eleazar,  is  call'd  the  ruler  over  them  in  time 
 (d)  pafl^  (who  was,  without  difpute,    the  only 
 proper  high-prieft  in  his  time  ;)  and  Zadok  alone 
 was  anointed  to  be  (e)  prieft,  that  is,  the  chief,  or 
 fupreme  high-prieft,  when  Solomon  was  anointed 
 King,  in  the  life  time  of  his  father  David,  tho* 
 Abiathar  was,  after  that,  (till  reckon'da  (J)p'iejl, 
 in  the  fame  rank  as  he  was  before,  to  wit,  in  fub- 
 ordination  to  the   only  true   high-prieft   Zadok. 
 So  far  was  Abiathar  from  being  the  proper  high- 
 prieft  of  the  Jews^  even  in  David's  time ;  and  fo 
 far  is  it  from  being  true,  that  he  was  depriv^dy 
 and  Zadok  put  into  it  by  Solomon,  as  fuccejfor  to 
 him  in  that  high  office,  that  Zadok  was  always  be- 
 fore 
 
 {a)  z  Sam.  viii.  17.  xv.  ^^. xx.  25.  I  Khgs  iv.  4- 
 
 I  Chron,  xv.  1 1.-- — xviii.  16. xxiv,  5,  6,  51.    Where  it  is 
 
 to  be  noted,  that  their  bting  thus  frequent!)'  nam'd  together,  is 
 no  proof  that  they  were  equally  high  prieils:  for  we  read  of  their 
 ancefiors,  i  CkroM.  xxiv.  z.  that  Eleazar  ^silthamar  executed fhe 
 pritfi's  cfice;  and  yet  'r'i  eviiient,  Kmnb.  xx.  18-  that  BUazar 
 alone  was  the  high-prieft,  and  not  Jthamar,  as  before  is  fet  forth, 
 
 p,   163.      (b)   1  Ckroji.  \x.  II.     (c) xxvii.  ij.  Zn^ok  could 
 
 not  properly  have  been  cl  d  fo,  if  he  had  not  been  ruler  over  the 
 pofterity  oi'  Itham-ir  as  well  as  0^  Ileaz.itr,  who  were  equa'ly 
 
 AarGnhes.     I  J)    iChjn.ix.zo.         (e) xxix.  ii.         (/) 
 
 I  Kifigs  iv.  4. 
 
/Z?(?  Regal  Succession.    i6^ 
 
 fore  him,  always  above  him.  And  therefore  we 
 need  not  here  to  enter  into  the  queftion,  whether 
 David  '  (bould  have  fuffer'd  the  whole  Jew'ijh 
 '  church  to  continue  in  a  ftate  of  fchifm,  by  a 
 «  detention  of  Zadokixom  his  a  right'!  fince  'tis 
 plain,»that  good  King  indeed  '  was  a  man  fo  much 
 '  after  God's  own  h  heart',  and  fo  far  from  a 
 forcihie  detention  of  God's  high-pried  from  his 
 rights  that  he  reftor'd  him  to  it,  and  thereby  took 
 care  to  heal  thzt  fchifm  in  which  the  whole  Jewifh 
 church  may  more  properly  be  faid  to  have  conti- 
 nuedy  from  the  time  of  Eliy  while  the  line  of 
 Ithamar  was  y«jf<rr'i  to  enjoy  that  high  and  holy 
 office,  inftead  of  the  elder  line  of  Eleazar,  on 
 which  God  himfelf  had  expredy  entail'd  the 
 high-priefthood,  as  before  is  fully  prov'd. 
 
 And  as  we  find  Abiathar^  even  at  Solomon^s 
 accefTion  to  the  throne,  not  the  high-prieft,  but 
 In  a  ftate  of  fubordination  ;  let  us  now  examine 
 the  full  import  of  that  text  (upon  which  fo  greaC 
 a  ftrefs  is  laid,)  where  Solomon  is  faid  to  have 
 thruji  him  cut  from  being  prieji  unto  the  (c)  Lord^ 
 &c. 
 
 It  has  been  already  (d,  intimated,  that  upon 
 Jdisnijah*s  attempt  upon  his  lather's  crown,  he 
 conferred  (or  concerted  meafures)  with  Joab  and 
 Abiathar,  and  they  following  Adonijah,  helped  \e) 
 him  •,  and  that  their  lives,  and  all  they  had  be- 
 fides,  were  thereby  at  the  King's  mercy  :  and 
 therefore,    whatever  ftation  Abiathar  had   been 
 
 Z  in, 
 
 (»)  N.  Mttrfh,  dff.  of  conftit.  p,  41,  41,         (b)  ibid,         [(} 
 liCi>^iii.  17.         (i)  Pag.     MV-      (<■)  i  JSC(>i>  J.  7. 
 
I7o     TZ?^  Short   History^ 
 
 in,  fo  foon  as  he  was  convided  of  fo  foul  a  crime 
 as  high-treafon,  upon  manifeft  overt-afls,  ic  could 
 not  but  be  deem'd  a  favour  fliewn  him  by  his 
 lawful  foveraign,  to  fpare  his  forfeited  life,  tho' 
 it  had  really  been  on  condition  of  his  lofing  all 
 the  reft.  But  inftead  of  this,  Unto  Abiath^r  the 
 friejl  fatd  the  King^  Get  thee  to  Anathoth,  unto  thine 
 own  fields,  for  thou  art  worthy  of  death  :  hut  I  will 
 not  at  this  time  put  thee  to  death,  hecaufe  thou  {a) 
 harejl  the  ark  of  the  Lord  God  before  David  my 
 father,  and  hecaufe  thou  hajl  heen  affliBed  in  all 
 wherein  my  father  was  afjii5ied.  So  Solomon  thrujl 
 out  Abiathar,  from  heingprieft  unto  the  Lord:  that 
 he  might  fulfill  the  word  of  the  Lord,  which  he 
 fpake   concer?iing    the  houfe  of  Eli  in    [b)  Shiloh ; 
 
 and  Zadok  the  priefi  did  the  King  put  in  the 
 
 room  of  {cj  Abiathar. 
 
 Now,  that  this  was  not  intended  as  a  depriva- 
 tion, is  plain  from  the  very  words  of  the  fentence, 
 which  confin'd  him  to  his  own  fi.elds  at  Anathoth  -' 
 for  he  had  no  fields  of  his  own  there,  but  what 
 belonged  to  him  as  (d)  prieft ;  and  therefore  if 
 he  had  been  truly  depriv'd  of  the  priefthood, 
 (as  is  alledg'd,)  the  eftate  annex'd  to  it  had  been 
 no  longer  his  own.  As  if  (for  inftance  in  a  mo- 
 dern cafe,j  the  fentence  againft  a  bifhop  of  Ro- 
 chefier  (e)  had  been,  in  the  like  terms,  Get  thee  to 
 
 Bromley 
 
 {a)  Mfati'ng,  that  he  had   affifted   Zi*dck  in   bringing  up   the 
 
 ark  to  JerupUm.         {b)   i   KiMgs  ii.  26,   t7.         {c) verf 
 
 IS-  W  y^fl'-  ^^'-  *8-  (^)  S«  this  point  farther  illuftrated, 
 in  the  notes  upon  the  late  edition  of  Fran.  Mafon's  vindic.  of  the 
 church  of  £«^/^«//,  fol,  izi. 
 
the  Regal  Succession.     171 
 
 Bromley  unto  thine  ozvn  houfe.  Sec.  I  prefume,  no- 
 body  would  have  condrued  that  as  a  deprivation 
 of  the  fee  of  Rochejler,  (fince  Bromley  belongs  to 
 the  bifhop  of  that  fee  only  as  bifhop  of  it  -,)  but 
 as  a  punifhment  meerly  fecular,  to  confine  him  to 
 his  own  houfe  there,  and  confequently  to  difable 
 him,  for  the  time,  to  hold  his  feat  in  parliament, 
 or  10  exercife  his  other  office  in  perfon  at  Wefi- 
 minjler^  of  which  he  was  alfo  Dean.  And  thus 
 Abiathar^  being  confin'd  to  Anathoth,  was  there- 
 by confequently  difabled  to  officiate  in  his  courfe 
 at  the  tabernacle  at  Jerufalem  ;  but  not  otherwife 
 in  the  leaft  affected  as  to  his  facerdotal  charader  ; 
 which  he  ftill  retain'd  neverthelefs,  as  I  have  al- 
 ready fhewn  :  fo  that  if  ever  it  had  pleas'd  the 
 King  to  relax  fuch  fentence,  and  to  give  him  a 
 free  pardon  inftead  of  this  bare  reprieve,  Abiathar 
 had  been  capable  of  exercifing  his  office,  in  as 
 full  and  ample  manner  as  ever  before.  But  du- 
 ring his  continuance  under  this  confinement, 
 which  had  the  effect  of  a  fufpenfion  upon  him, 
 as  it  difabled  him  to  exercife  his  office  him- 
 felf,  the  eight  families  of  the  houfe  of  Ithamar 
 were  immediately  under  the  jurifdidtion  of  Zadok, 
 as  well  as  the  other  fixreen  of  the  houfe  of  Elea- 
 zar  ;  tho'  not  as  fucceffor  to  Abiathar,  but  as  the 
 fupreme  or  metropolitan,  over  all  the  fons  of 
 Aaron,  For  as  to  that  exprcffion,  that  the  King 
 j  ut  Z-\dok  in  the  room  of  Abiathar,  it  proves  no 
 more,  than  that  he  eflablifh'd  and  confirm*d  the 
 high  priefl  of  the  houfe  of  Aaron  in  his  full  right 
 and  proper  flation,  according  to  the  injunftion 
 
 Z  2  given 
 
17^   T^/^c*  Sh  ORT  History  ^ 
 
 given  him  by  David  from  the  (a)  Lord:  whercr 
 ibe  courfes  of  the  priejls^  and  all  the  work  of  the 
 fervice  of  the  houfe  of  the  (b)  Lord  are  join'd 
 together,  and  alike  commanded  j  and  a  Itrift 
 charge  is  exprefly  given  him,  in  relacion  to  the 
 whole  oeconomy  of  the  houfe  of  God,  which  'lis 
 plain,  he  could  not  alter  !  And  heboid^  (faid  Da- 
 'vidi)  the  courfes  of  the  priejis  and  the  Levites,  even 
 the'j  fhall  he  with  thee  for  all  the  fervice  of  the  houfe 
 of  (c)  God:  and  thus  we  read,  that  when  Solomon 
 had  finifli'd  the  temple,  he  appointed^  according  to 
 the  order  of  David  his  father^  the  courfes  of  the 
 prieJls  to  their  fervice,  —  as  the  duty  of  every  man 
 required — —  ;  for  fo  had  David,  the  man  of  God, 
 (d)  commanded.  But,  if  the  kingly  authority  had 
 extended  to  the  ad:ual  depriving  of  the  true 
 priefts,  and  putting  others  into  their  places,  then 
 Solomon  might  have  put  any  other  into  the  place 
 of  Abiathar,  without  regard  to  Zadok ,  which 
 he  does  not  feem  to  have  had  in  his  thoughts,  nor 
 do  I  know  that  any  body  has  yet  prefum'd  to 
 lay  he  had  authority  to  do  it. 
 
 After  all  this,  I  leave  the  unprejudic'd  readers 
 to  judge,  with  what  truth  and  fincerity  it  can  be 
 affirm'd,  that  Solomon,  '  by  his  own  authority,  took 
 '  away  what  he  never  gave,  nay,  what  Abiathar 
 '  had  from  God  {e)  himfelf ' !  by  which  muft  be 
 meant  his  facerdotal  character,  or  fpiritual  rela- 
 tion to  God's  people  committed  to  his  care,  if 
 
 the 
 
 («)  I  ChroH  xxviii.  19.       (b) vcrf.  .'j.       (r vcff] 
 
 II.        (tfj  i  Chron.   vui.  J4.  {f)  6-  Bangor's  preicrv.  p    4J- 
 
//^^  Regal  Succession.    175 
 
 the  meaning  of  that  author  (a)  may  ever  be  (ab- 
 folutely  and  properly)  underftood  from  his  own 
 words,  and  from  the  tenour  of  his  difcourfe. 
 
 In  (hort,  if  this  fingle  text  muft  be  prefs'd  in- 
 to the  fervice,  to  prove  the  authority  of  Kings 
 to  deprive  bifhops  and  priefts  of  their  facred  fun- 
 <flion,  it  will  as  well  prove  their  authority  to  de- 
 grade them  of  their  holy  orders  ;  becaufe  it  is 
 faid,  King  Solomon  thrufi  out  Abiathar  from  being 
 priejiunto  the  Lord:  but  that  will  prove  too  much, 
 and  confequently  fhall  prove  nothing  at  all ;  be- 
 caufe no  Kings  do  now  pretend  to  fuch  authority 
 to  degrade  them.  And  if  the  difficulty  be  folv'd, 
 by  fuppofing,  that  Solomon  had  an  extraordinary 
 commiffion  from  the  Lord  to  do  what  he  did,  it 
 will  render  this  cafe  of  no  ufe  at  all  to  thofe  who 
 cite  it  as  a  precedent  for  our  times  ;  fmce  there  is 
 no  pretence  of  any  other  Kings  fucceeding  him 
 in  fuch  extraordinary  commiffion  to  do  the  like. 
 And  therefore,  upon  the  whole  matter,  this  be- 
 ing but  a  particular  fad,  nakedly  fet  forth,  with- 
 out any  mention  of  the  circumflances  relating 
 to  the  proceedings  upon  it,  it  feems  to  want  that 
 certainty  that  is  requifite  to  the  making  it  fit  for 
 a  precedent. 
 
 I  might 
 
 (a)  The  learned  Dr.  TrApp  favj  cf  him  thus;  '  I  defire  to  be 
 '  ifiform'd,  what  we  are  to  think  of  a  writer,  whoexprclTes  him» 
 '  fcif  in  fuch  a  manner,  that  no  body  can  underfland  h  m  ?  for 
 
 *  not  only  Dr.  S/iape,  and  myf.lf,  but  ail  the  lower  houfe  of  con- 
 
 *  vocation,  and  every  body  elie,  as  far  as  I  can  obiervc,  have  it 
 '  fecms  been  entirely  ignorant  of  his  meaning.     And  wh.  t  fort 
 
 *  of  meaning  muft  thit  b^'i  Traffi  i\  S.  to  his  Jciai.  19  Ma)>. 
 1717,  p-  31,  52. 
 
174    ^^^^  Short  History  of 
 
 I  might  here  appeal  to  the  cenfure  of  a  con- 
 vocation, which  has  condemn'd  it  as  a  great  (a) 
 error^    in  any  man  to  affirm,    '  that  the  people 
 
 *  had  any  lawful  intereft,  at  any  time, either 
 
 *  to  chufe  their  priefts,  or  (they  being  appoint- 
 '  ed  of  God  as  is  aforefaidj  to  deprive  them  ot 
 
 *  their  places  *,  ^c.  But  becaufe  the  judgment  of 
 a  convocation  may  feem  to  be  of  little  or  no  au- 
 thority with  fome  of  the  writers  we  have  here 
 had  to  deal  with,  I  (hall  content  myfelf  with  fub- 
 joining  a  few  fuch  teftimonies  as  they  can't  fairly 
 except  againft. 
 
 In  one  of  their  own  celebrated  performances 
 before  cited,  I  find  the  civil  power,  and  the  eccle- 
 fiaftical  or  fpiritual,  exprefly  acknowledg'd  to 
 have  '  two  rights,  as  diilinft  as  heaven  and  (b) 
 
 *  earth*.  And  in  another  it  is  obferv'd,  that 
 '  by  orders  a  man  receives  from  Chriil,  a  com- 
 '  mand  to  execute  a  facred  office  upon  lawful 
 '  occafions,  and  he  himfelf  covenants  fo  to  exe- 
 '  cute  it :  now,  as  he  cannot  be  abfolv'd  from 
 «  that  covenant,  but  only  by  Chrifl:  with  whom 
 '  he  covenanted  ;  fo  neither  can  he  be  difcharg'd 
 
 *  from  that  command,  but  only  by  Chrift  who 
 '  impos'd  {c)  it, or  perfons  authoriz'd  by  (d) 
 
 <  Chrift  * ;  meaning  biffiops  in  their  fynods.  And 
 a  third  is  more  exprefs,  that  '  the  greater  power 
 
 <  doth  not  always  imply  the  lefs :  nor  doth  it  fol- 
 
 *  low, 
 
 {»)  B'fliop  Overal's  convoc.  book,  i.  ii.  c.  xli.  {6)  BiOiop 
 
 Hosi«'/jf's  preferv.  againfl:  the  No//jur.  1717,  edit    4,  p.  ^a.  (c) 
 
 Dr.  G.  RjKe's  treat,  againft  the  Nonjur.  1719,  vol.  i,  p.  31,  33. 
 {</)  Ibid  vol.  ii.  p.  216. 
 
/Z^^  Regal  Succession.     175" 
 
 low,  becaufe  the  Hate  may  keep  a  clergyman 
 in  clofe  confinement,  or  even  put  him  to  death, 
 from  whence  will  accidentally  follow  an  incapa- 
 city in  him  from  adminiftrating  the  facraments* 
 ^c,  that  therefore  it  may  formally  deprive  him 
 of  the  power  to  adminifter  them,  which  he  re- 
 
 ceiv'd  from  Chrift. Death  will  diffolve  all 
 
 relative  obligations,  and  deprive  a  man  of  the 
 privileges  to  which  he  may  be  entitled  —— : 
 but  yet,  he  who  hath  the  power  of  put:ing  a 
 man  to  death,  hath  not  the  power  otherwife  to 
 diflblve  thofe  obligations,  or  to  deprive  the 
 party,  whom  he  may  put  to  death,  of  thofc 
 privileges.  A  Roman  Emperor  had  authority 
 to  have  made  any  Apoftle  of  Chrift  a  clofe  pri- 
 foner,  or  to  have  put  him  to  death,  upon  a  juft 
 occafion  ;  which  would  naturally  have  depriv'd 
 him  of  hisapoftolical  powers  :  but  yet  a  Roman 
 emperor  had  otherwife  no  authority  to  meddle 
 with  the  apoftolical  commiffion  •■>  nor  would 
 Chrift  have  remitted  the  wo,  which  St.  Paulzi^- 
 prehended  to  himfelf  (a)  if  he  preach' d  not  the 
 gofpel^  whilft  he  had  power  and  liberty  to  do 
 fo,  tho'  the  civil  magiftrate  had  forbidden  him. 
 So  that  we  fee,  there  is  a  manifeft  fallacy  in 
 the  argument,  which  would  entail  upon  the 
 ftate  a  depriving  power,  as  the  lefs,  from  the 
 (confefs'd)  greater  power  of  imprifoning,    or 
 
 ■  of  putting    to    death.     Our    ftate   hath    appa- 
 
 ■  rently  difclaim'd  the  one,  whilft  it  hath  aflerted 
 
 the 
 
 (»)  I  Ctr.  ix.  16. 
 
1^6    The  Short  History  of 
 
 '  the  (a)  other  *.  But  Mr.  Wloifton  is  ftill  more 
 full  to  that  point ;  who,  having  ftated  the  cafe  of 
 Solomon  &nd  j^bialbar^  among thofe  where  perfons 
 ufe  their  power  fomewhat  out  of  i heir  prober  fphere^ 
 concludes,  '  Upon  the  whole,  here  is  no  civil  de- 
 '  privation  of  an  ecclcfiaftical  perfon,  or  lecular 
 '  entrenchment   on    the   ecclcfiaftical  authority, 
 
 *  but  a  jull  execution  of  the  divine  decree,  wiih- 
 
 *  out  any  fuch  deprivation  or  entrenchment  at 
 '  (h)  z\W  And,  fpcaking  of  the  hi/hops  whom 
 the  Jlate  deprived  at  the  revolution,  he  takes  the 
 freedom  to  refled:  on  all  fuch  deprivations,  in 
 thefe  plain  terms  j    '  Certainly,  one  would  think 
 
 *  it  a  fomewhat  natural  confequence  of  the  ac- 
 
 *  knowledgment  of   the   fpiritual  powers    at  the 
 
 *  admilTion  of  a  bifhop,  that  he  fhould  not  be 
 '  degraded  or  depriv*d,   either  of  the  right,  or 
 
 *  of  the  exercife  of  the  fame,  without  fome  accu- 
 
 *  fation  and  convidion    before   the   church,    or 
 
 *  college  of  bifhops,  or  metropolitan,  whereto 
 *=  he  belongs  ;  which  is  ftill  own*d  to  be  the  regu- 
 '  lar  way  in  ordinary  cafes  even  at  this  day :  and 
 
 *  the  contrary  procedure   of  depriving   bifliops 
 
 *  from  the  exercife  of  their  fpiritual  power,  by 
 
 U)  N.Mnr/Ifdll's  dtf.  of  fforftt   1717,  p-so,  ii.        [h]  Whijl. 
 fcript,  pol.  p.  loj.  {c)  Viz.,  for  the  pret-n^ed crime  (as  he  calls 
 
 it)  of  rcfiifing  '  ro  take  that  oath  to  K..  William  and  Qj^Mary,  of 
 
 *  the  lawfu'nefs  whereof,  after  the  former  oath  to  K  fames,  they 
 
 *  were  not  fatisfy'd:  which  deprivation,  in  my  opinion,  (fays  he] 
 
 *  they  had  more  juftly  deferv*J,  had  they,  with  fuch  their  pcrfua- 
 
 *  fion,  comply'd  with  th^t  oath,  contrary  to  the  dictates  of  their 
 
 *  own  confcieoccs '.       Ibid,  dcdic.  to  B.  Bungor,  p.  xii. 
 
/Z/^Regal  Succession.    177 
 
 «  a  meer  fecular  authority,  for  meer  fecular  of- 
 
 *  fences,  feems  to  me  almofl:  as  abfurdas  the  pre- 
 «  tended  power  of  the  bifliop  of  Ro7?ie  to  deprive 
 
 *  fecular  princes  of  their  fecular  power  for  ec- 
 
 *  clefiaftical  offences  :   and  rhofe  that  are  fenfible 
 
 *  of  the  graat  ufurpation  and  wickednefs  of  the 
 
 *  latter,  ought  never  to  give  any  encouragement 
 
 *  to  it,  by  juftifying  the  former  procedure  ;  efpc- 
 
 *  cially  while  the  ftate  has  many  other  eafy  and 
 
 *  unexceptionable  ways  of  punifhing  feditious  or 
 
 *  rebellious  clergymen  -,   and  can  therefore  never 
 
 *  be  under  any  great  temptation  to  do  what  is 
 
 *  in  itfelf  fo  perfectly  unjuftifiable  upon  the  foot 
 '  of  fcripture  and  Chriflianity.  I  fay,  perfedly 
 '  unjuftifiable  upon  thofe  foundations.  For,  as  I 
 '  have  fhew*d  in  this  effay,  that  the  cafe  of  Abi- 
 '  athar,  depriv'd  by  Solomon,  which  is  the  only 
 <  pretended  fcripture-example,  was  quite  of  ano- 
 
 *  ther  nature,  and  done  upon  another  foundation  ; 
 
 *  fo  is  the  old  ftate  of  Chriflianity  known  to  be 
 '  fully  againft  fuch  a  pradlice  :  infomuch,  that 
 '  the  greateft  vindicators  of  the  ftate  at  the  re- 
 '  formation  and  revolution,  have  not,  I  think, 
 
 *  been  able  to  produce  one  (ingle  authority  for 
 '  it ;  at  leaft,  not  till  fuch  late  centuries  as  are  of 
 '  no  value  when  unfupported  by  earlier  {a)  anti, 
 
 *  quity  *. 
 
 I  might  here  have  added  two  modern  authori- 
 ties :  I  mean  the  difturbances  in  the  church  of 
 England,  as  well  as  in  that  of  Scotland,  occafion'd 
 
 A  a  by 
 
 [a)  Whijl.  fcript,  pol.  ded.  to  B,  B^ngofy  p.  x,  xi. 
 
178    The  Short  History  of 
 
 by  the  lay-deprivation  of  Dr.  Burnet,  archbifhop 
 ofGlafgow  -,  and  an  addrefs  of  the  houfe  of  Lords, 
 (in  or  about  March,  1705,  as  I  remember,;  com- 
 plaining of  fome  luch  deprivations  of  the  clergy 
 in  Carolina,  as  being  repugnant  to  the  laws  of  this 
 realm,  and  defiru5iive  to  the  conjiitution  of  the  church 
 of  England :  but,  as  I  have  not  the  printed  ad- 
 drefs now  by  me,  to  vouch  my  quotation  of  the 
 latter,  and  the  former  is  eafily   to  be   met  with 
 in  the  bo»ks  here  referr*d  {a)  to,  I  Ihall  leave  this 
 point  to  the  reader's  judgment,  uponVhat  has  been 
 fo  largely   related  already.     And  I  prefume,    I 
 Ihall  need  no  apology  for  having  been  the  longer 
 upon  it,  becaufe  it  has  afforded  matter  of  great 
 controverfy,  with  refpeft  to  the  rights  of  Kings, 
 and  the  doflrine  of  the  independency  of  the  church 
 upon  the  Jlate,  as  to  its  pure  fpiritual  powers :  how- 
 ever, I  hope,  this  fhall  no  more  be  caird  a  popifh 
 (h)  principle  (^ which  is  known  to  have  been  the  doc- 
 rine  of  the  primitive  church,  earlier  than  popery 
 itfelf  j)  efpecially  fince  it  is  thus  openly  counte- 
 nanc'd  by  fuch  zealous  proteftants,  as  have  here 
 vouch'd  for  it  on  this  occafion.    But  now,  to  re- 
 turn to  the  hiftory. 
 „  ,  ,       ,        §  XLII.  AfTE^i-the  death  of  So- 
 
 Rehoboam  s         ' 
 
 hretiitury  lomon^  tlje»  «rf^nalfilaw  of  hereditary 
 r'<gl"i-  fuqarfliSnt^^rding  to  proximity  of 
 
 blood,  came'  to  be  exadly  obferv'd  in  the 
 kingdom  of  Judah.  For,  in  obedience  thereto, 
 all  Ifrael  cafne  to  Shechem  ('to  Reholoam)  to  make ; 
 
 (or 
 
 («)  Collier's  ecdef.  Uifl:.  vol.  ii.  fol.  £9^.  and  Ma/on's  v'md'ic.  of 
 the  cfaureb,'  1718,  foi.  4-J6.         {i>)  Sachev.  trial,  fo).  1 131  c^c. 
 
the  Regal  Succession.     179 
 
 (or  more  properly,  to  recognize)  ^i»2f^)  ^ing^  who 
 was  Solomon's  fon  and  undoubted  heir.     But  here 
 the  ten  rebellious  tribes,  under  pretence  of  grie- 
 vances in  Solomon's  reign,  (as  the   revolutionifts 
 had  before  done  in  the  reign  of  David)  prefume 
 to  remonftrate  againft  them,  and  to  infift  upon 
 terms  with  their  lawful  King  (as  if  liberty  and 
 property  were  things  that  a  King  only  could  have 
 no  pretence  to!j  which  he,  thro*  a  judicial  infa- 
 tuation (for  the  punifhment  of  the  fins  of  Solo- 
 mon, as  had  been  {b)  foretold  by  the  Lord)  an- 
 fwering  impolitickly,     gave   occafion    to    thofe 
 tribes  to  revolt  •,  as  will  be  fhewn  hereafter.  How- 
 ever, the  (c)  loyal  tribes  of  Judah  and  Benjamin 
 (which,  becaufe  their  poflTeflions  were  intermix*d, 
 are  fometimes  reckon'd  as  onej  continu'd  to  be 
 faithful,  and  bear  true  allegiance  to  their  King's  fon. 
 But  neverthelefs,  left  their  example  Ihould  be 
 of  any  ufe  to  the  advocates  for  hereditary  right, 
 Mr.  fp^bijion  ('whofe  byafsis  turn'd  the  other  way) 
 infinuates,  that  'his  father's  favour,  his  mother's 
 »  intereft,  and  his  own  behaviour,  fome  or  all, 
 '  procur'd  him  the  general  good-will  of  the  two 
 '  tribes ;  who  went  to  Sbechem,  and  there,  in  a 
 A  a  2  «  fo- 
 
 (a)  I  Kings  xii.  f.  and  a  Chron.  x.  i.  (^b)  i  K<ttgsr.\.  12. 
 (cj  The  main  body  of  the  iribe  oi  Benjamin  adhfr'd  to  Rehoboam, 
 as  appears  i  KiTig^  xii.  13.  and  i  Chrcn  xi.  1,  &c.  but  probably 
 fome  part  of  them,  bordering  upon' the  revolted  tribes,  migh^ 
 fall  oft  with  them  to  Jerobo»m }  which  might  give  ground  for 
 that  laying,  that  there  reus  none  (th-jt  is,  no  entire  tribe)  tb^t 
 followed  the  hmfe  of  David,  but  tht  tribe  of  Judah  9)Ay,  i  Kings 
 ^ii>  20. 
 
l8o     The  Short  History  ^y 
 
 *  folemn  afTembly  made  him  their  King  (a\  \  Now, 
 tho'  the  drift  of  all  this  is  apparently  to  fupport 
 the  claim  of  popular  conventions  in  making 
 Kings,  yet  I  muft  take  the  liberty  to  demand, 
 from  what  other  motives  than  that  of  true  loyalty, 
 and  a  due  regard  to  his  birth-right,  the  two  tribes 
 could  reafonably  be  induced  to  adhere  to  their 
 King's  fon  and  heir,  when  the  other  ten  rebell'd 
 againft  him  ?  what  fcripture-evidence  to  prove, 
 that  his  father's  favour,  his  mother's  intereft,  and 
 his  own  behaviour,  fhould  not  be  as  much  regard- 
 ed in  Ifrael  as  Judah  ?  did  his  father  ever  exprefs 
 any  extraordinary  favour  for  him  ?  or  had  his 
 mother  any  particular  interefl:  after  his  father's 
 death,  to  prevail  with  the  two  tribes,  but  not  with 
 the  ten  ?  if  fo,  we  may  expedl  to  find  the  chap- 
 ter and  verfe  !  As  to  his  own  behaviour,  'tis  plain, 
 that  was  fo  very  impoljrick,  as  wt^ll  as  unpopular, 
 that  it  could  not  pofiibly  procure  hint  any  good 
 will :  but,  inftead  thereof,  if  the  two  tribes  had 
 been  given  to  change,  like  the  reft-,  and  not  of 
 truly  loyal  principles,  they  would  motl  probably 
 have  voted  the  throne  vacant,  and  placed  another 
 therein,  by  their  ovm  pretended  authority,  as 
 the  other  ten  did.  But  they,  not  regarding  the 
 rebellious  pradices  of  the  refc,  nor  ihinkmg 
 greater  numbers  any  argument  in  matters  of 
 right  and  duty,  proceeded  by  themfelves  to  recog- 
 nize the  natural  right  of  their  lawful  King's  ion 
 (eyen  tho'  they  could  promife  themfelves  nothing 
 
 from 
 
 -(«)  Whiji.  Script,  polit.  p.  54. 
 
the  Regal  Succession.    i8l 
 
 from  his  own  declaration  to  them,  but  the  moft 
 arbitrary  tyranny,)  as  all  the  other  tribes  were 
 ready  too  to  have  done,  if  they  had  not  been 
 aded  by  principles  of  human  politicks,  rather 
 than  thofe  of  religion  and  loyalty  ;  and  how 
 much  the  publick  good  was  effedted  thereby,  will 
 be  feen  in  its  proper  place. 
 
 In  the  mean  time,  I  fliall  proceed  upon  the  fuc- 
 celTion  of  thofe  Kings,  who  reign'd,  according 
 to  the  original  law  of  hereditary  right  and  proxi- 
 mity of  bloodj  over  the  loyal  tribes  o^Judah  and 
 Benjamin  :  who  having  been  a  race  of  Kings  (as  is 
 confefs'dj  h'j  divine  (a)  appointment^  we  may 
 obferve,  that  the  preheminence  of  the  primoge- 
 niture is  admitted  to  be  a  divine  right;  (for  'tis 
 plain,  none  of  thefe  following  Kings  had  any 
 other  evidence  of  God's  defignation,  than  that 
 of  their  birth,  or  hereditary  right,  tho'  one  of 
 this  author's  friends  flicks  not  to  call  it  hlafphe?n^ 
 (J?)  to  fay  fo  ! 
 
 But,  before  I  come  to  the  particulars,  I  fhall 
 take  notice  here,  once  for  all,  of  a  piece  of  criti- 
 cifm,  fitter  indeed  to  be  expos'd,  than  ferioufly 
 anfwer'd.  Mr.  Whijion  (forgetful  of  the  impar- 
 tiality he  pretends  to  in  his  title  page,)  when  no 
 other  colours  can  be  found  to  call  a  blot  upon 
 this  do6lrine  of  hereditary  right,  takes  upon  him 
 to  fuppofe,  (or  prefume  rather)  that  wherever  we 
 meet  with  the  tnother's  name,  it  is  an  argument, 
 that  fuch  fuccefTor  was  not  the  eldefi  fon  and  heir 
 
 h 
 
 (a)  Bradburyh  fon  of  Tdhgul,  1 708;  (h)  Vv.Kemet's  ferm. 
 S')  Sept.  ll\f,  p,  11. 
 
l8^    The  Short  History  q/ 
 
 hy  defcent.  It  '  feems  to  me  {fays  he)  an  obfcure 
 «  indication,  that  he  was  not  the  firft-born  fon  ; 
 
 *  tho'  I  cannot  fay  it  is  at  all  (a)  certain  *.  How- 
 ever, he  has  endeavour' d,  by  this  fallacy  alone 
 to  difparage  almoft  the  whole  line  of  Kings,  as 
 well  in  Judahy  as  in  Ifrael :  but  with  how  little 
 juftice  or  reafon,  I  leave  to  the  reader  to  judo-e 
 from  this  one  remark,  that  iVIr.  iFbiJlon  has  un- 
 fortunately fplit  upon  a  rock,  at  his  very  firft 
 launching  out.  For  even  Rehoboam  himfelf,  the 
 firft  of  all  thofe  in  the  kingdom  of  Jv.dah^  has 
 his  mother^s  name  recorded  with  him  fand  that  too 
 twice  in  one  Q?)  chapter,  which  is  more  than  we 
 iifually  meet  with  in  the  reftj  :  and  yet  Mr.  Whifton 
 himfelf  owns,  that  he  '  fucceeded  Solomon^  as  it 
 
 *  were  of  courfe  ;  that  is,  no  one  elfe   feems  to 
 
 *  have  flood  his  competitor,  he  probably  being 
 <  the  eldeft,  if  not  the  only  fon  fV)  *.  Which 
 plainly  demonftrates  the  abfurdity  of  that  his  own 
 peculiar  obfervation  !  and  therefore  I  Ihall  take 
 no  further  notice  of  it. 
 
 _;    ,     ,■„  ^XLIII.  As5'o/5»zo;z  was  fucceed- 
 
 The  hereditary  J 
 
 fitcccjfim  of  Abi-  ed  by  Rehoboam  his  fon  and  heir,  fo 
 ■J*^'  was  Rehoboam  fucceeded  by  Abijah 
 
 (or  Abijam)  his  fon  and  (d)  heir.  For,  tho',  'tis  true, 
 we  read,  that  Rehoboam  had  three  fons  by  his  for- 
 mer wives  (e)y  and  confequently  fuppofe,  that 
 jibijah  was  not  the  eldeft  at  the  time  that  his 
 father  made  hitn  chief,  to  be  ruler  over  his  brethren ; 
 
 and 
 
 (b)  Script,  pol  p.  4-5.  (b)  i  Kin,  xiv,  ii,  ;i.  and  z  Chron. 
 xii.  13.  (f)Scripr.  polir.  p.  34.  [d)  1  Kin.  x\v.  31.  and 
 z  Ckron.%\\.\6.         (t)  i  Chron.  x\,  19. 
 
the  Regal  Succession     183 
 
 and  thought  alfo  to  make  him  (a)  King,  (which  is 
 indeed  an  evidence  of  a  partial  favour  for  him, 
 during  their  lives  •,)  yet  it  does  by  no  means  fol- 
 low, that  Abijah  was  not  the  eldeiV  furvivor  at  the 
 time  of  his  father's  death,  and  his  own  fucceflion 
 to  the  throne  :    on  the  contrary,  it  no  where  ap- 
 pears, that  they,  or  any  one  of  them  was  living 
 at  that  time.     For  if  there  had  been  any  elder 
 furviving,  it  is  not  to  be  doubted,  but  we  fhoulci 
 have  heard  fomething  of  his  pretenfion  •,  of  which 
 as  there  is  not  the  leaft  hint  upon  record,  we  may 
 fafely  conclude,    that  they  were  all  dead  before 
 their  father,    and  that   Abijah  was  his  heir   and 
 lawful   fuccefibr,    by  due  courfe  of  inheritance : 
 and  the  rather,  for  that  we  have  a  precedent  for 
 it  in  the  fame  holy  writings ;  wherein  we  find,  that 
 Adomjah  had  once  had   three  elder  brethren  (//) 
 too,    one  of  whom,  for  ought  that  appears  to 
 the  contrary,  might  have  furvived  his  father  :  and 
 yet,  becaufe  there  is  no  mention  of  him,  or  his 
 pretenfions,  but  Adonijah  is  the  next  who  puts  in 
 his  claim  to  the  inheritance,  'tis  therefore  reafo- 
 nably  prefum'd,    that  all   the   elder  were  dead, 
 tho'  that  is  not  recorded  ;  and  Adonijah  is  univer- 
 fally  efteem'd  to  have  been  the  eldefl  furviving 
 fon  of  David,  at  that  demife  of  the  crown.  Thus 
 it  is  juftly  argu'd,  that  fince  we  read,  that  Am- 
 non  was  murder'd,    and  Abfalom  flain  in  battle, 
 '  we  may  rcafonably  prefume,    that  Da7iieU    or 
 *  Chileah,  as  he  is  elfewhere  called,  died  a  natu- 
 
 '  ral 
 
 («)  i  Chron,  xi.    2,2.      {b)  1  Sum.  iii,  i,  3.  and  i  Chron^  iii- 
 I,  1. 
 
i8.:l.     The  Short  History  of 
 
 <  ral  death  before  his  father :  for  there  appears 
 
 <  no  reafon,  why  Adonijah  fhould  fpeak  as  he  does, 
 
 <  (i  Kings  ii.  15.)  but  his  priority  of  birth,  or,  in 
 «  the  modern  language,  his  hereditary  right,  as 
 '  eldeft  branch  of  the  royal  ia)  family  *.  For  as, 
 in  that  cafe,  Adonijah  afiferted  his  own  immediate 
 right,  before  the  mother  of  Solomon  ('as  before  is 
 at  large  fet  forth,)  fo,  in  this,  Ahijah  aflerts  his 
 to  the  whole  inheritance,  in  ns  ftrong  terms  as  is 
 poflible,  even  to  the  face  of  him  who  had  ufurp'd 
 the  greateft  part  thereof,  and  before  all  his  army 
 (which  I  fhall  have  occafion  to  mention  hereafter, 
 in  the  cafe  oijeroloam^  and  to  which  I  fliall  there- 
 fore refer  my  reader  from  this  place.)  And  be- 
 fides,  there  is  not  the  leaft  appearance  of  any 
 other  pretender,  claiming  by  any  prior  right, 
 but  Ahijah  did  peaceably  fucceed  Rehoboam,  vjith- 
 out  any  oppofition  ('as  Mr.  JVhiJlon  (h)  confef- 
 fes-,)  which  is  the  very  argument  that  prevails 
 with  him  to  admit  Rehoboam  to  have  been  the 
 next  heir,  hecaufe,  fays  he,  no  one  elfe  feems  to 
 have  flood  his  competitors  which,  if  it  be  a  good 
 argument  in  one  cafe,  is  furely  as  good  in  ano- 
 ther. Nay,  further,  there  feems  to  be  fomething 
 worth  our  notice,  in  the  very  phrafe,  which  is 
 obje<5ted.  For  it  is  not  faid,  that  Rehoboam  made, 
 or  refolved  to  make,  but  only  that  he  thought 
 (or  had  fome  thoughts,  as  we  fay,)  to  make  him 
 King :  nor  does  Abijah*s  fucceeding  to  the  crown 
 afterwards  prove  in   the  leaft,  that  he  obtain'd 
 
 it 
 
 (a)  J.  ^nher'$  Cam.  ^tTtmhi^Wdh,  Aug.  8,  1714,  p^.  6, 
 [b)  Sciipr.  polit.  p.  3^. 
 
/y&^  Regal  Succession,   185- 
 
 it  only  in  confequence  of  that  thought,  but,  for 
 ought  that  can  be  prov'd  to  the  contrary,  as  his 
 right  by  furvivorfhip.  Much  lefs  can  we  argue  ("as 
 Mr.  Whijlon  doesj  becaufe  his  father  made  him 
 ruler  among  his  brethren^  in  his  own  lifetime,  that 
 therefore  he  broke  through  the  right  of  \a)  ■primo- 
 geniture ;  for  I  know  no  law,  that  hinders  a  fove- 
 reign  prince,  from  conftituting  his  own  inferior 
 magiftrates,  without  regard  to  age  or  family, 
 tho'  he  may  not  do  fo,  in  appointing  his  fuccef- 
 fors  in  the  throne. 
 
 But  will  it  not  put  Abijah's  hereditary  right  out 
 of  all  difpute,  if  we  obferve,  in  the  royal  pedi- 
 gree recorded  by  St.  Matthew^  that  our  blejfed 
 Saviour^s  title  to  the  fceptre  of  the  Jews,  is  deriv'd 
 through  Abijah,  fas  well  as  the  reft  of  that  royai 
 line,  herein  fet  forth  j  ?  For  if  Chrijlh  being  the 
 Mejftah  depends  upon  his  being  the  fon  of  David 
 and  King  of  the  Jews,  (as  without  qucflion  it  does  j 
 then  how  can  we  make  a  doubt  of  the  right  of 
 jibijah,  ('or  any  of  the  reft  in  that  pedigree)  with- 
 out railing  a  ftrong  objedion  againft  that  of  our 
 blefled  Saviour  him.felf  alfo  ? 
 
 §  XLIV.  Abijah  being  thus  proved  a  Afa. 
 lawful  King,  pafs  we  on  to  Afa,  his  fon  jehoram^ ' 
 (b)  and  heir,  who  fucceeded  him  •,  and  ""''  Ahazi- 
 who  washimfelf  fucceeded  by  Jehofaphat 
 his  {c)  fon  andheir ;  and  Jehofaphat  by  Jeho- 
 rajH  his  (d)  fon  and  heir  whofe  right  of  fuccef- 
 fion  to  the  kingdom  is  particularly  recorded, 
 B  b  becaufe 
 
 («)  Script,  polit.  p.  34.         yh)    i  Kvigs  xv.  8.  and   x  Cl.,on. 
 xiv.  r.  (t)  I  Kmgsvt  14.  and  i  Chrcn,  xvii.  i.    [d)  i  Kings^ux.^o. 
 
l8(5    The  Short  History  ^j/" 
 
 (a)  hecaufe  he  was  the  Jirfi-horn  ;  and  Jehoram  by 
 Ahaziah  his  {}?)  fan  and  heir,  without  the  leaft  in- 
 terruption: for,  tho'  we  read,  that  he  was  then 
 the  'joungejl  Jon  of  Jehoram,  yet  it  follows,  that 
 he  came  not  to  the  crown,  till  the  hand  of  men 
 that  came  with  the  Arabians  to  the  camp,  had  Jlain 
 all  the  (c)  eldejl ;  fo  that  he  was  the  eldeft  fon  fur- 
 viving,  and  confequently  heir  at  law  :  which  is 
 a  manifeft  indication ,  that  the  ordinary  rule  of 
 fucceflion  was  hereditary  according  to  primoge- 
 niture. 
 
 Neverthelcfs  here  Mr.  Whijlon  gives  it  another 
 turn,  in  favour  of  the  popular  fcheme,  tho*  one 
 would  think,  nothing  can  be  more  exprefs  to  the 
 contrary.  He  fays,  '  the  inhabitants  of  Jerufalem 
 '  made  Ahaziah  King, being  depriv*d  of  any 
 
 *  other  choice  among  the  fons  of  Jehoram  ' ;  and 
 proceeds  to  make  this  oblervation  from-  it,  *  here 
 
 *  we  fee  who  they   were,  that  ufually  made  or 
 
 *  recogniz'd  Kings  in  Judah  ;  even  the  people  of 
 '  the  land,  or,  in  this  particular  cafe,  where  there 
 
 *  ^as  no  choice  in  the  royal  family,  the  inhabi- 
 
 *  tants  o^  Jerufalem,  the  capital  city  ((i)  alone '. 
 But,  with  Mr.  JVhiJlon*s  good  leave,  the  giving 
 us  the  reafon  of  the  youngefl  fon*s  fuccceding  his 
 father  (becaufe  all  the  elder  were  dead')  plainly  inti- 
 mates, that  he  could  not  have  been  capable  of  it, 
 if  any  of  the  elder  had  been  left  alive  :  and  not- 
 withftanding  what  he  infers  from  the  inhabitants 
 cf  Jerufalem  making  or  recognizing  Kings,  all  that 
 
 they 
 
 [a)  zClnon.  xxi.  3.         (16)  1  K'oigs  viii.  14.  {c    z  Ckron. 
 
 JUjJi,  I.         (*')  ScTJp.  polit.  p.  41. 
 
the  Regal  Succession.     187 
 
 they  did,  or  could  do,  was  no  more  than  is  done, 
 in  our  own  hereditary  kingdom,  upon  every  de- 
 mife  of  the  crown  ;  where  the  privy  counfellors  and 
 the  magiftrates  of  the  city  of  Londoti,  together 
 with  fach  others  of  the  nobihty,  gentry,  and  in_ 
 habitants,  as  are  at  hand,  make  a  folemn  procla- 
 mation and  declaration  of  the  natural  right  of  the 
 next  heir  ;  not  thereby  making  him  King^  but  re- 
 cognizing, that  he  hsidxht  right  inherent  in  him,  by 
 the  laws  of  God  and  nature,  and  the  fundamental 
 laws  of  the  land  •,  tho'  our  fcriptiire  politician  does 
 not  diftinguifh,  between  making  and  recognizing 
 of  Kings !  Nay,  that  very'^  phrafe,  which  Mr. 
 Whifton  takes  his  objedlion  from,  the  people's  making 
 him  king,  is  honeftly  explain'd,  even  by  Grotius 
 himfelf  fwho  was  fo  far  from  being  an  enemy  to 
 the  juft  rights  of  the  people,  that  fome  of  them 
 quote  him  with  as  much  afTurance  as  the  gofpel 
 it  felf  J )  who  interprets  this  adlion  of  the  people, 
 to  be  no  more  than  barely  their  placing  him  in  the 
 throne  (as  they  did  alfo  afterwards  Joajlo  his  fon) 
 which  was  his  right  (viz.  by  birth,  j  whether  the  peo- 
 ple had  given  their  vote  or  fuff rage  or  (a)  not. 
 
 §  XLV,  Hitherto  the  fucceffion  had  Jo^fli. 
 been  regular  and  uninterrupted,  in  the  king- 
 dom oiyudah.  But  no  foonerwas  Ahaziah  dtz.<\, 
 than  his  mother  Athaliah  (the  daughter  of  the 
 wicked  Ahah,  the  fon  of  Ojnri,  King  of  Ifrael) 
 ufurped  the  hereditary  throne,   and  endeavour'd 
 
 B  b  2  to 
 
 (a)  Grot,  in  xChron.  xxii.  i.  In  folio locarunt, — -namregnum 
 jure  ipfi  debcbatur,  fine  uUis  populi  fuffragiis, 
 
1 88    The  Short  History  ^^ 
 
 to  make  herfelf  a  thorough  fettlement,  by  dejlroying 
 all  the  feed  {a)  royal^  except  one  who  was  happily 
 hid  from  her :  for  ('as  a  reverend  and  pious  pre- 
 late well  obfervedj  '  they  that  fear  to  lofe  their 
 <  ufurpcd  poflfeflions,  or  to  feel  the  revenge  of 
 '  their  treafon  and  rebellion,  never  think  them- 
 
 *  felves  fecured,   or  their  ufurpation  fettled,  un- 
 
 *  til  their  unjuft  titles  be  fealed  in  the  blood  of 
 
 *  the  right  owner,  and  their  own  wicked  lives 
 «  fecured  in  the  unmerited  death  of  their  innocent 
 
 *  (b)  adverfaries'. 
 
 And  now,  what  was  wanting  to  make  Athaliah 
 a  lawful  /over aigii^  that  can  be  pleaded  by  any 
 other  ufurper  ?  'tis  plain,  fhe  wanted  nothing  but 
 the  hereditary  right :  for  (he  had  full  and  uninter- 
 rupted poifefTion  of  all  the  power  in  the  govern- 
 ment, upwards  of  ftx  [c)  years,  and  the  provi- 
 dence (asfome  call  it)  of  fuccefs,  and  the  people's 
 fubmidion,  and  no  other  pretender  in  view,  to 
 interrupt  her :  and  yet  when  flie  leaf!  dream'd  of 
 it,  Joafh^  the  right  heir  by  birth  (who  had  been 
 miraculoufly  preferv'd  indeed  by  providence j  was 
 unexpeftedly  produc'd,  and  reftor'd,  and  the 
 ufurper  jufily  deftroy'd -,  and  then  (notwithftand- 
 ing  their  forc'd  fubmifiion  to  her  during  herpol- 
 fefiion  of  the  power)  all  the  people  of  the  land  re- 
 joiced^ and  the  city  was  quiet,  after  that  they  had 
 Jlain  Athaliah  (the  ufurper^  with  the  (d)  fword. 
 
 Here 
 
 [a]  1  Kings  xi.  I,  2.  and  i  Ch''oi?.  xxii.  ic,  ii;  (^)  Bp- 
 Grijf Ji^illi/iP)s'f  ftvcn  treaii'.cs,  ii6i,  fol.  21.  {c)  1  Kings  xi. 
 3,  4.  and  iCLron.  xxii.  12. — xxiii.  1.  (d)z  iC//?^;  xi.  JO.  and 
 a  Chron.xxui.  11. 
 
the  Regal  Succession.    189 
 
 Here  I  beg  leave  to  confider  fome  of  the  ar- 
 guments of  a  late  author  of  great  name,  who 
 affirms,   '  that  all    fovereign    princes,   who  are 
 
 <  fettled  in  their  thrones,  are  placed  there  by  God, 
 
 <  and  invefted  with  his  authority,  and  therefore 
 «  muft  be  obey*d,  by  all  fubjefts,  as  the  mi- 
 '  niflers  of  God,  without  enquiring  into  their  le- 
 «  gal  right  and  title  to  the  (a)  throne:  — that 
 '  the  fcripture  has  given  us  no  diredions  in  this 
 '  cafe,  but  to  fubmit,  and  pay  all  the  obedience 
 '  of  fubje<5ts  to  the  prefent  powers ;  it  makes  no 
 
 *  diftindlion,  that  ever  I  could  find,  between  right- 
 
 <  ful  Kings  and  ufurpers,  between  Kings  whom 
 '  we  muft,  and  v/hom  we  muft  not  obey :  but 
 '  the  general  rule  is,  let  ever'j  foul  he  fubje^l  to  the 
 '  higher  powers,  for  all  power  is  of(h)  God,"*  &c.  To 
 this  I  might  fairly  offer  the  cafes  of  David  and 
 Jhfalom,  Joaflo  and  Athaliah,  as  a  full  and  clear 
 confutation  :  but  I  chufe  rather  to  lay  before  my 
 reader  the  judgment  of  a  divine,  as  learned,  as 
 honeft,  as  unbyafs'd,  and  (without  the  common 
 odium  of  comparifons,^  every  way  as  worthy  of 
 credit  as  this  author  j  and  that  is  his  own  felf :  who 
 aflures  us,  that  '  the  moft  profperous  rebel  is  not 
 
 *  the  higher  power,  while  our  natural  prince,  to 
 
 *  whom  we  owe  obedience  and  fubjeflion,  is  in 
 '  being :  and  therefore,  tho'  fuch  men  may  get 
 
 *  the  power  into  their  hands  by  God's  permiflion, 
 
 yec 
 
 (a)  Dr.  W.  Sherlock's,  cafe  of  allegiance,  idpi.piio.    {b)  Ihld, 
 
 p.  18. 
 
190    The  Short  History  of 
 
 <  yet  not  by  God*s  ordinance';  and  he  who  refills 
 «  them  does  not  refift  the  ordinance  of  God,  but 
 
 <  the  ufurpations  of  (^)  men Athaliah  reign- 
 
 <  ed,  and  had  the  whole  power  of  government  in 
 
 *  her  hands;  but  yet,  this  did  not  make  her  a 
 
 *  foveraign  and  irrefiftible  prince,  becaufe  Joajhy 
 
 *  the  fon  of  Ahaziah^  the  right  heir  of  the  crown, 
 
 *  was  yet  alive :  and  therefore,  in  the  feventh 
 '  yt2LX,Jehoiada  the  pried  fet  Joajh  upon  the  thronet 
 
 *  and  flew  Athaliah,  and  was  guilty  of  no  treafon 
 
 *  or  rebellion  in  doing  fo ;  which  fhews,  that  no 
 '  ufurpation  can  extinguilh  the  right  and  title  of 
 
 *  a  natural  prince.     Such  ufurpers,  though  they 
 
 *  have  the  pofleflion  of  the  fupream  power,   yet 
 
 *  they  have  no  right  to  it:  and  tho'  God,  for  wife 
 '  reafons,  may  fometimes  permit  fuch  ufurpations, 
 
 *  yet,  while  his  providence  fecures  the  perfons  of 
 '  fuch  depos'd  and  banifh'd  princes  from  violence, 
 
 <  he  fecures  their  titles  {h)  too '.  After  all  this, 
 with  what  veracity  this  author  could  affirm,  that 
 the  fcripture  makes  no  diJlinSiiorii  that  ever  be  could 
 
 findi 
 
 {a)  Hv.W.  SA^r/w^'scafeofrefiftance,  1684,  P-  '2.8.  {b)  Ih'ul. 
 p.  I  3 1,  132.  And  here  I  ihall  fubjoia  the  opinion  of  a  noted 
 lawyer,  who  having  cited  the  cafes  of  Abfalom's  and  Athallah'z 
 ufurpations,  and  their  untimely  deaths,  as  mere  traytors  and  rebels, 
 (to  confirm  his  principle,  that  an  ufurper  can  never  gain  any  inte- 
 fefi  in  the  crown,  to  the  prejudice  of  tht  rightful  king  or  his  heirs,) 
 afiures  us,  that  as  this  vas  God's  law  among  the  Jews,  fo  it  vas 
 the  ancient  law  of  Enghnd,  under  the  Anions,  and  continued  fo  uh- 
 der  the  Saxons  and  Normans  j  ss  he  proves  by  divers  precedents, 
 in  confutation  of  that  vulgar  notion,  that  treafon  may  be  com- 
 mitted againft  a  King  defaSio,  5cc.  frpnis  plea  for  the  peers,  i  #5  83 
 f.486, 
 
/j&^  Regal  Succession.     191 
 
 jindy  I  leave  to  the  reader's  refledion !  efpecially 
 when  he  might  have  found  a  plain  dhlindtion,  as 
 in  the  cafe  of  Abfalom  {a)  before  mcntion'd  -,  fo  alfo 
 in  this  very  place  of  fcripture,  where  the  Holy 
 Ghoft  (who  muft  be  allow'd  to  be  the  beft  herald) 
 never  once  gives  the  title  of  queen  to  Athaliab^ 
 tho'  fhe  was  fo  long  in  peaceable  pofleflion,  but 
 appropriates  the  royal  title  to  the  rightful 
 King,  tho*  out  of  pofleflion,  and  in  obfcurity ; 
 calling  Joafi  [h)  King  no  lefs  than  five  feveral 
 times,  even  before  his  refl:oration:  whereby  'tis 
 manifefl:,  the  Holy  Ghofl:  grounded  his  title  upon 
 his  proximity  of  blood  only :  and  yet  when  the 
 ufurper  faw  the  King  fl:anding  in  his  place  in  the 
 temple,  flie  could  have  the  aflurance,  to  pervert 
 the  proper  meaning  of  words,  crying  out  treafont 
 treafon  {c) !  (or,  as  it  is  in  the  Septuagint,  a  plot! 
 a  plot ! )  tho'  in  truth,  flie  herfelf  was  the  great 
 tractor  -,  and  tho(c plotters  (as  flie  called  them)  the 
 mofl:  loyal  fubjefts  and  worthy  patriots.  For,  it 
 is  truly  obferv'd,  by  a  divine  before  quoted,  that 
 '  after  God  had  once  fettled  the  fuccefllon  of 
 
 '  the 
 
 (a)  Pag.  146.  (i)  2  Khigs  xi.  f,  7,  8,  11.  and  z  Chroni 
 xxiii.  5,  ^,  7.  lo-  {c)  X  Kings  xi.  14.  and  zChron.  xxiii.i5- 
 This  puts  me  in  mind  of  a  juft  obfervation  of  the  great  Lord  Bcteon 
 (Nov.  Organ.  1.  i.  in  his  works  lately  publifh'd,  vol.  i,  fol.  177, 
 178.)  that  the  giving  wrong  names  to  things  ("which  he  terms 
 JdoU  fori,)  is  one  of  the  principal  caufcs  thit  feiences  nre  fo  often 
 difturbedy  and  the  underfinndin^  of  men  fo  much  perplexed.  And  fb 
 doubtlcfs,  in  matters  of  confcicncc  a,nd  morality,  the  drefling  up 
 an  uncrcditable  charadlcr,  in  the  habit  of  reverence  and  dignity, 
 is  very  apt  to  draw  a  falfc  Idta  upon  the  mind,  and  difordcr  the 
 praflice  of  the  generality. 
 
I9X    r^^ Short  History  of 
 
 *  the  crown  oi Ijrael^  in  King  D^^'/Vs  family,  and 
 
 *  particularly  on  King  Solomon'%  ifiue,  by  primo- 
 «  oeniture,  then  it  was  high  treafon  for  any  to  put 
 «  by  the  lawful  heir  and  fucceflbr,  altho'  the  faid 
 «  heir  was  an  idolater,  and  never  fo  bad,  as 
 <  to  either  faith  or  {a)  manners'.  For  the  better 
 proof  whereof,  he  quotes  that  interrogation  of 
 Elibu  to  Job  »  Jhalle'Oen  he  that  hateth  right  (b)  go- 
 vern  ?  &c.  Where  the  point  of  interrogation  is 
 altogether  affirmative,  and  implies,  that  he  that 
 hateth  right,  Ihall  and  ought,  however,  to  govern 
 when  he  has  a  lawful  title  fo  to  do  ;  and  may  not 
 be  excluded  or  depos'd  under  that  pretence  of  his 
 want  of  grace.  Nay,  and  'tis  declar'd  even  by 
 the  kirk  of  Scotland,  and  their  friends  in  England,  in 
 their  confeffion  of  faith,  «  that  no  difference  in  reli- 
 c  gion,  or  even  infidelity,  does  take  away  the  right 
 
 *  of  the  King'  (c). 
 
 This 
 
 (ii) '7e»«fr's  prerog.  of  primog.  p.  ip.  [b)  Joh  xxxiv.  17. 
 (c)  Chap.  23.  Whence  the  principle  ofdepcfing  or  excluding law. 
 fuj  K-ings  from  their  juft  rights,  for  difference  in  religion,  had  its 
 origiral,  I  fhall  leave  to  the  Jefuits  iv.6i  Puritan's,  to  agree  between 
 then  filves:  butfince  their  appearing  in  the  world,  there  has  been 
 great  uneslinefs  given  toibvcraign  princes  on  that  account ;  the  'Je. 
 fusts  ufing  all  their  artifices  againft  protefiant  princes,  and  the  Puritans 
 the  like  againft /JC/^yi^.  But  to  be  fomewhat  more  particular  j 'tis 
 ■well  known,  that  in  the  infancy  of  our  reformation,  a  fchcme 
 was  laid  to  defeat  the  lawful  heir  of  King  Edveitrd  VI,  bccaufeflie 
 was  a  Papift  :  bur,  at  the  fame  t  me,  llizahth  the  younger 
 fifter  (tho'  a  Proteftant^  was  to  be  excluded,  as  well  as  Qi  A/«r/, 
 to  mske  wsy  for  lady  j^a»e  Grey,  a  diftant  relation;  and  at  lall 
 the  principal  naanager  of  that  defiga  was  difcovcr'd  to  be  a  Papift 
 
 himrdf! 
 
the  Regal  Succession,     jpg 
 
 This  cafe  may  afford  us  juft  ground  toobferve, 
 that  '  God  loves  to  fliew  himfelf,  and  in  an  eminent 
 
 *  manner  to  take  part  with  right  and  juftice  againft 
 «  thofe  mighty  oppreffors  of  the  earth,  who,  hke 
 '  an  overflowing  flood,  would  bear  down  all  before 
 
 *  {a)  them  '.  And  in  what  a  manner  that  is,  may 
 be  learnt  from  that  gracious  declaration,  /  will 
 have  mercj  upon  the  houfe  of  ]  udah,  andlwillfave 
 
 C  c  them 
 
 himfelf.  The  many  plots  of  the  fefuits  againft  our  Q.  Elizaieth 
 to  remove  her  from  her  throne,  as  well  as  their  open  rebellions, 
 againft  IC.  H<rrir^  IV.  oi' France,  to  keep  him  out  oP  his,  are  eafily 
 to  be  difco.ered  in  the  well-pcn'd  hiftories  of  their  refpe£live 
 reign?.  No  fooner  was  Q_  Elizabeth  dead,  but  the  ycfults  were 
 as  diligent  to  defeat  K.James  I,  of  his  undoubted  right  offuccef^ 
 fion,  by  the  help  cf  their  infamous  DcUman  (alias  Pmfons)  and 
 other  tools;  which  the  reader  may  find  a  large  account  of  in  the 
 freface  to  Mafon'^  •vindication  of  our  church  lately  printed :  and 
 when  that  delign  was  happily  render 'd  ineffectual,  the  next  wicked 
 plot  was  to  have  blown  him  out  of  his  throne  again  by  gun- powder- 
 On  the  other  hand,  the  puritan  party  were  as  bufy  all  around  u?, 
 in -their  rebellions  and  ufurpation  in5fo;/a»</,  France,  Holland  and 
 Bohemia,  (all  chiefly  under  the  pretence  of  religion,)  tho' they  were, 
 with  much  ado,  kept  under  here  during  thofe  two  reigns.  But 
 when  IC.  Charles  1.  inherited  the  throne,  it  was  his  unhappy  fare 
 to  be  purfu'd  to  death,  by  the  united  pack  o^Jefuits  zndFanaficks, 
 tho'  with  the  different  cry  of  /(^/Jfry  on  the  one  hand,  and  here/yon 
 the  other  ;  but  on  both  fides  on  the  fame  pretence  of  a  difference 
 in  religion!  However,  in  all  thefe  various  revolutions,  the  church 
 of  England  (properly  fo  cali'dj  was  fo  far  from  being  adluated  by 
 fuch  JeJHiticopuritanical  principles,  that  (as  Dr.  Sherlock  truly  faid) 
 in  his  ferm.  zp.  M^y,  1 68 5 ,  p.  3 1 , 5  2.)  it  has  fuffered  with  its  prince, 
 but  never  yet  rebeWd  againft  him;  being  loyal  upon  firm  and 
 fieady  principles,  and  without  referve}  whereas,  *  there  can  be  no 
 
 *  fecurity  of  thole  men's  loyalty,  whofe  religion,  in  any  cafe,  teachc$ 
 '  them t J  rebel).  '         {a)  Tillotf,  ferm.  16.  Jpr.  i<3po,  p.  19. 
 
194-     The  Short  History  c/' 
 
 them  h^  the  Lord  their  God  •,  and  will  not  fave  them  by 
 how,  nor  by  fword^  nor  by  battel,  by  horfes,  nor  by  {a) 
 horjemen :  that  is  to  fay,  «  when  there  is  no  fervant 
 '  to  draw  a  bow,  no  fubjed  to  manage  a  fword, 
 *  no  army  to  fight  a  battel ;  when  there  is  no 
 '  vifible  appearance  of  any  force,  then  is  God*s 
 «  hour  to  fhew  [b)  mercy  '  ;  fo  that  the  caufe  of 
 «  truth  and  righteoufnefs  ought  never  to  be  given 
 up  as  defperate. 
 
 And  here  we  have  likewife  a  clear  light  to  di- 
 ftinguifh  the  publick  good  from  all  Ipecious  pre- 
 tences.     For  we    cannot    doubt,    but  Athaliah 
 would   (as  other   ufurpers  ulually  doj  endeavour 
 to  blind  the  people's  eyes  with  plaufible  profefTi- 
 ons  and  declarations,  how  much  the  publick  good 
 would  be  advanc'd  by  her  filling  the  throne,  and 
 particularly,  how  much  it  would  be  better  for 
 them  to  have  a  perfon  of  her  age  and  experience, 
 than  a  child  to  he  their  prince,   and  a  babe  to  rule 
 over  {c)  them.     But  however,  the  publick  good 
 and  tranquillity  could  not  be  truly  attain'd,   till 
 the  next  natural-born  heir  (tho*  a  tender  infant) 
 was  reflor'd  to  his  right.    And  it  is  remarkable, 
 that,  when  command  was  given  to  kill  the  ufurper 
 and  her  adherents,    none  were  (lain  with  her,  but 
 only  Matt  an,  the  prieji  of(d)  Baal,     From  whence 
 we  may  judge  of  the  conftant   and  infeparable 
 correfpondence,  there  is  between  u  furpation  and 
 falfe  Cor  immoralj  worfiiip  j  whereas  no  fooner 
 
 was 
 
 (»)  Hff.'w;.         [b]  Alllngt.   Term.  iCfT,,  p.  91.  (<■}  7/*. 
 
 lii.  4.        (d)  2  Kings  sii.  iS.  and  zCkron.  xxiii.  17. 
 
the  Regal  Succession.    197 
 
 was  the  right  heir  reftor'd,    but  the  true  religion 
 wasalfo  reftor'dj  and  protected  by  him. 
 
 Before  I  leave  this  cafe,  it  may  be  proper  to 
 take  particular  notice  of  the  condu6t  of  JehoiadfO- 
 the  high-priefl: ;  becaufe  from  the  part  that  he 
 bore,  in  the  depofition  of  Athaliah,  and  the  re- 
 ftoration  of  JoaJJj^  fome  pretence  has  been  taken 
 (by  certain  weak,  or  fadious  Papifts  j  to  favour 
 the  Pope's  having  a  power  to  depofe  princes :  but 
 with  how  little  reafon  will  eafily  appear.  For  it 
 has  been  already  fhewn,  that  Athaliah  was  not  a 
 {^a)  Queen,  but  a  meer  ufurper  \  and  therefore,  to 
 argue  from  her  cafe,  to  that  of  a  lawful  prince,  is 
 abfurd  and  ridiculous.  Befides,  it  is  plain,  that 
 what  7^i?o?^c/<2  did,  was  not  by  virtue  of  anyeccle- 
 liaflical  authority  :  for  he  was  not  only  (in  right 
 of  his  wife)  the  Prochein  Amie  (as  the  lawyers  call 
 it)  or  next  of  kin  to  the  royal  infant,  but,  by 
 the  fpecial  providence  of  God  (which  is  moft  con- 
 fpicuous  in  the  protedion  and  prefervation  of  law- 
 ful princesj  was  alfo  become  the  guardian  and  pro- 
 tedor  of  his  facred  (Jf)  perfon  -,  nor  did  he  do  any 
 thing,  till   he  had  firft  ftrengthen'd  himfelf,    by 
 
 C  c  2  gain- 
 
 («)  lilv.Whiflon  makes  no  fciuple  to  call  her  Qiieen  Aihalinh, 
 (fcripc.poiit.  p.  97,  103)  thocontrary  to  the  icripture:  and  foms 
 people  affe<£tto  call  e\cry  thing  a  King  or  Queen,  that,  right  or 
 wrong,  gets  a  crown  upon  its  head.  I  know,  it  was  a  maxim 
 with  Ox. Sherlock,  that  •  wemuft  give  the  title  of  King  to  fuch  a 
 '  prince,  when  we  live  in  the  country  where  he  is  owned  tor 
 *  King;  becxufe  it  is  a  piece  of  good  manners*:  (cafe  of 
 alleg.  p.  17.)  But  that  is  notMT.WhiftoH's  cafej  or  if  it  had,  I 
 do  not  think  it  very  good  mdJiners,  to  the  king  at  lead,  to  malce 
 a  complement  of  the  royal  titles  to  a  known  ufurper*  (^) 
 i  Kings  xi.  4.  s^d  X  Chron.  xxii,  1 1 ,  1 1 , 
 
1^6    The  Short  History  of 
 
 gaining  to  his  party  fuch  of  the  captains^  of  the 
 Levites,  and  i\\(t  fathers  of  {a)  Ifrael,  as  he  thought 
 fit,  for  his  affiftance.  Neither  did  he  any  more, 
 than  what  every  private  fubjed  lawfully  might  and 
 ought  to  do ;  and  for  this  he  produc'd  a  very  good 
 warrant  from  the  word  of  God  :  Behold  >fays  he) 
 the  king's  fin  Jhall  reign,  as  the  Lord  hath  [aid  of 
 the  fins  of  .b)D2iv\d',  which  is  admitted  to  have 
 been  a  divine  (c)  entail,  as  likewife  that  '  there  can 
 «  be  no  prefcription  againft  a  divine  {d)  right.  ' 
 From  v;hich  alone  'if  we  had  nothing  elfe  to  the 
 fame  purpofe)  we  may  perceive,  that  it  was  the 
 want  of  this  divine  hereditary  right,  which  made 
 Athaliah  an  ufurper  •,  and  not  that  of  the  choice 
 of  the  ie) 'people,  as  Mr.  IVhifon  infinuates.  Nor 
 indeed  can  we  reafonably  fuppofe,  that  fhe  had 
 not  the  choice  of  the  people  (or  at  leaft  fomething 
 that  often  pafTcs  tor  their  confent, )  fince  flie  was 
 able  to  maintain  herfelf  in  the  throne  fo  many 
 years,  a!nd  the  king  had  no  fanduary  left  but  the 
 temple  of  the  Lord  :  however,  as  that  was  a  place  of 
 the  greateft  fecurity  to  the  lord's  vicegerent,  fo  the 
 high  pricft  was  the  only  perfon  qualify'd  to  have 
 the  care  of  him  there;  and  confequently  the  only 
 one  who  could  reftore  him  to  his  longing  fubjefls. 
 In  fF.ort,  fo  far  is  this  cafe  from  ferving  the  Pope's 
 (/)  turn,  or  making  good  hispretenfions,  that  (as 
 
 fome 
 
 (.7)  2  Kings  xi.  4.  and  z  Chron.  xxiii,  1,2.     {b)  —  3.  and  z  Sam. 
 
 vii»  11;     I  Kings  xi.  4 — — ix.  5.     2.  Chron.  ri.  10,  i  6. vii.  i  8. 
 
 (c)  Sherl.  cafe  of  alleg.  p.  3  5.         (d)  P.ys's  treat,  againft  the  Nonjur. 
 vol.  i.  p.  5$.        (0  Script,  polit.  p,  43:        (/)    f  the  Papifts 
 
 will 
 
the  Regal  Succession     197 
 
 fome  moderate  Papifts  themfelves  confcfs)  it 
 '  proveth  nothing,  but  that  it  is  lawful  for  a  ftate 
 '  or  commonwealth  to  depofe  an  ufurper,  and 
 *  reflore  the  true  heir  to  his  right ;  and  not  that 
 '  he  had  any  authority  to  depofe  any  lawful  prince, 
 '  were  he  otherwife  never  fo  exorbitant  in  life, 
 '  manners  and  belief,  or  cruel  in  his  [a]  govern- 
 '  ment*. 
 
 §  XLVI.  By  this  reftoration  ofjoajh  was  AmnziaK 
 the  hereditary  fuccelTion  turn'd  again  into  its  right 
 courfe  :  but,  after  he  had  reigned  forty  years,  fome 
 of  his  own  rebellious  y^r'j:;<^;//i  made  a  confpiracy,  and 
 Jlezv  (b)  him,  Hov/ever,  thofe  traytors  and  parri- 
 cides were  not  audacious  enough  to  juftify  that 
 regicide,  much  lefs  to  attempt  the  cxclufion  of 
 the  right  heir  from  his  inheritance :  for  Amaziab 
 his  (c)fon  immediately  reigned  in  his  Jiead-\  and  did 
 not  forget  to  do  juftice  upon  thofe  who  had  mur- 
 dcr'd  the  king  his  (d)  father. 
 
 §  XLVII.  But  as  he  fucceeded  his  U7.7.-:.h. 
 father  in  the  throne,  fo  did  he  in  his  traajca] 
 fate:  for  he  was  :i\{o  JIain  by  certain  (e)  confpi- 
 rators.     But  then  ail  the  people  of  Judah  took  Uz- 
 
 ziah, 
 
 will  needs  have  a  good  precedent  in  this  cafe  for  any  thinp,  I  beg 
 leave  to  recominead  it  as  fuch  for  the  marri?ge  of  the  clergy :  foj. 
 *tis  plain,  that  Jehofjjubeath,  who  fccur'd  the  perfoii  of  her  royal 
 nephew,  was  the  wife  of  Jchoiadi  the  priefi,    a  Chron.  xxii,  1 1. 
 
 (a)  Warmingt.  moder-  def.  of  the  oath  of  alleg.  i6ii,  p.  13. 
 {b)z  Kings xi\.  lo.and  iChron.  xxiv.  2,5.  (c)  z  Kingrx'n.zi, 
 and  1  ChroM.  xxiv.  zj.  {d)z  Kings  x\v.  ^.  and  i  Chroa.xxv.  3, 
 (e)  I  KhgsxiY.  19.  and  iChron.xxv,  zj. 
 
198     The  Short  History  of' 
 
 ziab,  (or  Azar'iahy    as  he  is  ellewhere  Gall'dJ  ani 
 made  him  king  in  the  room  of  hh  father  (a)  Amaziah. 
 Here   our    impartial  fcripttire-politician     (who 
 catches  at  every  occafion  to  dilparage  the  right 
 of  proximity  of  bloody  triumphs  at  the  expreffion 
 of  the  people* s  making  Azariah  king^  &c.  '  It  is  here 
 '  very  plain,   (Jays  he)  that  it  was  not  any  inde- 
 *  feafible  right  of  primogeniture,  but  the  unani- 
 <  mous  choice  or  recognition  of  the  people,  that 
 '  made  him  {b)  King  *.    For  which,  neverthelefs, 
 he  has  no  other  warrant,  but  the  vulgar  phrafe  in 
 our  translation  :    and  that  is  not  to  be  underftood 
 of  the  people's  giving  a  right  of  government  to 
 the  king  ;  but  only  that  they  put  him  in  a6bual 
 poffeflion  of  the  regal  power,  to  whom  it  belong'd 
 by  right  of  primogeniture  (as  I  have  obferv'd  {c) 
 above,)  and  paid  their  homage  and  allegiance  to 
 him  accordingly.      But  I  wonder,   that  this  zea- 
 lous afierter  of  the  power  of  the  people  did  not 
 here  alfo  take  notice  of  a  confiderable  ftretch  of 
 it,  which  ^tho'  not  exprefs'd  in  the  facred  tcxt^  ap- 
 pears by  the  chronology.    For,  by  comparifon  of 
 the  places  here  cited,  we  may  find,  that  AmaziaFs 
 murder  happen'd  j^//ff «  years  after  the  death  ofje- 
 hoafh,  fon  of  Jehoahaz  King  of  (d)  Ifrael  i  which 
 Jehoafh  was  fucceeded  by  Jeroboam  h.is(/)fon:  fo 
 that  Uzziah,    of  right,  became  King  of  Judah 
 fifteen  years  after  this  Jeroboam*^  acceflion  to  the 
 
 throne 
 
 {ft)  i'  ^'fig"  ^iy*  2.T.  and  z  Cfjrtn.  xxm'u  t.  (i)  JVhifi. 
 fcript.  polit.  p.  4$.  (f)  Page  197.  (d)  z  Khip  xivl  1 7 .  ind 
 z  ChfM.  XXV.  2y.        (e)  a  Kings  xiii.  1 3,——  xiv.  16. 
 
the  Regal  Succession.    199 
 
 throne  of  Ifrael  \  whereas,  in  faft^  we  are  told, 
 that  he  did  not  hegm  to  reign  till  the  twenty  and  fe- 
 ventb  year  of  (a  )  ]erohod.m  -,  from  whence  we  may- 
 perceive,  that  the  right  heir  of  Judab  was  kept 
 out  of  his  throne  about  twelve  years.  Puring 
 which  time,  fome  people  are  pleas'd  to  tell  us, 
 that  '  the  Hates  of  Judab  (their  King  being  de- 
 '  ftroy'd)  feiz'd  the  government,  and  turned  them- 
 '  felvesintoa  (h)  commonwealth  ':  but  indeed  the 
 Holy  Ghoft  has  not  given  us  any  light  into  that 
 dark  tranfaflion,  neither  can  I  any  where  difco- 
 ver  any  body  of  people  among  the  JeivSy  veiled 
 with  fuch  authority,  as  to  enable  them  to  take 
 upon  themfelves  the  exercife  of  the  fupreme  pov/er ; 
 and  much  lefs  in  difinherifon  of  their  rightful 
 King.  Befides,  tho'  Ainaziah  himfelf  was  de- 
 ftroy'd,  yet  his  throne  could  not  be  vacant :  for 
 he  left  a  fon,  this  Uzziab,  tho'  a  tender  infant, 
 in  whofe  name  at  lead,  and  by  whofe  authority, 
 the  foveraignty  ought  to  have  been  adminifter'd 
 from  the  time  of  his  father's  death,  without  any 
 interregnum ;  which  is  inconfiftent  with  the  being 
 of  an  hereditary  kingdom.  '  However,  it  is  not 
 '  improbable,  that  thofe  €onfpirators,  who  flew 
 
 *  his  father,  might  (according  to  the  ufual  poli- 
 '  cy  ot  traytorsj  feek  to  fecure  themfelves  from 
 '  the  punifhment  due  for  their  offence,  by  their 
 
 *  voluntary  incurment  of  a  more  criminous  guilt: 
 
 *  only  thus  much  I  am  affur'd  of,  that  if  this  were 
 
 '  the 
 
 {»)  2.  Kings  XV.  I .    (b)  Dr.  Frm.  Carfmllh  afi",  ferm .  at  Abhr^tofif 
 6  Aug.  1689,  p.  4. 
 
loo     The  Short  History  of 
 
 *  the  firft  inftitution  of  a  polarch^  {as  this  author 
 '  here  fee ms  to  think  it  was,)  the  devil  was  the  au- 
 
 *  thor  of  it ;  for  the  foundation  of  it  was  laid  in 
 '  rebellion,  murder,  ufurpation,  which  were  never 
 *■  any  of  God's  {a)  works  '.  And  'tis  plain  from 
 the  text,  that  whoever  the  inflruments  were  in  that 
 ufurpation,  the  people  did  at  length  recover 
 their  liberty,  when  their  rightful  foveraign  was 
 rcftoj  'd  to  his  throne  ;  as  ours  here  in  England 
 alfo  did,  after  another  of  the  fame  length  of 
 time. 
 
 Before  I  proceed  to  the  next  cafe,  I  mufl  flop 
 to  confider  the  force  of  their  arguments,  who  would 
 make  this  Uzziah's  cafe  as  precedent  for  the  Pope 
 or  people's  right  to  depofe  their  Kings.  'Tis 
 true,  he  v/as  an  undoubted  lawful  King  :  and  the 
 fcripture  informs  us,    that  when  he  zvent  into  the 
 
 temple  of  the  Lord  to  burn  incenfe the  priefts  ivith. 
 
 flood  him,  faying.  It  appertaineth  not  unto  thee^ 
 Uzziah,  to  hum  incenfe  unto  the  Lord,  hut  to  the 
 priejls,  the  fons  of  Aaron,  that  are  confecrated  to  hum 
 incenfe  \  go  out  of  the  fan5luary,  for  thou  haft  tref- 
 pafs'd,  neither fhall  it  he  for  thine  honour  unto  the  Lord 
 (b  God,  But,  if  we  confider,  that  the  regal  and 
 facerdoral  powers  were  diftind;  and  independent  on 
 each  other  ,  and  that  King  Uzz,icih'%  invading 
 and  intruding  himfelf  into  the  high-priefl's 
 office,  was  death  by  the  law  of  {c)  God  ;  furely 
 we  fliall  find  reafon  to  think,  that  the  behaviour 
 
 of 
 
 (a)  Dr.  Mich,  Hudfin  of  governm,  1 64,7,  p.  90.     (b)  x  Cbron. 
 xxvi.  it,  8cc.      {()  ET^od,x\x.  7.  and  Hhmi.  xviii,  7. 
 
the  Regal  Succession.   2.01 
 
 of  the  priefts  was  very  dutiful,  to  expoftulatewith 
 liim  (as  they  didj  concerning  his  great  offence, 
 ind  the  danger  of  it,  in  order  only  to  prevent  their 
 foveraign  from  committing  a  deadly  fin  :  for  they 
 did  not  prcfume  to  offer  him  any  violence,  but 
 left  him  to  the  chaftifement  of  God  Almighty 
 [whom  they  knew  to  be,  as  we  alfo  do  every  day 
 icknowledge  him,  the  onl'j  Ruler  of  princes)  who 
 :hereupon  punifli'd  his  prefumption  with  the  plague 
 ■:>f  leprofj.  Then  indeed,  yjt  rtzd  t\\2it  the^j  thruft 
 him  out :  but  we  are  told,  at  the  fame  time,  that 
 himfelf  hajled  alfo  to  go  out,  hecaufe  the  Lord  had 
 "fnitten  hijn  ;  which  plainly  fhews,  that  there  was, 
 £ven  then,  no  violence  offer'd  him.  He  had  in- 
 :urr'd  the  penalty  of  death  :  but  as  there  was  no 
 luman  tribunal  to  authorize  the  execution  of  it 
 jpon  their  king  ;  therefore  Almighty  God,  the 
 King  of  Kings,  took  him  into  his  own  hands,  and 
 humbled  his  proud  heart,  which  was  thus  lifted  up 
 to  his  deJlruBion,  by  that  loathfome  difeafe  under 
 ivhich  he  died.  And  yet  we  are  told  with  fome 
 ifTurance,  that  Uzziah,  '  between  being  thruft 
 '  or  affrighted  out  of  his  kingdom,  run  away,  and 
 
 '  left  it  j and  that  hereupon  the  dates  o{Judah 
 
 '  convened,  and,  their  King  having  thus  left  them, 
 '  for  the  prefent  junfbure  they  fet  Jotham,  the 
 '  King's  fon,  over  the  King's  houfe,  to  adminifter 
 
 '  the  government, and  finding  him  an  excel- 
 
 '  lent  prince,  in  a  fhort  time  after,  they  advanc'd 
 
 '  him   to  the  throne,   during  the  life  of  his  (a') 
 
 '  father  '.      Thus   can  men   of  quick  invention 
 
 D  d  make 
 
 (4)  Dr.  Qnurj-K.  as  before,  p.  ^, 
 
aox    r/j^  Short  History^ 
 
 make  even  the  word  of  God  itfclf,  like  a  nofe  of 
 wax,  to  fuit  any  mafk  they  think  fit  to  put  on, 
 according  to  their  own  fancy  and  difpofirjon !  But 
 tho*  fuch  open  perverfion  of  the  holy  fcripture  is 
 \inpardonable  in  any  one,  it  is  ftill  more  abomi- 
 nable in  clergymen,  (who  are  folemnly  fet  apart 
 to  be  faithful  difpenfers  of  the  word  of  God,  in  the 
 name  of  the  holy  trinity!)  and  efpecially  from 
 the  pulpit,  thus  to  blafpheme .     For,  in  the  cafe 
 before  us,  there  is  no  colour  of  fcripture  for  fuch 
 a  fuppos'd  abdication  of  the  kingdom,  or  conven- 
 tion of  the  ftates,  muchlefs  of  depofing  the  king, 
 as  this  author  fuggelis  •,  but  quite  the  contrary  : 
 For,  being  a  leper  unto  the  day  of  his  death,  he  was 
 thereby  incapable  of  any  bufmefs,  and  obliged  to 
 dwell  (a)  alone  *,    and  therefore,  Jotham    his  fin 
 was  over  the  Kin^s  boufe,  judging  the  people  of  the 
 {b)  land,  tho'  not  as  King,  but  as  the  King's  vice- 
 gerent only,  during  his  father's  life.     Which,  by 
 the  way,  affords  us  a  very  good  remark,  what  is 
 to  be  done,  in  cafe  of  a  King's  being  a  lunatick,  an 
 idiot,  or  under  any  other  perfonal  incapacity  to 
 anfwer   the   ends  of  government :  viz.   that  the 
 next  in  blood,  that  is  capable,  ought  to  govern  ; 
 tho'  not  in  his  own  name,  but  in  the  name  of  the 
 King,  and  by  his  authority  ;  zsyotha?n did,  during 
 his  father's  leprofy,  without  affecting  to  take  up- 
 on himfelf  the  title  of  King. 
 
 §  XLVIII.  But 
 
 (a)  Livit,  xiii.4.6.         b)   a  Ckr9ft.  xxvi.  ii. 
 
the  Regal  Succession.    103 
 
 §  XLVIII.  But,   after  the   na-     jotham, 
 
 tural  death  of  Uzziah,  and  not  be-     ^J^^^*, . . 
 r  1     1         cv     7  /       7 .       Hczekiah, 
 
 lore,  we  read  that  Jotham^  (a)  bis    ManafTeh, 
 
 fon,  reigned  in  hisjlead.    And  he  was     ^°^oo- 
 
 fucceeded  by  Ahaz,  {b;  hisfon  and  heir:  and  he  by 
 
 Hezekiah,  (c)  bis  fon  and  heir  :  and  he  by  Manajfeb-, 
 
 id)  bis  fon  and  heir  :  and  he  h"^  Anion ^  (e)  bis  fon 
 
 and  heir.    Againft  whofe  refpedive  fuccefllons,  in 
 
 virtue   of  their  hereditary  right,  I   find  no  ob- 
 
 jedlion  attempted  to  be  made,  except  that  of  Mr. 
 
 IVbiJlon^Sy  concerning  their  motber's  (f  )  name  fbe- 
 
 forc  fufficiently  expos'dj ;  under  colour  whereof 
 
 alone,  he  has  ventur'd  to  difparagcmoft  of  them, 
 
 contrary  to    fcripture,  reafon,  and  (for  ought  I 
 
 can  yet  fee)  common  fenfe  !    But  in  the  cafe  of 
 
 Manajjeb^  I  own,  he  makes  a  very  pertinent  and 
 
 u fef ul  obfervation.     For  indeed,   'it  will  here  de- 
 
 '  ferve   our   attention,  that  during    the  time  of 
 
 *  ManaJ[feb\  captivity  at  Bahyiony  the  nation  did 
 
 *  not  (vote  tbe  tbrone  vacant,  andj  fet  up  another 
 '  king  •,  but  owned    him  for  their  King  all  the 
 
 *  while,  notwithftanding  fuch  hisabfence  and  im- 
 '  prifonment  i  and  when  \w.  was  h'cught  again  to 
 '  (g)  Jerufakm^  he  thereby  was  brought  again 
 '  {that  is  reJlor\i)  to  bis  kingdom  alfo,  without  any 
 ^  new  difficulty  (b') '.     To  which  I  fhall  take  leave 
 
 D  d  2  to 
 
 {n)  I  Kings  XV.   7.  and  z  Chron.  xxvi.  2.3;  (b)  i  Khigs  xv^ 
 
 38.  and  z  Chron.  ixvii.  9.         {«)  2  Kings  xvi.  zo.  and  z  Chron. 
 xxviii,  17.         {d)  iiyf«^jxx,  21.  and  zC^row.  xxxii.  ^j.        (e) 
 2-  JCr;7^i  xxi.  18.  and  1  C^ro«,  xxxiii.  zo.         {f)  PFhift.  fcript 
 polit.  p.45,46.        C^)  i  C(^ro«,  xxxiii.  1 3 .        (^) Script,  polit 
 p.  46. 
 
2.04    The  Short  History  of 
 
 to  add  another  to  the  fame  purpofe  :  and  that  is, 
 that,  after  Nehuchadnezzar^s  having  been  in  a  (late 
 of  madnefs  (or,  as  it  is  call'd  in  the  fcripture, 
 driven  from  jnen,  to  dwell  with  the  beajls  of  the  field) 
 for  feven  years  ;  no  fooner  did  his  reafon  return  to 
 him,  but  his  coiinfellors  and  his  lords  fought  unto 
 him,  and  he  was  efahlijhed  in  (that  is,  reftor'd  to) 
 his  (a)  kingdotn  ;  the  hne  of  fuccefiion  having  not 
 been  broke,  nor  the  people  difcharg'd  from  their 
 allegiance  on  that  account.  And  it  is  farther 
 remarkable,  that  the  Lord,  in  whofe  hand  the 
 hearts  of  Kings  are,  and,  who  turneth  them  whither- 
 Joever  he  (b)  will,  was  pleas'd  to  change  both 
 thefe  princes,  from  wicked  and  cruel  ones,  to 
 become  truly  penitent   and  gracious. 
 
 But  I  muft  alfo  obferve,  that  thele  two  cafes 
 do  flatly  contradi<5l  another  remark  of  our  fcrip- 
 ture politician,  where,  fpeaking  of  the  duty  offub- 
 jefts  to  their  foveraigns,  he  accounts  them  bound 
 to    '  bear  patiently  the  hardfhips  they  endure  un- 
 
 *  der  their  lawful  Kings,    till  it  pleafes  God,  by 
 
 *  their  death,  or  otherwifc,  to  deliver  them  from 
 '  oppreflion  under  them.  I  fay,  by  their  death  or 
 '  otherwife  '  fa^,s  he    :  for   v/e  may  obferve,  that 
 
 *  any  other  method  of  providence,  which  removes 
 
 *  fuch  a  tyrant  or  oppreffor  from  the  government 
 
 *  over  us,  does  alfo  deliver  us  from  our  obligation 
 
 *  to  obedience  to  him  ;  there  being,  in  all  the  bi- 
 
 *  ble,  I  think,  no  obedience  ever  required  to  any 
 ^  other  prince  or  power,  than  that  w-hich  adually 
 
 *  has 
 
 {a]  Dam.  iv.  3a,  36,         {6)  Frov,  xxi,  I, 
 
the  Regal  Succession.     105" 
 
 *  has  dominion  over  men  U)  '•  And  fo  fays  ano- 
 ther, that  *  our  allegiance  was  no  longer  obliga- 
 '  tory,  than  whilfl:  the  throne  was  filled  by  the 
 
 *  perfon  it  was  due  Q?)  to  '  :  both  which,  with 
 other's  of  the  like  ftrain^  are  fetexaftly  to  the  tune 
 of  Anth.  AJhcam^  and  almofl:  in  the  very  fame 
 words  ;  who  boldly  affirm'd,  that  '  we  are  bound 
 
 *  to  own  princes,  folong  as  it  pleafes  God  to  give 
 '  them  the  power  to  command  us  :  and  when  we 
 '  fee  others  pofleft  of  their  powers,  we  may  then 
 «  fay,  that  the  King  of  Kings  hath  chang'd  our 
 '  frjvice-roys'  \  meaning  that  Oliver  was  then  to 
 be  God's  vicegerent,  and  not  King  Charles  \  But 
 here,  I  would  inquire  of  Mr.  Whifton^  whether 
 he  does  not  look  upon  Manajfeh  and  Nebuchad- 
 nezzar to  have  been  otherwife  removedh^  providence, 
 from  the  government  over  their  rcfpec5live  fubje6ts 
 before  they  were  finally  removed  by  death?  And, 
 if  fo,  whether,  during  fuch  other  removal,  their 
 fubjeds  were  delivered  from  their  obligation  of  ohe. 
 dience  to  them?  And  whether,  upon  fuch  fuppofed 
 deliverance,  any  other  obje6l  of  allegiance,  was 
 apply'd  unto,  and  plac'd  in  the  vacant  throne  ? 
 Sure  I  am,  the  learned  Dr.  Sherlock  was  once  very 
 pofitive,  that  tho'  the  tree  was  cut  down,  yet  while 
 the  jlump  of  the  roots  was  left  in  the  earth,  the  king- 
 dom fhould  be  fiire  to  the  natural  prince;  as  he 
 plainly  prov'd  from  the  {d)  bible:  yea,  and  Mr. 
 
 Whifion 
 
 («)  Script,  pol.  p,  '58.  [h)  N-Marf],  def.  of  conftit.  p.  il  i. 
 
 (c)  Afhc.  feaf.  difc.  (to  reconcile  men  to  the  re  volution  in  1648) 
 reprinted  1689,10  4C0,  p.  4X.         {^)  Sh^rt.ak  of  rcllft.  p.  iji- 
 
lo6    The  Short  History  0/ 
 
 Whijlon  himfelf  has  own'd  as  much,  in  the  cafe 
 of  Manajjeh  before  cited. 
 
 lofiah  ^  XLIX.  A  M  o  N  having  fucceeded  his  fa- 
 ther Manajfch,  as  aforefaid,  did  not  enjoy  his 
 throne  above  two  'jears^  before  certain  of  his  trayte- 
 rousfervants  confpir^d  againjl  hifn,  and  Jlew  him  in 
 his  own  [a)  houje:  and  yet  the  right  of  fuccefllon  was 
 not  thereby  defeated.  For  the  people  of  the  land 
 (vfcW  fenfible  both  of  the  heinoufnefs  of  that  trea- 
 fon  and  regicide,  and  of  their  indifpenfible  duty 
 in  fuch  a  cafe)  Jlew  all  them  that  had  confpired 
 againjl  Kiiig  Amon  ;  and  the  people  of  the  land  made 
 (or  rather  recogniz'd)  Jofiah  his  fon  King  in  his 
 (b)Jlead.  And  he  being  then  but  a  child,  of 
 eight  years  (j:)  old,  his  cafe  affords  us  this  ufeful 
 obfervation,  that  the  people,  even  in  thofe  trouble- 
 fome  times,  never  thought  of  breaking  through 
 the  law  of  God  and  nature,  under  any  pretence 
 of  the  pubhck  good,  but  readily  admitted  the  next 
 natural  heir,  tho'  a  tender  infant,  and  moreover 
 the  fon  of  a  wicked  and  idolatrous  father,  to  his 
 hereditary  throne,  according  to  their  natural  al- 
 legiance. For  which  their  loyalty,  they  were  fuf- 
 £ciently  rewarded  by  God  Almighty  :  who  made 
 that  infant  fuch  a  blefilng  to  his  people,  that  Mi? 
 unto  him  was  there  no  King  before  him,  that  turned 
 to  the  "Lord  with  all  his  heart,  and  with  all  his  foul^ 
 and  with  all  his  might,  according  to  all  the  law  of 
 Mofes,  neither  ajter;  him  arofe  there  any  like  [d)  him  ; 
 
 and 
 
 («)  t  K'tigs  xvi.  1^.  and  r  Chon.  xxxiii.  24.  {h)  i  X'tftgs 
 xxi.  14.  and  z  C^row. XX xiii.  if.  [ej  z  K>Pgi  xxii.  I.  and  z  Chron. 
 xxxiv.  1.        [(i)  -  Kings  xxii'u  if. 
 
Z/;^  Reg  AL  Sue  CESS  I  ON.     107 
 
 and  his  reign  was  prolonged,  for  the  publick  good 
 indeed,  to  one  and  thirty  (a)  yean.  So  that  thefc 
 loyal  Jews  wifely  preferv'd  their  loyalty  and  alle- 
 giance for  the  publick  good  ;  whereas  they  who 
 renounce  their  natural  allegiance,  under  the  colour 
 of  the  publick  good,  very  often  find  themfelves 
 difappointed,  and  inftead  thereof  are  the  caufe  of 
 their  country's  ruin ' 
 
 §  L.  One  inftance  whereof  (tho*  every  reader 
 may  eafily  recoUeft  others)  follows 
 
 '  ■'  ,        Interruption 
 
 immediately  upon  the  death  of  this  ofthefuccejjion 
 good  Jofiah.  For  the  people  of  the  '^■'.  "«^  < 
 land  took  Jehoahaz,  the  [on  0/ Jofiah, 
 and  anointed  him^  and  ?nade  him  King  in  his  father's 
 (b)  jiead:  by  the  comparifon  of  whofe  age,  with 
 that  of  his  brother  (c)  Eliakim^  we  fhall  find  Eli- 
 akim  to  have  been  '  the  elder  brother  to  ^^/jOi^^^z, 
 *  and  conlequently  the  right  heir  to  the  crown  : 
 <  but  he  being  injurioufly  refufed,  the  younger 
 '  was  fet  up  *,  and  it  fucceeded  (ii)  accordingly  *. 
 However,  this  is  the  left  ftrangc,  if  we  confider 
 cither  the  natural  refult  of  popular  conventions 
 (which  generally  begin  in  irregularity,  and  end 
 in  confufion\  or  the  condition  of  their  affairs  at 
 that  time.  For,  as,  in  Jofiah^s  days,  there  were 
 great  wars  betwixt  the  Kings  of  Egypt  ?ind  AJyria^ 
 Cthe  two  conftant  enemies,  and  rival  neighbours 
 of  the  Jews^  fo,  being  in  faft  friendfhip  with  the 
 latter,  he  was  of  courfe  liable  to  be  evil-trcated  by 
 
 the 
 
 {a)  1  k.b;gs  xxii.  i .  and  z  Chron.  xxxiv.  t  .  (h)  z  Khigs  xxiii.  30. 
 and  iChron.  xxxvi.  i.  {c)  z  Kings  xxiii.  3),  ,6  and  i  Chon- 
 xxxvi.  t,  5.       (d)  Mayer  ia  loco. 
 
ao8    The  Short  History^/ 
 
 the  former.  And  of  this  he  was  fo  fenfible,  that 
 no  fooner  did  the  Egyptian  draw  his  fword  againft 
 the  JJJjrian^  than  Jofiab  made  head  againft  him  -, 
 in  which  quarrel  he  was  (a)  flain.  After  whofe 
 death  the  Affyian  being  ftill  their  ally;  they,  for 
 the  publick  good  (as  probably,  in  thofe  circum- 
 ftances,  it  might  appear  to  them)  venturing  to 
 break  through  all  laws  and  rights,  in  a  cafe  of 
 necciTity,  and  forgetting  the  old  maxim,  nihil  uti- 
 le^ nifi  quod  Jit  honcfiiim^  preferr'd  the  younger 
 brother  fwho  was  of  their  fadlion,and  fo  the  more 
 fit  for  their  turn)  before  the  elder.  But,  alas  ! 
 fuch  were  the  miferies,  inftead  of  benefits,  enfuing 
 upon  that  fatal  revolution,  that,  that  very  breach 
 in  the  conftirution,  not  only  adminifler'd  fuifici- 
 cnt  caufe  of  diflentions  among  themfelves,  but 
 alfo  gave  the  Eg-jptian  a  good  handle  for  a  frefh 
 invafion  ;  which  he  taking  hold  of,  depos'd  the 
 iifurper,  and  reflor'd  the  right  heir  to  his  father's 
 throne.  Where  '  it  is  obfervable,  concerning  the 
 '  Ifraelitcs^  that,  when  they  went  about  to  fecure 
 '  themfelves  by  fubtile  devices  and  contrivances 
 '  of  their  own,  making  leagues  and  confedera- 
 '  cies  with  the  King  of  Egypt^  and  other  neigh- 
 '  bour  princes,  fo  often  they  were  foiled  and 
 *  baffled,  and  overcome  by  their  enemies  :  but 
 <  when  they  put  their  truft  in  Gody  and  com- 
 e  mitted  themfelves  to  his  prote6lion,  hepreferv*d 
 «  and  deliver'd  them  from  the  greateft  (b) 
 '  dangers  '.     Thus  here  we  read,   ibat  Fharavoh 
 
 Nechoh 
 
 (a)  2.  Kings  xxiii.  19.  and  2  C^ro».  xxxv.  to,  Scc         (^i)  Sfil- 
 //K^j?. ferm.  Ho-j.  15,  X678,  p.  30, 
 
/Z;^  Regal  Succession.    109 
 
 Nechoh  7nade  Eliakim,  the  [on  of  Jofiah,  Hing^  in 
 in  the  room  0/ Jofiah  his  (a)  father  :  which  is  the 
 more  remarkable,  fin  favour  of  the  primogeniture) 
 becaufe,  tho'  Jehoahaz  had  been  fome  time  in 
 pofTeflion  of  the  throne,  by  the  voice  of  the  peo- 
 ple, yet,  neither  is  there  the  leaft  record  of  any 
 of  his  ads,  nor  even  fo  much  as  the  bare  mention 
 of  him  as  King  ;  but  his  pretended  reign  ftands, 
 as  it  were,  in  a  parenthefis,  and  his  elder  brother, 
 the  King  de  jure,  is  recorded  King  immediately 
 from  their  father's  death. 
 
 Thus  was  the  hereditary  fucceflion  regularly 
 afferted,  and  maintain'd  againft  all  opponents,  in 
 the,  kingdom  of  Judab,  according  to  the  divine 
 right  of  primogeniture :  till  Neluchadnezzary 
 coming  up,  put  the  kingdom  under  a  tribute,  and 
 afterwards,  returning,  carry'd  all  together  into 
 captivity  to  (b)  Babylon. 
 
 'Tis  true  indeed,  it  pleas'd  God  to  reftore  thefe 
 two  loyal  tribes  to  their  own  country  again  :  but 
 as  they  were  ev^en  then  under  a  kind  of  vafla- 
 lage  to  the  neighbouring  potentates,  and  therefore 
 not  capable  of  enjoying  the  rights  of  a  free  and 
 independent  government,  I  fhall  take  no  further 
 notice  of  them  here. 
 
 §    LI.      And      now,       having      gone     Hereditary 
 
 through  the  fuccelTion    of  the    feveral  '^ohmlry 
 
 Kings  of  Judah^  I  beg  leave  to  appeal  ruieoffuc- 
 
 to  every  unprejudic'd  reader,   whether  1^1'^'!qoJ'j 
 
 I  have  not  made  it  clear  to  a  demon-  peopu. 
 
 E  e  ftration, 
 
 (a)  X Kings  xxiii.  54.        {b) M V.  la,  f^e.  aa4  i  Chron. 
 
 xxxvi.  6,  f^c. 
 
aio     The  Short  History  of 
 
 (Iration,  that  the  ordinary  rule  of  fucceeding  to 
 the  throne,  among  God's  people,  was  by  right 
 of  birth,  in  an  hereditary  courfe  of  defcent,  ac- 
 cording to  primogeniture  and  proximity  of  blood, 
 without  regard  to  the  choice  of  the  people,  or  to 
 the  perfonal  virtue,  goodnefs  and  defert  of  the 
 prince :  and  that  whenever  any  interruption  of 
 that  hereditary  right  was  attempted,  it  was  always 
 condemn'd  as  rebellion  and  ufurpation  ;  unlefs 
 where  God  Almighty,  forreafons  bed  known  to 
 himfelf,  thought  fit  to  interpofe  and  exert  his  di- 
 vine prerogative,  not  by  dark  and  doubtful  events, 
 but  by  an  exprefs  revelation,  as  it  is  fhewn  in  the 
 cafe  of  f/z)  Solomon.  I  cannot  therefore  but,  with 
 great  concern,  refledl  upon  the  flrong  prejudices 
 of  fuch  men,  as  confidently  affirm,  that  '  the  in- 
 
 *  defeifiblenefs  of  hereditary  right  is  by  no  means 
 
 *  agreeable  to  the  mind  of  God  in  the  (h')  fcrip- 
 
 '  tares  ! has  not  the  lead  countenance  afforded 
 
 «  it  in  the  word  of  {c)  God  ! where  [they  pre- 
 
 '  tend)  it  appears,  that  God  Almighty  has  ever  been 
 '  very  follicitous,  that  the  feveral  nations  of  the 
 
 *  world  Ihould  be  well  govern'd  j  but  not  fo  that 
 
 *  any  particular  families  Ihould  govern  [d)  them  ' ! 
 i^c.  whereas  the  contrary  is  evident,  in  divers 
 places  of  holy  fcripture»  where  the  crown  of 
 Judah  was  entail'd,  by  God  himfelf,  upon  the 
 particular  family  oi  David,  and  his  heirs  Cby  So- 
 lomon) 
 
 fAl  Pag.  !<;;!.       (h)  Lozels  £ctm.   i^  Not-.  I7I>,  p.  2i.  {e) 
 
 J.  Aicher'i  itrra.  S  A::g.  171^,  p.  1 5.       {d)  pfhiji.  fcript.  polit 
 tieuicac.  p<  iii. 
 
the  Regal  Succession     ill 
 
 lomon)  for  ever^  even  to  him  a?id  to  his  fins,   by  a 
 covenant  of  (a)  fait, 
 
 §  LII.  And,  as  I  have  fhewn,  Ami ^^jjlvt 
 how  fa c red  and  inviolable  the  perfons  t'>mr  \ndif- 
 and  authority  ol  t\\tj ewlftj  Kings  were  \eniihl'Juty. 
 during  the  time  of  that  monarchy,  it  cannot  be 
 impertinent,  briefly  to  confider  what  obligations 
 the  Jews  were  ftill  under,  to  be  fubjedt  to  the 
 lawful  higher  powers  of  that  country  into  which 
 they  were  carry 'd  captive.  '  Now  the  prophet 
 ^  Jeremiah  had    given   an    expreis  command   to 
 
 *  them,  feek  the  ^eace  of  the  citj,  ijohither  I  have 
 «  caufedyou  to  he  carrfd  aivay  captives,  and  pray 
 '  ujito  the  Lord  for  it ;  for  in  the  peace  thereof  Jhall 
 '  ye  have  (b)  peace:  which  made  it  a  neceflary 
 '  duty  to  be  fubje6l  to  thofe  powers,  under  whofe 
 
 *  government  they  liv'd.  And  accordingly  we 
 '  find,  that  Mordecai  difcover'd  the  treafon  oj  Big- 
 '  thana  and  Terefh,  two  of  the  Kin^s  chamberlains^. 
 
 *  the  keepers  of  the  door,  who  fought  to  lay  hand  on 
 
 *  the  King  (c)  Ahafuerus.     And  how  numerous 
 
 *  and  powerful  the  Jews  were  at  this  time,  and 
 '  what  great  difturbance  they  could  have  given 
 '  to  the  empire,  appears  evidently  from  the  book. 
 
 *  of  Ejiher.  King  Ahafuerus,  upon  the  fug- 
 '  geftions  of  Haman,  had  granted  a  decree,  for 
 '  the  deftrudion  of  the  v/hole  people  of  the  Jezvs^ 
 
 E  e  2-  This 
 
 (a)  2  Sam.  vii.  iz,  19.      1  Kings  ii.  4. viii.  2/. xi.  i  7 
 
 34,36,   38, XV.4.  1  Ki^£iyi^i-i9.  I  Chron.xvi'u  17.   tCiroa 
 
 vi.  16. xiii.  4. — xxi.  ?• — xxiii.  5.         [6)  Jerem.   xxix.  7. 
 
 N,  B.  Thofe  were  the  righttul  higher  powers  in  that  country, 
 (fj  ^Jlh.  vi.  i. 
 
a  1 X     The  Short  History  of 
 
 «  ——This  decree  could  never  be  revers*d  again  : 
 
 *  —'and  therefore,  when  EJlher  had  found  favour 
 
 *  with  the  King,  all  that  could  be  done  for  the 
 
 *  Jews  was  to  grant  another  decree  for  them  to 
 
 *  defend  themfelves  -,  which  accordingly  was  done, 
 
 *  and  the  efFe(5l  of  it  was  this,  that  the  Jews  that 
 
 '  were  in  Shuihan Jlew  three  hundred  men  ; 
 
 '  hut  the  other  Jews  that  were  in  the  Kin^s  provinces 
 '  ""—Jlew  of  their  foes  fevent'j  and  five  tkoufand^ 
 <  and  had  reft  from  their  (a)  enemies.  Without  this 
 «  decree,  Mordecai  did  not  think  it  lawful  to  re- 
 
 *  lift,  (which  yet  was  a  cafe  of  as  great  extremi- 
 '  ry  and  barbarous  cruelty  as  could  ever  happen  J 
 '  which  made  him  put  Efther  upon  fo  hazardous 
 
 *  an  attempt,  as  to  venture  into  the  King's  pre- 
 
 *  fence  without  being  call'd  ;  which  was  death  by 
 '  their  law,  unlefs  the  King  fhould  gracioufly  hold 
 
 *  out  the  golden  fee pter  io  ib)  them  :  and  yet,  when 
 
 *  they  had  obtain'd  this  decree,  they  were  able  to 
 defend  themfelves,  and  to  deftroy  their  enemies  j 
 which  is  as  famous  an  example  of  paffive  obe- 
 dience, as  can  be  met  with  in  any  (f)hifl:ory. 
 
 §  LIII.  Having  thus  done  with 
 lentrTh'ffom  ^^e  Kings  o^Judah,  properly  fo  call'd, 
 ihebeirsof  \  muft  defire  my  reader  to  turnback 
 with  me  to  the  fatal  breach,  which 
 was  m.ade  among  the  peculiar  people  of  God,  im- 
 mediately after  the  death  of  Solomon :  when  ten  of 
 the  twelve  tribes,  inftead  of  acknowledging  the 
 
 natural  right  of  Rehohoam^  his  fon  and  heir,  took 
 
 upon 
 
 («)  E/?i^.  ix.  If,  i6,  \7,         {^^- iv.ir.         (f)5kr/.ca{e 
 
 of  refift.  p.  39,  c^c . 
 
the  Regal  Succession,    iix 
 
 :5 
 
 upon  themfelves  the  liberty,  totally  to  withdraw 
 their  allegiance  due  to  him  by  birth,  and  to  fet 
 up  a  government  of  their  own,    under  the  con- 
 dud  of  JdTo^t^^w,  diftintflfrom,  and  independent 
 upon,  the  hon^^o^  Bavid^  as  before  {a)  is  briefly 
 hinted  at.     But  by  the  way,  'tis  very  remarkable, 
 that  even  thefe  revolters  did  not  once  think  of  de- 
 generating fo  far  from  the  common  rule  of  all 
 nations  in  thofe  days,  as  to  change  the  form  of 
 monarchy  into  a   commonwealth,    tho'  they  did 
 prefume  to   fet  up  an  idol  of  their  own,  with  the 
 full  power  and  title  of  King  of  Ifrael:  and  it  will 
 not  feem  flrange  to  any  fenfible  psrfon,'  that  in  a 
 government  fo  founded,  he  will   meet  with  little 
 or  nothing   but  tumult,  refillance,  murder,  and 
 ufurpation. 
 
 §  LJV.  'Tis  true,  there  is  a  co-    The  grounds  of 
 lour  of  a  divine  right  in  the  eftablifh-    '^"^  revolution 
 
 ^  examm'd. 
 
 ment  thereof,      ror   we   read,  that 
 
 v^litn  the  Lord  was  angr'j  with  Solomon,   lecaufe 
 
 his  heart  was  turned from  that  which  the  Lord 
 
 commanded,  he  faid  unto  him,  /  will  fur  el'^j  rend 
 the  kingdotn  from  thee,  and  will  give  it  to  thy  fer- 
 vant ;  —  howheit  I  will  not  rend  away  all  the  king- 
 dom, hut  ,will  give  one  (b)  tribe  to  thy  fon,for'Di~ 
 vid  my  fervanfsfake,  and  for  Jerufalem'j  y^)^<?  which 
 I  have  (c)chofen  :  and  again,  to  Jeroboam  himfelf, 
 by  the  mouth  of  Ahijah  the  prophet,  behold^  I  will 
 rend  the  kingdom  out  of  the  hand  of  Solomon,  and 
 
 will  give  ten  tribes  to  thee^ and  I  will  take 
 
 ihee 
 {*}  ^ag- 179.    {}]  See  this  explain'd,  iopage  179,    ^c)  i  Kings 
 
ai4    The  Short  History  <?/ 
 
 thee^  and  thou  /Jjalt  reign  according  to  all  that  thy 
 foul  deftreth,  and  Jhah  be  King  over  Jfrael  (a)^  &c. 
 which  Mr.  IVhiJlon  Cwithout  confidering  the  cir- 
 cumftances  of  the  cafe)  ventures  to  call  his  (h) 
 commtjfion  from  God ;  andupon  which  grounds  alone, 
 a  certain  preacher,  as  raflily  affirms,  that  Jero- 
 
 *  hoam  had  more  of  a  divine  right  to  the  govern- 
 «  ment  than  Saul  {c)  had  '.  Yet,  neverthelefs, 
 upon  better  examination,  thefe  authors  may  dif- 
 cover,  that  Jerohoam  never  had  a  commijfion  for 
 what  he  did ;  and  that  his  advancement  to  the 
 throne  was  far  fhort  of  a  divine  right.     For, 
 
 Firfl^  The  words  here  cited  do  not  convey  any 
 authority  at  all,  but  are  only  a  prophetical  decla- 
 ration of  what  fhould  happen  to  the  houfe  of 
 Solomon  for  his  fins ;  fo  that  they  no  way  concern 
 that  aftion,  but  only  the  event :  *  and  precedent 
 '  predidions  of  future  events  are  fo  far  from 
 '  carrying  the  nature  of  precepts,  to  warrant  the 
 '  adtions  of  thofe  perfons  whom  God  in  his  pro- 
 
 *  vidence  permits  to  be  inftruments  of  bringing 
 '  thofe  events  to  pafs,  that  fometimes  they  feem 
 
 *  rather  to  put  on  the  condition  of  caveats  to 
 
 *  give  them  warning,  that  they  prefumc  not  to 
 '  interpofe  themfelves  as  God's  coadjutors,  in  his 
 
 *  own  undertakings,  unlefs  they  have  their  com- 
 
 *  mifTion  from  him,  which  when  they  do,  it  com- 
 '  monly  fucceeds  with  them  {d)  accordingly  '. 
 Secondly^  We  do  not  find,  that  the  prophet,  who 
 
 de- 
 
 (n)  I  Kings  xi.  31,  ^c.  (6)  Whsfi.  fcript.  polit.  p.  31. 
 ic)  T.  Bradbury's  ferm.  fNov.  1 7  1 1 ,  p.  I  a.  [i)  Chr,  Hstrvey's 
 fight  rebel,  1 66 1,  p.  83,84. 
 
the  Regal  Succession.    xi5' 
 
 deliver'd   this   melTage   to  Jeroboam,   did  either 
 then  or  at  any  other  time  anoint  him,  as  (a)  Saul, 
 ib)  David,  and  others  were,  when  ihey  werede- 
 fign'd   to    the  regal  charadler  ;  nor  did  he  give 
 him  a  commifTion,    or   any    other   evidence,  or 
 token   of  God's  aftually    making  him  a  King. 
 'Thirdly,  Thispromile  (if  fuch  it  may  beefteem'd) 
 to  'Jeroboam,  was  at  bed  but  conditional,  if  thou 
 iDilt  hearken  unto  all  that  I  command  thee,  and  wilt 
 walk  in  my  ways,  and  do  that  is  right  in  my  fight^ 
 to  keep  my  flatutes  and  my  commandments,  as  David 
 my  fervant  (c)   did :   which  condition  none  ever 
 took  lefs  care  to  perform  than  he  did  on  his  part; 
 fo  that  he  could  not  found  any  divine  right  upon 
 fuch  conditional  exprefllons,  whatever  they  were. 
 But  Fourthly,   the  words,  in  a  fair  conflru<5tion, 
 cannot   be  extended  any  further  than  to  a  bare 
 permiflion,  or  the  giving  way  to  Jeroboam's  af- 
 piring  ambition,  in  order  to  make  ufe  of  him  as 
 the  inftrument  to  execute  God's  decreed  punifh- 
 ment  upon  the  houfe  of  Solomon  ;  as  may  be  un- 
 derftood  by  comparing  them  with  others  of   the 
 like  import  in  the  holy  fcriptures.     For,  as  I  (d) 
 have  intimated,  in   the  cafe  of   Abfalom,   God's 
 meffage  to  David  was,  in  much  the  fame  terms, 
 behold,  I  will  raife  up  evil  againjl  thee  out  of  thine 
 own  houfe,  and  I  will  take  thy  wives  before  thine 
 eyes,  and  give  them  unto  thy  neighbour,  and  he  Jh all 
 lie  with  thy  wives  in  the  fight  of  this  (e)  fun  ;  which 
 was  accordingly  fulfill'd  by  his  own  fon  (/j  Ab- 
 falom : 
 
 [a)  iSnm.x.i.    -{i) xvi.  11,13,     (e)  i  iC/»£j  xi.  3S.     (<«') 
 
 l'agci3i.    (e)  X  Sam.  xii.  11,    (/j— xvi.  ;i. 
 
1 1 6      The  Short  History  d)/' 
 
 falom :  fo  was  the  meflage  to  Jeroboam,  behold  I 
 -i^iil  bring  evil  upon  the  houfe  o/ Jeroboam,  and  will 
 cut  off  from  Jeroboam  him  that.pffeth  againft  the 
 
 wall,  &c. moreover  the  Lordjhall  raife  him 
 
 up  a  King  over  Ifrael,  who  fl:>all  cut  off  the  houfe 
 of  (a  Jeroboam  ;  which  was  exadlly  accomplifli'd 
 by  Baafha,  who  confpired  againjl  his  mafter  Nadah, 
 the  fon  oi  Jeroboam,  and  flew  him,  andfmote  all  the 
 
 houfe  c/ Jeroboam ac  cor  ding  unto  the  fa  fmg  of 
 
 the  (b)  Lord:  and  yet  the  like  mefTage  was  fent 
 afterwards  even  to  Baajha  himfelf,  behold,  I  will 
 take  away  the  fojlerity  (j/'Baalha,  and  the  pofterity 
 of  his  houfe,  and  will  make  thy  houfe  like  the  houfe 
 of  (c)  Jeroboam,  even  for  his  being  like  the  houfe 
 of  Jeroboam,  and  hecaufe  he  kiWd  (c)  him, 
 (meaning  Nadah!)  which  was  alfo  fulfill'd  by 
 Zimri,  who  confpired  againji  his  mafter  Elah,  the 
 fon  of  Baafloa,  and  fmote  him,  and  — —  few  all 
 
 the  houfe  of  Baafha according  to  the  word  of  the 
 
 \^e)  Lord:  all  which  feem  to  have  imported  full 
 as  much  of  a  divine  authority  and  commifllon,as 
 there  was  in  the  cafe  of  Jeroboam ;  and  yet,  he 
 muft  have  an  unwarrantable  afTurance  (like  that 
 of  Calvin,  who,  from  thofe  words  of  the  prophet 
 Nathan  to  David  before-cited,  inferred,  that  th^ 
 incejl  of  Abfalom  {f)  was  the  work  of  God! )  if  any 
 one  fliall  pretend  to  fay,  that  either  Jbfaloin, 
 Baafha,  or  Zimri  had  a  divine  commifllon  to  au- 
 thorize 
 
 {a)  I  IC/.i^r  xiv.  io,&c.     {L) xv.z-r,  &c.       [c)  —  xvi.J. 
 
 (a') vdti  7.        (e) ytsf.  9.        (/)  Calv.  inHit.  l.i.  c.  i  8. 
 
 cued  in  the  efla/  for  a  n^w  traiiflat.  of  the  bible,  I7i7>  edit,  i, 
 p.  iSjl. 
 
the  Regal  Succession    217 
 
 thon'ze  their  refpeftive  adions,  or  that  they  were 
 any  better  than  craytors,  rebels  and  ufurpers. 
 For  Fifthly^  it  has  been  obferv*d  by  very  good 
 criticks,  that  the  tranflations  ot  the  bible  do  »  of- 
 
 *  ten  make  ufe  of  expreflions,  which  bring  in  God 
 
 *  faying,  that  he  will  —  do  adions  which  arc  in- 
 
 *  compatible  with  his  attribute  of  {a)  holinefs*: 
 as  particularly,  in  that  judgment  denounc'd 
 againll  J[)^^;/<:/ ;  where,  inftead  of  rendering  them 
 as  they  are  before-cited,  we  are  told  the  more 
 proper  (and  'tis  certainly  the  lefs  exceptionable^ 
 reading  (hould  be,  /  will  fufFer  an  affli(5i;ion  to 
 rife  againji  thee  out  of  thine  own  houfe,  and  I  will 
 fuffer  thy   wives  to  be  taken,  ^c.  becaufe  *  the 
 
 *  verbs  here  ufed,  fignify  only  apermiflion  of  the 
 
 *  things  fpoken  of,  and  not  an  adion  :  and  the. 
 '  word   which  is  tranflated  evil,  fignifies  an  af- 
 
 *  flidlion,  or  misfortune,  here  and  in  many  other 
 '  places  of  (^j  fcripturc*  ;  of  which  they  give  us 
 a  great  many  clear  and  unqueftionable  examples  : 
 agreeably  to  which  if  we  underftand  the  cafe  of 
 Jerohoam,  fas  *tis  plain  we  mud  that  of  Abfalom 
 and  others  before-mention*d,)  it  will  eafily  make 
 it  appear,  that  there  was  no  more  authority  for 
 this  revolution  under  Jeroboam,  than  there  was 
 for  any  of  the  reft.  But,  be  that  as  it  will,  'tis 
 certain.  Sixthly,  that  Jeroboam  himfelf,  and  thofe 
 vain  men  the  children  of  (c)  Belial,  his  adherents, 
 had  no  regard  to  the  divine  predidlion,  or  pro- 
 mife  Cwhatever  it  was,j  nor  to  the  will  of  the 
 
 F  f  Lord, 
 
 (a)  Eflay  for  a  new  trsnflat.  of  the  bible,  p.  ii<,      (i)  Ibid. 
 p.  U8.      {c)  X  Chrtn,  %\\u  7. 
 
ZI 8     The  Short  History  of 
 
 Lord,  but  only  to  their  own  mutinous  will  and 
 '  ambitious  defires,  neither  had  they  patience  to 
 wait  fas  I  have  fliewn  (a)  David  did,)  till  it  ihould 
 pleafe  God  both  to  give  them  a  commifllon,  and 
 to  open  a  way  for  the  regular  execution  of  it :  but 
 the  people,  without  any  direftions  from  God,  fent 
 and  called  (b)  Jeroboam  out  of  Egypt,  and  of 
 their  own  heads  made  him  King  over  all  (c)  Ifrael  > 
 and  therefore  is  their  a6bion  difclaim'd  as  an  ufur- 
 pation,  and  they  are  condemn'd  by  the  Lord,  for 
 having/<f/  up  Kings  hut  not  by  him,  made  princes  and 
 he  knew  it(d)  not  !  yea,  they  are  branded  by  the 
 Holy  Ghoft  with  this  odious  charadler,  that  fo 
 Ifrael  rebelled  againji  the  houfe  of  David  unto  this 
 (e)  day ;  and  thus  the  voice  of  the  people  is  prov'd 
 not  to  have  been  the  voice  of  God,  but  this  revo- 
 lution prov'd  a  rebellion,  and  confequently  no^ 
 to  be  drawn  into  a  precedent :  for  fas  it  is  wcP 
 obferv'd)  *  where  men  have,  without  a  commif- 
 '  fion,  executed  even  the  unalterable  will  of  God, 
 
 *  they  have  not  been  juftify'd  in  fo  (f)  doing  '  ; 
 and  particularly  in  the  cafe  before  us,  '  tho'  God, 
 
 *  in  his  wife  and  jufl  providence, did  over* 
 
 *  rule  tijis  man's  ambition,  to  bring  his  own  de- 
 
 *  figns  to  pafs,  in  the  punifhing  of  Ifrael,  by  the 
 '  rent  of  ten    tribes  from  the  reft,  yet  this  was 
 
 *  no  more  excufe  to  his  irregular  luft  after  domi- 
 <  nion,  than  the  Jews  might  have  alledg'd,  for 
 
 *  bringing  about  what  God  had  before   decreed 
 
 '  in 
 
 {a]  Pag.  iz*;,  1 16.  [b)  I  Kings   xii.  3.    and  l  ChroH.x.  3. 
 
 U)   I    King!  xii.  ^o.  [d)  Hof.  viii.  4.         (t)  i  Kmgs\\\.  19. 
 
 and  2,  Chran.  x.  ip.  (/)  Dr.  Rye'^  treat,  againft  the  jHonjur* 
 vol.  ii,p.  634.. 
 
the  Regal  Succession.    ^I9 
 
 <  in  the  fufferings  of  his  beloved  fon,  the  faviour 
 
 <  of  the  world  ;  they  neverthelefs,  h^  wicked  {a) 
 
 *  hands  did  crucify  and  Jlay  him  •,   and  fo  might  J^- 
 
 *  rohoam,  neverthelefs,  wickedly  follow  the  temp- 
 
 *  tations  of  his  own  ambition  or  (h)  revenge'. 
 Seventhly^  we  may  obferve,  that  thefe  ten  tribes, 
 which  thus  fet  up  Jeroboam^  were  the  very  fame 
 people  who  had  before  let  up  Abfalom  firft,  and 
 then  Sheba,  even  againft  David,  the  man  after 
 God's  own  heart  j  and  that  too  upon  the  very 
 fame  motives,  and  in  much  the  fame  words: 
 we  have  no  part  in  David,  (T^fJSheba)  neither  have 
 we  inheritance  in  the  fon  of  Jefle  j  ever'^  man  to 
 his  tents,  O  { c)  Ifrael !  and  fo  the  people  under 
 the  conduct  of  Jeroboam  faid,  what  -portion  have 
 we  in  David  ?  neither  have  we  inheritance  in  the  fon 
 of  Jefie  j  to  your  tents,  O  Ifrael  ;  now  fee  to  thine 
 own  houfe^  id)  David  !  And  as  thefe  words  were 
 fpoken  by  a  man  of  (e,  Belial,  in  the  former  cafe,  fo 
 they  who  fpake  them  are  call'd  the  children  of  {f) 
 Belial,  in  the  latter  ;  and  indeed  it  is  hardly  to  be 
 imagin'd,  that5f/z^/ Ihould  didate  the  one,  and 
 God  the  other  ;  much  lefs  that  God  would  write 
 after  Belial,  and  that  too  in  the  fame  words  I  and 
 moreover,as  rebellions  when  repeated  againft  God's 
 vicegerents,  become  thereby  the  more  heinous  re- 
 bellions againft  God  himfelf,  'tis  but  juft  to  fuppofe, 
 that  thefe  tribes  having  thus  rebellioufly  fet  up  Ab- 
 falom,  Sheba  and  J eroboaffi,  were  at  laft  given  up  to 
 
 F  f  2  fall 
 
 (a)  A8$\\.  zi-  {b)  B.  Cornfield's  fcrra.  lo  Fchr,  1684,  p.  12, 
 (r)  2  Sam.  xx.  it  (</}  i  Kings  xii;  16.  and  a  Chron.  x.  16. 
 {e)  z  Sam.  xx.  1.        (/)  2  Chren.  xiii.  7. 
 
aio    The  Short  History  of 
 
 fall  by  their  own  devices.  Eighthly,  if  we  confider 
 the  occafion  that  was  taken  for  this  revolt,  we  fhall 
 find  it  to  have  been  without  any  juft  grounds,  for 
 'tis  plain,  the  Jews,  in  Solomon*s  reign,  had  been  the 
 happieft  people,  in  all  refpe<^s,  of  any  people  in  the 
 world,  if  they  had  but  been  judges  of  their  own 
 true  happinefs  :  and  yet  we  find  thefe  ten  tribes, 
 with  Jeroboam  at  their  head,  complaining  of  great 
 grievances,  which  they  pretended  to  have  borne 
 under  him,  and  peremptorily  demanding  aredrefs 
 atRehohoam*s  hands,  as  the  condition  (forfooth  !) 
 upon  which  they  would  be  content  ftill  to  pay  that 
 allegiance  to  which  they  were  bound  by  the  laws 
 both  of  God  and  nature.  Thy  father  (faid  they) 
 made  our  yoke  grievous:  now  therefore  make  thou 
 the  grievous  fervice  of  thy  father,  and  his  heavy  yoke 
 which  he  put  up07i  us,  lighter,  and  we  will  ferve  (a) 
 
 thee 
 
 (»)  I  Kin^svn   4.   indiChron.  x.  4,    '    When  we  look  inro 
 
 *  hiftorjr,  and  find  this  to  have  been  generally  the  t<:tt  ct  the  moft 
 
 *  mild  and  gracious  prince?,  it  pompts  vs  to  rtficft. upon 
 
 *  theconditionofdepiav'J  human  nature;  ami  toconlidcr,  whether 
 
 *  the  caufc  of  more  rebellions  and  convuUlor.s  of  government  has 
 
 *  arifen  from  the  mal-sdminiflrJtion  of  piince«,  or  from  the  pe- 
 
 *  tulancy  and  unreafonaWenefs  of  the  people?  [Mofes,  David  and 
 Solomon  are  here  inllanc'd;  nonf  of  rchich  could  flfitfe  them  !^ 
 «   After  the  meckeft  and  jallcfi,  the  moft  pious  and  vifto- 
 
 *  rious,  the  moft   peaceable,  richcft,  and  wifeft,  whom   elfc  of 
 
 *  mortal  race  fhoald  we  name!    But  God  did  ones  vouchsafe  to 
 
 *  take  the  government  mto  his  own  hands,  and  to  be  King  him* 
 
 *  ftlf:  ——but  thsy  grew  weary  of  hii  Theacrnfit,  and— —  rc- 
 '  jeftcd  God  too  from  being  :he:r  King !  and  wonld  chufe  for  them- 
 '  felves!  and  of  all  they  chole  not  one  prov'd   good.  On 
 
 *  the  other  hand,  where  they  are  rul'd  with  a  ftrait  rein,  and  even 
 
 *  tyrannicsliy,  tbey   commonly  fpsak  bcft  oi  tbole  princes,  and 
 
 adoro 
 
the  Regal  Succession.    ^^I 
 
 thee  -,  which  a  certain  gifted  preacher  before 
 quoted  prefumes  to  call  a  claim  of  (a)  right  I  But 
 the  impolitick  King  anfwered  the  people  (h)  roughly^ 
 according  to  what  his  prerogative  authorized  him 
 to  have  done,  rather  than  what  was  either  his  in- 
 cereft  or  inclination  to  do :  and  thus  the  caufe  is 
 faid  to  have  been  from  the  (c)  Lord^  inafmuch  as 
 he  had  before  decreed  to  rent  thofe  ten  tribes 
 from  the  houfe  of  Solomon^  to  which  this  infatu- 
 ated prince  unadvifedly  contributed  a  plaufible  oc- 
 cafion  ;  tho*  the  calumny,  tumult,  refiftance,  and 
 other  evil  means  ufed  in  this  revolt,  cannot,  with- 
 out blafphemy,  be  afcrib'd  to  God  as  the  author. 
 *Tis  true,  '  an  extraordinary  concurrence  of  all 
 '  favourable  accidents,  and  particularly  the  dif- 
 '  pofing  of  all  men's  minds  one  way  *,  may  be 
 faid  to  be  the  hordes  doing :  but  then  'tis  own'd 
 
 *  how  dangerous  and  deceitful  an  argument  this 
 '  from  providence  will  ever  feem  to  be  * ;  and 
 therefore,  that  it  is  to  be  touched  with  (d)  caution ! 
 for  *  fince  God  may  order  and  difpofe  what  he 
 
 *  does  not  approve,  and  ufe  the  wickednefs  of  men 
 '  while   he  forbids  it,   the   defign   of  the    firfl 
 
 *  caufe 
 
 *i  adoro  their  memories. K.Charles  I.  courted  the  Fanaticks 
 
 '  eftablifh'd  them  in  ScetlanJ,  indulg'd  them  in  England^  and  even 
 
 *  made  himfelf  a  facrifice  Co  them  i  yet  they  hate  his  memory ! 
 
 *  Q^Elizabeth  profecuted  them  with  the  utmoft  rigor 3  madefe. 
 
 *  vcrc   laws  agsinft  them,  and  put  them  in  full  execution}  (he 
 
 *  reckon'd  them  as  her  word  enemies,  even  worfe  than  the  fe- 
 '  fuiti  themfclves,  and  to  havre   been  inftruraental  in  the  Spanijh 
 
 invafion!  ——and  yet  they  pretend  to  reverence  her  memory  *' 
 C^c.  C^Jfrnndra,  No.  i,  1704,  p.  50,  8cc. 
 
 (4)  r.  Bmdtury's  ferm.  14. Mar.  1708.  (t)  i  Kings  xii.  !}5 
 and  t  ChroM.  x.  13.  (c)  1  Kings  xii,  i/.  and  i.Chr$n»  X,  I  J. 
 {d)  Dr  BHrnff's  ferna,  a 3  Dee.  x688,  p,  9, 
 
ail     The  Short  History  (j/' 
 
 «  caufe  does  not  excufe  the  malignity  of  the  (a) 
 «  jfecond  *.  Ninthly,  J erohoain  himfelf  was  fo  far 
 from  juftifying  himfelf  by  any  pretence  of  God's 
 authority,  that  his  whole  condu6l  fiicws,  that  he 
 durfl:  nottruft  to  the  divine  providence  to  eftablifh 
 him  in  what,  'tis  plain,  he  was  only  permitted  to 
 poflefs  himfelf  of:  yea,  he  was  fo  far  from  in- 
 filling on  a  divine  right  to  that  kingdom,  that 
 he  fairly  owns  Rehoboam  ftill  to  be  thsir  lord  the 
 King,  and  himfelf  no  better  than  a  rebel  and 
 ufurper  •,  as  will  be  prov'd  in  the  enfuing  feftion. 
 But,  Lajily,  to  bring  this  whole  controverfy  to 
 a  Ihort  iflTue  ;  if  Jeroboam  had  no  more  than  a  bare 
 pcrmiffion,  for  what  he  did,  he  can  never  be 
 juftify'd,  much  lefs  ought  he  to  be  imitated  in  his 
 ungrateful  {h)  and  treafonable  revolt  from  the  fon 
 and  heir  of  his  mailer  and  benefadtor :  or,  if 
 thofc  paflages  before  cited  mufl  beconllrued  (Con- 
 trary to  all  rule  and  reafon;  to  fjgnify  an  a6lual 
 and  immediate  conveyance  of  that  kingdom  to 
 him  from  God  Almighty,  then  his  cafe  is,  in  that 
 refped  alfo,  fo  particular,  as  not  to  be  a  proper 
 precedent  in  our  days  -,  becaufe  '  no  man,  fince 
 '  Chriji^s  advent,  ever  had,  or  can  have  the  like 
 <  warranty  in  the  days  of  the  (c)  gofpel  *.  In 
 Ihort  fas  the  author  laft  quoted  faysj  '  we  Chri- 
 
 *  ftians  may   pertinently  urge,  in   this   cafe  of 
 
 *  treafon  and  rebellion,  what  Chrifl:  alledg'd  in 
 
 *  that    of  offences,    woe  to  the  world  becaufe    of 
 '^  offences ;  for  offences  will  come,  but  woe  to  them 
 
 (/i)Dr.  5<j«r//sferm.  on  i  'SCmgi  xiii.  5  j,  54, p.  i.       {b)  i  'Kingi 
 xi.  i8.        {c)  Jenner's ^rexog.  of  primog.  p.  55. 
 
/Z?^  Reg  AL  Succession.    113 
 
 '  h'j  whom  the  offence  (a)  cometh:  fo  here  woe  to 
 '  the  world,  becaufe  of  trealons  and  rebellions; 
 
 *  for  treafons  and  rebellions  will  happen,  as  long 
 
 *  as  youth  are  not  duly  catechized,  and  men  are 
 '  not  better  and  more  loyally   principled  -,  but 
 
 *  woe  to  thofe  men  by  whom  feditions,  treafons, 
 '  and  rebellions  do  come  ;  for  the  divine  Nemefi^ 
 '  will  undoubtedly  purfue  and  overtake  them,  ei- 
 '  ther  in  this  world,  or  in  that  to  C^)  come  *. 
 
 §  LV.  For  the  proof  of  which,    ^,  .     ..    ,, 
 
 ■^  r  J     Jhetr  miJerafAe 
 
 let  us  now  take  a  view  of  the  ftate  ft'^te  defcnb^d 
 of  thefe  ten  tribes  under  thefe  Kings  '"  ^'"''''^^ 
 of  their  own  chufing  ;  that  we  may  judge  how 
 much  their  condition  was  mended  by  the  change. 
 And  here  we  Ihall  find,  that  inftead  of  the  peace, 
 plenty,  honour,  and  all  happinefs  that  is  ufually 
 enjoy'd  by  dutiful  fubjedls  under  a  fucceflion  of 
 hereditary  princes  j  when  the  Kingis  the  fon  of  {c) 
 nohleSy  and  every  fucceeding  heir  can  truly  fay, 
 I  am  the  fon  of  ancient  (d)  Kings  ;  when  he  who 
 afcends  the  throne  as  his  undoubted  right,  '  by 
 
 *  the  appointment  of  God  and  nature,  can  main- 
 '  tain  his  dignity,  without  thofe  bafe  and  ignoble 
 «  arts,  without  thofe  ambitious  fhifts  and  contri- 
 «  vances,  which  are  the  only  fupport  of  thofe  that 
 
 *  have  no  right,  and  as  little  (e)  merit* :  (inftead 
 of  fuch  a  ftate  of  happinefs,  I  fay,  we  fhall 
 find,  that)  whereas  the  grievances  they  had  com- 
 plaint of  in   Solotnon^^  reign,    and  were   more 
 
 afraid 
 
 («)  Zt.Matth.  xvHi.  7.  {b)Jenner\  prcrog,  o^  primog.  p. 
 36,  37.  (c)  Ecclef,  X.  17.  {d)l[Ai.  xix.  il.  (s)  fV.Gii- 
 w^^'s  fcrm.at  Cambr- 14  Mtty,  1660,  p.  17. 
 
114-    The  Short  History  <?/ 
 
 afraid  of  under  his  fon  Rehohoairiy  Vftrc  but  ima- 
 ginary ffor  neither  of  thofe  Kings  appears  in  fcrip- 
 ture  to  have  been  a  tyrant  or  opprcfTorjJ  no 
 fooner  had  they  in  their  worldly  wifdom,  afium'd 
 the  liberty,  finally  to  withdraw  their  due  allegiance, 
 to  their  rightful  foveraign,  and  fet  up  another 
 in  his  throne,  but  they  found  themfelves  every 
 way  miferably  deluded ;  their  ftrength  broken, 
 their  trade  loft,  their  riches  wafted,  their  honour 
 turn'd  into  contempt,  their  peace  into  a  continual 
 ftate  of  war  and  bloodfhcd,  their  religion  into 
 an  abomination,  and  in  ftiort  all  the  happinefsthat 
 men  are  capable  of  in  this  life,  chang'd  into  its 
 quite  contrary,  till  they  became  at  length  a  prey 
 to  their  neighbours  fwho  before  had  been  forc*d 
 to  court  them,)  and  were  buried  in  obfcurity  to 
 the  world*s  end.  And  indeed  it  is  no  wonder, 
 fince,  *  a  general  diffolutenefs  of  manners,  an  im. 
 
 *  pudent  boldnefs  in  the  pradice  of  iniquity,  a 
 '  negled  and  contempt  of  all  the  duties  of  reli- 
 «  gion,  the  loofing  the  joints  of  government  by 
 '  treafons  and  confpiracies,  divided  interefts 
 '  and  difientions  among  the  people,  confufions 
 «  and  divifions  in  the  church,  are  as  infallible 
 '  fymptoms  of  a  dying  ftate,  of  the  diffolution 
 '  of  a  commonwealth,  and  the  funeral  of  a  king- 
 
 *  dom,  as  if  a  flaming  fword  had  hung  over  it, 
 '  or  a  voice  from  heaven  had  revealed  its  doom : 
 
 «  and  how  near  we  ourfelves  refemble  them 
 
 «  (fays  this  learned  author,)  I  leave  you  to  {a") 
 
 *  judge ! 
 
 ^  §LVI. 
 
 (4)  Dr.  Janth  fcrm.  11  Jpr.  J  679,  p.  10. 
 
the  Regal  Successic^n    ai^* 
 
 §  LVI.    But   as  Jeroboam  Mim-    ^nd  in  parti  at- 
 felf  was  the  moft  confiderable  of  all    ^^^^  andhis^^ 
 that  fat   upon  the  throne  of   Ifrael^  fin  Nadab. 
 after  that  revolution,  and   the  perfon  alfo  whofe 
 popularity   was  a  principal  caufe   of  it,    let  us 
 examine  their  condition   a  little  more  particular- 
 ly under  him,  as  it  is  largely  fet  forth  in  the  facred 
 records,  among  the   ads  of  Jeroboain.      In    the 
 very  beginning  of  this  revolt,  we  find  fo  little  of 
 the  fpirit  of  God  accompanying  them,  that  when 
 their    King  Rehohoam   fent   Adoram   (one  of  his 
 principal  officers")  with  a  commiffion  to  expoftu- 
 late  with  them,  in  order  to  prevent  fif  poiTible) 
 the  fatal  confequences,  they  were  fo  far  from  re- 
 collefling  themfelves,  and  returning  to  their  du- 
 ty, that,  without  regard  to  his  perfon  or  commif- 
 fion, zhey  Jioned  him  with  ftones  that  he  (a)  died-, 
 as  if  they  had  been  the  children  of  him  who  was 
 a  murderer  from  the   (h)   beginnings    rather  than 
 children  of  Ifrael ! 
 
 And  no  fooner  was  Jeroboam  in  polTeffion 
 of  the  fupreme  power,  but  his  firll  iliudy  was 
 how  to  fettle  himlelf  in  it,  and  to  prevent  the 
 people  from  recovering  their  fenfes,  and  there- 
 withal their  true  allegiance :  he  knew  right  well 
 that  religion  and  loyalty  are  infeparable  com- 
 panions, and  that  the  true  religion  is  fo  far  from 
 being  a  friend  to  unjud  titles  and  acquifitions, 
 that  it  teaches  the  indifpenfible  neceffity  of  refti- 
 tution  ;  and  therefore,  he  takes  upon  him  to  re- 
 
 G  g  fora^ 
 
 C«)    I   Hjingi  xii.   1 8,  aad   i  CKron.  x.  i8.  (i)  Si.  John 
 
 xviij,  44. 
 
%i6     The  Short  History  of 
 
 form  it  according  to  his  own  mind  His  firltftep 
 was  to  grant  the  people  a  toleration  or  indulgence, 
 fo  that  they  might  no  longer  be  oblig'd  to  that 
 unity  and  uniformity  of  worfliip,  which  God 
 himfelf  had  eftablifh'd,  and  exprefly  requir'd  of 
 them,  in  the  temple  at  (a)  Jerufale??i ;  for  '  the 
 
 *  Lord,  to  prevent  divifions,  had  provided  fo  far 
 '  for  uniformity  in  his  worfhip,  that  he  required  a 
 «  fingle  unity  •,  and  that  it  might  be  but  in  one 
 
 *  manner,  he  list  it  be  but  in  one  (b)  place ' :  but 
 Jeroloam  tells  them,  it  is  too  much  for  you  to  go 
 up  to  (c)  Jerufalem !  However,  becaufe  he  would 
 not  be  fufpefted  of  being  a  man  of  lefs  piety> 
 but  only  would  pafs  for  one  lefs  bigotted  to  the 
 ftriclneis  of  rites  and  ceremonies,  and  more  care- 
 ful of  their  eafe  than  ordinary,  he  took  care  to 
 make  a  fhew  of  religion  (fuch  it  as  was !  )  and  as 
 they  had  provided  themfelves  of  an  idol  for  a 
 King,  fo  he  furnifh'd  them  with  idols  for  their 
 Gods ;  which  he  plac'd  at  proper  diftances,  the  one 
 in  Beth- el,  and  the  other  in  (d)  Dan  ;  fo  that  now 
 they  were  fo  happy  as  to  have  two  conventicles 
 for  one  cathedral,  and  thofe  at  their  own  doors 
 too,  whereas  that  was  more  remote !  And  here, 
 ffaid  he)  behold  thy  Gods,  O  Ifrael,  which  brought 
 thee  up  out  of  the  land  of  (e)  Egypt !  But  would  it 
 not  tempt  us  to  imagine,  that  thefe  peopk  muft 
 have  become  meer  ideots  when  they  became  re- 
 bels, (^the  one  as  a  judgment  upon  them  for  the 
 
 other,) 
 
 U)  ExOiJ.ryCxW.  17.— — xxxiv.  z\.  Dcm.xv'i.  16.  2t\d  z  Chron' 
 jK.  I.  [b)  Dr.  Jllrjlr.  fcrm.  vol.  i,  fol.  a  3 2,.  (c)i  Kings  xii= 
 iS.        (d)  verf.  29.         [e)  i  Ktngsyin.  a8. 
 
//?^  Regal  Succession.    ^^7 
 
 other,)  fince  they  could  be  perfuaded  to  fuch  a 
 ridiculous  worlliip  !  they  knew  thefe  new  Gods  of 
 theirs  were  indeed  but  calves,  tho'  golden  ones !  that 
 they  were  made  by  Jeroboam  himfelf,  or  by  his 
 diredion !  and  that,  when  they  ofFer'd  their  oxen 
 upon  thofe  altars,  '  the  God  and  the  facrifice  were 
 
 *  out  of  the  fame  [a)  herd '  1  And  yet  fo  monftroufly 
 ilupid  were  they,  that  the  people  fthat  is,  the  great 
 multitude)  went  to  worjinp  before (b)  them  !  which 
 confirms  an  obfervation  of  a  learned  divine,  that 
 '  there  is  nothing  fo  abfurd,  but  may  be  obtruded 
 
 *  upon  the  vulgar,  under  the  pretence  (c)  of  re- 
 '  ligion  '. 
 
 'Tis  true,  it  may  be  faid,  they  had  a  prece- 
 dent for  it,  in  the  altar  which  Aaron  fthro'  an 
 inexcufable  weaknefs^  had  been  prevail'd  with, 
 by  the  great  importunity  of  the  mutinous  peo- 
 ple, to  build  before  his  molten  calf  in  the  wilder- 
 nefs :  but,  if  they  had  confider'd,  how  hot  the 
 •zvrath  of  the  Lord  waxed  againjl  the  people  for  that 
 ad:,  and  what  an  atonement  (d)  it  cofl  them,  be- 
 G  g  2  fore 
 
 {a)  Dr.  Smth's  fertn.  1668,  upon  i  Kings  xiii.  33,  34,  p.  39. 
 Where  he  fuppofes  JeroboAm  to  hive'rnade  fach  an  eJi^  as  this; 
 '  I  Jeroboam,  con(AzC\ng  the  great  diftance  ot  ihe  temple,  and  the 
 '  charges  that  poor  people  arc  put  to  in  going  thither,  as  alio  the 
 
 *  in'o'.erabie  burden  of  paying  the  firft-fiuicand  tythes  to  the  prieft 
 
 *  have  confider'd  of  a  way  that  may  be  moreeafy,  andlefs  burthen. 
 '  fome  to  the  people, ssalfotnorc  comfortable  to  the  priefts  them- 
 
 *  felves:  and  therefore  ftridlly  enjoyn,  that  none  henceforth  pre- 
 »  fume  to  repair  to  the  tempk  it  J erufaUfn  ;  efpecially  fince  God 
 '  is  not  tyed  to  any  place  or  form  of  worlhip;  as  alfo  becjufe 
 «  the  devotion  of  men  is  apt  to  be  clogged  by  fuch  ceremonies  *, 
 C^c.  [b)  I  Kingi  Jtii.  30.  and  a  Chron.  xiii.  8.  (;:)  Df^ 
 Sistfh's  ftrm.  as  before,  p.  41.      (d)  Eaod.  xxxii.  and  Daut.  ix, 
 
^^S     The  Short  History  of 
 
 fore  they  could  be  acquitted  of  that  great  fin,  it 
 would  have  been  but  fmall  encouragement  to  an 
 imitation  of  it.  However,  this  fhews  us,  how 
 the  frailties  and  infirmities  of  good  men  are  of- 
 tentimes fought  out,  to  juftify  or  excufe  the  im- 
 pieties and  immoralities  of  wicked  ones  •,  tho'  'tis 
 certain,  that  ten  thoufand  precedents  are  not  fuf- 
 ficient  to  legitimate  one  a6l  which  is  either  un- 
 lawful in  itfelf,  or  exprefly  prohibited  by  the  law 
 of  God;  but  in  aftions  which  are  evil,  the. imi- 
 tation is  commonly  worfe  than  the  example:  for 
 'tis  a  good  rule,  that  *  no  example  of  any  perfon 
 '  whatever  is  to  be  followed,  unlefs  it  be  con- 
 '  formable  to  the  precepts  of  religion:    by  this 
 
 *  rule  we  are  to  judge  of  the  aftions  of  others? 
 «  as  well  as  our  own  \  and  one  reafon,  no  doubt, 
 '  why  the  failings  of  holy  men  are  fo  frequently 
 '  related  in  fcripturc,  is  to  warn  us,  not  to  imi- 
 '  tate  the  bed  of  men  in  all  things,  but  only  in 
 
 *  fuch  as  v/e  are  convinc'd  they  ought  to  have  (^) 
 
 *  done  '. 
 
 But  befidcs,  how  great  a  fin  foever  that  of 
 Aarcn  was  in  itfelf,  yet  fiill  he  being  the  true 
 high-prieft,  the  people's  adhering  to  him  ftho'  in 
 an  errorj  may  be  much  more  eafily  excus'd,  than 
 thofe  in  the  cafe  of  Jeroboam  can  be  juftify 'd  ; 
 becaufc  here  was  notorious  fchifm  added  to  the 
 falfe  worlhip.  For  Jeroboam  did  not  only  fepa- 
 rate  himfelf  and  his  people  from  the  true  worlhip 
 
 of 
 
 {a)  Obligat.  cf  acting  according  to  confc'ence,  (fy>c.    A  farewej 
 
the  Regal  Succession,     tic) 
 
 of  God  in  the  temple,  and  from  the  only  true 
 high-prieft,  but  he  fet  up  a  mock-priefthood 
 againft  the  one,  as  he  had  fet  up  a  mock-worfhip 
 againft  the  other  :  he  jnade  priejls  of  the  lowejl  of 
 the  people,  which  were  not  of  the  fons  of  (a)  Levi, 
 (and  therefore  utterly  incapable  of  that  {h)  office  ;) 
 
 whofoever  would,  he  confecrated  (c^  him  ; . 
 
 yea,  whofoever  came  to  confecrate  himfelf  with  a 
 •joung  bullock  and  feven  rams,  the  fame  might  be  a. 
 (d)  prieft  ;  which  gave  occafion  to  a  celebrated 
 preacher  to  intimate,  that  Jeroboam  was  an  inde^ 
 pendent,  as  Korah  was  a  {e)  presbyterian ! 
 
 All  this  might  poITibly  be  much  applauded  by 
 the  fawning  addrelTers  of  this   impoftor,  as  high 
 proofs  of  his  ?noderation,  and   pious  care  of  his 
 people,  to  prevent  their  being  priefi  ridden  I  and 
 to  eafe  their  tender  confciences  from  impofitions 
 and   ordinances    for    which    they    could    fee   no 
 ground  in  reafonl  But  the  Holy  Ghoft  gives   it 
 the  true  character,  that  it  became  fin  unto  the  houfe 
 of  Jeroboam,  even  to  cut  it  off,  and  to  defray  it 
 from  off  the  face  of  the  (/)  earth :  and,  left  it  fhould 
 be  thought  only  to  relate  to  himfelf  and  his  proper 
 race,  we  find  a  brand  of  indelible  infamy  after- 
 wards faflcn'd  upon  Jeroboam,  that  heftnned,  and 
 
 made  Ifrael  to  {g)ftn !  For  as  '  princes, .  who 
 
 '  being 
 
 {a)  I  Kings  xii.  ?l.  (^)  IxoJ.  xxviii.  and  xxi.v,  Nami'-  n\ 
 Sfid  iv.  and  Dent.  x.  8.—^ — 'and  xxi.  <5.  (c)  i  Kings  x-'l.  ;; 
 (d/  z  Chron.xm.g.         (e)  Miles  Bame's  fcrm.  ic  July,  i6Sj,  -p, 
 
 7.  (f)    1     Kings  xii.   50. xiii.    34. xv.    16,  (g) 
 
 ——XV.   30,   54  xvi    19,  z6. xxii.  j-i.    1  Kings  iii.   j. 
 
 '^ X.  zg,   zi. xiii.  i,  11. xiv.  14, xv.  9,  i  S,  14^ 
 
 l3. xxiii.  15, 
 
ago      The  S  H  O  R  r  H  I  S  T  O  R  Y  <?/ 
 
 *  being  themfelves  vitious, (turning  piety  in- 
 
 *  lo  policy,  and  religion  into  reafon  of  ftatc,J  not 
 
 *  only  infe6t  the  people  by  the  contagion  of  an 
 
 *  impious  example,  but  are  willing  the  people 
 '  fhould  be  as  bad  as  \a)  themfelves':  fo  'tis 
 obvious  to  every  one*s  obfervation,  that  the  ape- 
 like multitude  arc  proud  to  become  like  their 
 leaders,  and  think  it  but  a  due  refpecft  to  the  court- 
 mode,  CO  imitate  them  in  their  follies  and  vices, 
 yea,  even  in  their  moft  deteftable  fins  and  mon- 
 ftrous  deformities  ! 
 
 Thus  Jeroboam  himfelf,  taking  upon  him  to 
 invade  the  prieft's  office,  by  burning  {b)  incenfe, 
 could  not  long  want  others  among  his  party  for- 
 ward enough  to  intrude  themfelves  into  the  fame  : 
 their  King's  countenance  and  encouragement  was 
 more  apt  to  fpur  them  on  to  it,  than  God's  pro- 
 hibitions were  to  flacken  them  :  and  when  they 
 had  got  the  face  of  a  church  (how  monftrous  fo- 
 ever,  j  the  people  readily  came  into  it  ;  nor  were 
 they  difcourag'd  even  when  a  prophet  came  to 
 denounce  God's  judgments  againfl  them,  and 
 prov'd  his  miflion  by  a  (c)  miracle.  And  thus, 
 when  this  falfe  worfhip  was  (et  up,  (tho'  by  a  re- 
 bel and  ufurper)  it  muft  undoubtedly  be  look'd 
 upon  as  the  religion  by  law  eftablifh'd  -,  and  who- 
 ever refus'd  to  join  in  it,  mifreprefented  as  enemies 
 to  their  country !  Whereas,  in  truth,  thofe  who 
 did  join  with  them,  in  fuch  their  feparation  and 
 falfe  worfhip,  did  notonou^y  follow  a  multitude  to 
 
 do 
 
 (a)  Dr.Gaude'tsCcTm.  iB.  Tebr.  1659,  ^.7 a,         (b)  i  Kings 
 
the  Regal  Succession,    xgi 
 
 do  {a)  evil  j  contrary  to  God's  exprefs  command, 
 whereby  we  are  taughc,  that  it  is  not  the  num- 
 ber of  the  parties  or  other  advocates,  but  the 
 truth  and  juftice  of  the  caufe,  that  is  to  be  regard- 
 ed :  for  '  truth  is  the  fam.e,  and  changeth  not, 
 
 <  whether  they    be  few  or  many  that  profefs  it  -, 
 
 *  and  our  religion  (lands  not  in  a  multitude  of 
 '  pretenders,  but  in  a  holy  dodlrine,  and  a  holy 
 
 *  pradlice,  which  all  ought  to  follow,  even  when 
 '  the  mod  do  (b)  not '.  Befidcs,  if  Dr.i?)A  ob- 
 fervation  be  true,  (as  without  doubt  it  is,)  that 
 
 <  when  prayers  and  praifes  are  offer'd  up  to  God 
 
 *  by  a  clergyman,  as  the  mouth  of  the  congre- 
 '  gation,  if  he  be  an  open  heretic  or  fchifmatic, 
 
 '  his  congregation  fin  by  joining  in  commu- 
 
 '  nion  with  him  j   and   when  perfons  fin   in  the 
 
 *  very  a6t  of  offering  up  their  prayers,  the  prayers 
 
 *  . — mud  undoubtedly  be  an  (^c)  abomination': 
 then  doubtlefs  the  facrifices  offer'd  up  by  Jero^ 
 ham^s  mock-priefts,  who  were  not  only  hereticks 
 
 and 
 
 {a)  ExoJ.-x^iu.  z.  (b)  Dr-C/.i^z/'s  anfw.  to  fevcrai  captious 
 queries,  1688,  p.  ic5.  And  the  reader  may  find  divers  other  re- 
 markable proofs  to  the  fame  point,  colledled  from  Tillo'fon,  Stil- 
 Hngfieet,  Blackall,  &c.  in  the  notes  upon  Mafon'sv\niii\czx.  of  the 
 Cb.of  i:«i/.  1728,  fol.  141,  119.  5'c^j  "Ji'.  6ii,  ^f.  (c) 
 Dr.  Rye's  treat,  againft  the  Nonjur.  vol.  J',  p.  216,  217.  who,  n\ 
 an  other  phce^  fpeaks  of  prayers,  thus  '  our  prayers  would  really 
 '  difhonour  God,  if  there  were  a  faifhcod  in  them,  and  vve  knew 
 
 *  it  to  be  a  falftioodj  or  if  we  pray'd  again.^l  p!ain  right,  in  ex. 
 '  prefs  terms,  or  againft  a  prince  whom  we  believed  to  bcilght- 
 
 *  fu!:  for  the  former  prayers  wou'd  fhew,  that  we  thcu^hr   we 
 
 *  could  deceive  God,  and  the  latter  that  vve  thougkt  Gcd  wonid  t'l 
 '  vour  injufticc'!  ibid.  p.  59f»  19^' 
 
a 5  X    The  Short  History  <?/ 
 
 and   fchifmaticks,  but   open  idolaters  too,  muft 
 needs  have  been  an  abomination  to  the  Lord. 
 
 This  the  priefts  of  the  L,ord,  and  the  Levifes, 
 and  all  luch  others  as  fear*d  God,  were  truly  {en- 
 fible  of ;  as  appears  by  their  leaving  their  poflef- 
 fions,  withdrawing  from  the  communion  of  the 
 fchifmaticks,  and  reconciling  themfelves  to  the 
 true  church  and  their  rightful  foveraign.  For  tbs 
 priejls  and  the  Levites,  that  irere  in  all  Ifrael,  re~ 
 forted  to  him  (^ their  King)  out  of  all  their  coajls:  for 
 ths  Levites  left  their   fnhtirhs^  and  their  poffejfwn^ 
 
 dndca?neto  Judah  ^wJ  Jerufalem  :■ and,  after 
 
 ihem,  out  of  all  the  tribes  of  Ifrael,  fuch  as  fet  their 
 hearts  to  feek  the  Lord  God  of  Ifrael  came  to  Jeru- 
 lalem  to  facrifice  unto  the  Lord  God  of  their  fathers  ; 
 fo  they  Jlrength^ned  the  kingdo?n  c/ Judah,  and  made 
 Rehoboam,  the  fon  of  Solomon,  Jlrong:  and  this 
 was  the  reafonj/t?;"  Jeroboam  and  his  fins  had  {hy 
 pretended  flate-ads,  depriv'd  and)  caji  them  off 
 i'ror.i  executing  the priefl^s  oflce  unto  the  Lord,  and  or- 
 dained him  priejfs  for  the  high  places^  and  for  the 
 devils,  and  for  the  calves  zuhich  he  had  (a)  made  ! 
 which  was  a  formal  a6t  of  fchifm,  and  that  *  the 
 *  moil  dangerous  condition  in  the  world ;  for  it 
 '  is  to  be  out  of  the  way  to  heaven,  and  in  the 
 '  high  road  to  {h)  hell  ! 
 
 Thus 
 
 (a)  t  C'.rou.  xt    13,  Sec.  And  how  our  orthodox  bifhops  and 
 ccFj;)"  an.l   rhcir   flocks  asfSed,  under  the  like  tria's,  in  times  of 
 po^riy  at)d  Jcliirm.  may  be  iircn  at  large  in  the  preface  to  thehte 
 cdu!on  o\  AM/3«^  bsfortf-quored,  ful.  xxiv,  Ixix,  ^c.         [b]  Dr 
 R^e'i  trcir.  rigiialt  ihe yijujur.  vol.  i,  p.  i,  ;. 
 
the  Regal  Succession    233 
 
 Thus  fin  is  ufually  feconded  with  fin :  and  as 
 Jeroboam  had  committed  the  fin  of  rebellion  to 
 gratify  his  own  ambition,  his  ungodly  policy  led 
 him  of  courle  to  commit  that  of  fchifm,  in  hopes 
 thereby  the  better  to  fecure  himfelf  in  his  ufur- 
 pation ;  for  '  thofe  fins  of  fchifm  and  rebellion 
 '  are  never  better  defended  than  by  one  (a)  ano- 
 '  ther  *.  And,  as  the  natural  confequence  there- 
 of, his  own  private  views  oblig'd  him  to  pcrfe- 
 cute  the  true  priefts  and  Levites  and  rheir  adhe- 
 rents, as  enemies  to  his  title  and  proceedings  ;  and 
 would  not  fufier  him  to  difcover  any  repentance 
 (if  he  had  ftill  had  the  grace  to  repent,  j  when  a 
 man  of  God  came  out  of  Judah,  exprcfly  to  pro- 
 claim the  'Word  of  the  Lord  againft  him  :  butthg 
 fame  prophane  hand,  with  which  he  was  offering 
 burnt  incenfej  was  prefently  ftrctch'd/^r//^  from  the 
 altar^  ivith  a  direction  to  his  followers  to  la"^  hold 
 on  the  f^)  prophet,  in  order  to  punifh  him  for  his 
 mcflfage,  if  the  Lord,  who  fent  him,  had  not  mira. 
 culoufly  refcued  him  from  the  tyrant,  and  mani- 
 fcfted  the  truth  of  his  own  word.  Then  indeed 
 he  could  fpeak  him  fair,  offering  him  refrefJjment 
 and  a  reward  for  refioring  his  wicher'd  hand:  but 
 fo  little  are  the  Lord's  people  to  have  to  do  with 
 rebels  and  fchifmaticks,  that  he  utterly  refus'd  to 
 accept  of  any  favours  from  him,  and  plainly  told 
 him,  if  thou  wilt  give  me  hMf  thine  houfe^  I  will 
 not  go  in  with  thee^  neither  will  I  eat  bread  nor 
 H  h  drink 
 
 (*)L.  Milb.  legacy  to  the  church,  I7ii>  ^o'-  i.  P-  ->•         (^/ 
 I  Kings  xiii.  i,  8cc. 
 
^34     y/^^SnoRT  History  of 
 
 drink  water  in  this  place -^  for  fo  was  it  charged  me 
 hy  the  word  of  the  {a)  Lord. 
 
 And  that  they  were  no  lefs  difappointed  of  their 
 propofed  happinefs  in  civil  affairs,  than  they  were 
 in  religious,  may  be  fairly  concluded  from  thefe 
 following  obfervations.  Firf,  that  'tis  the  ufual 
 method  of  divine  providence,  in  punilhing  irre- 
 gular princes  or  people, to  make  ufeof  the  greateft 
 tyrants  and  mod  hardnedfinncrs,  to  be  firebrands 
 of  his  wrath,  that  by  means  of  their  cruel  and 
 mercilefs  oppreflion,  his  people  might  the  fooner 
 be  reduced  to  a  fenfe  of  their  duty  :  thus,  he  fuf- 
 fer'd  certain  of  the  very  word  of  the  heathen 
 nations  to  remain  among  them,  in  the  land  of  pro- 
 mife,  as  thorns  in  their  fides,  that  through  them  he 
 might  prove  Ifrael,  whether  they  would  keep  the  way 
 of  the  (b)  Lord;  thus  David,  for  his  fins,  was  pu- 
 nifhed  by  his  mod  unnatural,  ungrateful  and  re- 
 bellious fon  (c)  Ahfalom  ;  thus  the  idolatrous  houfe 
 of  Ahah  was  deftrov'd  and  rooted  out  by  Jehui 
 an  {J)  idolater,  and  Hazael  a  moniier  of  a  (<?) 
 man  ;  and  thus  the  idolatry  of  Soloffwn  was  pu- 
 nifli'd  by  J  er  oho  am,  whofe  idolatrous  wickednefs 
 was  notorious  even  to  a  proverb.  But,  feco7id- 
 Is,  we  may  obferve,  as  before,  what  a  zealous 
 ftickler  he  had  been  for  the  people's  liberty,  and 
 the  rcdrefs  of  grievances,  under  their  natural  fo- 
 veraign,  thereby  the  more  toinfinuate  himfclf  in- 
 to their  favour,  as  a  great  patriot  and  alTcrler  of 
 
 the 
 
 {:i)  I  Kin^s  xiii.  (■,  Sec.         (b)  Jtulg.  ii.  5,  ii.  (c)  Sec 
 
 l^gc   \i:\\  ^c.     {d)  I  Kings  xix.  '15,  g;c.  1  Kings  x.  19.        (t'j 
 
the  Regal  Succession,    i^s 
 
 the  publick  good :  and  yet,  no  fooner  was  his 
 own  turn  ferv'd,  and  the  whole  power  in  his 
 hands,  but  we  find  him  building  {a)  cities,  and 
 places  of  ftrength  to  fortify  himfelf  with  gar- 
 rifons  and  magazines ;  which  could  not  be 
 done  without  heavy  taxes,  and  large  fupplies  of 
 men  and  money  5  and  which  would  not  have  been 
 requir'd,  if  the  whole  kingdom  had  been  united,  as 
 before,  under  its  own  proper  head.     *  Thus  whac- 
 
 <  ever  the  pretences  are,  how  fair  and  popular 
 
 *  foever,  in  the  oppofition  men  make  to  authority, 
 
 *  ambition  and  private  difcontents  are  the  truebe- 
 
 *  ginners  of  them  :  but  thefe  muft   be  covered 
 
 *  over  with  the  deepeft  diffimulation,  with  mod 
 '  vehement  proteftations  to  the  contrary  ;  nothing 
 
 *  muft  be   talked   of,  but  a  mighty  zeal  for  re- 
 
 ,  *  ligion  and  the  publick   intereft  : But,    if 
 
 '  fair  pretences,  and  glorious   titles  will  ferve  to 
 
 <  cheat  the  people    into  their  own   miferies,  and 
 
 *  the  fad  effects  of  rebellion,  they  fhall  never  want 
 
 *  thofe  who  will  enflave  them  for  the  fake  of  li- 
 
 *  berty,  undo  them  for  the  publick  good,  and 
 '  deftroy  them  withdefigns  of  reformation.     For 
 
 *  nothing  is  more   popular  than  rebellion  in  the 
 
 *  beginning,  nothing  lefs  in  the  ifTue  of  it :  and 
 
 *  the  only  true  reafon  that  it  is  ever  fo,  is  from 
 
 <  the  want  of  wifdom  and  judgment  in  the  ge- 
 
 *  nerality   of  mankind,    who  feldom  fee  to  the 
 
 *  end  of  things,  and  hardly  diftinguifli  between 
 
 ^  the  names  and  nature  of  them,  till  their  own 
 
 H  h  2  '  dear^ 
 
 \ 
 
 («)  I   Kings  xii.  a  $0 
 
^^6    The  Short  History  of 
 
 *  dear-bought  experience  hath  taught  them  the 
 «  difference  ia)  '. 
 
 This  was  fully  verify'd  in  the  cafe  now  before 
 us :  for  whatever  fair  fpeeches  and  declarations  Jt- 
 roboam  made  publickly  to  the  people,  he  fa'idin  his 
 ^eart^  now  /hall  the  kingdom  return  to  the  houfe  of 
 David  :  if  this  people  go  up  to  do  facrifice  in  the 
 houfe  of  the  Lord  at  Jerufalem,  thenfJjall  the  heart 
 of  this  people  turn  again  unto  their  Lord,  even  unto 
 Rehoboam,  King  0/ Judah,  and  thejjhall  kill  me^  and 
 go  again  to  Rehoboam,  King  of  (b)  Judah.  Where, 
 by  the  way,  we  may  difcover,  not  only  the  true 
 grounds  of  this  ufurper's  politicks,  but  alfo  how 
 confcious  he  was  of  his  unwarrantable  revolt  ;  fo 
 that  he  could  not  but  in  his  own  heart  acknowledge 
 
 the 
 
 (s)  StiWngfi.  Ccrm.  lojan.  i66S,  p.  14,  M.  *Tis  vrifcly  re- 
 mark'd  by  Sir  fhillp  tVarwick  (in  his  memoirs,  p;  |-i,  fz.)  that 
 when  fl)ip-money  was  laid  upon  the  whole  kingdom,  in  the  reign 
 of  King  Charles  I,  acccording  to  a  folemn  judgment  pronounc'd 
 in  favour  of  it,  the  whole  fum  amounted  not  to  1 0000  /.  a  monthi 
 which  '  fell  very  fhort  of  what  the  future  charges  amounted  un- 
 
 *  to,  in  maintaining  a  rebellion  againft  his  Majefty,  upon  pretence 
 «  of  thefe  grievances: and  they  that  made  this  fo  grievous, 
 
 *  foon   after  thought   it   not  amifs,  becaufe  it  was  to  maintain 
 
 *  their  own  fedition,  to  lay  ten  times  more  upon  every  fubjeft  than 
 
 *  he  paid  before'.  Ibhl.  p.  63,  Another  tells  us  of  the  Dutch, 
 that  '  having  fought  with  the  King  of  Spain  about  two  things, 
 «  religion  and  taxes,  they  have  fo  far  prevailed  in  refpeft  of  both, 
 
 *  that  they  have  gotten  all   the  reiigions  in  Chrijlcndomy  and  pay 
 
 *  the  greatcft  taxes  in  the  world '.  Dr.  Edw.  Telling  %  fcrm.  30 
 y»H.  1681,  p. 2,4.  And,  in  general,  it  is  the  common obfervation 
 of  travellers  abroad,  that  they  feldom  read  liberty  vrit  over  the  gate  i 
 btitentring  the  city,  they  find  flavcry  tDithin;  fo  little  are  people  fen- 
 Hble  of  that  wherein  true  liberty  con(ifts  till  tbey  have  toft  it! 
 {b)   \  jaings  xii.  2,6,  17. 
 
the  Regal  Succession.    237 
 
 tlie  right  of  Rehohoajn,  fthat  he  was  their  Lord 
 ftill,  notwithftanding  himfelf  was  in  polTeirion  of 
 the  kingdom  of  Ifrael,  with  the  full  confent  of 
 the  people  thereof,^  and  the  capital  puniihment 
 which  himfelf  dcferv*d,  and  might  juftlyexpedt, 
 to  be  kiird,  for  his  rebellion  and  ufurpation  !  A 
 plain  evidence  this,  that  Rehohoam  had  not  loft  his 
 title  to  the  ten  tribes  by  that  revolution!  that 
 poflTeflion,  and  the  people's  conknt  or  recognition,  is 
 no  fufficient  title  to  the  throne,  in  fuch  hereditary 
 countries,  efpecially  fas  Mr.  Whijlon  fuggefts,)  in 
 harr  to  (a)  primogeniture !  and  in  fhort,  that  the 
 people  themlelves  are  commonly  difappointed, 
 when  they  prefumc  to  break  through  natural 
 rights,  and  the  fundamental  laws  of  fuccclTion, 
 (as  well  in  kingdoms  as  familiesj  upon  fuch  falla- 
 cious grounds  as  the  fuppofed  perfonal  v\rtue,good- 
 nefsy  and  defert  of  their  favourite  !  For  as  the 
 worthlefs  bramble  is  obferv*d  to  be  the  moft  (b) 
 afpiring,  fo  'tis  certainly  the  moft  apt  to  fcratch 
 and  tear  thofc  who  come  into  its  power.  *  Where- 
 '  fore  it's  but  a  feafonable  caution,  that  men 
 '  beware  of  giving  into  principles  which  tend  to 
 '  fhut  God  out  from  the  government  of  the 
 •  world :  for  fuppofe  fubjcdls,  taking  the  fword 
 '  and  the  caufe  into  their  own  hands,  ftiould  lay 
 '  about  them  fo  fuccefsfully,  as  to  free  themfelves 
 «  from  under  the  fcourge,  he  will  certainly  change 
 '  it  into  the  chaftifement  of  the  fcorpion  i  and  the 
 
 « little 
 
 (*)  Wh'sft.  fcript.  polit.  p.  30.        (^)  See  Jdth^m's  parable,  in 
 p.  S9. 
 
agS     The  Short  History  ^ 
 
 «  little  finger  of  providence  will  be  thicker  upon 
 «  them,    than  the  Wim    of   the   very   prince   of 
 
 *  whom  they  complain.     Many  of  you,  I  know, 
 
 <  muft  be  fenfible,  that  I  could  give  a  very  de- 
 «  plorable  evidence  of  this  truth,  by  tracing  from 
 
 <  point  to  point  the  condu6t  of  providence 
 «  towards  (a)  ourfelves ' :  —  but  the  nature  of 
 the  cafe  is  fo  evident  as  not  to  need  particular 
 proofs.  For  '  an  ufurper  brings  along  with  him 
 '  a  neceflity  of  renouncing  all  humanity,  and 
 '  religion  too :  he  muft  hate   all  thofe  whom  he 
 
 *  hath  injured,  and  muft  punifh  whatfoever  his 
 
 <  own  guilty  fears  prefent,  as  if  they  were  ma- 
 '  nifeft  crimes  :  he  muft  tolerate  all  manner  of 
 
 *  diforder  and  confufion  in  the  worfhip  of  heaven, 
 
 *  for  the  fake  of  thofe  which  himfelf  hath  brought 
 
 *  upon  the  affairs  of  earth  :  he  muft  give  up  the 
 
 *  word  of  God  to  mercenary  tongues  and  unhal- 
 '  low'd  hands,  to  be  tenter'd,  and  fet  upon  the  rack 
 '  till,  with  the   heathen   oracles   of  old,    it  can 
 
 *  (f/\/T'7-i(^«.' ,  cant  fomething  in  the  favour  of  his 
 
 *  pretenfions.     And  who  can  be  fo  vain,  as  even 
 
 *  to  dream  of  property  or  liberty  under  fuch  a 
 
 *  ftate  ?  who  can    hope  for  the  enjoyment  of  a 
 
 *  rightful  pofTcflion,  whilft  the  government  itfelf 
 
 *  is  but  a  fplendid   J?)  robbery  '  ?  But,  now   to 
 
 go  on. 
 
 Tho'  the  Lord  did  not  think  fit  to  fuffcr  King 
 Rehoboam  to  reduce  thefe  revolted  Ifraelites  to  his 
 
 obc- 
 
 (a)  Mr.  Tt'Oyly's  ferm.  at  'Bathy  17  Sept.  1710,  p.  if,     (l>) 
 K»i'  Alf^fs  ierm.  at  Lcwefiir,  13  Mdr,  i68r,  p.  r  3*  14,. 
 
/^^Regal  Succession.    159 
 
 obedience,  yet  he  gave  them  into  the  hands  of  Abi- 
 jah^  his  fon  and  heir,  who,  with  an  army  of  four  hun- 
 dred thoufand^  ('in  a  moft  exemplary  manner)  de- 
 feated Jerohoatn'&  army  of  eight  hundred  [a]  thoufandy 
 hilling  five  hundred  ihoufand  of  them  on  the  fpot : 
 which,  being  the  mofl  complete  and  remarkable  vi- 
 ctory that  we  read  of  in  the  whole  bible,  wasfurely 
 fomething  more  than  a  bare  (b)  deliverance,  (ae 
 Mr.  TVhifion  calls  it  •, )  for  it  was  a  moil  wonderful 
 and  fignal  appearance  of  providence,  (if  he  will 
 allow  that  providence  ever  appears  on  the  right 
 fide!)  in  favour  of  hereditary  right,  againftpof- 
 feffion  by  popular  eledion.  And  this,  Mr.  JVhifton 
 could  not  but  have  clearly  diftinguifh'd,  if  he  had 
 pcrus'd  it  impartially  ('as  he  pretends ;)  for  the  text 
 is  not,  that  God  delivered  Judah  out  of  the  hand  of 
 Ifrael,  but  God  delivered  Ifrael  into  the  hand  of  Ju- 
 dah: neither  did  the  ufurpcr  die  without  fome 
 remarkable  judgment  from  God ;  for  the  text 
 fays,  the  Lord  Jlruck  (c)  him. 
 
 Here  I  mull  beg  my  reader's  patience,  whilfl 
 I  give  him  an  abftra6l  of  this  chapter,  which 
 contains  fo  folemn  an  appeal  to,  and  fignal  in- 
 terpolition  and  appearance  of  the  Lord  himfelf, 
 in  favour  of  the  right  heir  of  the  houfe  oi  David. 
 
 When  the  battle  was  fet  in  array,  Ahijah  flood 
 up,  and  addrefTing  himfelf  to  the  ufurper  Jero- 
 hoam,  and  to  all  his  army,  faid,  Ought  ye  not  to 
 know,  that  the  LordGodoflirnel  gave  the  kingdom 
 
 over 
 
 (a)  1  Chfon.  xiii,  3,   17.        {l>)  Wliijl,  fcrip!  polir.  p  5^.    {c) 
 z  Chron,  xiii.  ao. 
 
X40    The  Short  History^ 
 
 over  Ifrael  to  David  for  ever^  even  to  him  and  to 
 his  fins  by   a  covenant  of  (<a)  fait  ?  yet  Jeroboam 
 
 is  rifen  up,  and  bath  rebelled  againji  his  Lord! 
 
 and  there  are  gathered  unto  him  vain  men^  the  chil- 
 dren of  Belial  /  and  have  Jirengthened  themfelve^ 
 againji  Rehoboam,  the  fon  oj  Solomon,  when  Re- 
 hoboam  was  young  (b)  and  tender-hearted,  and  could 
 not  withjland  them!  And  now  ye  think  to  withjland 
 the  kingdom  of  the  Lord  in  the  hand  of  the  fons  of 
 David  ;  arid  ye  be  a  great  multitude,  and  there  are 
 'with  you  golden  calves,  which  Jeroboam  made  you 
 for  Gods !  Have  ye  not  caji  out   the  priejis  of  the 
 
 Lord and  have  made  you  priejis  after  the  mau' 
 
 tier  of  the  nations  ? But  as  for  us,  the  Lord 
 
 is  our  God,  and  we  have  not  forfaken  him  j  and  the 
 priefts  which   minijier   unto  the  Lord,  are  the  fons 
 
 of  Aaron, for  we   keep  the  charge  oj  the  Lord 
 
 cur  God,  but  ye  have  forfaken  him!  And  behold* 
 God  himfelfis  with  us  for  our  captain,  and  his  priejis 
 with  founding  trumpets,  to  cry  alarm  againji  you ! 
 O  children  of  Ifrael,  fght  ye  not  againji  the  Lord  God 
 of  your  fathers,  for  ye  fhall  not  (c)  profper  ! 
 
 In  which  fpeech,  *ris  obfervable,  that  Abijah 
 infifts  pofitively,  that  the  Lord  had  given  the 
 kingdom  of  Ifrael  to  David  and  to  his  heirs  for 
 ever,  in  due  courfe  of  fucceflion  ;  and  thai  fuch 
 his  divine  hereditary  right  thereto,  was  by  a  co- 
 venant ;or  ordinance,  or  inftitutiony   never  to  be 
 
 alter'd 
 
 {a}  Thar  i«,  ij  m  perpetual,  f»cred  and  invol^ile  covenant ;  for 
 lal:  drives  away  corruption,  and  therefore  is  the  emblem  of  durabili- 
 ty. (i>)  Th's  muft  be  uodcrftood  of  his  want  of  capacity,  ra- 
 ifccf  than  of  agr.         (c]  i  Chfoi,  i'lil  j,  &c. 
 
/Z?^  Pv EG  AL  Succession.    14,1 
 
 alcer'd,  that  is  to  fay,  indefeaHble:  he  charges 
 Jeroboam  with  rtbellicn  againfl:  his  Lord,  and 
 vvichftanding  the  kingdom  of  the  Lord  in  the 
 hand  of  the  Tons  of  Dj ^'/u  •,  and  final'y  aflures 
 them,  that  in  fighting  againfl  him,  they  fought 
 againjl  the  Lord  God,  and  therefore  fhould  not 
 profper.  All  which  would  have  been  very- im- 
 proper and  impeninent  for  him  to  have  mention'd, 
 efpecially  in  fo  folemn  and  publick  an  appeal 
 fand  Jeroboam,  or  his  party,  might  eaHly  have 
 objeded  it  to  him,  as  fuch}  if  the  hereditary  right 
 to  the  throne  had  not  been  notcrioufiy  knov/n 
 and  allow'd  to  be  indefeafible,  or  \l  Abijah  him- 
 felf  had  not  been  the  right  heir  of  the  houfe  of 
 David,  as  I  have  (a)  prov'd  him  to  have  been. 
 
 I  might  likewife  have  obferv'd,  how  he  upbraids 
 the  ufurper  with  cafting  out  the  priefls  of  the 
 Lord  under  pretence  of  his  lay-deprivations,  and 
 intruding  others  into  rheir  ofnces  by  ftate-acrs, 
 and  impofing  a  new  flare- reiigirn  upon  the 
 multitude,  ^c.  But  I  ihall  wave  the  further  con- 
 fideration  of  thefe  particulars,  at  prefent. 
 
 However,  this  fpeech  of  his  had  no  effc<5t  upon 
 the  audience.  For  Jeroboam  ('who  truf^ed  not  in 
 God,  but  in  his  own  llrength  and  policy,  as  ufurpers 
 ufually  do'    caiifed  an  airJsujhmrat   to  com:   about 
 
 behind  them And  lijhen  Judah   locked   backy 
 
 heboid,  the  battle  cc^zi  before  and  behind  •,  and  they 
 
 cried  unto  the  Lord,  And G5c7/'r.'/!?^'' Jeroboam 
 
 and  ^// Ifrael,  befare  Abijah  and  Judah, and 
 
 I  i  Csi 
 
 (*]  Pag.  >  S* 
 
a4^    The  Short  History  of 
 
 God  delivered  them  into  their  hand: neither 
 
 did  Jeroboam  recover  Jlrength  again  in  the  days  of 
 Abijah  ;  and  the  Lord  Jlnick  him,  and  he  (a)  died. 
 
 Thus  have  we  feen  this  kingdom  of  Ifrael,  tho' 
 much  larger  in  territories,  and  fuller  of  people, 
 than  that  of  Judah,  reduc'd  to  a  very  low  and 
 weak  condition,  at  that  time,  by  reafon  of  their 
 revolt,  and  as  the  natural  confequence  of  their 
 being  rebels  with  relation  to  their  King,  fchif- 
 maticks  to  the  church,  and  apoftates  to  God  !  In 
 which  miferable  ftate  they  fubfifted,  under  nine- 
 teen Kings  (fo  called,)  of  nine  feveral  families  *, 
 moft  of  which  came  to  violent  ends,  and  not 
 one  of  them  was  tolerably  furnifh'd  with  perfonai 
 virtue,  goodnefi  or  defert,  ftho'  feverally  fet  up 
 by  the  people  themfelves)  but  all  of  them,  to  a 
 man,  branded  with  this  character,  that  they  ftnned 
 and  made  Ifrael  to  fin!  whom  I  fhall  now  proceed 
 to  give  my  reader  a  more  particular  view  of. 
 
 Jerohoajn  held  the  throne  tzvo  and  twenty  (h) 
 years,  tho'  he  cannot  with  any  propriety  be  faid 
 to  have  had  a  fettlement  in  it,  when  there  was 
 a  right  heir  aflerting  his  pretenfion  to  it :  how- 
 ever, after  his  death,  Nadab  his  fon  reigned  in  his 
 
 (c)  Jlead ',  the  beginning  of  whofe  reign  was  co- 
 temporary  with   the  fecond  year   of  Afa  King  of 
 
 (d)  Judah.  But  he  was  fcarce  warm  in  the 
 throne,  when 
 
 §  LVII. 
 
 (l>)  z  Chron.  xiii.  13,  &c.         [b)  I  Kings   xlv.  20.    (c)  Ibid, 
 
 (J)    XV.  i^. 
 
/>&^  Regal  Succession,   z^^ 
 
 §  LVII.    B  A  A  s  H  A    confpired  agatnfl   Baafha  and 
 
 him^  and  fmote  hi?n, and  reigned  in  his 
 
 {a)  Jlead:  which  he  did  out  of  his  own  wicked 
 ambition  only,  without  any  commiffion,  tho'  he 
 thereby  became  the  inftrument  o(  deftroyingall  the 
 houfe  of  Jtrohod.m,  according  unto  the  faying  of  the 
 (h)  Lord.  —  His  mounting  the  throne  was  in  the 
 third  year  of  Afa  ;  and  there  was  war  hetween  them 
 all  their  (f)  days :  yet,  after  twenty  and  four  years 
 he  died,  and'EAoih  his  fin  reigned  in  his  Jlead,  in  the 
 twenty  and  fxth  year  of  {d')  Afa.  But  it  was  not 
 long  before  he  was  difpatch*d  the  fame  way  as 
 Nadah  had  been  by  his  father :  for 
 
 §  LVIII.  ZiM  Ri  {capain  of  half  his 
 
 chariots)  confpired  againft  him, and 
 
 killed  him,  in  the  twenty  and  feventh  year  of  Afa, 
 
 King  0/ Judah,  and  reigned  in  his  {e)  jlead-, • 
 
 and  dejlroyed  all  the  houfe  of  Baafna,  according  to 
 fje  word  of  the  (/)  Lord:  and  yet  Zimri,  having 
 had  no  commidion  to  execute  the  judgment  de- 
 nounc'd  againft  the  houfe  of  BaafJja,  was  fo  far 
 from^  being  juftify'd,  that  it  becam.e  a  proverbial 
 faying,  by  way  of  interrogation;,  implying  a  ftrong 
 negative,  hadX'imn  peace  who  few  his  (g)  mailer? 
 No  !  he  had  no  peace,  but  was  foon  rewarded  ac- 
 cording   to  his  defert  :  for, 
 
 §  LIX.    N  o  fooner  was  it  known,    omri,  Ahab, 
 that  he  had  affum'd  the  foveraigntv,    Ahaziah,  and 
 
 Tehoram. 
 
 but  ^//Ifrael  ;«^^(f  Omri,  the  captain 
 
 I   i  2  of 
 
 (a)  I  Kings  xiv.  27,  &c.  (b) verf.  29.  and  xiv, 
 
 10,  bV.         (c) XV.  32,  33.         (d) xvi.  6,  8. 
 
 (e) verf.  9,  10,  15.         (f)  verf.  2,  ^r.         (g) 
 
 Kings  ix.  31, 
 
a44'    Tl-^e  Short  History  of 
 
 of  the-  hojt^  King  over  (a)  Ifrael  j  and  hefieg*d  Zimri 
 2// Tirzah  ;  where,  after  a  reignof  Jcven  da'js,  he 
 Z'wn;/  the  King's  hoiife  over  him  with  fire^  and  {f) 
 died,  to  avoid  falling  into  the  hands  of  his  enemies. 
 And  here  Mr.  JFbiJlon  himfelf  calls  Zinri  nn 
 tifurper;  but  only  fo  '  becaufe  he  hadnoconfent 
 '  of  the  body  of  the  {c)  people'  !  As  if  the  body 
 of  the  people  of  Ifrael  had  fufficient  authority 
 to  make  0;?iri  a  King,  any  more  than  Zimri  was 
 one  !  which  I  challenge  him  to  fhew  good  grounds 
 for  in  the  word  of  God.     But  whereas  he  fays, 
 
 *  the    facred    hiftory  does  not  ever  fuppofe  fuch 
 
 *  titles  as  this  of  Omri's  to  be  invalid,  that  I  can 
 '^  find  throughout  the  whole  (d)  bible  '  -,  1  would 
 recommend  to  his  more  ferious  confideration  that 
 text  before  quoted,  fo  Ifrael  rebelled  againjl  the 
 houfe  oj  David  unto  this  (e)  day.  It  is  nor  enough 
 for  him  to  come  off  with  that  explanation,  as 
 he   does,  in  the    cafe  of  Baa/ha,  where   he  fays, 
 
 *  I  mean,  where  no  law  of  God  had  interpofed, 
 '  and  where  therefore  the  ele6lion  of  the  people  was 
 '  ever  efleem'd,  fo  far  as  I  can  find,  a  fufficient 
 title  to  the  (f)  crovv'n  '.  For  that  phrafe,  unto 
 this  dajy  will  extend  toOmri  as  well  as  loBaafha^ 
 and  to  both  of  thefe,  as  properly  as  to  Jeroboam 
 himfelf:  for  all  thefe  rebell'd  againll  the  houfe 
 of  David,  by  their  heading  the  revolted  tribes. 
 The  bible  fays,  they  rebelled,  and  lets  us  know 
 %vherein  it  confifted  ;  not  in   any    defect  of  the 
 
 people's 
 
 (a)  I  Kings  xvi.  i6.      (b) verf.  17,  18.       (c)  IVhift. 
 
 fcript.  polit.  p.  38.  (d)Vo\^.  (c)  i  Kingsxii.  19.  and 
 S  Cbrsn  x.  19.         f/J  JP'hiJi.  fcript.  polit.  p.  35. 
 
Z/:?^  Reg AL  Succession,    a^f 
 
 people's  choice  or  confent,  but  in  their  oppofition 
 to  the  right  heir  of  David:  nay,  the  facred  hiftory 
 afiures  us,  that  both  Jeroboam  and  Omri  were  the 
 people's  own  choice,  and  Mr.  JVhiJton  affirms  the 
 fame  of  Baafia  (a)  too  ;  and  yet  they  are  all 
 charg'd  with  rebellion  againft  the  houle  of  David, 
 as  much  as  Zimri  is,  which  one  would  think  is 
 more  than  a  bare  fuppofal,  that  fuch  titles  are  in- 
 valid.  If  not,  I  would  gladly  know  what  Mr. 
 IVhiJlon  means  by  calling  Baa/Jja''s  title  (h)  irre- 
 gular? Surely,  there  mult  then  be  fome  (landing 
 rule  which  it  did  not  fquare  with  :  but  he  had  the 
 people's  voice,  and  his  title  *  feems  to  be  fully 
 '  acknowledg'd  for  a  good  one  by  God  {cj  him- 
 *  felf  ',  (according  to  Mr.  lVbifton''s  conftruclion 
 of  the  text  (J;  referr'd  to-,)  therefore  it  can  be 
 nothing  but  the  want  of  the  hereditary  right  that 
 could  make  fuch  a  title  irregular.  As  this  i? 
 clearly  my  own  notion  of  it,  I  cannot  but  im- 
 pute it  to  the  irrefiftible  force  of  truth,  that  it 
 has  dropp'd  from  his  pen.  For,  if  either  the 
 ele5lion  of  the  people  '^^?,  a  fiijjicieut  ////^  in  general, 
 or  it  had  hzsn  fully  acknowledT^d  for  a  good  one  ^v 
 God  himfelf  in  that  particular  cafe,  no  man  of 
 learning  or  religion  would  have  prefum'd  to  call 
 it  irregular:  but  fince  the  fufRciency  of  the  po- 
 pular title  is  but  a  groundlcfs  fancy,  and  that 
 particular  text  cannot  fairly  amount  to  any  mors 
 than  God's  permifHon  only,  ^as  I  have  already 
 (e)  demonftrated  it  cannot,,'  the  difficulty   is  un- 
 
 ravellM 
 
 (a)    Whijl.  fcr.'pt.  polit.  p.  35.         (b)   Ibid.         (c)  Ibid. 
 (d)  I  Kings  xvi.  1,  2.         (e)  Pag.  216. 
 
14^6    The  Short  History^/ 
 
 ravell'd,  fo  that  Mr.  Whijion  might  call  fuch 
 titles  irregular,  without  any  abfurdity. 
 
 But,  to  return  to  Omri ;  fo  precarious  a  thing 
 is  a  title  founded  on  the  voice  of  the  people, 
 that,  no  fooner  was  Zi7-«n  deftroy'd,  hxxx.  then  were 
 
 the  people  of  Ifrael  divided  into  tino  parts  ;  half 
 
 followed  Tibni, to  make  him  King  (tho*  all 
 
 Ifrael  had  made  Omri  King  but  a  few  days  before) 
 and  half  followed  Omri.  Upon  which  divifion  (for 
 the  publick  good  to  be  fure  ! )  there  inevitably 
 enfu'd  a  civil  war :  hut  the  people  that  followed 
 Omri  prevail' d\  -  -  fo  T\bn\  died,  and  Omr'^ 
 reigned,  in  the  thirty  and  one  year  of  {a)  Afa. 
 
 And  now,  by  this  conquefl,  together  with  his 
 original  title  of  the  people's  choice,  Omri  might 
 feem  to  have  what  they  call  a  providential  fettle- 
 ment  in  the  throne,  which  he  held  twelve  yearly 
 and  was  fucceeded,  at  his  death,  by  Jhab,  his  fon 
 in  the  thirty  and  eight  year  of  (h)  Afa  :  and  Ahah, 
 after  a  reign  cf  twenty  and  two  years,  dying  in 
 battle,  was  fucceeded  by  Ahaziah,  his  fon,  in  the 
 feventeenth  year  of  ]Qhoi^3.plr3it,  King  of  <:^Judah; 
 which  Ahaziah,  dying  foon  after,  was  fucceeded 
 by  his  brother  "jehoram,  in  the  eighteenth  year  of 
 Jehofaphat,  King  of  Judah,  and  reigned  twelve  d) 
 
 years. 
 
 (a)   I  Kings  xvi.  21,  is'r.  (b)  2R,  29.     Thefe 
 
 chronological  notices  may  be  of  fonic  ufe,  to  inform  the  lefs 
 learned  reader  which  of  the  Kings  of  Judah  xVz^o.  were  feve- 
 ^ally  cotemporary  with  :  but  if  any  will  be  critical,  and  make 
 remarks  upon  the  chronology  as  not  exad:,  le  t  him  know,  the 
 f;ult  is  not  mine  ;  I  have  quoted  my  authority  for  it,  and 
 aS  fuch  fliall  fubmit  it  to  the  proper  cenfors.  (c)  i  Kings 
 xvi.  29.  —— xxii.  40,  51.         (d)  2  Kings  i.  17. iii.  i. 
 
/^^  Regal  Succession.    247 
 
 'jears.  And  the  reafon  of  his  fucceflion  is  particu- 
 larly recorded,  hecaufe  Ahaziah  had 710  {a]  [on  -,  fo 
 that  Jehoram  was  then  his  natural  heir  :  which  is 
 a  further  proof  of  the  generally  receiv'd  notion  of 
 the  right  of  proximity  of  blood,  according  to 
 the  law  of  (h)  inheritance  -,  inafmuch  as  we  may 
 learn  from  hence,  that  whatever  family  was  in 
 the  throne,  ftill  the  fucceflion  was  look'd  upon  by 
 all  the  adherents  as  due  to  him  that  was  next  of 
 kin  of  that  line.  But  however,  fo  far  was  that 
 providential  right  fas  they  call  it,j  or  the  pre- 
 fcription  of  eight  and  forty  years  pofiefllon,  from 
 fecuring  the  cftablifhment  of  the  houfe  of  Omri^ 
 -that  Jehu^  by  exprefs  commiffion  from  God,  de- 
 .ftroy'd  that  whole  houfe  and  kindred  j  as  will  be 
 prov'd  in  the  following  feclion. 
 
 But,  before  I  leave  this,  it  is  to  be  obferv'd 
 of  that  very  populous  kingdom  of //r^d"/,  (which  in 
 Jerohoavi'sXAmt  had  afforded  an  army  o{  eight  hun- 
 dred thoufand  fighting  men  at  once,  and  therefore 
 may  be  reafonably  fuppos'd  to  contain  feveral 
 millions  of  fouls  in  the  whole,  j  that  they  were  fo 
 far  alienated  from  God,  notwithftanding  all  their 
 wonted  zeal  for  circumcifion  and  other  Mofaical 
 ordinances,  that,  even  in  yf^^^'s  time,  not  much 
 more  than  half  a  century  after  their  revolt,) 
 '  what  through  the  indigence  of  the  clergy,  who, 
 <  being  of  the  meaneft  of  the  people,  were  thrufb 
 '  into  the  pried's  office,  as  fuch  who  would  make 
 
 '  undue  compliances  for  a  piece  offilver,    or   a 
 
 *    morfei 
 (a)  z  Kings  i.  ij.        (b)  Numb,  xxvii.  1 1 . 
 
a48   The  SnokT  Hist oRY  0/ 
 
 «  morfelofCa)  hread-,  what  through  the  covetouf- 
 <  nefs  of  the. laity,  who  had   confciences   large 
 
 *  enough  to  fwallow  all  fuch  riches  or  honours 
 '  as  were  the  rewards  of  a  time-ferving  profef- 
 '  fion,  they  ran  in  almofl:  all  of  them  fo  uncon- 
 
 *  trollably  into  the  worfliip  of  Baa!.,  that  fa(hi- 
 
 «  onable  and  lucrative    idolatry, that  there 
 
 '  were  bat  feven  thoiifand  left.,  that  had  not  bowed 
 
 *  their  knees  to  {b  Baal ' ;  and  thofe  too  fo  fcatter'd 
 and  difpers'd,  that  they  did  not  know  one  ano- 
 ther j  much  lefs  had  they  any  opportunities  of 
 correfpondence  or  publick  worfhip.  Thus  were 
 the  multitude  wholly  infiuenc^d  by  the  court-religion  , 
 which  '  they  thought  ^as  too  comrnonly  it  hap- 
 '  pens)  the   readitft  way  to  get  preferment  and 
 
 *  become  rich  by  :  and  they  preferr'd  this  to  all 
 
 *  other  (f)  confiderations',  not  excepting  even 
 thofe  of  fchifm  and  idolatry  ;  whereas  the  truth 
 was  with  thofe  few,  who,  like  Elijah^  were  per- 
 fecuted  into  the  (d)  ivilderffefs:  *  but  men  that  are 
 '  fincere  in  any  religion,  do  hate  and  abhor  fuch 
 '  hypocritical  difemblers,  and  defpife  and  fpue 
 '  them  out,  for  their  naufeous  lukewarm  nefs  -,  and 
 '  as  men  indeed  of  no  religion  or  confcience, 
 '  but  for  what  ferves  to  their  prefent  (e)  ends '. 
 
 Agreeable  to  which  was  the  conduti  of  Elijha, 
 the  prophet  towards  Jehoravi,  when  he  went  down 
 together  with  Jehofa^hat,  to   enquire  of  the  Lord 
 
 hy 
 
 (a J  I  Sam.  n.  36.  fi>)  Stul^Fs  ferm.  4  OHo.  1702,  p.  7, 
 in  4to.^  (c)  J.  Walker\  ferm.  23  Apr.  1710.  p.  3.  (d) 
 I  Khigi^iiyi.        (e)  Stillifi^Jl.  Term.  13  Novcm,  1687,  p.  29. 
 
/Z^^  Reg  AL  Succession.    14.9 
 
 hj  him.  What  have  I  to  do  zvith  thee  (fa id  Elijha)  ? 
 Get  thee  to  the  Prophets  of  thy  father^  and  to  the 
 prophets  of  thy  mother Cmeaning  the  falfe  pro- 
 phets, who  hardned  him  in  his  fchifm,  and  coun- 
 teaanc'd  him  in  his  idolatry  •,  declaring  to  him. 
 As  the  Lord  of  hofts  liveth,  before  'whom  I  Jland^ 
 furely^  were  it  not  that  I  regard  the  prefence  of  Je- 
 hofaphat,  the  King  of  Judah,  /  would  not  look 
 toward  thee,  7ior  jee  {a)  thee.  So  much  was  the 
 refpe<5t,  which  the  prophet  paid  to  a  lawful  and 
 orthodox  prince,  different  from  his  behaviour  to 
 a  fchifmatick  and  ufurper  I 
 
 Another  remarkable  occurrence  happens  here 
 alfo  within  the  fame  period  of  time  ;  which  has 
 occafion*d  various  miftaken  conftruftions.  Naa- 
 man,  the  King  of  Syrians  General  and  great  fa- 
 vourite, was  a  (b)  leper  ;  and,  having  heard  of  the 
 miracles  done  by  Elijha,  came  to  that  prophet, 
 who  effefted  his  cure.  Upon  which  Naaman 
 makes  a  folemn  declaration  before  Elijha,  faying^ 
 Behold,  now  I  know,  that  there  is  no  God  in  all  the 
 
 earth  but  in  Ifrael  j thy  fervant  will  henceforth 
 
 offer  neither  burnt  offering  nor  facrifice  unto  other 
 Gods, '  but  unto  the  Lord :  in  this  thing  the  Lord 
 pardon  thy  fervant,  that  when  my  maf/r  goeth  into 
 the  houfe  of  Rimmon  to  worjhip  there,  and  he 
 leaneth  on  my  hand,  and  L  bow  myfelf  in  the 
 houfe  of  Rimmon;  when  I  bow  down  myfelf  in 
 the  houfe  e/ Rimmon,  the  Lord  pardon  thy  fervant 
 in  this  thing.  And  he  f aid  unto  him,  go  in  {b)  peace. 
 K  k  Which 
 
 (a)  2  Kings  m,  n,  &c.         (h) ^v.  i.         (^) — —» 
 
 verf.  15.  ^(. 
 
%SO    The  Short  History  of 
 
 Which  words  have  inclin*d  many  people  to 
 think,  that  they  may  juftify  their  compliance 
 with  (or  at  leaft  their  prefence  at)  fuperftitious 
 or  immoral  worfhip  by  this  example:  whereas, 
 if  they  were  tranflated  with  refpecl  to  the  time 
 pall,  and  not  to  the  time  to  come,  (as  feveral 
 learned  men  acknowledge  the  original  will  well 
 bear,)  the  difficulty  would  be  remov'd,  the  ob- 
 jeftion  anfwer'd,  and  all  reconciled  to  a  confiften- 
 cy  with  the  attributes  of  God,  as  well  as  to  that 
 purity  and  fimplicity  which  is  requir'd  of  us  in 
 divine  worlhip.  Thus  (we  are  toldj  Luther'% 
 German  bible,  printed  at  Weimars,  with  notes, 
 hath  well  render'd  it.  In  this  thing  the  Lord  pardon 
 th'j  fervant,  that  when  m'j  mafier  went  into  the 
 houfe  of  Rimmon  to  worjhip  there,  and  he  leaned 
 on  vfj  hand,  I  bowed  m'jfelf  in  the  houfe  of 
 Rimmon ;  the  Lord  pardon  thy  fervant  in 
 ihis  thing,  that  I  bowed  myjelf  in  the  houfe  of 
 Rimmon,  (a)  ^c.  In  which  verfion  the  penitent 
 is  only  made  to  beg  God's  pardon  for  his  former 
 fm,  and  not  a  difpenfation  for  repeating  it :  the 
 former  of  which  the  prophet  might  well  give  him 
 an  afiurance  of,  but  not  of  the  latter ;  neither 
 indeed  would  the  latter  have  been  fo  confident 
 with  the  convert's  own  foregoing  declaration  as 
 the  former  is. 
 Jehu,  Jehoahaz,        §  LX.  B  u  T  now  let  US  procced 
 
 Z^^JSh°°''^'    ^^  ^^^^'  ^^°  ^^^   J^^or^OT,  and 
 all  that  remained  of  the  houfe  of{b\ 
 
 AhabJ 
 
 (a)  Eflay  for  a  new  tranflat.  of  the  bible,  1727,  p.  215- 
 (h)  2  Kings  ix.  24.  —  X-  J  K 
 
the  Regal  Succession.    %fi 
 
 Ahab  ;  according  to  tht  word  of  the  Lord  by 
 the  prophet  (a)  Elijah.  But  here  it  is  to  be  ob- 
 ferv'd,  that  Jehu  was  made  King  himfelf  before 
 he  attempted  this  upon  his  mafter  :  not  by  the 
 voice  of  the  people  (for  they  were  never  confultedj 
 but  by  a  prophet  of  the  Lord  ;  who  calling  him 
 apart  from  his  company,  anointedhim,  andgave 
 him  an  exprefs  commifTion  and  command,  tQ 
 finite  the  houfe  of  (h)  Ahab  :  in  virtue  of  which 
 Jehu  thought  himlelf  fufBciently  authoriz'd  ^as 
 undoubtedly  he  wasj  to  take  it  upon  him,  with- 
 out fo  much  as  asking  the  people  for  their  confent 
 afterwards.  And  yet  this  very  perfon,  fo  imme- 
 diately rais'd  up  by  God,  was  himfelf  a  notorious 
 (c)  idolater  :  fo  that  I  would  gladly  know,  whac 
 a  modern  divine  meant,  when  he  faid,  '  God 
 '  would  not  fuffer  idolatrous  princes  to  rule  over 
 
 *  his  people  -,  and  why  faould  (d)  we  '  ?  Efpe- 
 cially,  when  he  affirms,  in   the  fame  page,  thaC 
 
 *  a   divine  example  is fet  down  for  our  imi- 
 
 '  ration,  and  therefore  not  to  imitate   it,  would 
 
 *  be  (e)  fin  ' .  It  plainly  appears,  in  many  exam- 
 ples, that  God  did  fuffer^  and  in  this  particularly, 
 that  he  did  actually  raife  up  an  idolatrotis  prince 
 to  rule  over  his  people  !  What  inference  this  author 
 would  draw  from  fuch  a  divine  example,  I  leave  tQ 
 himfelf  to  declare  :  'tis  enough  for  me  to  conclude, 
 that  dominion  is  not  founded  in  grace,  but  in 
 nature.       However,    Jehu  having  executed  his 
 
 ^  K  k  2  com- 
 
 (aj  I  Kings  xxi.  zi.  zz.  (b)  z  Kings  ix.  i.  Sec.  (t) 
 —  3f-  29,  31.  (d)  Blakewafs  ferm.  in  Nov.  lyi^y  p.  5, 
 (ej  Ibid. 
 
ayx    TheSno^r  History  (^/^ 
 
 commifllon  to  the  full,  he  had  a  promife  from 
 
 the  Lord,  that  his  children  of  the  fourth  generation 
 Jhould  ftt  on  the  throne  of  (a)  Ifrael.  Thus,  after 
 he  had  reigned  twenty  and  eight  years^  he  was  fuc- 
 ceeded  by  Jehoahaz  his  hn^  in  the  three  and 
 twentieth  year  of  Joafh,  King  of  (b)  Judah  :  and  he, 
 after  feventeen  years,  by  Joafh  his  fon,  in  the  thirty 
 and  feventh  year  of  Joafh,  King  of  {c"  Judah,  and 
 he,  after  fixteen  years,  by  Jeroboam  his  fon,  in  the 
 fifteenth  year  0/ Amaziah,  King  of  (d)  Judah  :  and 
 he,  after  forty  and  one  years,  by  Zacf^riah,  his 
 fin,  in  the  thirty  and  eighth  year  of  Aza.ndh,  vor 
 Uzziah)  King  of(e)  Judah,  in  whom  the  line  of 
 Jehu  ended. 
 
 §  L>XI.   For,    no  fooner    was  the 
 
 ^  ""^'      promifed  term  expir'd,  h\JitShallumcon- 
 
 fpired  againft  Zachariah,  when  he  had  reign'd  but 
 
 fix  months  ;  and  fmote  him  before  the  people,    and 
 
 Jlew  him  and  reigned  in  his  fieady  in  the  nine  and 
 
 ihirtieth  year  o/the  fame  (f)  Uzziah. 
 
 §  LXII.  But,  when  he  had  play*d 
 Menahem,       ^.j^g  ^j^g    ^  y-^//  j^onth,  he  was    paid 
 
 in  his  own  coin  by  Menahejn,  who 
 fmote  him,  and  flew  him,  and  reigned  in  his  flead 
 ten  {g)  years:  and  when  he  died  Pekehiah  Kis  fon 
 reigned  in  his  fie  ad  ^  in  the  fiftieth  year  of  the  iziUQ 
 King  of  (h)  Judah, 
 
 §  LXIII. 
 
 (a)  2  Kings  X.  30.         (o)  verf.  35,  36. xiii.   i. 
 
 (c)' -verl".  1,9,    10.         (d) verf.   10,    13. 
 
 xiv.  16,    23.         (e) verf.  23,  29. xv.  8.         (f) 
 
 verf.  8,  10,  13.         (g) verf.  13,  14,  17.        (h)  * — - 
 
 Verf.  22,  23. 
 
/^^  Regal  Succession     zf^ 
 
 §  LXIII.  But,  as  his  father    had    p^j^^j^ 
 got  the   throne    by  violence,  fo   did 
 he  alfo  lofe   it,  after   two  years  poflefllon :   for 
 Pekah,  one  of  his  captains,  confpired  againfi  him, 
 
 and  fmote  him, afid  reigned  in  his  room,  in  ths 
 
 two  and  fiftieth  year  of  the  fame  King  of  (a')  Ju- 
 dah. 
 
 §  LXIV.  Nor  had  he  himfelf  any  bet-  Hofhea. 
 ter  fate,  tho*  he  kept  the  poflefllon  twenty  years : 
 for  Hofhea  made  the  like  confpiracy  againji  him,  and 
 fmote  him,  and  few  hjjn,  and  reigned  inhis  ftead,  in 
 the  twelfth  year  of  Ahaz,  King  of  (h)  Judah. 
 
 From  all  which  we  may  gather  this  general  ob- 
 fervation,  '  that  he  that  has  once  dar'd  to  violate 
 
 *  themajefl:y  of  Kings,  hath  feldom  foundall  the 
 
 *  hands  that  he  could  join  together,  fufficient  to 
 '  uphold   an  ufurped    throne ;  and  hath  taught 
 
 *  others  to  bear  no  more  refpedl  to  himfelf  than 
 
 *  he  hath  fliewed ;  and  given  them,  befides,  a 
 '  pretence  to  difpolTefs  him  for  unjuflly  invading 
 '  another's  right  :  which  being  once  taken  away, 
 '  and  power    become  the   rule  of  jufl:ice,  ther^ 
 
 *  have   often  rifen  up  a  fort  of  men   pretending 
 
 *  to  it,  who  never  failed  to  give  one  another  their 
 
 *  deferved  {c)  punifliment  '.  Neither  are  the 
 petty  fliifts  and  mean  artifices  lefs^  remarkable, 
 which  thefe  feveral  ufurpers  were  forc'd  to  make 
 ufe  of  in  their  refpedive  difficulties:  fometimes 
 giving  vafl:  fums  of  money  to  a  powerful  neigh- 
 bour,   to  guaranty    their   ill-gotten    poflTeflions, 
 
 or 
 
 (a)  zKings-x-v.  23,  25,  27.         (b) verf.   27,   30.— 
 
 xvii.  I.        (c)  Gojizv^h^  ierm.  26  July^  1685,  p.  XJ. 
 
a^4    T^^  Short  History  ^/ 
 
 or  (as  our  tranflation  renders  it)  to  confirm  the 
 kingdom  in  their  (a)  hand!  Sometimes  dearly  buy- 
 ing a  little  prefent  peace  of  one,  and  at  the  fame 
 time  bafely  endeavouring  to  make  contrary  al- 
 liances, to  enable  them  to  break  (b)  it !  And  what- 
 ever their  end  was  in  the  difpofal  of  it,  ftill  the 
 mc7te'j  was  (c)  exa^ed  of  the  deluded  people,  to 
 their  impoverifhment ;  for  thefe  quack- methods 
 were  fo  far  from  curing  the  wound,  that  they  both 
 made  it  deeper  and  increas*d  the  fmart:  their 
 neighbours  became  flill  ftronger  and  more  im- 
 pofing,  while  they  themfelves  grew  daily  weaker 
 and  lefs  able  either  to  gratify  or  deny  whatever 
 they  demanded  ;  till  at  laft  Shalmanezcr,  King  of 
 JJfyria,  like  an  infatiable  gulph,  exhaufted  all 
 at  once,  carrying  away  Hojhea  and  all  his  peo- 
 ple into  captivity,  and  overflowing  the  country 
 with  an  inundation  of  foreigners,  who  knew  not 
 the  God  of  the  ' d)  land! 
 
 Thus  have  I  gone  through  the  whole  hiflory  of 
 the  Kings  of  Judah  and  Ifrael  with  due  care  and 
 impartiality,  ending  with  their  refpedive  capti- 
 vity: out  of  which  (as  is  before  obferv'dj  the 
 former  did  return,  tho*  not  as  a  proper  and  in- 
 dependent kingdom  ;  but  the  latter  were  totally 
 loft,  infomu(?h  that  all  we  now  hear  of  in  any  part 
 of  the  world ,  are  defcended  from  the  loyal  tribe 
 of  Judah.  And  now,  to  fum  up  the  whole 
 again,  I  beg  leave  to  remind  the  reader,  that 
 tho'  the  fuccefTion  of  thofe  in  Ifraely  was  not  re- 
 gular, 
 
 (a)  2  Kings  XV.  1 9.        flj xvii.  3,  4.        (^f )  —  x v- 
 
 20.        (<t]  ' —  xvii,  6,  24,  (5'r,;;;^xviii.  9,  bV. 
 
//^^  Regal  Succession,    i^f 
 
 gular,  as  that  of  the  Kings  of  Judah  was,  yet, 
 even  there,  the  law  of  inheritances  was  ftill  fo 
 much  regarded,  that  whoever  obtain'd  the  crown, 
 and  left  it  in  peace,  was  always  fucceeded  by  his 
 fon,  or  other  next  heir,  according  to  the  law  of 
 nature,  as  he  will  perceive  by  the  particulars 
 before  fet  forth  :  and  that,  of  all  the  feveral  revo- 
 lutions among  them,  there  is  not  one  juftified, 
 except  that  of  Jehu  only  ;  nor  that  any  otherwife 
 than  becaufe  he  had  an  exprefs  warrant  from  the 
 Lord,  for  what  he  did,  and  was  himfelf  a  King 
 before  he  made  any  attempt  upon  his  mafter. 
 But,  as  for  the  reft,  tho*  God  Almighty  doth 
 oftentimes  raife  up  (or  rather  permit^  certain  re- 
 bels to  be  his  inftruments  of  wrath  to  punifh  ir- 
 regular princes  fas  it  is  his  fole  prerogative  to  do, 
 he  not  being  bound  to  thofe  laws  which  he  pre- 
 fcribeth  to  othersj  ;  yet,  unlefs  they  have  an  ex- 
 prefs warrant  from  him,  as  Jehu  had,  they  are 
 but  rebels  ftill.  And  therefore,  it  follows,  ras 
 an  author  before  quoted  well  obferves j  that  *  it  is 
 
 *  treafon  for  any  fubjeds,  upon  the  fpecious  pre- 
 
 *  tence  of  executing  God's  decree  and  vengeance, 
 «  to  raife  war,  make  fedition,  to  depofe  and  kill 
 
 *  their  lawful  prince  (a)  *  ! 
 
 §  LXV.  An  d  now  (though  I  am  not    Seme  hints 
 oblig'd  to    it    by   my   prefcnt   under-  ^27iom^''' 
 taking)  I  fhall  juft  caft  my  eye  abroad 
 in  the  world:  wherein,  that  the  fame  regard  was 
 had  to  this  hereditary  defcent,  by  proximity  of 
 
 blood, 
 
 (tf)  ^^w^r's  prerog.  of  primogen.  p- 35' 
 
aj'd   T'^^  Short  History  ^ 
 
 blood,  even  univerfally  among  the  nations  alfo, 
 we  may  gather,  from  thefe  few  evidences  fol- 
 lowing. 
 
 When  Ahimelech,  King  of  Gerar,  defired  Abra- 
 hamto  enter  into  a  covenant  with  him,  fwearunto 
 me  ^fays  he,)- —  that  thou  wilt  not  dealfalfly  with 
 me,  nor  with  my  /on,  nor  with  my  fin's  (a)  fin,- 
 
 The  kingdom  of  Pharaoh  in  Egypt,  which  Mr. 
 Whifion  fuppofes  not  to  be  any  way  difcoverahle 
 in  (b)  firipture,  was  certainly  hereditary,  as  we 
 find,  we  read,  that  the  Lord  fmote  all  the  firjl' 
 lorn — from  the  firjl-born  of  Pharaoh,  that  fat  on  his 
 (c)  throne,  &c.  or(as  it  is  in  fometranflations)  that 
 was  to  fit  on  his  throne :  and  again,  where  it  is  faid , 
 in  the  perfon  of  Pharaoh,  I  am  the  fin  of  antient 
 {d)  Kings.  To  which  we  may  add,  what  is  well 
 obferv'd  by  our  judicious  countryman,  to  put  the 
 matter  out  of  all  controverfy.     '  The  crown  royal 
 
 *  (fays  he)  always  paffed  by  defcent,  and  not  by 
 
 *  eledion  :  which  ('befides  confent  of  authors)  the 
 
 *  fcriptures  alfo    prove.      For,   whereas  Jofeph 
 
 *  bought  all  the  land  of  Egypt /or  Pharaoh,  if  the 
 '  crown  had  palTed  by  eleftion,  then  fhould  Pha' 
 '  raoh*s  children  hereby   either  have    been    en- 
 
 *  thrall'd  among  the  reft  of  the  people,  to  the 
 
 *  next  fucceflbr,  or  enjoying  their  father's  land, 
 
 *  tho'  not  his  eftate  (or  royal  dignity,) have  been 
 
 *  more  mighty  than  the  King,  as  landlords  of  all 
 «  Egypt,  and  the  King  himlelf  their  {e)  tenant '. 
 
 When 
 
 [a)  Genef.  xxi.  23.  {h)  Whlji.  fcript.  polit.  p.  14.  (f) 
 'Exod.  xii.  29.     [d)  IJa.  xix.  U.      (t)  Rfileigfh  tiift.  fol.  200. 
 
the  Regal  Succession,   xj^ 
 
 When  Nahajh,  the  King  of  the  children  ofAm- 
 mon,  died,  Hznun  his fon  reigned  in  his  (a)ftead. 
 
 In  the  anfwer,  which  the  King  of  Tyr*?  return'd 
 to  Solomon^s  meffage,  he  tells  him,  he  has  fenthim 
 workmen  0/ Huram  his  {b) father;  which  fhews 
 that  he  was  his  father's  heir  in  that  kingdom. 
 
 When  the  King  of  Moab  facrificed  his  eldeft 
 fon,  it  is  written,  that  he  took  his  eldefi  fon  that 
 fljould  have  reigned  in  his  (c)fiead,  or  (zsjofephu^ 
 cxprefles  itj  who  ought  in  right  to  fucceed  him  in 
 the  (d)  kingdom  \  <  where  the  eldeft  fon  feems  to 
 *  be  in  Gourfe  fuppofed  the  {e)  fuccefTor '. 
 
 By  jB^^^zz^r's  inheriting  his  father  (/)Nebu- 
 chadnezzar*i  kingdom,  we  may  perceive  it  was  the 
 rule  in  that  country  alfo :  which  is  further  con- 
 firm'd  by  that  of  the  prophet  'Jeremy,  all  nations 
 Jhall  ferve  him,  and  his  fon,  and  his  fan's  (h")  fon» 
 
 From  which  hints  fand  feveral  others  in  the  ho- 
 ly fcripturesj,  we  may  conclude  the  general  ex- 
 tent of  the  law  of  hereditary  fucceffion  :  but,  as 
 that  may  be  more  amply  made  appear  from  other 
 authors,  this  may  fuffice  here. 
 
 LI  APPEN- 
 
 (a)  zSam.  x.  i.     and    i   Chron.  xix.  i.  (b)  2  Chrort. 
 
 ii.    13.         (^)  2  Kings  iii.    27.  {d)  Antiq.  Jud.  1.  ix.  c.  i. 
 
 {e)  Whift.  fcript.  polit.  p.  37.  But  it  was  the  King  oi Edo?n's 
 fon,  and  not  his  own,  whom  he  thus  facrificed  :  as  feems  clear 
 from  the  prophet,  (yf;W(?;  ii.  i.)  who  calls  him  the  King  oi  Edom, 
 becaufe  he  had  that  kingdom  in  his  view  in  right  of  primo- 
 geniture ;  as  the  learned  Archbifhop  UJher  obferves,  in  his  fer- 
 mon  in  the  IJle  of  Wight,  1648,  p.  10,  in  4to.  (/)  Dan, 
 
 ^'  **       CS^)  J^ff^'  xxvii.  7. 
 
XfB    TheSuo^r  History  <?/■ 
 
 APPENDIX. 
 
 S  to  the  Cmfars  ("or  Roman  emperors^ 
 that  is,  the  higher  powers^  to  whom 
 our  bleffed  Saviour  and  his  Apgltles, 
 have  taught  us  to  fuhmit  our  felves* 
 their  particular  titles  are  not  to  be  afcertain'd 
 from  the  holy  fcriptures  :  but  as  it  is  very  proper 
 to  know  fomewhat  thereof,  for  the  better  under- 
 ftanding  the  nature  and  extent  of  that  duty  of 
 fubjeftion,  the  following  extrad:  has  been  made, 
 with  all  due  brevity,  from  authors  of  undoubted 
 credit. 
 
 But,  to  obviate  all  objeflions,  as  if  (according 
 to  the  foregoing  hiftory,)  in  order  to  entitle  thefe 
 Roman  emperors  to  the  obedience  of  their  fubjeds, 
 for  confcience  fake,  I  ought  firft  to  prove  every 
 one  of  them  to  have  had  a  ftrid  hereditary  right 
 to  the  throne,  I  find  it  necvflary  to  premife,  that, 
 tho*  conqueft,  in  itfelf,  is  *  but  a  falfe  glofs,  put 
 *  on  the  word  and  blacked  of  crimes,  injuftice, 
 '  robbery,  and  cruelty  (^)  *,  and  therefore  can 
 give  no  prince  any  better  title  to  a  crown,  than 
 an  highway -man  has  to  any  purfe  he  can  catch: 
 yet,  'tis  agreed,  by  all  cafuifts,  that  power,  how- 
 
 foever 
 
 [a)  Bp.  Burnet's  ferm.  31  Decern.  1706.^ 
 
the  Regal  Succession.    1^9 
 
 foever  unlawfully  obrain'd,  may  be  legitimated, 
 and  commence  authority,  either  by  exprefs  reve- 
 lation from  God  Almighty,  as  that  of  Saul^  Da- 
 vid, and  Solomon  did,  or  by  the  utter  extindlion 
 and  failure  of  all  thofe  who  have  a  prior  righc> 
 like  that  of  Ahaziah  (ji)  abovementioned,  or  elfe 
 by  the  fubmiflion,  and  difclaimer  of  them  to 
 whom  the  crown  of  right  belongs :  in  any  of 
 which  cafes,  'tis  agreed,  the  pofleflbr  becomes 
 authoriz'd,  and  entitled  to  the  allegiance  of  his 
 fubjefts,  by  what  means  foever  he  became  poffeft 
 of  the  power ;  becaufe  he  then  requires  nothing 
 of  them,  but  what  is  in  their  own  power,  and 
 they  are  at  liberty  to  pay  him,  without  doing 
 wrong  to  any  third  perfon  :  for  that  is  the  greaC 
 objedion  againft  fubmiflion  to  powers  de  fa5fa^ 
 fo  long  as  there  are  any  others  claiming,  de 
 jure. 
 
 Now,  to  apply  this  to  the  cafe  before  us.  It 
 is  not  deny*d,  but  that,  when  our  Saviour  ap- 
 peared in  the  flefh,  the  fcepre  was  departed  from 
 Judah  ;  and  the  Jews  were  become  fubjeds  to 
 the  Romans^  by  the  dedition  or  fubmiflion  of  (b) 
 L  1  2  Hyrcanus  : 
 
 (a)  Pag,  1 86.  (^)  Bifbop  Burnet  (preaching  on  our  Savi- 
 our's command,  to  render  to  Caefar  the  things  which  are  Cas- 
 far'/,)  obferves,  that  •  about  an  hundred  years  before  this  time, 
 
 *  two  brothers,  of  the  pofterity  of  the  Maccakes,  quzrdkd  about 
 
 *  the  kingdom  :  and  the  younger  brother,  Ariftobulus,  being  too 
 
 *  hard   for  his  elder  brother.  Hire  anus  ^  he, claimed  the 
 
 *  proteftion  of  the  Romans Upon  ihnPompey  came,  and 
 
 *  took  Jerufalem :  but,  inftead  gf  reftoring  Hircmus,  which 
 
 ia 
 
0.6o    The  Short  History  of 
 
 Hyrcanus:  but  the  controverfy  is,  whether  the 
 emperors  then  reigning  Cto  whom  the  fubjedlion 
 was  commanded  in  the  gofpel^)  were  lawful  em- 
 perors ?  or  whether  the  fubjedlion  was  due  to  them 
 as  to  the  powers  for  the  time  in  being,  without 
 any  refped:  had  to  the  legality  or  illegality  of 
 their  titles? 
 
 This  being  the  queAion,  we  muft  obferve,  that 
 Atigufim  was  upon  the  throne  when  our  Saviour 
 was  born  :  and  therefore  we  muft  enquire  into  his 
 title,  as  well  as  thofe  of  'Tiberius^  Caligula,  Clau- 
 dius and  Nero  ;  wjio  are  all  that  come  within  the 
 compafs  of  this  controverry.     And  all  thefewere 
 
 lawful 
 
 *  in  juftice  he  ought  to  have  done,  he — reduced  Judaa  unto 
 '  the  form  of  a  province.     From  that  time  the  Romans 
 
 *  treated  the  nation  as  fubje£t  to  them  '.  (Bp.  Bum.  ferm.  29 
 May,  1710,  p.  3,  4.)  And  he  repeats  it  again,  '  certainly  Pom- 
 
 *  pey  ought  to  have  reftored  Hirranus  to  his  right,  according 
 
 *  to  the  alliance  that  the  Romans  had  made  with  his  anceftors  '. 
 But  as  he  has  ftated  the  cafe,  it  appears,  that  the  Romans  had  the 
 Jews  in  fubjeftion  by  right  of  conquejl ,  and  that  in  '  a  v/ar 
 
 *  begun  upon  jull  and  lawful  grounds:  and  [ashe  himfelfhad 
 
 *  affinned  on  ano!h:r  occafion,)  it  is  the  uncontroverted  opinion 
 
 *  of  alllawyers,  that  the  fuccefs  of  a  jull  war  gives  a  lawful 
 
 *  title  to  that  which  is  acquired  in  the  progrefs  of  it  '.  (Pall,  let- 
 ter, 1689,  p.  20.)   And  had  he  taken  notice,  that  Hyrcnnus  was 
 
 *  a  quiet  indolent  rnan,  who had  no  ambition  for  reigning'. 
 
 ^Prid.  conneft.  vol.  ii.  par.  ii.  b.  vi.)  he  could  not  have  wonder'd 
 at  PoTnpey\  not  reftoring  him.  However,  it  feems,  the  right 
 of  primogeniture,  even  in  Bifhop  Burnet's  opinion,  was  fo 
 facred,  that  in  juftice  it  ought  not  to  have  been  defeated  :  and  it 
 is  certain,  that  the  dijfention,  occafion'd  by  the  interruption 
 thereof,  '  was  the  caufe  of  the  Jews  lofs  of  foveraignty  and 
 
 *  liberty,  which  the  Romans  never  before  of  themfelves  at- 
 « tempted  '.  HomlP^  hili  bib,  vol.  ii>  p.  Z^^»  edit,  2j  in  8yo. 
 
/^^  Regal  Succession.    %6i 
 
 lawful  emperors  -,  as  in  the  following  extraft  will 
 be  made  appear. 
 
 For  fnoc  to  infift  here  upon  the  manner  of  ac- 
 quiring it,  which  indeed  was  by  refiftance  and 
 rebellion,  as  all  other  popular  ftates  andcommon- 
 wealihs  began^  the  fupreme  power  was  vefted  in 
 the  fenate  of  Rome,  as  reprefentatives  of  the 
 people  ;  and  that,  without  any  claim  or  pretenfion 
 kept  up  by  their  Kings,  or  any  other  competi- 
 tion to  the  contrary  :  fo  that  they  were  then 
 pofTeft  of  the  government,  in  the  fame  manner 
 as  our  neighbours,  the  Dutch,  have  been,  ever 
 fince  the  Kings  of  Spain  dropp'd  their  claim  of 
 foveraignty  over  them.  I  fay,  the  fupreme  power 
 was  thus  in  the  fenate,  without  any  competition, 
 when  Julius  Ccsfar,  having  overcome  Pompej^ 
 made  himfelf  abfolute  mafter  of  the  liberties  of 
 Rome  :  but  the  fenate,  and  people,  who  before 
 had  it  in  their  own  hands,  having  immediately 
 made  him  a  compliment  thereof  for  his  life,  that 
 a£t  of  theirs  gave  him  a  good  right  and  authori- 
 ty to  what  he  had  before  in  his  power  ;  fo  that 
 he  was  undoubtedly  their  lawful  foveraign  from 
 thenccforwards,  without  any  competition,  folong 
 as  he  liv'd,  and  was  obey*d  by  them  as  fuch. 
 Nor  was  that  all  :  for  he  Was  received  with  the 
 greateft  joy  imaginable,  and  inverted  with  fuch 
 honours  and  power,  as  they  had  never  before  con- 
 ferr*d  on  any.  In  Ihort,  they  made  him  all  thai 
 was  great,  and  never  thought  they  had  enough 
 to  bellow  upon  him  *,  till  he,  beginning  to  exer- 
 
 cife  the  power  they  ha4  given  him,  was  afTafii- 
 
 nated. 
 
^6i    The  Short  History  of 
 
 nated,  in  the  fenate-houfe,  under  pretence  of 
 the  publick  good,  and  reftoring  the  libert-j  of  the 
 fuhje^  y  and  that  too,  by  a  fett  of  confpirators, 
 who  were  all  under  the  greatcft  perfonal  obliga- 
 tions to  him. 
 
 But  *  publick  good,  reformation  of  abufes,  and 
 
 *  zeal   for   religion,  are  ever  pretended,  and  as 
 
 *  conflantly  invaded,  in  the  courfe  of  fuch  pro- 
 <  cecdings,  till  at  laft,  the  well-meaning,  that  for 
 
 *  the  fake  of  thefe  were  drawn  in  to  aflift,  find 
 
 *  themfelves  cheated  out  of  them  all  (a)  \  Thus 
 the  people,  foon  finding  themfelves  difappointed 
 of  the  advantages  which  the  confpirators  had  flat- 
 ter'd  them  withal,  began  to  mutiny,  and  burn 
 their  houfes  ("as  they  defer v*dj  ;  which  gave  O^Ia- 
 vius  Aiigujlus  a  fair  opportunity  to  ingratiate 
 himfelf  with  the  Senate  and  people,  by  purfuing 
 the  regicides  to  death.  After  which,  and  his 
 vi6lory  over  his  competitors,  he  fo  wrought  up- 
 on the  Senate,  that  they  befought  him  earnellly 
 to  take  the  empire  upon  himfelf  alone.  Whereby 
 all  the  authority  of  the  Senate  and  people  being 
 freely  and  voluntarily  transferr'd  and  confirm'd 
 to  Aiigujliis,  by  their  own  aft,  the  imperial  power 
 thenceforwards  became  a  legal  conftitution,  and 
 was  indeed  thoroughly  fettled  and  eftablifh'd  in 
 him  ;  as  is  acknowledged,  by  bilhop  Stilling  fleet 
 (h),  as  well  as  by  all  other  writers.  Befides, 
 fo  forward  were  they,  in  invefting  him  with  the 
 
 fupreme 
 
 (tz)  'E'p.Chand/.  ferm.  ^o  jfan.  1717,  p.  27.         (ij  Un- 
 jsafv  of  new  feparat.  1689,  P-  39' 
 
/Z?^' Regal  Succession     a(Jg 
 
 fupreme  power,  that  as  the  fame  learned  luthor 
 obferves  from  Dio,  they  offered  to  bind  their  al- 
 legiance to  him  by  oaths :  which,  however,  he 
 wifely  refus'd,  for  this  reafon  •,  *  he  confidered 
 '  well,  that  if  they  gave  their  free  conlcnt,  they 
 
 *  would  do  what  they  promis'd  without  fwearing, 
 «  and  if  they  did  not,  all  the  oaths  in  the  world 
 
 *  would  not  make  {a)  them'. 
 
 Thus  was  he  confefTedly  a  lawful  foveraign,  in 
 obedience  to  whofe  decree,  ^ofeph  and  Mary  Cthen 
 big  with  childjwent  up  to  Jerufalem,  to  be  taxed 
 (h) ;  and  in  whofe  time  our  bleffed  Saviour  chofc 
 to  appear  in  the  flefh. 
 
 Auguftus  dying,  'Tiberius  (whom  he  had  adopted, 
 and  made  his  partner  in  the  empire^  was  left  with 
 the  power  in  his  hand,  and  without  any  rival, 
 Cno  Pretender  appearing  to  put  in  a  claim  againfl 
 him) :  fo  that  the  Romans,  of  all  degrees,  crowd* 
 ed,  to  Jhew  their  forwardnefs  to  fubje^  themfelves 
 to  (b)  him.  And,  after  many  earned  entreaties 
 on  the  one  part,  and  feign'd  refufals  on  the 
 other,  he  was  at  length,  as  it  were  conipeird,  or 
 forced,  with  fome  feeming  reluStancy,  to  take  the 
 government  upon  him,  as  a  man  does  a  burthen, 
 upon  his  Jhoulders,    meerly  to  oblige  the  (d)  people. 
 
 Thus  was  this  Emperor  in  the  throne,  during 
 all  the  time  of  our  Saviour^s  preaching.  And, 
 as  he  had  all  the  right   that  was  then  required, 
 
 accord- 
 
 (a)  Uunreaf.  of  new  feparat.  1689,  p.  40.  Ci>J  St.  Lukf 
 ii.  1.  (cj  Tacit,  ann-  1.  i.  Romse  ruere  in  fervitium  conlu- 
 les,  patres,  eq^uites,        (<ij  Quaft  coaftus.  Suetori.  p.  24. 
 
^6^4    T'^^  Short  History  ^/ 
 
 according  to  the  (a)  conftitution  of  that  empire : 
 fo  was  that  right  confirm'd  to  him  by  our  5^- 
 viour  himfclf,  who  was  the  natural  horn  King  of 
 the  Q>)  Jews,  and  whofe  pedigree  is  dcriv'd  in  a 
 dired  line  of  hereditary  defcent,  from  Ahrahanty 
 by  St.  Matthew  {c)y  and  from  Adam  by  St.  Luke 
 (d).  For,  whcn*the  queftion  was  put  to  him, 
 concerning  the  pa'jment  of  tribute  to  Cefar  (e),  he 
 did  not  only  determine  it  in  favour  of  C^far,  as 
 a  duty  (f)  to  him ;  but  likewife,  to  make  it  flill 
 more  exemplary,  he  wrought  a  miracle  to  pay 
 the  fame  for  himfelf :  and  when  the  people  would 
 
 have 
 
 fa)  Great  pains  is  taken,  to  draw  a  parallel  between  the 
 conftitution  of  the  Roma?i  empire,  and  that  of  other  king(ioms, 
 where  the  fucceffion  is  undoubtedly  hereditary  ;  and  thereup- 
 on to  infmuate,  that  the  Emperor  here  treated  of  was  no  bet- 
 ter than  a  meer  ufurper,  the  right  heir  being  then  known :  (Bp. 
 Burnet,  paft.  lett.  1689.  p.  10.)  Whereas 'tis  certain,  there 
 was  then  no  fuch  pretender  as  a  right  heir;  as  the  reader  may 
 be  fully  convinc'd,  by  Dr.  Hickes^  in  his  Jovian,   1683,  P-  S 
 
 l^c.         (i> J  St.  Matt.   ii.  2.        (c) chap.  i.         (d)^t. 
 
 Luke  iii.  (e)  St.  Matt.  xxii.  17,  &c.  and  St.  Mark  xii.  13, 
 &c.  (f)  His  anfwer  was  only  in  general,  render  unto  Cae- 
 far  the  things  which  are  Cxfar's  ;  which  was  not  properly  2 
 determination,  what  was  Cafar*s  :  but  only  a  command  to  re- 
 fiare  every  man  his  own :  for  as  the  queftion  was  put  to  him 
 with  a  premeditated  defign  to  take  advantage  againft  him  from 
 his  own  words,  fo  was  his  anfwer  guarded  with  caution  to 
 avoid  the  fnare.  But,  to  fay,  that  becaufe  the  Roman  coin  was 
 then  current  among  them,  CaefarV  image  and fuperfcription  upon  it 
 was,  of  itfelf,  a  fufficient  proof  of  his  being  cntitl'd  to  their  al- 
 legiance, (as  fome  people  argue  upon  occafion,)  is  as  abfurd,  as 
 to  infer  Oliverh  right  to  our  allegiance,  from  his  breeches-mo- 
 vey,  which  was  current  here  among  us  for  fome  time,  even  (I 
 believe)  after  our  rightful  foveraign's  rcftoration  I 
 
/^^  Regal  Succession.   z^S" 
 
 have  taken  him  by  force  to  make  him  a  King^  hede*'. 
 farted  into  a  mountain  himfelf  {a)  alone*  Nor  did 
 he  only  thus  waive  his  claim,  and  fubmit  himfelf 
 to  Ccefar^  but  he  declared  alfo,  that  his  kingdom 
 was  not  of  this  world:  If  my  kingdom  were  of 
 this  world  (Taid  he,^  then  would  my  fervants  fight 
 (h)  i  exprefling  thereby  the  great  duty  indifpen- 
 fibly  incumbent  upon  all  fubjeds,  in  general,  to 
 afiift  and  fight  for  their  natural  foveraign,  when? 
 ever  his  fervice  requires  it.  So  far  was  he  from 
 authorizing,  what  Mr.  Whiflon  dreams  of,  ihs 
 duty  of  fiibjeSts  to  leave  their  King  {c\  unajfiftedy 
 when  invaded !  For  what  a  late  divine  faid  of 
 EngUfhmen,  is  equally  true,  of  all  fubjefts,  that 
 they  are  all  '  born  fubjeds  to  their  lawful  prince : 
 '  and   tho*  they  have  never  taken  any   oath  of 
 
 *  allegiance  to  him,  they  areas  much  liable,— - 
 
 *  as   if    they  had  been  under  the  obligation  of 
 
 *  a  thoufand  folemn  oaths  and  promifes  (Jj  *. 
 And  that  '  the  fubjeds  or  fervants  of  all  lawful 
 '  princes  are  obliged,    by  the   very  nature    of 
 
 *  government,    and  the  agreement  of  all  man- 
 
 *  kind,  to  endeavour,  by  the  force  of  arms,  if 
 «  otherwife  they   cannot,  to  refcue  and  defend 
 
 *  their  foveraigns,  from  any  injuries  offered  them 
 «  by  any  of  their  enemies  (e) '. 
 
 But  as,  in  this  particular  cafe,  our  bleffcd  Sa- 
 viour did  not  make  any  claim  of  his  right :  io 
 M  m  neither 
 
 (a)  St.  Johnv'i.  15.         (l>) xviii.  36.     (c)WhiJi. 
 
 fcript.  polit.  dedic.  p.  iv.  (d)  Mllbourne'&  fcrm.  30  Jan, 
 
%66    TheSuoRT  History  of 
 
 neither  would  he  fuffer  his  followers  to  refifl  the 
 civil  power  which  himfelf  had  authoriz'd,  tho*, 
 at  that  very  inftant,  it  was  imploy*d  on  a  moft 
 wicked  defign  (even  no  lefs  than  the  death  of  the 
 Saviour  of  the  world,^  but  fharply  reprov'd  P^/^-r's 
 unwarrantable  zeal  5  declaring  that  all  they  that 
 tah  (afifume,  or  ufurp)  the  fword^  Jloall  ferijh  with 
 the  (a)  jword.  And,  to  fhew  that  it  was  not  for 
 want  of  fufficient  power  to  defend  himfelf,  he 
 adds,  Ihinkejl  thou  that  I  cannot  now  pray  to  my 
 father^  and  he  Jhall  prefently  give  me  more  than 
 twelve  legions  of  (b)  angels  ?  that  is,  a  force  niore 
 than  enough  to  have  routed  both  the  Jews  and 
 Romans :  but  (as  St.  Peter  himfelf  afterwards  de- 
 clares, j  our  blefled  Saviour  fujfered  for  an  example 
 to  us,  that  we  Jhould  folloiv  his  fteps ',  who  did  no 
 fin,  neither  was  guile  found  in  his  mouth  ;  whoy 
 when  he  was  reviled.,  reviled  not  again,  when  he 
 juffered,  he  threatned  not,  hut  committed  himfelf  to 
 him  that  judgeth  (c)  righteoufly.  All  which  the 
 infpired  apoftle  applies  to  our fuffering  wrongfully 
 and  patiently  -,  as  part  of  our  portion  or  {d)  calling : 
 and  tis  plain,  the  fulfilling  the  work  of  our  re- 
 demption could  not  be  the  fole  confideration  of 
 Chrijl^s  not  refifting,  becaufe  that  would  have 
 been  no  example  to  us,  who  cannot  pofTibly  fol- 
 low his  fteps  in  that  refpeft. 
 
 This   conlideration  alone,    one   would    think, 
 might  be  fufficient  to  ft  op  the  mouths  of  gainfayers, 
 
 and 
 
 (a)  St.  Matt.  xxvi.  ^z.         (b) vcrf.  53.         (c)\Pct. 
 
/Z?^  Regal  Succession,    i^j 
 
 and  to  condemn  the  fenfelefs  and  wicked  com- 
 ments of  thofc  modern  interpreters,  who  falfly 
 pretend,  that  the  followers  of  this  divine  exainple 
 in  the  primitive  ages,  dad  patiently  fuffer^  only  for 
 want  of  power  to  refift,  and  nor.  for  confcience  fake  I 
 Cwhich  a  late  learned  perfon  truly  calls  an  intolera- 
 ile  reproach  to  (a,  Cbrijlianity  O  and  who  induftri- 
 oufly  infinuatc,  that,  under  the  general  words, 
 whereby  our  obedience  is  injoin'd,  there  are  cer- 
 tain exceptions  implfd^  of  cafes  of  necejfity,  rof 
 which  the  people  themfelves,  or  any  mutinous 
 party  of  them,  are  to  be  the  judges,  when  they 
 lawfully  may  fyea,  and  are  in  duty  bound  to)  refift 
 authority,  for  the  fecurity  of  religion,  or  what  any- 
 prevailing  party  [b)  is  pleas'd  to  call  fo.  But,  who- 
 ever they  be,  that  propagate  principles,  that  encou- 
 rage rebellion  and  treafonable  pra^ices,  '  with  which 
 '  too  many  corrupt  and  fpurious  Protejlants  ha.vQ 
 '  declared  themfelves  to  be  infedted,  to  the  great 
 
 «  fcandal  of  our  holy  religion, they  are  noC 
 
 <  Protefiants  in  imbibing  them  j  nay,  they  are  Pa- 
 '  pijls  in  fo  doing,  for  'tis  very  well  known,  they 
 '  at  leaft  originally  received  them  from  their  (c') 
 '  books '.  'Tis  certain,  '  never  caufe  of  religioa 
 M  m  2  '  was 
 
 (a)  ZtiUingfl.  ferm.  7  Mar.  1678,  p.  50.  Who  there  alfo, 
 fpeaking  of  the  propagators  of  fuch  fallacious  notions,  fays,  *we 
 *  are  fure,  whofe  difciplcs  focvcr  they  pretend  to  be,  they  are 
 none  of  ChriJT^'' \  ibid.  p.  52.  [h)  Thus  the  heatlicn 
 Bulgarians  took  armsagainft  their  King,  bscaitfe  he  zuas  converlsd 
 to  the  Chriftian  religion  ;  (as  Zonaras  tells  us,  torn,  iii.)  and  {o 
 may  the  wildeft  offspring  of  herefy  do  upon  the  fame  fpecious 
 pretence  of  confcience  and  religion.  (c)V>x.T.-:'!r:^ :  ^y^ . 
 of  offences,   1683, p.  ii,  19. 
 
z6S    The  Short  Hist  ory  of 
 
 «  was  of  fo  great  concern,  as  the  preierving  the 
 
 <  head  and  author  of  (a)  it  * ;  and  therefore  the 
 condud  of  our  blefTed  Saviour,  in  his  own  cafe, 
 
 *  doth  fo  exprefly  difcharge  all  bulling  and  fight- 
 
 <  ing,  on  the  pretence  of  religion,  that  we  muft 
 «  either  fet  up  for  another  gofpel,  or  utterly  re- 
 
 *  je6t  what  is  fo  formally  condemned  by  the  au- 
 
 <  thor  of  this  we  profefs  to  (J?)  believe  *  :  for 
 whether  St.  PeUr  be  confider'd  as  a  Bijbop  or  a 
 Presbyter,  at  that  time,  «  this  command,  to  put 
 «  up  his  fwordy  equally  concerns  him  in  all  capa- 
 
 *  cities;  and  ought   to  fecure  fovereign  princes 
 
 *  from  the  unjuft  ufurpations  and  treacherous  con- 
 «  fpiracies  both  oi  Geneva  and  (c)Rome'.  But 
 I  fhall  clofe  this  point  with  a  juft  conclufion  of 
 a  great  man  now  living,  drawn  from  this  very 
 cafe,  that  *  if  neither  the  malice  of  the  7^wj,  nor 
 
 *  the  innocence  of  our  Lord  ;  if  neither  the  truth 
 «  of  our  religion,  perfecuted  in  its  founder,  nor 
 
 *  the  apparent  marks  of  malice  and  envy,  of  vio- 
 
 *  lence  and  oppreflion,  which   appeared    in   the 
 
 *  whole  courfe  of  their  prolecution  of  him,  were 
 
 *  fufEcient  to  warrant  St.  Peler  to  draw  the  fword 
 '  in  his  defence,  againft  that  legal  authority  by 
 '  which  they  aftcd  j  we  rauft  conclude,  that  nei- 
 «  iher  will  any  of  thefe  pretences  fu  15 ce  tojuftify 
 
 *  any  other  ChriJliaNs,  in  the  like  circumftances 
 «  now  :  but  if  it  fliall  pleafe  God,  at  any  time,  to 
 i  permit  the  lawful  powers  to  be  againft  us,  and 
 «  make  them  that  hate  us   to  rule  over  us,  we 
 
 muft 
 
 fa)  Dr.  Burn.   Term.  6  Dec.    1674,  p- 41.  {^J   Ibid- 
 
 i()  Dr.  Sher/.  cafe  of  refill,  p.  63. 
 
/Z?^  Regal  Succession.    z6^ 
 
 «  muft  follow  the  example  of  our  blefled  Mafter, 
 
 *  and  fubmic    patiently  to  their  authority  ;  and 
 
 *  not,  with  this  warm  apoftle,  take  the /word  againfl, 
 
 *  thofe,  to  whom  God  has  committed  the  poV:  " 
 «  of  the  fword  {a)  *.  And  this  he  very  prop.fii^- 
 calls  tht  true  Chrijlian  do5frine  of  fuhmijjion  Tor,  in 
 other  words,  paflive  obedience  and  non-rcfiftance^ 
 to  the  civil  magtjlrate.  For,  this  our  blcfTed  Sa- 
 viour himfelf  taught  us,  when  he  patiently  fub- 
 mitted  himfelf  to  die  by  the  judgment  of  Pilate 
 (who  adtedby  the  lawful  emperor's  commiflion,) 
 acknowledging,  that  his  power  was  given  him  from 
 above  ih).  '  The  blefied  apoftles  followed  their 
 Mailer's  jieps,  in  this  as  in  all  other  things,,  and 
 <  counted  it  their  glory  to  be  conformable  to 
 «  him    in    his  fufFerings.  ■ And,    as  long  as 
 
 *  Chriftianity  continu'd  pure  and  unallay'd,  this 
 '  dodrinc  gave  proofs  of  its  reality,  by  the  un- 
 
 *  exampled  patience  and  fufFerings  of  the  Chrijli. 
 
 *  ans,  in  a  f  jcceflion   of  three   ages,  and  ten  (c) 
 
 *  perfecutions  '  !  Out  of  due  tegard  to  them 
 therefore,  we  might  have  expe<5led  fofter  terms 
 than  thofe  of  a,  JIaviJh  principle !  a  bloody  do^rinef 
 the  do5lrine  of  the  bow- firing  I  &c.  which  have  been 
 borrow'd  from  the  infam.ous  life  of  Julian  the 
 apojlate,  by  certain  perfons,  who  would  perfwadc 
 
 us, 
 
 (a)  Bp.  Wake^i  ferm.  30  Jan.  1707,  p.  1 1,  in  8vo.  (b) 
 St.  John  xix.  II.  (c)  Dr.  Burnet's  ferm.  6  Dece?n.  1674, 
 p.  41,  &c.  edit.  1710,  in  8vo.  where  'tis  obferv'd,  that,  in  one 
 of  thefe  perfecutions,  and  in  the  province  of  Egjpt  alone,  there 
 were  no  fewer  than  8  or  9,000,000  of  martyrs ;  and  yet  no  tu~ 
 were  rais'd  againll  all  this  tyranny  and  injuftice. 
 
a7o   The  Short  History^ 
 
 us,  that  this  doctrine  '  is  inconfiftent  with  the  law 
 of  reafon,  with  the  law  of  nature,  and  with  the 
 
 praiflice  of  all  ages  and  countries, firfl  in- 
 
 ^'■ented  to  fupport  arbitrary  and  defpotick  power  j 
 ^—tending  to  enflave  a  free  nation,  to  foment 
 divifions  and  parties',  ^c.  But  *  indeed  in  an 
 age,  when  fome  are  bold  enough,  (  becaufe 
 with  impunity  they  dare}  to  attack  our  Saviour's 
 divinity,  what  refpeft  do  we  think  they  can  pay 
 to  his  (a)  doftrine  '  ?  However,  notwithftanding 
 
 all  the  feoffs  and  railings  of  Rahjhakehy  *  there 
 arc  th^ee  ways  of  proving  and  confirming  the 
 do6trine  of  non-refiftance,  or  fubjeftion  to  fo- 
 vereign  princes-,  i.  By  the  teftimonies  of  the 
 holy  fcriptures  j  2.  By  the  do6lrine  and  pradice 
 of  the  primitive  Chrijtians  j  3 .  By  the  fundamen- 
 tal conflitutions  of  that  particular  government 
 under  which  we  (h)  live  *.     So  that  Dr.  Burnet- 
 
 might  truly  make  this  refledlion,  that,  '  among 
 all  the  herefies  this  age  has  fpawn'd,  there  is 
 not  one  more  contrary  to  the  whole  defign  of 
 religion,  and  more  deflru6live  of  mankind, 
 than  that  bloody  opinion  of  defending  religion 
 by  arms,  and  forcible  refiflance  upon  the  colour 
 of  preferving  religion  :  the  wifdom  of  this  po- 
 licy is  earthly,  fenfual  and  devilijh  ;  favouring 
 of  a  carnal,  unmortify'd  and  unpatient  mind, 
 that  cannot  bear  the  crofs,  nor  truft  the  pro- 
 vidence oi (c')  God'. 
 
 That 
 
 (a)  Jufticc  done  to  the  facred  text,  feV.  A  ferm.  1 2  May, 
 1 71 7,  by  G.  C.  A.  M.  p.  20.  {l>)  Dr.  S&er/.  cafe  of  refift. 
 p.  2.  fcj  Pref.  to  vind.  of  the  church  and  ftate  of  Scet- 
 hrJ,  1673. 
 
/>&^  Regal  Succession     zyi 
 
 That  the  Jews  paid  fubmilTion  to  the  Rommn 
 emperor,  as  a  duty  to  their  lawful  foveraign,  wc 
 may  gather  from  the  rage  or  fury  wherewith  they 
 profecuted  our  Saviour  as  an  enejn^j  to  Ctsfar* 
 When  they  brought  him  before  Pilate^  they  ac- 
 cufed  him  with  perverting  the  ?2ation,  and  forlid- 
 ding  to  give  tribute  to  {a)  Csefar  !  When  Pilate 
 fhew'd  an  incHnation  to  releafe  him,  they  cry'd 
 out.  If  thou  let  this  man  go  thou  art  not  Csefar'i 
 (h)  friend!  And  again,  when  he  faid  unto  them, 
 Jhall  I  crucif'j  pur  King  ?  the  chief  priejis  anfwer'd, 
 we  have  no  King  but  {c)  Casfar ;  thereby  exprefly 
 affirming,  that  Ctsfar  was  their  lawful  foveraign, 
 without  any  competitor. 
 
 Such  was  the  right  of  1'iberius,  by  whofe  autho- 
 rity our  blelTed  Saviour  was  put  to  death.  But  I 
 can't  leave  it  without  this  remark,  relating  to 
 the  refiftance  of  that  authority,  that,  as  Peter  (from. 
 whom  the  Pope  pretends  to  claim  his  fupremacy  j 
 was  the  perfon  refitting,  fo  the  perfon  wounded 
 and  miraculouflyheal'd  again,  was  call'd  ((ij  M^/- 
 <:/&«j  (which  in  the  original  fignifies  a  King;)  not 
 without  a  myftery,  to  fhcw  us  the  unlawfulnefs  of 
 that  unchriftian  dodrine  of  killing  and  depofmg 
 lawful  kings,  fo  much  contended  for  by  fome  of 
 the  worft  of  papifts^  and  from  them  taken  up  by 
 the  worft  of  thofe  who  call  themfelves  (e")  Prote- 
 Jlants ! 
 
 After 
 
 (z)  St.  Luke  xxiii,  2.        (l^)  St.  John  xix.  12.        (c) 
 
 verf.  15.         {d)    St.  Luke  xxn.   51.  and  St.  John  xvm.   lo- 
 (e)  Sccalarge  catalogue  gf  thelUce  principles,  adopted  by  the  P//- 
 
 ritansg 
 
%"]!    The  Short  History  of 
 
 After  Tiherius's  death,  Caligula  (who  was  the 
 feople^s  darling  for  his  father* s  fakej  by  the  joint 
 confent  of  the  fenate  and  people^  was  declar'd  em*. 
 feror^  and  the  whoh  fovereign  power  C^)lodg'd  in 
 his  hands :  but,  being  in  a  (hort  time  flain  by  fome 
 of  the  difappointed  people,  he  was  fucceeded  by  a 
 riotous  anarchy  (as  is  common  in  all  elective  king- 
 doms,) till  Claudius  was  found  out,  and  rais'd  to 
 the  throne,  by  common  confent.  And  he,  having 
 adopted  Nero,  his  fuccefTion  was  eafily  accom- 
 plilh'd  after  Claudiuses  death. 
 
 During  all  which  fuccefilons,  there  is  not  indeed 
 the  leaft  footftep  of  a  lineal  hereditary  defcent  in 
 the  Roman  empire,  but  the  fucceflion  to  the  im- 
 perial throne  was  eledive,  cafual,  uncertain,  and 
 arbitrary  :  and  whofoever  obtained  the  fovereign 
 power  by  the  confent  of  the  fenate  and  people, 
 was  the  undoubted  lawful  fovcraign,  according 
 to  the  conflitution  of  the  Roman  empire.  Becaufe 
 (as  I  faid  before)  there  was,  after  that,  no  fuch 
 thing  as  a  competition  for  the  throne,  nor  any  pre- 
 tender 
 ritans,  outof  the  writings  o^  Jefuits,  and  other  known  Papi/is,in 
 Dr.  HzV/fri's  ferm.  30  Jan.  1681,  p.  17,  &c.  And  whoever 
 is  curious  to  obferve  the  harmony  (both  in  principle  and  pra- 
 Gicc,)  between  thofe  two  parties,  notwithftanding  their  pre- 
 tended oppofition,  may  find  ample  proof  of  it  in  Archbiihop 
 Bancroft^  book,  entitled  Davgeroits  pofitions  and  proceedings  (fe- 
 veral  times  reprinted  ;)  Mr.  Dav.  Owen's  Herod  and  Pilate  re- 
 conciled, l^c.  1 610.  Dr.  Hey/i»''shi{\.OTy  oi^tke  Presiyterianf, 
 1672.  Mr.  Hen.  For/ /is'' sh'iH.  of  the  plots,  ^e.  of  our  pre- 
 tended Saints,  1674.  ^^-  ^are'*&  foxes  and  firebrands ^  1682. 
 Mr.  Tho.  Long's,  hiit.  of  the  fame  confpiracics,  1684.  and  ma' 
 3iy  more. 
 
 {a)  Sue  ton.  p.  14.  \ 
 
the^^GAL  Succession.    173 
 
 tender  to  a  better  title  :  and,  I  believe, 'tis  agreed 
 on  all  fides,  that  poflefTion  howfoever  obtain'd, 
 muft  be  prefum'd  to  be  rightful,  until  a  better 
 title  (a)  appears.  So  that,  in  a  word,  I  fhall 
 make  no  doubt  of  all  the  above-named  empe- 
 rors being  lawfully  poffefsM  of  the  fovereign 
 power,  at  lead,  till  I  am  inform'd  who  were 
 better  intitled  thereto,  and  whether  fuch  better 
 title  was  kept  up,  and  aflerted,  in  oppofition  to 
 ^he  pofleflbr ;  that  is  (as  we  commonly  exprefs 
 't  now-a-days,  whether  there  were  princes  dejure^ 
 pretending  to,  or  claiming  the  throne,  againft 
 thofe  who  were  only,  de  faUo^   in  pofTeflion  of 
 
 it. 
 
 The  learned  Mr.  Locke  Cwhofe  principles  have 
 
 the  authority  of  a  gofpel  with  fome  of  our  ad- 
 verfariesjj  lays  it  down  as  a  certain  rule,  that 
 there  is  no  ufurpalion,  hut  where  one  is  got  into  the 
 fojfejfwn  of  what  another  has  right  (b^  to.  From 
 whence  we  muft  infer,  that,  tho*  poflefiion,  in 
 itfelf  alone,  is  no  bar  to  a  real  and  proper 
 right,  when  aflerted  and  prov'd,  but  the  unjuft 
 poneffor  is  bound  in  law  and  confcience  to  make 
 reftitution  to  the  right  owner :  yet,  when  no  body 
 N  n  is 
 
 {a)  A  late  ingenious  writer  illuftrates  this  by  a  very  familiar 
 
 example.     *  Suppofe  (fays  he)  I  fliould  rob  you  of  your  hat. 
 
 This  does  not  give  me  a  right  againft  you  :  but  it  gives  mc 
 
 *  fuch  a  right  to  it,    that  if  another  fhould  rob  me  of  that  hat, 
 it  would  be  robbery  in  him  ;  and,  tho'  he  fliouId  prove,   at 
 
 *  his  tryal,  that  I  had  robb'd  you  of  that  hat,   it  would  be  no 
 
 *  juftification  of  him,  becaufc  he  could  fhew  no  right  that  hg 
 '  had  to  it  '.  {LeJIie's)  rehearf  vol.  i.  n.  66.  {t/}  Loch's  two 
 treatif  ofgovernm.  b.  ii.  ch.xvii.  efufurpatiim,  p.  8.  41 
 
X74-    The  Short  History  of 
 
 is  injured,  fas  it  is  to  be  taken  for  granted,  where 
 no  pretender  aflferts  any  right,)  polTeflion  fuppofes 
 a  right  •,  and  as  fuch  is  to  be  regarded,  as  well 
 in  relation  to  government,  as  to  private  property. 
 And,  this   being  the  cafe,  I  cannot  fee  any  con- 
 clufions  to  be  fairly  drawn,  (however  artfully  they 
 have  been  attempted,^  from  St.  Paul'j   behaviour 
 towards  the  civil  magijirate,  in  favour  of  the  dar- 
 ling dodrine  of  refinance  ;  nor  any  inconfiftency 
 between  the  apoftle*s  praftice  and  his  precept  : 
 iinlefs   his    appeal   from    an  inferior   magiftrate, 
 (who  was  willing  to  do  the  Jews  a  pleafure^  by  gi- 
 ring  him  up  to  their  mercy,)  to  Cafar  (a)  himfelf, 
 who  was  the  undifputed  fupreme,  can  with  any 
 good   fenfe  be  call'd  a   refinance  of   the   higher 
 powers  to  whom  he  had  commsinded  every  Jcul  to 
 he  fuhje^  for  confcience  {h)  fake  I 
 
 Divers  other  fallacies  might  here  be  pertinently 
 cxpos'd,  amongft  our  modern  expofitions  (ov  per- 
 verfions)  of  this  apoftolical  precept:  but,  to  avoid 
 being  more  tedious,  I  ihall  only  recommend  the 
 following  obfervations  to  the  memory  of  every 
 ingenuous  reader.  When  we  confider  the  quali- 
 ties of  that  C^far,  to  whom  St.  Paul  fo  ftridlly 
 injom'd  2Lfubje^ion  under  pain  of  damnation,  and 
 to  whom  he  appealed,  as  the  dernier  refort,  in  his 
 own  cafe,  we  may  be  fure,  it  was  all  out  of  re- 
 gard to  his  authority,  as  being  the  lawful  higher 
 power,  or  fupreme  governour,  and  as  fuch  the 
 minifier  of  God  3  and  not  with  refped  to  his  perfo- 
 
 nal 
 
 {a)  ABs  XXV.  II.         (b)  Rom\\^, 
 
the  Regal  Succession.    275* 
 
 nal  virtue^  goodnefs  and  defert:  for  Nero  (in  whofe 
 reign  this  happcn'd,  as  Chronologen  generally 
 agrec^  was  not  only  a  Heatbefi,  and  violent  perfe- 
 cutor  of  the  true  religion,  but  even  a  monfter  in 
 morality  ;  fo  that,  as  his  dominion  cannot  truly  be 
 faid  to  have  been  foufided  in  grace,  neither  can  his 
 want  of  grace  to  anfwer  fwhat  fome  people  affe<ft 
 to  call)  the  end  of  this  injlitution,  be  faid  to  amount 
 to  ?L  forfeiture  of  his  right  to  his  fubjecfs  obedience, 
 without  openly  flying  in  the  face  of  the  infpir'd 
 apoftle  I  And  again,  when  we  meet  with  others 
 gravely,    and   dogmatically,    pronouncing,    that 
 
 *  when    St.  Paul  writ  to   the  Cbrijlians  of  Rome, 
 
 *  he  is  exprefs  in  this,  that  they  fhould  not  trou- 
 
 *  ble   themfelves    with   inquiries   into   titles,  but 
 
 *  fliould  take  things  as  they  found  (a)  them', 
 ^c.  we  ought  to  remember,  that  he  is  moreifjt- 
 prefs  in  this,  that  we  are  to  render  to  all  their  dues : 
 tribute  to  whom  tribute  is  due,  cufiom  to  whom 
 cuflom  (b),  &c.  according  to  that  of  our  bleifed  Sa- 
 viour himfe'f,  render  unto  Cjefar  the  things  zvhich  art 
 (c)  C^far'j,  &c.  But  how  fliall  we  know  what  things 
 are  Csefar'j  due,  unlefs  we  are  fatii.fy'd  of  his  title 
 to  them  ?  And  in  cafe  of  a  controverfy  about  fuch 
 
 N  n  2  title, 
 
 {a)  Bp.  Burnet's  paft.  left.  1689,  p.  12.  And 'tis  remarkahic 
 among  many  other  felf-contradiftions,  that  this  fame  author, 
 afterwards  infmuated,  that  St.  PauPs  doftrinc  againft  refifta?ue 
 was  meant  only  to  the  Jcics  ;  tho'  here  he  owns  it  written  to 
 he  Chr/Jlians  of  Rome.  As  if  St.  Paul  had  been  mi!bken  ij^ 
 the  diredion  of  his  epiftle  \  Or  a  Chriftian  prelate  had  a  difpen- 
 fation  io  /peak  notorious  untruths,  in  favour  of  occfljional  con  fur-, 
 fnity!         [b)  Rm.xul-j.        {i)  St.  Matf/^.  xxii,  21. 
 
t7(J    The  Short  History  of 
 
 title,  how  (liall  we  know  which  of  the  competitors 
 to  pay  tribute,  and  fwear  allegiance  to,  if  we  are 
 7Wt  to  trouble  ourfelves  with  inquiries,  in  order  to 
 fatisfy  ourconfcicnces^Cas  fuchfolemn  afts  require,  J 
 which  has  the  beft  right  to  them  ?  For,  *  if  they 
 
 *  claim    that  which  is  not  theirs, we  are  noj 
 
 *  bound  to  pay  or  render  that,  fmce  it  is  not  at 
 
 *  all  {a)  theirs '.  Surely,  fuch  weather-cock-divinity 
 fas  one  (b)  merrily  calls  it)  was  not  known 
 in  the  apoftle's  days,  unlefs  it  be  underftood 
 among  thofe  things,  which,  he  fays,  were  taught 
 by  deceivers  for  Ji  I  thy  lucre's  (c)fake! 
 
 But  how  St.  Paul  would  have  behav'd  himfelf 
 towards  an  ufurper,  (properly  fo  callM^  if  there 
 had  been  fuch  a  one  in  power  in  his  days,  we 
 are  left  to  guefs,  from  the  word  by  which  the 
 Holy  Ghoft  infpir'd  him  to  diftinguifli  the 
 higher  powers,  to  whom  he  commanded  us  to 
 be  fubjea.  For  a.\  EHOTXIAI,  (which  he  there, 
 and  every  where  elfe,  makes  choice  of,^jfbr  that  pur- 
 pofe^  being  deriv*d  from  s'fsr/,  licet,  (which  fignifies 
 to  be  lawful,)  does  always,  and  only  denote  lawful 
 power,  or  {d)  authority:  whereas  ATNAMEIS, 
 
 from 
 
 (a)'B'p.  Burn.  Term.  29  May,  1710,  p.  4.  (I/)  S.Johnfon^ 
 tc)  Tit.  i.  rO,  II.  y)  For  the  truth  of  this  I  might  vouch 
 Bp.  War^j  Bp.  Hopkins,  and  many  more  learned  men  :  but 
 the  common  fchool-diftindion,  that  i^aata  properly  figni^,^'^ 
 fies  the  moral  faculty,  and  Jb'vafzn  the  natural,  may  be  fuffi- 
 cient  to  fhcw,  that  the  former  always  fuppofes  a  right.  And 
 therefore  I  could  wifli,  that  our  EugliJJp  reader  would  always 
 diftinguifli  between  authority  and  power,  by  the  inftance  oi  Oli- 
 ver, who  had  the  one',  while  the  other  was  in  King  Charles, 
 ncverthelefs  for  his  being  in  cxiic,  attaincsd  and  abjured. 
 
the  Regal  Succession.   177 
 
 from  /uVajuo/,  pojfum,  Cwhich  fignifies  to  be  able) 
 would  have  denoted  any  kind  of  power,  in  gene- 
 ral, which  a  man  is  able  to  pofiefs  himfelf  of,  i' 
 the  apoftle's  meaning  had  not  been  to  determine 
 it  to  the  moral  faculty  only  ;  and  certainly,  it 
 would  be  a  blafphemous  prefumption  to  infinuate, 
 that  the  Holy  Ghoji  { by  whofe  infpiration  thefe  pre- 
 cepts were  written,)  has  not  made  ufe  of  a  word 
 proper  for  his  own  meaning.  So  that  Dr.  Sher- 
 iock*s  notion,  that  where  God  has  placed  and  fettled 
 the  power,  it  is  a  certain  ftgn  to  us,  that  he  has  given 
 the  (a)  authority,  is  groundlefs  and  unwarrantable, 
 and  contrary  to  all  the  principles  of  fcripcure,  law, 
 and  right  reafon  ;  unlefs  by  fettling  we  underftand 
 fuch  a  fettlement,  as  fuppofes  an  extindlion  or 
 difclaimer  of  all  other  pretenders  :  for,  otherwiie? 
 Ahfalom,  Athaliah,  Cromwell  or  Maffanello,  muft 
 have  had  that  certain  fign  of  God*s  authority  ;  which 
 this  author  himfelf  durfl  nor  venture  to  allow  them, 
 while  there  was  a  natural  prince  in  {b')  being. 
 
 Here  I  might  farther  purfue  the  inquiry  into 
 what  is  call'd  Chrijlian  liberty,  and  lliew  that  the 
 gofpel  has  made  no  alteration  as  to  the  rights  of 
 Kings  and  duty  of  fubjeds,  nor  given  any  greater 
 encouragement  to  faction  and  fedition  than  the 
 law  did  :  for  (to  ufe  the  words  of  a  learned  Civilian) 
 
 *  the  current  of  the  antient  fathers  is  in  this  point 
 
 *  concurrent  i  infomuch  as,  among  them  all,  there 
 
 '  is 
 
 (a)  Sherl.  cafe  of  alleg.  1690,  p-  15.  (^)  — —  cafe  of 
 refill.  1684,  p.  128.  Seethe  notes  alfo  upon  M^^»'s  vindicat. 
 of  our  church,   1728,  fol.  2J5,  and  265. 
 
ty^    The  Short  History  ^jT 
 
 *  is  not  one  found,  not  any  one,  (one  is  a  fmall  num- 
 «  bcr,  and  yet  I   fay  confidently  again,  there  is 
 
 *  not  any  one!  who  hath  let  fall  fo  loofe  a  fpeech, 
 
 *  as  may  be  drained  to  a  contrary  (a^  fenfc  *.  But 
 I  fhall  clofe  the  whole  with  this  obfcrvation,  from 
 an  eminent  divine,  that  the  Chrijlian  do6trine  is 
 fo  far  from  warranting  the  frivolous  evaftom  and 
 ridiculous  diJlin5lions  of  thofc  who,  infpite  of  Chri- 
 Jiiamiy,  have  pleaded  for  the  reftjlance  of  authority 
 under  the  old  pretence  of  zeal  for  religion  and  liber- 
 ty^ '  that  what  God  then  declared  to  be  difplea- 
 '  fing  to  him,  by  fuch  remarkable  judgments,  hath 
 
 *  been  now  more  fully  manifefted,  by  frequent 
 
 *  precepts,    and   vehement  exhortations,   by  the 
 
 *  moft    weighty    arguments,    and  the    conftant 
 
 *  practice  of  the  firft  and   the  bed  of  ChriftianSy 
 
 *  and  by  the  black  charadter  which  is  fet  upon 
 
 *  thofe,  who,  under  a  pretence  of  Chrijlian  liber- 
 
 *  /]/,  did  defpife  dominion^  and  [peak  evil  of  (b)  dig- 
 
 *  nitieSj  and  follow  Corah  in  his  rebellion,  however 
 
 *  they  may  pleafe  themfelves  with  greater  light 
 «  than  former  ages  had  in  this  matter,  they  arc 
 '  faid  to  be  fuch  for  whom  is  referved  the  blacknefs 
 ^  of  darknefsfor  (c)  ever  * ! 
 
 And  now,  I  have  faithfully  and  honeftly  endea- 
 vour'd  to  difcharge  my  duty,  as  Ipromis*dat  the 
 beginning  of  this  undertaking  :  and  if  any  thing 
 herein  is  of  ufe  towards  fettling  the  minds  of  my 
 readers,  in  matters  of  fo  great  and  univcrfai  con- 
 cern* 
 
 (rt)  Sir  y.  Hayzvarii^s  anfw.  to  Boleman,    1603,  p.  47.      [h) 
 St.  Jude  u,    13.  (0  Dr.  Stil/ivsf.  ferm.  30  Jan.    1668, 
 
 p.    39. 
 
the  Regal  Succesion.    x79 
 
 cern,  I  have  my  end  •,  and  fhall  add  no  more,  but 
 this  declaration,  that  I  am  as  free  from -prejudice  a% 
 an'j  man  living<,  and  therefore  Jhall  readily  acknow- 
 ledge and  correal  any  miftakes  or  overftghts  which  / 
 may  have  happen* d  to  be  guilty  of  in  this  Short 
 Hiftory,  upon  due  notice  and  convi5fion^  and  be 
 thankful  for  better  information  ;  hoping  in  the  mean 
 time,  that  the  candid  reader  will  be  as  ready  to  par- 
 don  as  I  am  to  retra^i  them. 
 
 FINIS. 
 
Advertisement 
 
 LaUly  publijh'd, 
 
 A  Vindication  of  the  Church  of  England,  and 
 of  the  lawful  Minifliry  thereof;  that  is  to  fay,  of 
 rfie  Succeflion,  Eledlion,  Confirmation  and  Con- 
 fecration  of  Bijhops ;  as  alfo,  of  the  Ordination  of 
 Priejls  and  Deacons^  in  five  Books :  "Wherein  the 
 Church  of  England  is  defended  againft  the  Calum- 
 nies and  Reproaches  of  Bellarmine and  other 
 
 Romanijls,  tcc.    Written  by  Franci  s  Mason, 
 
 B.  D. And  now  Tranflated  from  the  Authors 
 
 Latin   Edition,     much   inlarg'd   and   correfled. 
 Whereunto  is  added  a  Sermon  of  the  fame  au- 
 thor's, concerning  the  Authority  of  the  Church  -, 
 an  exa(fl  Copy  ot  the  firft  Reform'd  Ordinal  in 
 1549  ;    and  a  Tranflation  of  fome  Fragments  of 
 Letters  written    ffrom  Lambeth)     to   Father  Le 
 Cotirayer,    in   an  Appendix;    together   with   a 
 complete  Index,    and  Marginal  Notes  upon 
 the  whole  Book.     To  all  which  is  prefix'd,  a  full 
 and  particular  Series  of  the  Succejfion  of  our  Bi- 
 fhops,  through  the  feveral  Reigns  fince  the  Refor- 
 mation, in  diftinft  'Tables-,  an  Hillorical  Account 
 of  this  Co?nroverfj,   and  of  the  feveral  Writers  on 
 both  fides ;    and  particularly  of  our  learned  Au- 
 thor,   Mafon,   and  of  all  his  Works,    in  a  large 
 Preface,  by  John  Lindsay. 
 
 N.  B. laudattir  6f  alget ! 
 
■.-^*N»1fe.-S^^^'.'!« 
 
 a: 
 
 LETTER 
 
 T  O   TH  E 
 
 / 
 
 Rev.  Mr.  Patrick  Cockhurn&ic. 
 
^\a»id^§km3-M3^^§^S^<t^-^vk}^w'i3^u^SMm}Sb^ 
 
 ERRATA. 
 
 PAGE  23.  1.  28.    for  SuccejJioTiy  read  Succejs.     p.  99. 
 1.  22.  for  forgo,  read  forego,     p.  100.  1.  12.      {or  forgo, 
 xead  forego,     p.  127.  I.  ult.  for  38,  read  28.     p.  189.  1.  18. 
 
 {^iox  f'thjianiia,  Tt2iAfubJia?uial. ,._  I.  26.  for  DoSrifte,  read 
 
 VoSlrities.     p.  45.  1.  14.  ^f/f  the.     p.  134.  1.  ult.  after  55, 
 add  and  115. 
 
 HT.O'OO'O 
 
 ^i>"i-t-'fl'f"#l?¥¥'i*"#¥"#^^"^"#¥¥ 
 
A  N 
 EXPO  S'TULAT^ORT 
 
 LETTER 
 
 TO     THE 
 
 Rev.  Mr.  Patrick  Cock  bum, 
 
 Former/y  Curate  of  SL  Dunftan'j  in  the  JVefi, 
 London,  afterwards  a  Nonjuror  ;  late  Mi- 
 nijier  of  St.  Paul'^  Chapel  in  Aberdeen,  and 
 now  Beneficed  in  the  Biocefe  of  Durham. 
 
 Fairly  and  Friendly  to  convince  him,  That 
 by  his  having  revived  the  Exploded  Doc- 
 trines of  Sherlock  and  Higderiy  he  has  not 
 only  miftaken  St.  Paul's  Injandion  to 
 pray  for  Kings,  &c.  but  has  alio  unwarily 
 expofed  the  late  Revolution,  and  even  the 
 preient  Government  itfelf  to  a  dangerous 
 Controverfy. 
 
 yfj  when  the  Sea  breaks  o*er  its  Bounds, 
 
 j^nd  overflows  the  level  Grounds, 
 
 *Ihofe  Banks  andDamms,  that  like  a  Skreen 
 
 Did  keep  it  out,  now  keep  it  in : 
 
 So  when  Tyrannic  Ufurpation 
 
 Invades  the  Freedom  of  a  Nation, 
 
 The  Laws  o'  //j'  Land,  that  were  intended 
 
 To  keep  it  out,  are  made  defend  it. 
 
 Hudib.  Part  II.  Can.  ii.  1.  349,  ^c. 
 
 LONDON 
 
 Printed,  and  Sold  by  the  Bookfcllers.     1740. 
 
LETTER 
 
 T  O 
 
 Mr.  COCKBURN. 
 
 Re'verend   SIR, 
 
 Y 
 
 1 
 
 fe^ 
 
 OUR  Iat&  Performance, 
 which  by  its  Date  appears  to 
 have  been  publifh'd  two  or 
 three  Years  pailr,   was  lately 
 
 put  into  my  Hands,  with  this 
 
 Charadler  of  it,  that  Tou  7-eckon  it  imaJTJwer- 
 able.  This,  with  the  Opinion  I  had  long 
 entertain'd  of  your  Judgment  and  Integrity, 
 engag'd  me  to  give  it  a  very  ferious  Perufal : 
 And  the  Condition,  under  which  I  had  the 
 Favour  of  it,  obliges  me  to  communicate  my 
 
 Thoughts,  and  to  make  Refnarks  itpon  it. ■ 
 
 I  mean  Your  Vindication  o/'  ^  Coronation 
 B  Sermoiit 
 
[2] 
 
 Sermon^  which  you  had  preach'd  in  St.  Paul's 
 Chapel  in  Aberdeen  ;  in  Anjwer  to  certain 
 Remarks  made  upon  it,  which,  you  fay,  you 
 have  reprinted  Verbatim^  and  anjwer  d  Para- 
 graph by  [a)  Paragraph. 
 
 As  this  feems  to  be  very  fair  Dealing  with 
 your  Reader  and  Antagonift;  fo,  in  the  Dif- 
 charge  of  my  own  Engagement,  I  fliall  en- 
 deavour to  deal  as  fairly  with  you.  And  there- 
 fore, tho'  I  (hall  avoid  that  Method,  which 
 would  now  be  very  tedious,  I  (hall  be, 
 neverthelefs,  careful  to  refer  to  your  own 
 Words,  in  every  PafTage  that  I  {hall  have 
 Occafion  to  animadvert  upon :  All  which 
 I  think  mofl:  reafonable  and  decent  to  addrefs 
 to  yourfelf,  as  the  Perfon  chiefly  concern'd  ; 
 that  you  may  judge,  whether  I  treat  you, 
 as  I  ought,  and  intend  to  do,  with  all  due 
 Refped  to  your  Perfon  and  Charad:er,  tho' 
 the  World  will  judge  of  the  Force  of  our 
 refpcdive  Arguments. 
 
 In  the  firll  Place,  Sir,  I  think  it  proper  to 
 declare,  That  I  am  an  utter  Stranger  to  the 
 io^mtx  Re  marker :  And  therefore  my  Perfor- 
 mance, how  weak  or  exceptionable  foever, 
 is  not  to  be  charg'd  to  his  Account.  I  take 
 your  Vindication,  as  it  lies  here  iingly  before 
 me;  and  fliall  not  ofRcioufly  make  myfelf 
 a  Party  in  the  Controveriy  between  your  6*^^- 
 mon  and  his  Remarks-,  and  much  lefs  fo  as 
 to  be  anfwcrable  for  the  Application  made 
 of  it  on  either  Side,  Your 
 
 [a]  Pit  face. 
 
[3] 
 
 Your  avow'd  Undertaking  here  is,  to  vin- 
 dicate the  Lawfidnefs  and  Duty  of  praying 
 for  our  prefent  King  and  {b)  Governor :  And 
 this  you  profefs  to  have  been  your  Intention 
 inyour  Sermon,  to  prove  y  by  this  Argument,  of 
 his  '  being  vefted   with  a  lawful  and  right- 
 
 *  ful  [c)  Authority.'  You  fay,  '  your  Sermon 
 
 *  preffes  a  Duty  only  to  rightful  and  lawiul 
 '  \d)  Authority  :'  And  that  whether  the  Text 
 is  to  be  under  flood  with  this  DiJiinBlon  (of  a 
 Rightful  Title)  or  not,  it  no  ways  afeBsybur 
 Argument  in  your  Sermon^  fince  you  there 
 prefs  the  Duty  to  lawful  and  rightful  {e)  Au^ 
 thority. 
 
 Now,  Sir,  had  you  in  this  Vindication 
 prejjed  a  Duty  only  to  rightful  and  lawful 
 Authority  (as  you  fay  you  did  intend  in  your 
 Sermon)  I  would  not  have  drawn  my  Pen, 
 unlefs  perhaps  to  have  return'd  you  my 
 Thanks,  for  fettling  that  Duty  upon  its  juft 
 Foundation.  And  why  did  you  think  there 
 could  be  any  Occalion  to  ftrain  your  Argu- 
 ment farther  ?  For,  if  our  prefe?it  King  and 
 Governor  is  vefted  with  a  lawful  and  rightful 
 Authority  (And  where  is  the  Champion  who 
 dares  to  fay  the  contrary  ?)  then  furely,  you 
 had  no  more  to  do,  but  to  prefs  the  Apoftle's 
 Injundtion  upon  all  his  Subjects,  to  pray  for 
 hitn,  &c.  as  fuch.  It  was  enoueh  for  you, 
 to  have  taken  his  lawful  and  rightful  Autho^ 
 rity  for  granted :  But,  to  ftrain  your  Argu- 
 B  2  ment 
 
 (^J  Title-page,     [c)  Page  4.      (i)  Ibid,     {t)  Page  lo,  II, 
 
ut 
 
 ment  farther  than  there  was  either  Occafioii 
 for  you  to  do,  or  than  even  the  Apoftle's 
 Rule  in  the  Text  can  be  fairly  underllood  to 
 warrant,  feems,  in  my  humble  Opinion,  to 
 be  fpinning  out  the  Thread  till  it  breaks  in 
 your  Hand,  and  giving  fome  of  your  Rea- 
 ders Caufe  to  fufpedt,  that  you  are  confcious 
 of  fome  Defedt  that  wants  to  be  thus  fine- 
 draw'd ! 
 
 Whether  the  Rcmarker  wasmiftaken  in  the 
 Dejlgn  of  your  Sermon  or  not,  it  concerns  not 
 ne  to  enquire.  You  fay.  It  was  not  your 
 Intention^  in  your  Sermon,  to  prove  ^  That  we 
 are  to  pray  for  all  Sorts  of  Adual  (J)  Go- 
 vernors/ But  then  you  fay  again,  *  If  the 
 
 general  Reafons,  there  laid  down  •  are 
 
 fo  juft  and  flrong,  as  to  infer  and  conclude 
 even  for  all  a(5tual  Governors,  then  certainly 
 they  conclude  for  thofe  who  are  lawful 
 and  rightful  Governors,  as  well  as  ad:ual : 
 And  for  fuch  only,  that  is,  for  our  right*, 
 ful  and  lawful  Governors,  the  Higher  Pow- 
 ers now  over  us,  did  j^cu  endeavour  to  per- 
 fuade  your  Hearers  to  put  up  their  Prayers, 
 as  in  Duty  bound,  and  not  for  any  Go- 
 vernors, be  their  Title  what  it  (ff)  will.' 
 Yet,  after  nil,  whatever  was  your  De- 
 fign  or  hiteJition  in  your  Sermon,  you  have, 
 in  this  Vindication  of  it,  gone  fo  far  out  of 
 your  Way,  as  plainly  endeavouring  toperfuade 
 your  Readers,   to  put  up  their  Prayers,  as  in. 
 
 Duty 
 
 (/)  Page  4.  ~  (/)  Page  16,  17. 
 
[  J] 
 
 Duty  bound,  for  any  Governors,  be  their  T^ttk 
 what  it  will)  yea,  for  all  Sorts  of  aSlual  Go- 
 vernors,  whether  their  Title  be  rightful  and 
 lawful  or  not !  And  this,  Sir,  has  induc'd  me, 
 as  an  indifferent  Perfon  between  you,  to  en- 
 ter into  a  frank  and  friendly  Expoftulation 
 with  you,  as  what  feems  to  give  the  Op- 
 ponent great  Advantage  againft  youj  which 
 I  fhall  now  proceed  to  confider  more  parti- 
 cularly. 
 
 And  here,  in  the  very  T'itle-page,  we  may- 
 perceive,  that  you  have  artfully  varied  the 
 State  of  the  Queftion.  For  your  Sermon 
 propos'd  no  more  than  T'he  Duty  and  Benefit 
 of  praying  for  our  Goverjiors,  in  general 
 Terms :  But  your  Anfwer  to  the  Remarks  is 
 intitled,  The  Lawfulnefs  and  Duty  of  praying 
 for  our  prefent  King  and  Governor  vindicated. 
 Thus  you  endeavour  to  fcreen  yourfelf,  under 
 the  Name  and  Authority  of  our  prefent  King 
 and  Governor^  whofe  Right  and  Title  the 
 Remarker  has  not  difputed ;  when  your  pro- 
 per Bufinefs  was  only  to  vindicate  your  Ser^ 
 mouy  againft  the   Imputation  of  Teaching, 
 
 *  That  we  ought  to  pray  for  all  Sorts  of 
 
 *  adual  Governors,  whether  their  Authority 
 
 *  be  good  or  [g)  not.'  So  that  now,  your 
 Doj^rine,  which  tends  to  legitimate  and 
 fanftify  all  manner  of  Ufurpation,  and  fuc- 
 cefsful  Rebellion,  cannot  be  fairly  contro- 
 verted ;  but  your  Reader  is  to  be  alarm'd,  as 
 if  the  Title  and  Authority  of  our  prefent 
 
 (g)  Page  2.  B  3  King 
 
[6] 
 
 KiNg  and  Ooverfior  were  call'd  in  Quefllon  ! 
 
 Thus  you  call  the  Remarks  on  your  Ser- 
 
 P2on,  *  A  Paper  of  Objedions  againft  pray- 
 
 *  jng  for  our  prefent  King  and  (/j)  Governor:' 
 And  reprefent  them,   *  as  being  fuppos'd  to 
 
 *  contain  the  Force  of  the  Argurnents  of 
 '  fuch  as  are  difTatisfied   with   the    prefent 
 
 *  Government  in  this  Country,   againfl.  the 
 
 *  Duty  recommended  in  the  (/)  Sermon.' 
 But,  you  know,  Sir,  there  is  a  great  Diffe- 
 rence between  objeBing  againji  praying  for 
 him,  and  objed:ing  againft  the  Method  yoi^ 
 have  taken  to  prove  the  Lawjulnefs  and  Duty 
 of  praying  for  him.  The  former  may  be 
 not  only  lawfd^  but  a  neceffary  Duty  (as  it 
 certainly  is,  for  all  thofe  who  are  vejied  with 
 a  lawful  and  rightjul  Authority ;)  and  yet 
 the  latter  may  be  fairly  liable  to  Objections, 
 where  the  Method  taken  to  enforce  that 
 puty  is  incumber'd  with  precarious  Argu- 
 ments or  Infinuations :  As,  every  one  knows, 
 a  Prince  may  have  an  undoubted  lawful  and 
 rightful  Title,  and  yet  even  the  very  befi 
 Title  may  be  too  weakly  or  unfkilfully  de- 
 fended.    And    this  Caveat  I  think  very 
 
 proper  to  be  enter'd  here,  to  guard  againft 
 that  inyidious  Suggeftion,  as  if  every  one 
 \vho  diilents  from  you  in  this  Controverfy, 
 muft  of  courfe  be  fuppos'd  to  be  difjatisfydf 
 with  the  prejcnt  Government  I 
 
 I  agree  with  you,  that  where  your  Text 
 
 injoin^ 
 
 {h)  Preface,  Page  iii.  {t]lh'J. 
 
[7] 
 
 (k)  injoins  us  to  pray  for  Khigs^  and  all  that 
 are  in  Authority^  the  Word  Ki?igs  *  ftands 
 
 *  for  the  Supreme  Magiftrate  in  any  Coun- 
 
 *  try  J  the  Precept  enjoining  us  to  pray  for 
 
 *  all  Magiftrates,  Supreme  or  (/)  Subordinate :' 
 As  likewife,  that   *    The  Doctrine   of  the 
 
 *  Text  is  general ;  reaching  to  all  Subje<5ts, 
 
 *  under  what  Form  of  Government  foever 
 
 *  they   live,   and  by   whatfoever  Names  the 
 
 *  Higher  Pov^ers  to  them  are  dignify 'd  or 
 '  diftinguifli'd  ;'  (?;/)  whether  King^  Emperor, 
 Sultan^  Sophiy  Pri?7ce,  DukCy  Lord,  or  (if  you 
 pleafe)  ProteBor !  For  the  Name  or  Stile  of 
 the  Supreme  Magiftrate  alters  not  the  Cafe 
 at  all,  provided  only,  that  he  be  vejled  with 
 a  lawful  and  rightful  Authority,  according  to 
 the  fundamental  Conftitution  of  the  Coun- 
 try of  which  he  takes  upon  him  to  be  the 
 Supreme  Magiftrate.  Yet,  confidering  that 
 you  live  in  a  Country,  where  the  King  is  ac- 
 knowledged {ri)  to  be  the  only  Supreme  Cover-' 
 
 nor, 
 
 (i)   I  Tifff.  ii.  2.  (/)  Page  2.  (tk)  Page  3. 
 
 («)   In  the  39  Articles  of  Religion,  the  Church  of  England 
 profeflbs  to  believe,  That  the  King  *  hath  the  chief  Power 
 
 *  in  this  Realm  of  England,  and  other  his  Dominions ;  unto 
 «  whom  the  chief  Government  of  all  Eftates  of  this  Realm, 
 «  whether  they  be  ecclefiaftical  or  civil,  in  all  Caufes  doth 
 
 *  appertain.'  {Jrt.  xxxvii.)  By  the  Oath  of  Suprefnacy, 
 appointed  to  be  taken  by  all  Members  of  both  Houfes  of 
 Parliament,  iffc.   the  King  is  acknowledg'd  to  be  '   the  only 
 
 *  Supreme  Governor  of  this  Realm,  ^c'  By  the  Conjiitu- 
 tiom  and  Canons  ecclejtaftical,    '  Whofoever  Ihall  impeach  any 
 
 *  Part  of  his  Regal  Supremacy'  ^c.  is  to  be  excommuni- 
 cated, Jj>JoFailo.     (Can,  ii.)  And  the  fame  is  evident  alfo  in 
 
 the 
 
[8] 
 
 jtor^  and  where,  as  you  well  obferve,  allPart^ 
 of  tbe  Adminijh-ation  and  Government  (the 
 Connelly  Judges  and  Magijirates^  and  even 
 the  Parliatnent  itfelf)  aci  by  CommiJJion  from 
 hiniy  under  him^  and  depending  upon  {p)  kini-, 
 your  making  Ufe  of  the  ambiguous  Term, 
 GoverjiorSj  rather  than  that  of  Kings,  does 
 not  feem,  even  to  me,  fo  apt  and  proper,  nor 
 fo  fairly  adapted  to  the  common  Conception 
 of  your  Hearers  and  Readers;  tho'  I  am 
 not  inclined  to  fufped:,  that  you  did  this  with 
 a  Defign  to  mijlead  them,  as  you  intimate 
 fome  others  have  infmuated  you  (/>)  did. 
 But,  if  you  would  fairly  acquit  yourfelt 
 of  fuch  a  Defign  in  your  Sermon^  *  To  prove, 
 
 *  that  we  ought  to  pray  for  all  Sorts  of  ac- 
 
 *  tual  Governors,  whether  their  Authority 
 
 *  be  good  or  [q)  not,*  with  which  the  Re- 
 marker  charges  you,  Why  do  you  here  fo 
 flrenuoufly  and  politively  infifl:  upon  what 
 plainly  amounts  to  the  fame  Thing,  as  you 
 do  almoft  in  every  Page  of  your  Vindication? 
 
 You  fay,  '  The  Reafon  for  fuch  Prayer  is 
 '  not  on  Account  of  the  Title  of  King, 
 
 *  but  on  the  Account  of  his  being  our  (r) 
 
 *  Go- 
 
 the  great  Statute  Book  ;  where  it  is  declar'd.  That  '  the  Sole 
 
 *  Supreme  Government,  Command,  and  Difpofition    of  the 
 
 *  Militia,  and  of  all  Forces  by  Sea  and  Land,  and  of  all  Forts 
 
 *  and  Places  of  Strength,   is,  aod  by 'the  Laws  of  Englajid 
 
 *  ever  was,  the  ur.doubted  Right  of  his  Majefly,  and  his  Royal 
 
 *  Predeceffors,'  kzc.  {Stat.  13.  Car.  ii.  r.  6.  &  13.  &  14. 
 Car.  ii.  c.  3  )  befides  infinite  other  Authorities  to  the  fame 
 Purpofe. 
 
 (0)  Pag.  24.  ij,)  Fag.  3.     (q)  Pag.  2.     (r)  3id.  &  Pag.  3. 
 
[9] 
 
 '•  Governor!  But,  how  does  that  appear? 
 One  would  think,  that,  in  a  Country  where 
 the  Chief  Magiftrate  has  the  Title  of  King^ 
 the  Reafon  of  praying  for  him  fliould  pro- 
 perly be  on  Account  of  his  Authority^  as 
 being  the  King:  And  where  that  Title  is 
 Hereditary,  furely,  fuch  Prayers  (riould  in 
 right  Reafon  be  appropriated  to  him,  who 
 is  the  undoubted  Rightful  King  by  the 
 Natural  Courfe  of  Inheritance,  tho'  poffibly 
 for  a  Time  difpoflefs'd  of  the  adual  Power 
 to  exercife  that  Authority;  and  not  to  any 
 other,  who  may  get  the  Reins  of  Govern- 
 ment into  his  Hands,  without  any  Right  or 
 Title  to  be  our  Governor,  but  only  that  pre- 
 tended one  of  his  being  aSiually  in  Pojj'ejjion 
 of  the  Power  over  us.  But,  neverthelefs, 
 you  tell  us,    *  In  this  Kingdom  the  Words 
 
 *  King  and  Governor  are  fynonymous  Terms, 
 
 *  or  expletive  the  one  of  the  [a)  other.'  In 
 this  Kingdom,  as  I  faid  before,  the  King 
 is  the  only  Supreme  Governor :  But  you  will 
 not  fay,  Sir,  that  every  one  who  may  poffi- 
 bly become  our  aclual  Governor,  does  there- 
 upon of  courfe  become  our  King,  You  can- 
 not but  know  fufficient  Proofs  to  the  con- 
 trary :  And  therefore  your  Polition,  that  the 
 Words  King  and  Governor  are  fynonymous 
 Terms,  or  expletive  the  one  of  the  other,  is 
 groundlefs  even  in  Fadl.     'Tis  true,  '  In  the 
 
 *  Litany  and  Colleds  in  the  Communion- 
 
 *  Ser- 
 
 \a)  Page  3. 
 
[   10  J 
 
 ^  Service,  it  Is,  our  King  and  Governor -^  that 
 
 *  is,  as  you  interpret  it,    our  King,    who  is 
 
 *  our  (b)  Governor.'  And  well  it  may  be 
 fo:  Becaufe  the  Principles  of  the  Church  of 
 Eiiglafid  {c)  are  fo  orthodox,  with  regard  to 
 the  Rights  of  Princes,  that  the  Compilers  of 
 our  Liturgy  could  not  decently  fuppofe,  that 
 any  one  could  become  our  Governor  but  the 
 King  himfelf,  whofe  fole  Right  it  is  acknowr 
 ledg'd  to  be,  to  govern  us. 
 
 But,  in  faft,  fo  far  is  that  excellent  Office 
 from  being  indifferent,  with  refpcdt  to  the 
 Right  and  Title  of  our  King  and  Governor^ 
 thatit  plainly  fuppofeG(/)  an  undoubted  Right 
 
 in 
 
 [h)  Page  3.  (f)  Dr.  WiUiam  King,  late  Arch-bifliop 
 
 of  Uuhlm,  gives  this  true  Charader  of  the  Church  of  Eng- 
 and,  in  refpeft  of  her  fteady  Loyalty,  That  '  it  is  impofll- 
 '   ble  any  one  of  our  Communion  fliould  be  difloyal,  without 
 
 *  renouncing  his' Religion.'      {Letter  to  Bijlnp  ^\\tx\d.2LX\,  pre- 
 
 fx'd  to  that  Bijhop's  Sermcn  22.  March  1 6S4.)  And  Dr.  Sher- 
 lock,  fpeaking  of  the  bill  of  Exclujicn,  fays,  '  If  ever  the 
 '  Loyalty  of  the  Church  of  Ejigland  was  try'd,  it  was  in 
 <  that  Affair,  which  (he  had  no  other  Intereil,  but  a  Senfe  of 
 
 *  Duty,   to  oblige  her  to :  And  I  know  not  any  one  Man, 
 
 *  who  was  firm  and  Iledfail  to  the  Church,  but  was  fo  to  the 
 '  SuccefTion  too  ;  tho'  he  underwent  the  Imputation  of  being 
 '  a  Papiji,  Qv  popijhly  inclind,  for  it.'  (Vindication  of  his  Ser- 
 tmn  29.  (Tfrtv.  1685.  \to.  p.  25.) 
 
 (d)   Dr.  Ccmber^  who  mufl:  be  fuppos'J  to  have  underftood 
 cur  Coir.niOn  i'raycr,f.\vs, «  NoAfFeclions  nor  PafTions  are  too 
 
 *  fervent,  no  Opportunities  too  often,  to  call  upon  God  for 
 '  our  Gracious  Kingj  w'lo  is  our  La-ivful  and  Natural  Liege 
 '   Lord,  ^jujl  Pcff.ffor  of  his  Crown,'  <3c.  (C.cwp.  to  the  Temp. 
 
 *  3.  Edit.  S^jo.  1679.  P^''^  ^-  P-  426.)  He  paraphrafeth  the 
 Words,  Ki72g  and  Go'vernor,  thus  ;   '   Charles,  by  thy  Provi- 
 
 *  der.ce,  and  h.'s  undoubted  Right,  our  Kicg  and  Governpr ; 
 «  ■ —  oarju/i  and  ri^rtful  i'-i.';g  and  Graver.''"  r,'  [Ccf.p.  to  the 
 Alta^^  %    Edit.  8r(7.   i63i.  p.  42.  46.)  On  the  Petition  for  all 
 
 Chrif 
 
in  the  Perfon  to  be  pray'd  for ;  and  that  Right 
 too  to  be  indefeafible.  As  for  Inftance,  in 
 our  Prayers  for  our  Sovereigfi  Lord^  where 
 we  acknowledge  God  to  be  the  only  Ruler  of 
 Princes  J  and  the  King  to  be  bis  Minifier^  and 
 to  have  his  Authority:  And,  more  particu- 
 larly, where  we  own  King  Charles  II.  to  hi^ve 
 been  the  undoubted  Heir  of  his  martyr'd  Fa- 
 ther's Crowns,  a7id  our  then  Gracious  Sove^ 
 reign  (even  while  he  was  in  Exile  and  At- 
 tainted, and  another  Perfon  aSlually  gover?td 
 his  Kingdoms)  and  return  folemn  Thanks  to 
 God  for  reftoring  him,  iphofe  Right  it  was, 
 together  with  his  Royal  Brothery  King  James, 
 to  fit  fucceffively  in  Peace  upon  the  "Throne  of 
 their  Father^  and  to  exercife  that  Supreme 
 Authority  over  us^  one  after  the  other ^  which 
 of  his  Special  Grace  he  had  defigrid  for  [e) 
 them.  So  that  you  can't  have  any  Warrant 
 from  the  Church  of  England,  for  your 
 Affertion,     *  That    the     very  Reafon     for 
 
 *  praying  for  Kings  is,  that  they  are  our  (/) 
 
 *  Governors.'  Nor  have  I  yet  difcover'd, 
 where  you  will  find  one  for  what  follows. 
 
 Chrlfliati  Kings,  ^c.  he  obferves,  that  *  We  mufl:  pray  for  the 
 
 *  Safety  of  other  Kings,  no  farther  than  is  confiftent  with 
 
 *  the  Welfare  of  our  Natural  Liege^  for  whom  we  mufl  pray 
 
 *  efpecially.^  [Ibid.  p.  89.)  And  he  paraphrafeth  the  fame, 
 thus ;  ■■■  ■  *  Save  the  Souls,  and  defend  the  Perfons  and 
 '  Rights  of  all  Chriftian  Magiflrates,   who,  in  their  feveral 
 
 *  Dominions,  have,  or  ought  to  have.  Supreme  Governance,' 
 
 is'c.      (Ibid.  p.   102.) 
 (f)  Offices  for  the  ^oth.  of  January  and  the  z^th,  oi  May. 
 (/J  Page  3. 
 
 You 
 
[    >2    ] 
 
 You  will  here  venture  to  fay,  '  That  they 
 
 *  who  pray  for  their  adual  Governors  (what- 
 
 *  ever  Right  they  have  to  that  Authority) 
 
 *  come  nearer  to  the  Duty  in  the  Text,  and 
 
 *  run  lefs  Hazard  of  an  Error,   than  they 
 
 *  who  refufe  it  {g)  .'  But,  for  my  Part, 
 I  never  v^^as  inclin'd  to  venfure,  or  run  Ha^ 
 zards  of  any  Error,  in  Relation  to  folemn 
 Offices.  —  Since  the  Injundlion  in  the 
 Text  is,   '  To  be  a  Rule   to  all  fucceeding 
 
 *  Ages,*  as  v^ell  as  to  thofe  firft  Converts  to 
 whom    the  Apojlle  gave  it,    '  to  regulate 
 
 *  their  Behaviour  in  this  Point,   as  a  Matter 
 
 *  of  great  {h)  Moment,'  it  highly  concerns 
 every  Chrifl-ian,  not  only  to  come  near  to  the 
 Duty  in  the  Text,  but  even  to  come  up  to  it. 
 And,  fmce  that  Duty  is  to  be  difcharg'd  by 
 our  praying  for  Kings,  and  all  that  are  in 
 Authority,  how  can  we  acquit  ourfelves  of  it 
 as  we  ought,  without  duly  confidering  Who 
 is  our  King,  and  PFho  are  in  Authority  ?  Or 
 how  can  we  receive  this  Apoflolical  InjunSiion, 
 as  the  primitive  Chriftians  did,   *  with  great 
 
 *  Simplicity  and  Sincerity  of  (/)  Heart,'  if 
 we  concern  ourfelves  no  farther  about  the 
 Matter,  than  by  praying,  as  you  would  have 
 us,  for  our  ABual  Governors,  for  the  Time 
 being,  without  regarding  whether  they  have 
 Authority  to  be  fo  or  not  ?  This  Sort  of 
 Simplicity  feems,  at  beft,  to  be  but  a  praying 
 at  a  Venture-,  and  fuch  Prayers  to  be  no  bet- 
 ter 
 
 is)  Pa§~  4-  <h  P^ge  5.  (/)  Page  6. 
 
[  13  ] 
 
 ter  than  what  you  call  '  vain  Words,  and 
 
 *  an  empty  (k)  Sound/  like  the  Swearing  at 
 a  Venture f  which  feveral  excellent  Authors, 
 (/)  as  you  cannot  but  know,  pronounce  to 
 be  Perjury.  For,  as  in  the  Cafe  of  Swearings 
 it  does  not  acquit  us  of  the  Sin,  tho'  the 
 Thing  fworn  fhall  happen  to  be  true,  while 
 we  doubt  of,  or  do  not  certainly  know,  the 
 Truth  of  it  j  fo  in  the  Cafe  of  Praying,  we 
 cannot  duly  difcharge  our  Duty  by  Praying 
 for  any  one,  as  our  Ki?tg  and  Governor,  even 
 tho'  he  may  happen  to  be  fo,  while  we  doubt 
 of,  or  do  not  certainly  know,  the  Truth  of  it. 
 How  then,   Sir,  can  you  'venture  to  fay,   that 
 
 *  they  who  pray  for  their  adual  Governors 
 '  (whatever  Right  they  have  to  tliat  Autho- 
 '  rity)  come  nearer  to  the  Duty  in  the  Text, 
 
 *  and  run  lefs  Hazard  of  an  Error,  than  thev 
 
 *  who  refufe  it  ? ' 
 
 I  do  not  exped:  you  to  come  off  here,  as 
 feme  others   have   done,    with  a   yefuitical 
 Evafion,  as  if  you  did  not,  abjblutely  and  pro- 
 perly, 
 
 {k)  Page  24.              (/)  The  Author  of  l^he  ^o:hole  Duty  of 
 Man,  fpeaking  of  affertory   Oaths,  fays, *  Nay,    if  I 
 
 *  fwea.1  to  the  Truth  of  that  whereof  I  am  only  doubtful, 
 
 *  tho'  the  Thing  fhould  happen  to  be  true,  yet  it  brings 
 '  upon  me  the  Guilt  of  Perjury:  For  I  fwear  at  a  Venture, 
 '  and  the  Thing  might,  for  ought  I  knew,  be  as  well  falfe 
 
 *  as  true ;  whereas  1   ought   never  to  fwear  any  thing,  the 
 
 *  Truth  of  which  I  do  not  certainly  hiovj*  {Whole  Duty  of 
 Man,  §.  iv.)  And,  to  the  fame  Effeft,  the  lafl  Archbifhop  of 
 Canterbury  fays,  *  He.  forfvears  himfelf,  who  fwears  to  the 
 
 *  Truth  of  any  Faft,  which  at  the  fame  Time  he  either  cer- 
 
 *  tainly  knows  to  be  falfe,  or  does  not  kno^v  to  be  true' 
 tlVakei  Difc.  concerning  Swearing,  1696.  81^0.  p.  15) 
 
t  h] 
 
 perl)\  mean  their  not  having  fome  propcff 
 Right,  but  only  whatever  Sort  of  Right  Juch 
 aBual  Governors  may  have  to  that  Authority^ 
 whether  that  of  Inheritance  in  Hereditary, 
 or  of  Eledion  in  Elective  Governments,  ^c. 
 For  your  Argument  is  not  concern'd  in  the 
 Nature  of  that  Authority^  provided  they 
 have  a  Right  to  it,  or  rather  to  the  Exercife 
 of  it  (for  Authority  always  fuppofes  a  Right) 
 according  to  the  fundamental  Conftitution 
 of  the  Government.  But  the  general  Drift 
 of  this  your  whole  Difcourfe  fufficiently  ex- 
 plains your  Meaning  of  adlual  Goveriicrs,  as 
 fuch,  whether  they  have  any  Right  to  be  fo 
 or  not;  which  is  the  Propolition  I  except 
 againfl,  as  both  unwarrantable,  and  of  dan- 
 gerous Confequence  to  the  Caufe  in  Hand". 
 Neither  can  I  fee  what  great  Hazard  of  a?i 
 Error  they  run,  who  refufe  to  pray  for  fuch 
 adfual  Governors,  while  they  refufe  it  not  out 
 of  mereDifafFection  to  them,  but  purely  on  a 
 confcientious  Doubt  of  their  Authority,  and 
 a  Dread  of  offending  againft  this  very  Jn- 
 jundion  in  the  Text;  as  I  am  fully  per- 
 fuaded  of  many,  and  in  Charity  we  ought 
 to  believe  of  all,  who  refife  it. 
 
 You  are  pleas'd  to  queftion,  whether  the 
 Original  Words,  which  we  tranflate  Kings, 
 and  all  that  are  in  Authority,  do  imply  a 
 Rightful  Title:  And  fay,  *  There  are  very 
 
 *  flrong  Reafons  to  perfuade  us,   that  fuch 
 
 *  nice  Diftin<5tions  are   not  fo  eafily  to  be 
 
 *  admit- 
 
[  15  1 
 
 *  admitted,  in  this  and  the  other  Precepts  ort 
 '  that  Subje(fl,  in  the  (;;;)  Golpel.'  Among 
 which   you    recommend    to   Conlideration, 
 
 *  I.  That   all    the   Precepts   of  Subjed:ion, 
 
 *  Obedience,   and   Prayers   for  the   Higher 
 
 *  Powers,   are  dehver'd  in   general  Terms, 
 
 *  without  any  fuch  Diftindion,  or  Infmua- 
 
 *  tion  of  Diilindtion,  as  is  (??)  pretended.' 
 But,  it  fo  happens,  that  fome  of  thofe  very 
 Texts,  which  you  have  here  inftanced,  are 
 by  the  beft  Commentators  (and  that  is  an 
 Authority  to  which  you  pay  a  regard,  on 
 fome  (o)  Occafions)  as  well  as  by  many  Cele- 
 brated Preachers,  expounded  ivith  fuch  a 
 T>iJlinBion.  As  Render  to  Csfar  ^c.  plainly 
 fjppofes  a  Right  to  what  was  fo  to  be  ren- 
 der'd,  or  reftor'd  to  him  3  as  you  yourfelf  have 
 afterwards  explain'd  it,  to  mean  the  Things 
 which  of  Right  belong  to  (/>)  Ccefar :  And 
 the  Higher  Powers  are  [q) ,   in  the  Original, 
 
 literally 
 
 (m)  Page  4.  (?/)   Ibid. 
 
 {0)  Page  2,3,  56,91.  _     [p)   P:ige8g. 
 
 [q)  Bifhop  Ward,  on  Rom.  xiii.  i,  2.  obferves,  *  That 
 «  the  Greek  Words,  which  we  tranflate  the  Higher  Pon.vF.rs, 
 '  properly  {\<^r\\^Y  Author ities;  Ci^oil  Authorities,  having  y-us 
 '  Gladii;  the  Authorities  fupreme  or  fubordinate,  jujily  ob- 
 
 *  taining  over  them.  It  is  not  AvTix/J-is  or  Kpxr©'  which 
 '  is  here  us'd  (which  fignify  corporal  Strength  and 
 «  Power)     but    e^vcria.   which   the    Scripture  dillingulfheth 
 
 *  from  both  the  other.'  [Serm.  5  Not'emher,  1661.  4/!?.  p.  8.) 
 Bifhop  Hopkins   obferves,    <  That  the  Word    c^yjict,  which 
 
 *  is  here  tranilated  Poiver,  is  not  any  where  us'd  in  the  Nc'vi 
 
 *  Tefiament,   but  only  to   fignify  Authority,   and    a   Linv/ut 
 
 *  Fov.-sr.     Yea,    the  very  Noiation  ot  it,  from   the 
 
 *  Verb 
 
[i6] 
 
 literally  the  Rightful  and  Lawful  Powers,  or 
 Authorities ;  befides  other  Texts  of  the  like 
 Import,  which  I  may  perhaps  have  another 
 Occafion  to  mention  more  particularly. 
 You  fay,  2.  '  What  could  the  primitive 
 
 *  Chriftians   (to   whom  thefe  Precepts  were 
 
 *  firft  given)  infer  from  fuch  Injunctions,  but 
 
 *  that  tliey  were  to  pay  fubmiffion  to,  and 
 '  to  pray  for,  thofe  Kings  and  Governors, 
 '  under  whom   they    then  liv'd,    and  fo  on 
 
 *  in  fucceeding  (r)  Generations?'  But,  if 
 thofe  Kings  and  Go^'cemcrs^  imder  whom  they 
 then  livdy  were  Rightful  and  Lawful  Kings 
 and  Governors,  they  had  no  Reafon  to  think 
 or  adt  otherwife.  No!  You  fay,  '  He  mull 
 *■  be  very  ignorant  in  Hiftory,  who  imagines, 
 
 *  that   all    the   Nations  and   Countries,   in 
 
 *  which   the  Gofpel  was  preached  by   the 
 
 *  Apoftles  and  their  Succeflbrs,  were  all  go- 
 
 *  vern'd  by  Rightful  and  Lawful  Kings,  in  the 
 
 *  Senfe  of  thefe  Terms,  Lawful  atid  Right- 
 
 *  ful,  which  fome  Men  [s)  contend  for.'     So 
 
 far 
 
 «  Verb  c^f-ri.  ^^^^^j  proves  the  only  proper  Ufe  of  it  to  be 
 *-for  Zcit/}// PoTcw.'  (Sam.  31  'January,  1669.  i\to.  p.  14.) 
 ^[{ho'pAiierbmy  prcnounceth  it  to  be  fixum  ratumqu:^  that  the 
 Subjeftion  to  the  Higher  Poiverj  is  due,  — — '  iis  qui  Legitima 
 
 *  Potertate  funt  prsditi.*  (Cone,  ad  Cler.  Lond.  i  709  4/0. 
 p.  5.)  And  BiftiopJ?«rx£/ fays,  '  This  is  certain,  that  Higher 
 <  Powers^  which  are  ordain'd  of  God,  are  only  the  Lawful 
 *■  Poiuers,  not  to  be  apply'd  to  Ufurpers.'  [Scrm.  ^tb  Not'sn- 
 terljio,  2  Edit,  8-7,3.  p.  10.) 
 
 {>)  Page  6.  {s)  Ibid. 
 
[  '7  J 
 
 far  I  grant  you.     But,  whatever  Se72fe  of  thefe 
 'Terms  fome  Men  may  contend  j'o7\  I  (hall  rea- 
 dily allow  all  to  be  Rightful  and  Laivful 
 Ki72gSj   who  are  fo  according  to  the  funda- 
 mental Conftitution  of  their  refpe^live  King- 
 doms.    As  to  what  you  mention  in  general, 
 of  ambitious  Men^  contejied  Q'owns,   dijputed 
 Rights,  different  Claims,  and  the  longejl  Sivord 
 decidi?2g  the  Conteft,  and  jecuring  [a)  the  Pcf- 
 feff.on  ;    tis   not   improbable,   that,  by    fuch 
 Means,    the    fundamental   Conftitution    of 
 mod  Countries  may,   at  one  Time  or  other, 
 have  been  violated:  But,  be  that  as  it  will,  it 
 can  be  no  Proof  in  this  Queftion,  unlefs  you 
 could   give  an   Inftance  of  fome  particular 
 Kingdoms  wherein  the  Apoftle  hadinjoin'd, 
 and  the  Chriftian  Subjects  had  accordingly 
 prayed  for  their  aBual  Governors,    in  Oppo- 
 {ition   to  a  more  lawful  and  rightful  Clai- 
 mant 
 
 Give  me  Leave  therefore,  Sir,  to  fuppofe 
 the  Cafe  of  fome  Kingdom  abroad,  (no  Mat- 
 ter how  far,  or  v>^here)  by  the  fundamental 
 Conftitution  of  which  the  Crown  ought  to 
 defcend  from  Fathei  to  Son  ;  and  fo  down- 
 wards, according  to  the  ffcrideft  Laws  of 
 Hereditary  Succeffion,  to  the  next  Heir  of 
 the  Blood  Royal :  And  then  again,  fuppoiing 
 an  Interruption  in  the  Succeffion  there,  the 
 next  Heir  difpolTefs'd  and  in  Exile,  but  ftiil 
 claiming,  and  another  in  polTeflion,  aSiually 
 C  governing^ 
 
 {a)  Ibid. 
 
■  •        [  i8  ] 
 
 governmgy  and  exercifing  all  the  Royal 
 Power  and  Prerogatives,  the  Queftion  be- 
 tween you  and  me  is,  Which  of  the  two 
 Claimants  the  Chriflian  Subjedls  in  that  King- 
 dom are  bound  to  pray  for^  as  their  King^  in 
 Obedience  to  this  Apoftolical  Injundlion  ? 
 According  to  your  Principle  here  laid  down, 
 it  is  their  Duty  to  pray  for  him  who  does 
 aciually  govern^  without  any  Regard  to  the 
 Right,  or  Pretentions  of  him  who  is  difpof- 
 fefs'd.  Bat,  now,  let  us  conlider  with  what 
 Arguments  and  Reafons  you  endeavour  to 
 eflablidi  this  Dodrine  j  and  what  Strength 
 of  Authority  you  have  for  the  Cenfure  you 
 have  pafs'd  upon  thofe  of  a  different  Senti- 
 ment; vi^here  you  too  unadvifedly  undertake 
 to  fhew,  *  That  their  Opinion  in  this  Parti- 
 '  cular,  has  nofuch  Foundation  in  Scripture, 
 
 *  Reafon,  or  Law,  as  thev  imagine,  and  is 
 '  contrary   to   the    Pfa<^"tice    of    the    whole 
 
 *  Chriftian  {b)  Church/ 
 
 All  that  you  have  faid  of  the  primitive 
 Chriftians  praying  for  thofe  Kings  and  Go- 
 vernors under  ivbom  they  then  livdy  v^'ill  be 
 far  (hort  of  any  Proof  in  this  Cafe,  as  I  have 
 already  obferv'd,  unlefs  you  could  give  an 
 Inilance  of  fome  particular  Kingdom  exad:ly 
 parallel  to  that  here  fuppos'd  :  And  fo  is  what 
 you  have  fo  frequently  repeated  of  the  Cc^- 
 farSy  and  the  fucceeding  Emperors,  whom 
 you   treat  as  downright  UfurperSy  tho'  the 
 
 con- 
 
 {b)   Preface. 
 
I"  '9  ] 
 
 contrary  thereof  Is  Truth,  in  cur  now  com- 
 nionly  received  Acceptation  of  that  ignomi- 
 nious Term  J  as  I  fliall  make  out  in  its  pro- 
 per Place. 
 
 Butjbecaufe  thofeEmperors  v/ere  fubmitted 
 to,  and  pray  d for,  by  the  Chriftian  Churches 
 under  their  refpedlive  Dominions,  you  feem 
 defirous  to  bring  in  the  Holy  Scriptures  alio 
 as  authorizing  Prayers  for  Ufurpers-,  where 
 you  fay,  *  With  thefe  Things  the  Chriftian 
 '  Religion  meddles   not:  The  Gofpel  was 
 
 *  not  given  to  decide  the  Rights  and  Claims 
 
 *  of  [c)  Princes.'  'Tis  true  indeed,  the  Gof- 
 pel was  not  given  for  that  End,  but  has  left 
 the  feveral  Princes  of  this  World  to  their 
 refpe6live  proper  Rights:  Yet  v/e  ought  not 
 to  fay,  the  Chrifiian  Religion  meddles  not  n.mth 
 thefe  Things,  unlefs  it  were  demon ftrable, 
 that  the  Gofpel  has  nothing  to  do  with  the 
 flanding  Rules  of  Moral  Honefty  and  Juf- 
 tice;  and  that  it  is  indifferent,  in  Point  of 
 Chriftianity,  whether  we  take  upon  us  to 
 abet  wrong  Titles  againft  apparent  Right,  or 
 run  the  Hazard  of  fuffering  for  refufmg  [d) 
 
 C  2  it. 
 
 {c)   Page  6.  (</)  Bifhop  Morley,  in  his  Anfwer  to 
 
 Father  dcjps,  fays, '  May  not  a  Man  have  an  Eye  to  Religion, 
 
 *  in  fuftering  for  his   Loyalty  F   Is  not  Obedience  to  our  So-ve- 
 
 *  reign  a  Part  of  our  Religion  ?  I  am  fure  it  is  a  Part  of  our 
 
 *  Religion,  if  it  be  not  a  Part  of  his:   And  we  think  \i\m  as 
 
 *  much  a  Martyr,   that  dies  in  Defence  of  the  Tijth,  or  any 
 
 *  other  of  the  Ten  Commandments,  as  he  that  dies  in  Defence 
 
 *  of  any  of  the  Articles  of  the  Creed.     And  certainly,    if  it 
 
 *  had    not  been  Religion,  or  Confcience   towards   Gcd,   that 
 
 •  made 
 
[20] 
 
 oT  ^^?7^^^^>   if  a  Man,    for  Argument 
 Sake,  Ihould  afhrm,  thnthe  Cbrijiian  Religmi 
 does   meddle  with  thefe  Things,  and  that  the 
 Lro/pel  has  exprefly   determin'd  all   the  Pre- 
 cepts for  Submiffion,    and   Prayers   &c    to 
 relate   only   to   Rightful   Princes;    and  '  for 
 Prooi^   thereof,  (hould  refer   you  to  the  fame 
 Chapter,    where   you  find   Subieds    autho- 
 riz'd  to  refift,  exclude,  and  depbfe  their  Na- 
 tural Sovereign,   for  Difference   in  Religion 
 or  following  the  Advice  of  evil  Counfeilors' 
 &c.  I  would  be  glad  to  hear  how.  you  would 
 difprove  him. 
 
 You  infift  much  upon  '  the  Benefits  for 
 
 which  Government  was  eftablifh'd,'  as  the 
 
 principal,  or  fole  '  Reafon,  why  we  are  com- 
 
 *  manded  to  pray  for  Kings,  &c:  And  you 
 are  pleas'd  to  fay,  *  This  Reafon  equally  holds 
 '  under   all  Governors,  or  all  Kings,   what- 
 
 *  ever  their  Right  or  Title  to  the  Crown 
 '  may  be  :  And   therefore   the  Precepts  for 
 
 '  Subjection  and  Prayers  ■ .  may  very  rea- 
 
 '  fonably   be  fuppos'd  to   include  all  adlual 
 '  (e)  Governors;    Now,  Sir,  I  always  under- 
 good  Peace  to  be  one  of  the  Benefits  which 
 People  hope  to  reap  under  Government;  and 
 as  fuch,   the  Apojile,  m  the  Context,  com- 
 
 mands 
 
 ;   mjde  us  fuftr  for  our  Loyalty  to  our  Prince,  we  miVht  as 
 eaiiiy  have  bought  our  Security,  by  quitting  our  LoyaJtv 
 as  you  ,j.y,  feveral  of  the  wifell  of  us  did,  Iffc'     (Several 
 Tieatifes,  by  George,  Lord  Ciihon   of  lyhstc^,  16R3    in  A.U 
 Treat.  IV.  p.  9,  10.)  >  luo^.  hj  4«. 
 
 {e)   Page  -. 
 
[    2'    ] 
 
 mands  us  to  pray  fo?'  Kingi^  &c.  thai  we  may 
 lead  a  quiet  and  peaceable  hije^  &c.  But,  tis 
 evident,  that  where  the  actual  Governor  has 
 not  a  proper  Right,  but  only  a  contefted  and 
 precarious  Title,  as  in  the  Cafe  here  fuppos'd. 
 Peace  and^iietnefs  cannot  reafonably  be  ex- 
 pected, nor  confequently  be  pray'd  for,  in 
 Faith^  as  all  Prayer  ought  to  be.  For,  tho* 
 Godlincfs  and  Hoftejiy  is  what  we  ourielves 
 muft  pradtife  ;  yet,  as  you  well  obferve,  '  oui* 
 '  Peace  and  Quiet  does  not  depend  upon 
 '  ourfelves,  but  upon  our  Governors,  and 
 '  their  vigorous  Adminiftration  of  Juftice, 
 
 *  in  punifliing  the  Evil-doers,  and  rewarding 
 '  them  that  do  {f)  well.'  But  tis  needlefs 
 to  infift,  how  inconfiftent  Peace  and  ^liet 
 are  with  fuch  a  State,  where  the  ABual  Go- 
 vernor  is  always  oblig'd  to  Standi^ig  Armies 
 to  defend  his  PolTeffion  :  And  how  fuch  Go- 
 vernors, who  get  and  keep  Poffefilon,  con- 
 trary to  the  Principles  of  common  Right  and 
 Juftice,  are  wont  to  admi?nfter  (what  they 
 call)  yuftice,  in  the  Diftribution  of  their 
 Rewards^  and  the  Execution  of  Pu?iifiments^ 
 (g)  recjuires  no  great  Depth  of  Judgment  or 
 
 C  3  Expe- 
 
 {/)  ^^§^  -2.  [g]   Mr.    y.   AUington,  defcribing 
 
 the  Difference   between   the    Adminiibation    of  a   Rightful 
 
 King  and  an  Ufurper,    fays, '  Whiiil   Pfli'/.y  was  at 
 
 '  home  and  in  the  City,  the  Citizens  would  not  llrengthen 
 
 *  his  Hand?,  would  not  ftand  to  him  ;  for  he  was  fain  to 
 '  Jlj  •■    But  nov/,  when  out  of  the  Land,  they  then  br^gin  to 
 
 *  confider  the  feeling  and  fenfibie  Difference,  between  ^a 
 
[    22    J 
 
 Experience  to  underftand.  'Tls  evident 
 therefore,  that  this  Reajbn  does  not  equally 
 hold  imder  all  Governors^  as  you  would  per- 
 fuade  us  it  does. 
 
 And  now  farther,  to  prove,  that  the  Pre- 
 cepts, in  ^efaon  are  not  to  be  imderJioodJlriBly 
 of  Lawful  and  Rightful  Kings,  you  argue, 
 I.  The  Abfurdity  of  fuppofing,  that,  among 
 the  many  Changes  and  Revolutions  in  King- 
 doms,  '  Chriftians  muft  have  refus'd  their 
 
 ■  '  Sub- 
 
 *  Ufurper  and  a  Father;  between  nn  Abfalom  and  a  Da-vitf. 
 '-  And  then  they  find  there  was  as  much  DifFerence  between 
 '  the  King  and  his  Ufurper,  as  is  between  a  Hiifband  and  an 
 
 *  Adulterer  :  For,  as  the  one  takes  a  Woman  for  his  Love, 
 "  and  the  other  for  his  Luft,  even  fo  do  they  take  Crowns ; 
 «  the  King  to  promote,  the  Ufurper  to  make  a  Prey  on  it ; 
 
 *  the  King  he  loves,  the  Ufurper  he  lulls;  the  Kinglludieth 
 «  the  Advance,  Peace,  and  Improvement  of  his  People,  — 
 "=  but  the  Ufurper  heiludieth  how  to  advance  himfelf,  tfff.* 
 [The  Dejtre  of  Nations,  A  Sermon  6  Jprii^  1660.  \2mo.  p. 
 33,  34  )  And  another,  to  the  like  Eflld,  fays,  '  An  Ufurper 
 «  brings  along  v.'ith  him  a  Neceffity  of  renouncing  all  Hu- 
 
 *  manity,  and  Religion  too.  He  muft  hate  all  tliofe  v.hom 
 «  he  Iiath   injur'd  ;  and   muft   punilh    whatfoever   his  own 
 
 *  guilty  Fears  prefent,  as  if  they  were  manifeft  Crimes:  He 
 
 *  muft  tolerate  all  manner  of  Diforder  and  Confufion  in  the 
 '  Worfhip  of  Heaven,  for  the  Sake  of  thofe  which  himfelf 
 «  hath    brought  upon   the  Affairs  of  Earth  :   He  muft   give 
 
 *  up  the  Word  of  God  to  mercenary  Tongues  and  unhal- 
 '  low'd  Hands,  to  be  tenter'd  and  {tt  upon  the  Rack,  till, 
 *•  with  the    Heathen  Oracles    of    old,     it    can    (pixi'Tnri^uvt 
 
 *  cant  fomething  in   tl^e  Favour  of  his  Pretenfions.      And 
 
 *  who  can  be  fo  vain,  as  even  to  dream  of  Property  or  Li- 
 
 *  berty  under  fuch  a  State  ?  Who  can  hope  for  the  Enjoy- 
 «  ment  of  a  rightful  PolTellion,  while  the  Government  itfetf 
 
 «  is  but  a  fp lend  id  Robbery  ? Jmperium  flagitio  acquifi- 
 
 '  turn  nemo  it';quain  bonis  Artibus  exercuit,^  was  an  Obfervaticii 
 cf  the  Vi/ife  Hiftorian  Tacitus.  (Mr.  "Nathaniel Alfop'i^zxxrSin. 
 Zl  Ldcejicr  AiX.  23  March y  168!.  4.V.  p.  13,   1 4.] 
 
L  23  j 
 
 *  Siibjedlion  and  Prayers,  till  they  had  been 
 
 *  fully   fatisfy'd    in  the  Rightful  Title,   and 
 
 *  Lawful  Authority  of  their  Princes;  that  is, 
 '  till  they  had  examin'd  and  judged  upon  the 
 
 *  Rights,    Titles,   and  Claims  of  the  feveral 
 
 *  Pretenders;  which,   in   many   Cafes, 
 
 *  (you  fay)  not  one  of  a  Thoufand  was  capa- 
 
 *  ble  to  (^)do.'  Butmethinks,  Sir,  any  Man 
 of  true  Chriflian  Simplicity  and  Sincerity^ 
 would  rather  conclude  it  a  great  Abfiirdiiy 
 to  fuppofe  the  contrary.  For  when  we  conli- 
 der,  that  ABual  Governors  have  it  always  in 
 their  Power,  to  enforce  their  own  peremptory 
 Commands  by  the  Dread  of  temporal  Pu- 
 niQiments,  there  could  not  be  any  Occafion 
 at  all,  for  the  Apoftle  to  fuperadd  the  Obli- 
 gation of  Confcience,  and  the  Penalty  of  Darn- 
 nation^  if  he  had  meant  no  more  by  it,  than 
 barely  to  prefs  Obedience  and  SubjeBion  to  all 
 ABual  Governors^  right  or  wrong,  for  the 
 Time  being.  And  what  could  the  new  Con- 
 verts have  thought  of  fuch  Precepts,  fo  con- 
 trary to  the  Moral  Law,  if  they  had  under- 
 ftood  them,  as  you  would  perfuade  us,  that 
 any  audacious  Rebel  or  Invader,  who  had 
 incurr'd  the  Penalty  of  Damnation  for  Re- 
 fijiance  and  Ufurpation  of  another's  Right, 
 was  immediately,  by  Succeffion  a^nd  Settle- 
 ment alone,  fo  become  the  irrefiftible  Ordi- 
 nance of  God  J  and  as  fuch  to  be  prafd  for  and 
 
 C  4  obeyd^ 
 
[24    ] 
 
 oheydy  not  only  for  Wrath^  hut  olfo  for  Con" 
 fcic'nce    Sake?    Or    how    would    they  have 
 thought  this  Dodrine  reconcileable  with  that 
 other    neceflary   Duty   of    Repentance    and 
 Rcftitutionj  or  indeed  with  the  whole  Syftem 
 of  the  Chriftian  Inftitution  ?  But,  after  all, 
 the  Difficulty  of  being  fatifyd  in  the  Right- 
 fill  Title ^  is  not  fo  great  as  you  reprefent  it ; 
 efpecially  in  the  Cafe  of  an  Hereditary  King- 
 dom, as  is  here  fuppos'd  3  where  not  one  of  a 
 Thoifiind  can    be  ignorant  of  the  Right  of 
 Birth  between   the  two  Pretenders,   unlefs  it 
 be  his  own  Fault :  For  it  does  not  require  any 
 great  Capacity  to  examine  and  judge  ^  which  of 
 them    is   next   Heir  of  the    Blood   Royal. 
 Every    one   knows,    the  Children   of  Great 
 Princes  are    not    brought  into    the   World 
 without  a  Number  of  Witnelles  (and  fome- 
 times  alio  their  Depofitions  on  Oath  recorded) 
 to  put   the  Birth  out  of  all  Doubt:  But,   if 
 there  were  no   fuch  authentic  formal  Proofs, 
 you  know  very  well,  Sir,  tis  a  Maxim  in  Law, 
 [i)  that  the  Parents  Nomination  and  Acknow- 
 ledgment of  a  Child  J  gives  him  a  Right  to  all 
 
 the 
 
 (/)  Ma/card,  the  Civilian,  teaches  us,  That  '  Nominatio 
 •  P.iventum  inducit  FiHationem,  &  trans fcrt  Onus  proband]  in 
 f  Adverfarium  ;  Sz  conlHcuit  Nominatum  in  aliquali  PofTeffi- 
 5  one,  donee  Contrarium  probetur.'  [Canclus.  700,  No.  9. 
 RtbusdeNom.  !^u.rji.].  L  n.  8  )  And  L.  C.  ].' Hobart  ^f- 
 lirms, '  That  even  if  a  fuppofititious  Chi'd  be  acknowledged 
 f  by  thpfe  whom  it  concern?,  the  Confequences  which  follow 
 '  of  it,  areas  certain  ex  Hypotbef,,  ex  ConcfJJis,  as  if  he  were 
 '■^  the  true  Child  indeed,  [Colt  and Glon.>e>'s  Cafe  againll  the 
 jBiHiop  ol  Lichfield.      Hobari\  Rcf'orti^  fgj.  146. j 
 
[    25    ] 
 
 the  Benefits  and  Privileges  of  their  Child;  fo 
 that  even  in  Cafe  of  any  ObjeSlion  to  his  Legi- 
 timacy y  the  Burthen  of  the  Proof  is  to  lie  upon 
 the  Adverfary.  Where  then  is  the  Difficulty 
 of  obtaining  SatisfaBion  in  the  Rightful  'Title 
 mid  Lawful  Authority  ?  Or  what  Abfurdity 
 is  there  in  fuppofing  Men  ohligd  to  do  that 
 which  is  fo  eafy  ? 
 
 Another   Reafon  you  urge  again  ft    that 
 flrid  Conftruction  of  the  Text  is,  2.  *  That 
 
 *  upon    this    Suppoiition,    Chriftians   muft 
 
 *  have  been,  in  this  Refpecl,  in  a  worfe  Con- 
 '  dition  than  they  were  in  before,  when  this 
 
 *  was  not  a  Matter  of  Confcience  to  them  j 
 
 *  fince  it  muft  unavoidably  expofe  them  to 
 '  the  Refentment  of  the  Higher  Powers,  and 
 ■  the  imminent  Hazard  of  their  Lives  and 
 '  Fortunes,  for  the  Rights   and   Titles   of 
 
 *  Princes,   which  (you  {■^•'j)   the  Gofpel  no- 
 
 *  where  requires  of  them,  on  that  (li)  Ac- 
 '  count.'  But  111  rely,  the  Gofpel  ?'equircs  of 
 them  to  render  unto  all  Men  their  Due  ;  and 
 particularly,  unto  Gaifar  th^  Things  which  are 
 
 Ciefar's. And  hov*^  is  itpoffible  for  us  to 
 
 perform  this  Duty,  according  to  thefe  Gof- 
 pel Precepts,    without    cxa-mining^   or  being 
 
 fully  fitisfyd  what  is  their  Due,  and   what 
 
 Right  (/)  they  have  to  it  ? •  Which  never- 
 
 thelefs 
 
 (k)  Page  3.  (/)  Bjfiiop  Burnet  determines,  '  That 
 
 '  if  thofe  who  govern  us  do  claim  that  which  is  notthein, 
 *  find  which  eiuier  by  the  Laws  of  God,  or  by  the  exprei-i 
 
 *  Laws 
 
[26    J 
 
 thelefs  you  arc  pleas'd  to  ridicule,  as  a  Thing 
 abfurdto  fhppofe!  And  yet,  your  own  Father, 
 whofe  Papers  (as  I  have  Reafon  to  think 
 them)  relating  to  the  Oaths,  you  have  here 
 thought  fit  to  fubjoin  to  );our  Vindicatio?i^ 
 has  more  ingenuoufly  declar'd  and  fairly  prov- 
 ed, '  That  certainly  neither  Man   nor  Wo- 
 
 *  man  can  fwear  law^fully,  and  with  a  good 
 
 *  Confcience,  what  they  do  not  underftand, 
 '■  and  are  not  fatisfy'd  [m)  about.'  And  again, 
 
 *  That  if  the  Anfwers  to  the  Queries  do 
 '  not   fatisfy   and  remove  all  Scruples  about 
 
 *  the  Meaning  and  Matter  of  the  Oaths,  it 
 ^  ought  to  be  refus'd,  whatever  may  be  the 
 
 *  in)  Confequence/  And  what  more  ahjo' 
 lute  NeceJJlty  there  can  be,  for  iMch  j till  Sat is- 
 
 JaBion  and  CowoiBioji,  with  refped:  to  the 
 Oaths,  than  to  the  Prayers  in  Queflion,  I 
 muft  leave  to  you  to  demonftrate  at  Leifurc.- 
 But  you,  it  feems,  would  have  Men  to  com- 
 ply with  both,  implicitely  and  without  Rea- 
 fon! For,  as  you  well  obferve  in  another 
 Place,  '  He  that  has  never  examin'd,  can  have 
 
 no 
 
 *  Laws  of  tKe  Conflitution,  are  declar'd  not  to  belong  tq 
 '  them,  we  are  not  bound  to  pay  or  render  that,  fince  it  is 
 
 •  nof  at  all  theirs^   for  that  is  ail  that  we  are  bound  to    ren- 
 
 •  Aer  to  them.'  {S-cr?iw77  2t)  May,  1710  S'vo.  p.  4,  5.)  And 
 Eifliop  Jndrenvs,  '  That  it  is   firft  to  be  confider'd,  whether 
 
 *  he  that  commands  be  Nobis  Rex:  For  every  one  is  not  a 
 '  Ruler  :  The  Robes  qualify  him  notfo  far,  but  as  he  is  c«r 
 '  King,  and  no  farther  than  quatenus  nobis  imperat,  as  he 
 "  rules  over  us,  or  hath  Jlight  to  command  us.'  {Expos  of 
 the  Commandments,  fol.  336.) 
 
 {vi)  Page  ::i5,  216,  &  223.  (k)  Page  225^. 
 
[  27  ] 
 
 '  no  juft  (o)  Reafon  to  do  any  thing.  *  But 
 when  I  pray  you,  Sir,  was  this  not  a  Matter 
 
 of  Confcience  to  them  P Before  their  Con- 
 
 verfion  to  Chriftianity  ?  That  is  certainly  a 
 great  Miftake.  For  whether  they  were  'Je'uoi 
 or  Gentiles^  they  had  the  Law  of  Nature,  if 
 not  the  Law  of  God  alfo,  to  dired  their  Con^ 
 fciences,  and  to  teach  them  a  dutiful  and  ftead- 
 faft  Adherence  to  their  Natural  and  Rightful 
 Sovereigns.  —  However,  fuppofing  the  Con- 
 ditio}! of  Chrijiians^  which  you  fpeak  of,  to 
 be  ever  fo  hazardous  on  that  Account,  this 
 Argument  is  fo  full  of  worldly  Politics,  more 
 than  of  Chriflian  Piety,  that  it  is  not  lit  to 
 be  infifted  on  by  a  Chriftian  Cafuift,  in  the 
 
 Refolution  of  a  Cafe  of  Confcience. 
 
 Were  we  to  confult  only  with  Fleili  and 
 Blood  indeed,  this  Confideration  of  the  per- 
 emptory Commands  of  Princes,  their  Rejhtf- 
 mejitSj  and  the  imminent  Hazards  of  our 
 Non-compliance,  would  quickly  determine 
 the  Queftion :  But  then.  Sir,  what  becomes 
 of  the  Evangelical  Docftrine  of  the  Crofs ; 
 for  the  Pradice  of  which  there  have  been  fo 
 many  glorious  Confeflbrs  in  all  Ages  of  the 
 Chriftian  Church,  and  efpecially  in  the  pri- 
 mitiveTimcs,  when  thofeApoflolical  In]anc- 
 tions  were  but  newly  receiv'd,  and  fredi  in 
 Memory .?  If  it  is  not  in  Force  in  fach  Cafes 
 aG  this,    where  the  Queflion   turns  upon  a 
 
 Point 
 
[28] 
 
 Point  of  Moral  Right  and  Juilice,  what  bet- 
 ter Subjecft  are  we  like  to  have,  for  the  Exer- 
 ci{e  of  our  Chriftian  Patience  and  Fortitude, 
 which  are  fo  highly  recommended,  and  fo 
 earneftly  prefs'd,  by  our  Blefled  Saviour  him- 
 lelf,  as  well  a"s  by  his  Apoftles  ?  Or  now,  in 
 Countries  where  the  Gofpel  is  recciv'd  by 
 public  Authority,  who  can  be  better  intitled 
 to  the  promifed  Bkjjing  o? fujf'ering  for  Righ- 
 teoujnefs-fake^  and  a  good  Confcience^  than 
 they  who  hazard  (/>)  all  they  have  in  this 
 World,  rather  than  become  Partakers  of 
 other  Mens  StJis  and  Immoralities ?  Befides, 
 Sir,  to  teach  that  Chriftians  not  only  law- 
 fully may,  but  are  alfo  in  Duty  bound,  to 
 comply  with  all  ABual  Governors^  without 
 due  Examination  and  Satisfadlion,  or  any 
 Diilincflion  of  their  Titles,  is  fuch  a  Dodtrine 
 as  ewes  its  Patronage,  if  not  its  Rife,  to  one 
 of  the  worft  Se(5ls  now  profefTing  the  Chrif- 
 tian  Name  \  and  which  the  wifefl:  and  more 
 honeft  Heathens  were  afham'd  (f)  of! 
 
 But, 
 
 [f]  See  the  Note  on  p,  19.  (q)  Bifhop  Sma'riJge 
 
 oixfen'es, '  That  a  wife  and  fober  Heathen  was  wont  to  pro- 
 '    nounce  a  folemn  Curfe    againft  thole,    who  tirft  found  out 
 
 *  the   unluckly   Dirtindion    between  ProJitnUe  and   Honeft ; 
 
 *  and  feveral,  who  had  only  the  Light  of  Reafon   to  guide 
 '  them,  have  judg'd  it  extremely  fcandalous,  not  only  to  pre- 
 
 *  fer  Profit    to  Ijonefly,  but  even  fo  much  as   to  bring  th? 
 
 *  Former  into   Competition   with    the    Latter.     But,   fome 
 
 *  Veilbns,   who  call    themfelves  Chriftians,  and  fome,   who 
 
 *  have  appropiated  to  themfelves  the  Holy  Name  of  Jefus, 
 
 *  have  thought  it  a  plain  indication  of  Wcakncfs  and  folly, 
 
 •  to 
 
[29] 
 
 But,  3.  You  fay, '  This  Diflindlon  would 
 
 *  have  defeated  one  main  End  for  which  the 
 
 *  Precepts  were  (r)  given  /  viz.  to  refute  the 
 Calumny  of  thofe  who  charg'd  the  Chriftian 
 Religion  with  Principles  tending  to  Sedition 
 and  Rebellion.     For,  you  are  pleas'd  to  aik, 
 
 *  How  would  this  Calumny  have  been  refut- 
 '  ed,  if  they  had  refus'd  their  Subjection  and 
 
 *  Prayers,  till  they  had  examin'd,  and  were 
 '  fatisfy'd  of  the  Juftice  and  the  Right  the 
 
 *  Higher  Powers  had  to  their  (i)  Obedience?' 
 In  my  humble  Opinion,  Sir,  that  Calum7iy 
 was  much  better  refuted  by  a  confcientious 
 Adherence  to  Rightful  and  Lawful  Titles, 
 according  to  the  fundamental  Conflitution  of 
 their  Country,  than  by  {hewing  a  verfatile 
 and  Time-ferving  Difpofition  to  comply  with 
 every  Change  or  Revolution  of  State,  as 
 Things  might  take  their  Turn  to  be  upper- 
 moft,  right  or  wrong.  For,  what  Confi- 
 dence can  any  Prince  have  in,  or  Dependance 
 upon,   the  Loyalty   of  thofe  I\Ien,    whofe 
 
 declar'd 
 
 *  to  forego  any  thing  which  is   greatly  profitable,  becaufe 
 
 *  it  is  a  little  difhoneit ;  and  have  laughed  at  the  idle  Sera- 
 
 *  pies  of  thofe,  who  have  given  themfelves  the  Tremble  to  en- 
 
 *  quirey   Whether  an  Aftion  be  li'Vjful  or  not,   after  it  has 
 «  once  appear'd  expedient !  ■  That  the  ftiorteft  Ways  to 
 
 <  an   End  are  fittelt   to   be  chofen,  be  they  never   fofoul; 
 
 <  that  the  Appearance  of  Virtue  is  an  Advantage,   but  the 
 '■  Praflice  of  it  a  Burden  ;  that  Charity  ought  to  begin  at 
 
 *  home,  and  to  end  there  too,  are  Maxims,  which,  tho'  own'd 
 '  by  few,  are  by  many  made  the  Meafures  of  their  Adicas. 
 [Sermon  5  November  1 705.  ^I'Q^  p.  10.) 
 
 (r)  Page  8.  [i)  Ppge  9. 
 
[3°] 
 
 declar'd  Principle  it  is,  that  they  will  be 
 faithful  and  bear  true  Allegiance  to  him, 
 only  while  he  continues  to  govern  them  !  That 
 is,  while  he  is  able  to  keep  his  Seat,  and  to 
 oblige  them  to  be  fubjedt !  But,  whenever  he 
 fhall  be  difpojfefsd,  they  fliall  no  longer  look 
 upon  him  as  intitled  to  their  Allegiance  «nd 
 prayers,  but  tranfer  both  to  the  next  they 
 Ihall   find  aBually  fettled  in  his  Place,  with 
 
 the  Reins  and  Whip  in  his  Hand ! A 
 
 flrange  Way  this,  to  remove  the  Sufpicions 
 of  Seditioji  and  Rebellion^  and  to  gain  the 
 good  Opinion  of  Princes !  Whereas,  'tis  na- 
 tural for  all  generous  Souls  to  have  a  greater 
 Regard  for  a  Perfon  whom  they  find  to  be 
 firm  and  fteady  in  a  fair  Principle  (however 
 they  may  think  him  miflaken  in  it)  than  for 
 thofe  whom  they  perceive  to  be  thus  ready 
 to  turn  with  every  Wind,  or  row  with  every 
 Stream. 
 
 .  But,  whereas  you  are  pleas'd  to  proceed 
 thus,  '  Who  made  them  Judges  of  thefe 
 '  Things?  The  Chriftian  Religion  gave 
 *  them  no  fuch  Right  or  Authority,  laid  no 
 '  fuch  Obligation  upon  them,  requir'd  no 
 '  fuch  Thing  at  their  (/)  Hands ;'  I  might 
 objeft  to  you  the  Abfurdity  of  queftioning 
 the  People's  Right  to  judge  of  their  Gover- 
 nor's Title  and  Authority,  when  the  whole 
 Scope  of  your  Difcourfe  fuppofes  them  to 
 
 have 
 
 (/)  Page  9. 
 
[31  ] 
 
 have  a  Right  to  jW^^  of  the  Adminifcratlon, 
 and  in  what  Cafes  they  may  refift  and  depofs 
 their  undoubted  Rightful  Sovereign ;  which 
 is  much  more  difficult  to  make  a  true  Judg- 
 ment of,  for  as  much  as  the  Reafons  of  State, 
 and  the  true  Motives  of  a  Sovereign's  Councils 
 and  Actions,  are  not  fo  eafily  underflood  as 
 the  Right  and  Title  which  he  has  to  the  So- 
 vereignty. But,  to  come  diredly  to  the  Point, 
 I  beg  Leave  to  fay,  That  whoever  requires 
 me  to  pray  for  him^  as  my  King,  does  fo  far 
 make  me  a  Judge,  whether  he  is  the  Perfon 
 whom  I  ought  to  pray  for  under  that  Cha- 
 radter  or  not :  And  the  like  may  be  faid  of 
 ^'wearing  to  him,  as  I  intimated  before.  For, 
 in  fuch  folemn  Adls  and  Offices  as  thefe,  the 
 Chriftian  Religion  has  not  only  give?i  us  a 
 Right  and  Authority,  but  alfo  reqiiird  and 
 laid  an  Obligation  upon  us,  to  pro"ce  all  I'hings, 
 and  to  examine  and  be  well  fatisfy'd  in  the 
 Matter,  before  we  prefume  either  to  call  upon 
 Almighty  God  as  a  V/itnefs  in  the  one  Cafe, 
 or  to  invoke  him  as  a  Patron  in  the  other : 
 Whereas,  on  the  contrary,  to  pray,  or  fwear, 
 at  a  Venture,  after  Vows  to  make  inquiry,  and 
 to  offer  up  folemn  Prayers  to  God  with  Wrath 
 or  Doubti?2g,  have  been  generally  cenfur'd,  as 
 contrary  both  to  Chriftian  and  Moral  Prin- 
 ciples j  and  you  will  not  deny,  that  we  are 
 exprefly  commanded  to  fee  ail  Appearance 
 of  Evil.  Nay,  tho',  both  here  and  elfewhere, 
 over  and   over  ajain,    you  roundly  affirm, 
 
 '    ^  That 
 
[  32  ] 
 
 '  That  Chriftianity  lays  no  fuch  Obligation 
 
 *  upon  them,  nor  binds  the  Confciences  of 
 '  Believers  to  any  fuch  Regards  j*  yet  you  do 
 pretty  fairly  grant,  that  Mejt  may  be  under 
 other  Obligations^  *  from  the  common  Rights 
 '  of  Mankind,  h'om  the  Laws  and  Cuftoms 
 
 *  of  the  Common-wealth  and  Society  they 
 '  live  in,  or  other  acceffory  Ties,  to  examine 
 '  or  contend  for  the  Rights  and  Titles  of  {n) 
 '  Princes:'  And,  more  plainly,  in  a  P^r^;?- 
 thejisy  you  fay,    '  AfTertory  Oaths,  indeed, 
 '  about  the  Rights  and  Lawful  Authority  of 
 '■  Princes,   are  another  Cale,  and  require  far- 
 '  ther  {x)  Confideration.'     But,  how  is  this 
 a?2other  Cafe,   Sir  ?  Or  what  farther  Cofifide- 
 raiion  is  there  requird^    for  the  afferting  on 
 Oath,  that  our  Adual  Governor  has  the  Right 
 and  Lawful  Authority,  in  Oppofition  to  all 
 other  Pretenders,  than  for  folemnly  praying 
 
 for  him  as  fuch,  and  that  he  may  va?iqtiijh 
 and  o^oercome  them^c}  Is  not  praying  to 
 God  in  a  public  Congregation,  and  that  too 
 by  a  known  ftated  Form,  as  folemn  and  de- 
 liberate an  A(ft  as  Swearing  by  him  in  a 
 Court  of  Juflice  ?  Or  can  it  require  farther 
 Confideration,  for  once,  to  call  God  to  Wit- 
 nefs,  that  fuch  a  one  is  our  Lawfiil  and  Right- 
 ful King  and  Governor,  than  daily  to  call 
 upon  him  to  profper  him  as  fuch?  For  my 
 own  Part,  I  can't  fee  this  to  be  another  Cafe'y 
 
 or 
 
 (u)  Page  10  {.\.  11': J. 
 
[  33  ] 
 
 or  what  farther  Conjideration  can  be  requird 
 for  the  one  than  the  other:  And  therefore 
 I  put  them  here  together,  as  what  to  me 
 feems  equally  to  require  due  Confideration, 
 Examination,  and  Satisfa(5lion,  before  good 
 Chriftians  prefume  to  do  either.     '  For,   if 
 
 *  Submifllon,  Honour,  Tribute  and  Prayers— 
 
 *  are  due,  and  may  be  lawfully  paid,  to  all 
 *■'  who  are  in  the  adtual  Pofleflion  and  Exer- 
 
 *  cife  of  Power  and  Dominion,' as  you 
 
 {a)  affirm,  there  mufl.  be  the  fame  Submijjion 
 due,  with  regard  to  the  Oaths,  as  to  the  Pray- 
 ers'y  they  being  bothalike  in  that  refped:: 
 And  confequently,  there  muft  be  as  much 
 Confideration  and  Satisfadion  necelTarily  re- 
 quirdj  for  SiibmiJJion  to  the  one  as  to  the 
 other.  'Tis  true,  indeed,  you  add,  *  That 
 ^  in  this,  as  in  other  Things,  it  is  pofiible, 
 '  there  may  be  no  General  Rule,  which  may 
 ^  not,  in   fome  Cafes,  admit  of  {b)  Excep- 
 
 *  tion/  And,  if  fo,  what  Cafe  can  be  thought 
 more  reafonably  to  admit  of  Exception,  than 
 this  here  fuppos'd,  of  a  contefled  Title  to  an 
 Hereditary  Crown,  between  PofTeffion  on  the 
 one  Hand,  and  Right  on  the  other  ?  But,  be 
 this  as  it  will ;  if  there  be  other  Obligations, 
 
 from  the  Laws  and  Cuftoms  of  the  Society  they 
 live  in,  or  whatever  elfe,  to  contend  for  the 
 Rights  and  Titles  of  Princes,  as  you  feem 
 here  to  grant,  then,    furely,   they   can't  be 
 
 D  bound 
 
 {a)  Page  lo.  (b)  Ibid. 
 
[34] 
 
 bound  in  Duty  to  pray  for  their  aBual  Go- 
 vernors, purely  as  luch,  till  they  have  examined 
 and  are  fatisffd  of  the  Right  and  Title  of 
 thole  Governors  whom  they  are  requir'd  to 
 pray  for.     And   this  is  ftill  the  more  abfo- 
 lutely  necelTary  in   the  Cafe  here  fuppos'd; 
 when  they  can't  pray  for  the  Profperity  and 
 Succefs  of  the  one,    without  praying  for  the 
 Confiifion  and  Overthrow  of  the  other;  and 
 confequently,  without  Examination,  may  be 
 unwarily  engag'd,  to  pray  to  the  God  of  Juf- 
 tice,   for  the  Continuance  and  Protedion  of 
 downright  Injuftice;    than    which  nothing 
 can  be  a  greater  {c)  Abomination  to  him,  or 
 a  more  audacious   Infult   upon   his  Divine 
 Attributes.     You   cenfure   your   Remarket 
 '^  as  miftaking  the  Nature  and  End  of  the 
 *  Prayers  commanded  in  the  Text,  and  not 
 
 *  confi- 
 
 (r)  Bifhop  Burnet,  having  enumerated  feveral  Particulars,  to 
 prove   that  King  James  was  fuch  an  L7«r/.r  as  might  law- 
 ul!y  be  re^t:_fteJ,  fays,  '  The  Revolution  _  muft  be  Jook'd  on 
 as  a  continued  Ufurpation  to  this  Day,  if  thcfe  Principles 
 are  not  true  :  All  the  Oaths  taken  to  fupport  it  are  fo  many 
 ^  foUmv  Perjunes^  which  are  of  no  Force,  unlefs  built  upon 
 ^  a  jult  Foundation  ;  and  the  Prayers  we  have  been  offering 
 .  "P-  ';^'f  ting  to  it,  are  an  iTnpma  Profanation  of  the  Name 
 ot  God,  if  that  for  which  we  blefs  God  was  unlawful '' 
 T'Te^'-^t  ^'T'"^"'  i7>o-  2^^ Edition  ^vo.  p.  12.)    And 
 fo  alfo  Doaor  ^j.fays,  «  Our  Prayers  would  really  Jijhonour 
 .       i'  iL     V^  '''^'■^  ^  Fal/hoodm  them,  and  we  knew  it  to  be 
 a  i-alihood  ;  or  if  we  prafdagahj?  flair.  Right  in  exprefs 
 1  crms,  or  agninft  a  Prince  we  belie^Sd  to  be  ri<.htfuh  For 
 *  the  former  Prayers  would  iliew,  that  we  thouglit  we  could* 
 '  decez-ve  God;  and  the  Latter,  that  we  thought  God  would 
 *fa-vour   I„j;^ue.r     [Treatife  againjt    the  Nonjurors,    I^ig. 
 in  8i'..  Voh  n.  p.  395,  396.;  '     '    ^ 
 
[35] 
 
 *  confidering  the  Reafons  given  for  them  in 
 
 *  the  {d)  Sermon/  'Tis  true,  as  Kmgs  and 
 other  Governors  are  Men,  we  are  undoubt- 
 edly iopray  for  them  in  general,  becaufe  the 
 Text  injoins  us  to  pray  for  all  Men:  But 
 they  mufi;  be  ftrangely  tniftakeit  indeed,  who 
 can  from  thence  conclude,  that  it  muft  be 
 lawful,  and  a  Duty  to  pray  for  every  ASlual 
 Governor,  as  King ;  and  efpecially  in  fuch 
 Terms  as  thofe  of  the  Englifi  Liturgy. 
 
 Again  you  fay,  *  Tho'  they  may  be  wicked 
 
 *  Men,   or  unjuft   and  criminal   in  the  Pof- 
 
 *  feffion  of  Power,  our  Prayers  for  them 
 '  neither  tend  to  commend  the  one,  nor  to 
 
 *  blefs  the  (e)  other.'  Now,  I  fhall  not  deny, 
 that  a  very  wicked  Man  may  be  the  Subjed: 
 of  the  Prayers  commanded  in  the  Text ; 
 even  as  Nero  himfelf  was  *  at  the   Time 
 
 *  when  St.  Paulgzve  this  (f)  Precept/  But, 
 for  the  making  this  the  more  intelligible  to 
 ordinary  Capacities,  we  ought  to  diflinguifh. 
 That  a  Rightful  Prince,  however  perfonally 
 wicked,  or  tyrannical  in  his  Adminiftration, 
 is  to  be  view'd  in  one  Light ;  and  an  Ufurper, 
 however  plauiibly  he  may  live  and  govern, 
 in  another.  This,  Sir,  you  know  very  well, 
 is  a  common  Diftindtion  in  the  Schools,  be- 
 tween Tyranmis  Adminiftratione,  and  Tyra7i' 
 72US  Titulo',  the  former  being  what  we  now 
 call  a  Tyrant,  or  wicked  King,  and  the  latter 
 
 D  2  an 
 
 {d)  Page  11.  {e)  JhU.  if]  Page  la. 
 
[  36  1 
 
 an  Ufiirper^  or  unjuft:  PoiTeffor  of  Another's 
 Right.     Of  the  former  Sort  was  Nero-,  who 
 was,  '  as  to  his  Moral  Charader,   the  very 
 *  worft  of  Men/  as  you  truly  call  {g)  him : 
 And  yet  this  very  Nero  was  the  HigherPower, 
 to  whom  St.   Paul  exprefsly    commanded 
 every   Soul  to  be  JuhjeB  for  Confcience  Sake. 
 But  I  can't  by  any  Means  agree  with  you, 
 that  he   was  of  the  latter  Sort,   an  Ufurper^ 
 till  you  can  prove   whofe  Right  he  unjuftly 
 polTsfs'd,  and  who  was  the  Pretender  to  that 
 Right  againfl  him.     This  Inftance  therefore, 
 of  Subjevftion  to,  and  praying  for  ISIero,  how- 
 ever ftrong  and  pertinent  it  may  be,  againft 
 thofe  who  rejift  and  dethrone  a  Prince  vejled 
 ivitb  Lawful  and  Rightful  Authority,  even 
 fuppofing  his  Adminiftration   to  have  been 
 wicked  and  tyrannical,   can't  pertinently  be 
 urg'd  as  an  Argument  for  Subjedlion  to,   and 
 praying  for,  any  other  Adual  Governor,  not 
 vefted  with  Lawful  and  Rightful  Authority.— 
 You  affirm  indeed,  that  Nero  had  no  Au- 
 thority,   *  but  what  was  deriv'd  from  Ufur- 
 '  pation,  tho'  fubmitted  to  by  the  Senate  and 
 
 *  People,  through  Fear  and  [h)  Force : '  For^ 
 you  fay,  '  What  were  fulius  Ccefar  and  Au^ 
 '  guftus  but  Ufurpers,  tho'  their  Authority, 
 '  through   Fear   or  Force,    was  afterwards 
 
 *  recogniz'd  by  the  Senate  and  People?  Or 
 '  what  Title  to  the  Empire  had  the  Succeed- 
 ing 
 
 (f)  Page  12.  {h)  IliJ. 
 
[37] 
 
 *  ing  Emperors,  under  whom  thefe  Precepts 
 
 *  were  all  given,  but  what  was  owing  to  that 
 
 *  firft  (/)  Ufurpation  ?  '  With  your  good 
 Leave,  Sir,  when  the  Senate  and  People ^  who 
 had  exercis'd  the  Supreme  Power  uninter- 
 rupted for  many  Ages,  had  fubmitted  to,  and 
 recognizd  the  Authority  of  yulius  Cafar  and 
 AtigiiJluSj  it  is  very  extraordinary  in  you,  to 
 triumph  as  you  do,  with  the  Notion  of  their 
 being  Ufurpers;  yea,  and  confejjedly  (k) 
 Ujurpen  !  Could  you  have  prov'd.  That  the 
 Senate  did  not  voluntarily  abdicate  their  own 
 Right,  but  afTerted  their  Authority  fo  long  as 
 they  could;  and  that,  when  they  found 
 themfelves  borne  dov/n  by  the  Influence  of 
 Ccefar,  and  his  Partizans  among  them,  they 
 had,  even  then,  after  long  and  warm  Debates, 
 pafs'd  the  Abdication^  and  their  Recognition 
 of  Cciefar^  by  no  greater  Majority  than  that 
 of  one  or  two  Voices,  you  had  faid  fome- 
 what  more  to  the  Purpofe :  And  yet,  even  on 
 that  Suppofition,  you  could  not  properly 
 have  prov'd  Ccejar  an  Ufurper^  unlefs  you 
 could  alfo  have  prov'd,  that  the  Senate  and 
 People  ftill  continued  to  affert  their  proper 
 Right,  againft  him  and  his  SuccefTors.  But, 
 fince  neither  the  Senate  and  People  did  this, 
 nor  any  other  more  Rightful  Pretender  ever 
 did  appear  to  claim  a  better  Authority ;  fiire- 
 ly,  the  Chriftian  Subjedls  were  not  concern- 
 
 41")  Page  6,  s)(\  Page  20, 
 
[38  J 
 
 cd,  In  that  Cafe,  to  be  more  folicitous  than 
 the  Roman  Senate  themfelves  were,  to  fcruple 
 the  Authority  of  the  Cafarsy  (o  recogniz'd  by 
 the  Parties  interefted,  whatever  they  might 
 think  of  the  fecret  Motives  to  that  Recogni- 
 tion. And,  as  to  the  Title  of  the  Succeeding 
 Emperors,  fince  it  was  founded  on  the  Autho- 
 rity of  the  firfl:  Ccefars,  fo  recognized,  and 
 uninterrupted  by  any  other  Claim,  it  could 
 not  be  fairly  queflion'd  -,  tho'  mere  Pofleflion, 
 where  there  is  a  better  Right  alTerted,  is  in- 
 deed (/)  no  Title  at  all.  But,  after  all,  Sir, 
 I  muft  own  to  you,  that  I  am  not  a  httle 
 concern'd,  to  fee  a  Gentleman  of  your  Cha- 
 rader  following  the  old  beaten  Path  of  the 
 bailed  Pamphleteers,  in  purfuit  of  this  ftale 
 and  groundlefs  Argument,  when  you  cannot 
 but  know,  how  often  and  convincingly  the 
 Abfurdity  of  it  has  been  demonftrated;  and 
 particularly  by  the  learned  Dr.  Hickes,  in  his 
 yet  unanfwer'd,  and  perhaps  unanfwerable 
 yovian. 
 
 But  now,  Tmce  you  are  pleas'd  to  mention 
 *  the  Prayers  of  the  Church  for  a  King  and 
 
 *  Gover- 
 
 (/)  *  §uppofe  any  Man,  by  forcible  Entry,  gets   PofeJJton 
 
 *  of  the  Mannor-Houfe,  is  he  thereupon  Lord  of  the  Man- 
 
 ♦  nor  ;  or  has  he  a  Right  to  the  Rents  of  the  Tenants  ?  It 
 
 *  intitles  him  to  nothing  that  I  know  of,  but  to  be  follovv'd 
 
 •  by  a  Writ  of  Bjenmcnt.  For,  the  Right  and  the  EJiate  are 
 <  for  ever  infeparable.  For  the'  the  right  Ow  ner  be  not  in  the 
 
 •  Eftate,  yet  the  Eftate  is  always  in  him.'  (Mr.  Samuel 
 ^^ohn/on's  Notes  upon  the  Rhcenix  Edition  of  Bifhop  Burnet's 
 Palbral  Letter,  Part  I.  1694.  in  4/0,  p.  25.) 
 
'[  39  ] 
 
 *^  Governor,  the'  wicked  in  his  Morals,  tho' 
 
 *  unjaft  and  criminal  in  his  Power  and  Do- 
 
 *  minion,  tho'  he  had  murder'd  the  neareft 
 '  Heir,  to  come  at  the  Crown,  as  fome  have 
 '  (m)  done,'  it  brings  to  mind  the  Cafe  of 
 our  ki chard  III.  who  was  jiStnal  Gover?ior, 
 and  at  the  fame  Time  both  a  T^yrant  and 
 UJ'urper.  He  had  murder  d  his  Nephews  (the 
 young  King  Edward  V.  and  his  Brother)  the 
 two  nearejl  Heirs^  to  come  at  the  Crown;  and 
 yet  this  execrable  Parricide  did  not  render 
 him  properly  an  Ufurper :  So  that,  notwith- 
 flanding  this  his  Wickednefs^  he  might  have 
 been  entitled  to  the  Prayers  of  the  Church, 
 as  King  and  Governor^  if  there  had  not  re- 
 mained any  other  Heir^  nearer  to  the  Crown 
 than  himfelf.  But,  forafmuch  as  his  Niece, 
 the  Lady  'Elizabeth^  was  ftill  in  being,  to 
 whom  the  Crown  of  Right  defcended,  im- 
 mediately after  the  Death  of  thofe  her  two 
 Brothers,  therefore  was  "Richard  an  Ufurper^ 
 (to  wit,  of  her  Right ;)  and,  as  fuch,  not  in- 
 titled  to  thofe  Prayers^  or  any  Duty  of  Alle- 
 giance. For,  taking  it  for  granted,  that  he 
 look'd  upon  the  Lady  Elizabeth  zi  his  Enemy., 
 as  he  certainly  did  her  two  Brothers,  (or  eJfe 
 why  did  he  fimrder  them  ?)  and  that  he 
 would  have  facrifis'd  her  alfo  to  his  Ambi- 
 tion, if  once  in  his  Power,  for  the  fame  Rea- 
 fon,by  murdering  all  the  nearer  Heirs,  to  come 
 
 D  4  at 
 
 {m)  Page  12. 
 
[40] 
 
 at  the  Crown  ;  Could  any  good  Man  apply 
 fuch  Prayers  to  him,  as  thofc  of  our  Church, 
 that  God  would  pro/per,  and  firengthen  him^ 
 that  he  might  vanquijh  and  overcome  all  his 
 Enemies,  &c.  ?  Or  could  any  Man  of  com- 
 mon Senfe  underftand  the  Force  of  fuch  a 
 Petition,  if  he  did  not  think  it  tended  to  com- 
 mend  or  blefs  the  unjufi  and  criminal  PoJfeJJion 
 of  the  Ufurper,  and  in  effe6lto  curfe  the  right 
 Heir,  (n)  by  devoting  her  to  Deftru(ftion. 
 And  yet,  you,  Sir,  are  pleas'd  to  deny  all  this, 
 and  to  call  it  a  Miftaking  the  'Nature  and 
 End  of  the  Prayers !  &c.  And,  tho'  you 
 are  pleas'd  to  fay,  *  That,  being  in  Poffeffion 
 
 *  of  that   Dominion  and  Power,    they  are, 
 
 *  for  that  Reafon,  in  titled  to  our  Prayers, 
 
 *  and,  both  for  their  Sakes  and  our  own,  we 
 
 *  are  commanded  to  give  (o)  them;'  one 
 would  think  it  more  confiftent  with  the  Duty 
 of  a  Chriftian  Subjecft,  and  the  Principles  of 
 the  Church  of  England,   fo  long  famous  (p) 
 
 for 
 
 («)  Dr.  Comher  fays,  *  Whoever  loves  the  Peace  of  the 
 
 *  Church,  doth   heartily  pray  for  the   Flcurifhing  of  the 
 
 *  Crown,  becaufe  they  live  and  grow  together;  and  he  that 
 
 *  is  a  Friend  to  one,  cannot   be  a  Foe  to  the  other.     His 
 
 *  Friends  are  our  Friends,  and^/V  Enemies  our  Enemies."       ■ 
 
 *  If  it  be  a  Foreign  Prince  that  oppofeth  our  King,  he  is  a 
 «  Robber,  and  unjuil,  to  invade   his  Neighbour's  Rights :  If 
 
 *  he  be  a  SuhjeSl  who  rifeth  againft  his  Sovereign,  he  hath 
 
 *  renounced  Chrijlianity  ivith  his  Allegiance,  and  is  to  be  ef- 
 «  teem'd  a  Troubler  of  our  Ifrael.     Therefore,  whoever  they 
 
 *  be,  that  are  Enemies  to  the  King,  or  whatfoever    the  Pre- 
 
 *  tences  be,  we  wifh  they  may  never  pro/per  in  that  black 
 '  Ihipiety  of  unjuft  Ini<aJion,  or  UnchrilUan  Rebellion  !  ' 
 {Comp.  to  the  Temple,  ^d.  Edition  ^njo.  1679.  P^rti-  P-  422.) 
 
 \p)  Page  13.  (^)  See  the  Note  on  p.  10. 
 
[41  1 
 
 for  her  diO-inguiflVd  Loyalty,  to  pray,  that 
 fuch  unjuft  PolTeffors  might  repent,  and  make 
 Reflitution  of  what  they  have  ufurp'd,  than 
 to  profper  and  fucceed  in  it;  as  your  Re- 
 marker  has  well  {q)  obferved. 
 
 But  becaufe  he  had  apply 'd  this  to  the 
 Cafe  of  Pirates,  Highwaymen^  and  fuch  like 
 public  Robbers,  you  endeavour  to  dif- 
 tinguifli  it  from  that  of  an  Ufurper,  thus : 
 
 *  Pirates,  Highwaymen,  and  public  Robbers, 
 
 *  are  Difturbers  of  Peace,Order,  and  Society ; 
 '  Viplaters   of   all    Rights   and   Laws,  and 
 
 *  public  Enemies  of  Mankind :  Every  A(ft 
 '  of  their  Trade  is  an  Act  of  Injuftice, 
 '  Violence,  and  Oppreffion  j  their  Trade  it- 
 '  {elf  (r)  Wickednefs  &c'  But  does  not  this 
 feem  to  be  a  Diftindlion  without  a  Diffe- 
 rence ?  For,  would  not  any  one  be  apt  to 
 think  the  fame  alfo  of  Ufurpers  ?  And  was 
 not  the  petty  Robber's  Anfwer  to  Alexander 
 the  Great,  (that  he  was  a  great  Robber  I)  al- 
 ways thought  to  be  pertinent  and  rational, 
 inafmuch  as  Alexander  was  an  ambitious  In- 
 vader and  Ufurper  of  other  Princes  Domi- 
 nions? No!  you  fay,*  Between  thefe  two, 
 '  Governors  and  public  Robbers,  there  can 
 '  be  no  Comparifon,  but  what  is  truly  odious ; 
 
 *  and  the  Objecftion  is  frivolous,  and  foreign  to 
 
 *  the  [s)  Purpofe.'  'Tis  true,  between  Right- 
 ful Governors   and  fuch  Robbers  as  are  here 
 
 menti- 
 
 (?)  Page  13,  (r)  Page  14.  (■)  Page  15. 
 
[42  J 
 
 mentloh'd,  there  can  he  no  Comparijon  hut 
 what  is  truly  odious :  But  between  fome  Ac- 
 tual Governors^  (fuch  as  are  fuppos'd  in  the 
 Cafe  here  put)  and  thofe  other  i^c^M^rj,  there 
 may  be  as  juft  a  Comparifon,  as  can  be  be- 
 tween great  Robbers  and  little  ones^  between 
 him  who  forcibly  or  unfairly  takes  a 
 Crown,  and  him  who  fteals  an  ordinary  Cap. 
 You  fay,  indeed,  of  Robbers^  '  That,  as  they 
 
 *  are  the  Enemies  of  Mankind,  it  is  every 
 '  Man's  Duty  to  oppofe  them,  if  able  j  it  is 
 
 *  lawful  to  kill  them,  as  Beafts  of  Prey,  that 
 
 *  do  great  Mifchief  to  the  Country ;  and  in 
 
 *  all  Ages  and  Nations,  it  has  been  accounted 
 '  a  glorious  Action  to  deftroy  them,  becaufe 
 
 *  it  is  a  public  (t)  Benefit.'  And,  it  would 
 be  no  hard  Tafk  to  prove  the  fame,  as  to 
 JJfurpers  alfo,  from  celebrated  Cafuifts  in  all 
 Ages  and  Nations:  But,  tho*  I  fhould  be  ex- 
 tremely averfe  to  the  having  my  Hand  im- 
 ploy'd  in  the  Deftrudion  of  either ;  and 
 confequently,  in  fending  them  headlong  to 
 Hell,  without  Space  for  Repentance ;  yet,  I 
 frankly  own  my  Opinion,  that  you  may  as 
 eafily  prove  it  lawful,  and  a  Duty^  to  aid,affift, 
 and  pray  for  the  Profpcrity  and  Succefs  of 
 the  one,  as  the  other  of  them. 
 
 As  to  what  you  have  quoted  on  this  Sub- 
 jed:  [u)  from  Dr.  Falhier,  I  can't  perceive 
 that  it  makes  any  thing  to  your  Purpofe.  For, 
 
 accord- 
 
 (/)  P.ige  14.  {u)  Page  15, 
 
[43] 
 
 according  to  his  Reafoning,  *  As  he  is  pro- 
 
 *  perly  a  Traveller  who  goeth  upon  his  al- 
 
 *  lowable  or  ordinary  Occalions;'  lb  is  he 
 properly  a  Governor,  who  keeps  within  the 
 proper  Bounds  of  his  allowable  and  ordinary 
 Jurisdidion,  and  doth  not  invade  or  encroach 
 upon  that  of  others.  And  again,  as  he  ob- 
 ferves,  *  If  the  meaneft  Man  in  the  Country 
 
 *  fhould   hear  of  an  A(fl  of  Parliament,  for 
 
 *  fecuring  the  fafe  Paffage  of  all  Travellers, 
 '  he  would  never  thence  conclude,  that  they 
 
 *  intended  to  provide  for  the  Safety  of  Rob- 
 
 *  bers.  Highwaymen,  and  Traitors,  who  are 
 
 *  the  great  Difturbers  of  [x)  Safety.*  Even 
 fo,  we  may  fuppofe,  when  he  hears  of  this 
 Apoftolical  Injunction,  to  pray  for  Kings,  and 
 all  that  are  in  Authority,  he  would  never 
 thence  conclude,  that  the  Apoftle  intended 
 to  oblige  all  Christians  to  join  in  folemn  Pray- 
 ers to  God  for  the  Safety  and  Protedion  of 
 Traytors,  Rebels,  and  Ufurpers,  whofe  Rife 
 and  Succefs  is  an  outragious  Infult  upon,  and 
 open  Violation  of  all  Authority.  And  tho' 
 St.   Paul  commands,    that  Prayer  be  made 
 
 for  all  Men  (which  Expreffion  is  z.%  general 
 and  indefinite  as  any  of  the  reft  (^);  yet,  the 
 utmoft  that  Dr.  Falkner  here  fuppofes  allow- 
 able to  be  pray'd  for,  in  behalf  of  Traitors 
 and  Robbers,  is,  *  That  God  would  preferve 
 '  them  from  tarther  Sin,  and  fo  keep  them, 
 
 *  that 
 
 [x]  Page  15.  {y)  Page  5 
 
[44] 
 
 '  that  they  may  have  Time  and  Grace  for 
 
 *  Repentance  J  and  that  thereby  they   may 
 
 *  be  preferved  from  eternal  {z)  Deftrudlion/ 
 And  how  Ufurpers  can  reafonably,  according 
 to  this  learned  Author's  Judgment,  be  enti- 
 tled to  more  than  this,  is  hard  to  prove  ;  un- 
 lefs  we  fhould  grant,  that  their  Succefs  alone 
 alters  the  Nature  of  Things,  fo  that  what 
 would  otherwife  have  been  plain  Treafon 
 and  Robbery,  becomes  thereby  juft,  laudable, 
 and  authoritative;  which  may  be  a  good 
 Mahometan  Argument  indeed,  but  is  contrary 
 to  Chrijiian  Doctrine.  Much  lefs  therefore 
 can  it  be  a  Duty,  or  even  lav^^ful,  in  fuch  a 
 Cafe  as  we  have  here  fuppos'd,  for  Chriftians 
 to  pray  for  their  de  Fadlo,  or  Aclual  Go'vernor, 
 in  fuch  Terms  as  thefe  of  our  EngliJJo  Litur- 
 gy, (fuppofing  them  to  have  fuch  a  one)  viz. 
 acknowledging  him  to  be  their  Sovereign 
 Lord  and  King;  moft  humbly  befeeching 
 God  to  Jirengthen  him,  that  he  may  vanquifi 
 and  overcome  all  his  E?iemies,  and  to  give  him 
 the  ViBory  over  all  his  Rnemies^  &c.  while 
 they  believe,  or  have  any  Reafon  to  doubt, 
 that  the  other  Competitor,  whom  he  looks 
 upon  as  his  Enemy,  is,  de  Jure,  their  Sove- 
 reign Lord  and  King,  {a)  unjuftly  difpoffefs'd 
 of  his  Right ;  or  acknowledging;  the  PofTef- 
 for  as  Gods  cho/en  Servant  and  Mini fier,  and 
 to  have  his  Authority  oyer  them,  &c.  without 
 
 any 
 
 (si)  Page  i6.  {a]  See  the  Note  on  p  13. 
 
[45] 
 
 any  exprefs  Revelation  from  God,  and  even 
 while  the  Event  itfelf  is  yet  doubtful!  And 
 yet  all  this,  and  much  more  of  the  lame 
 kind,  how  abfurd,  immoral,  or  impious  foe- 
 ver,  mufi:  be  lawful  and  neceifary,  if  the 
 Apoftolical  Injunction,  to  pray  for  Kings ^ 
 and  all  that  are  in  Authority^  be  extended  to 
 all  A5lual  Governors^  without  Diftindtion  of 
 their  Titles,  right  or  wrong !  So  that,  tho' 
 you  are  pleas'd  to  call  thefe  '  The  Arguments 
 
 *  of  fuch  as  are  diffatisfy'd  with  the  prefent 
 
 *  Government  in  this  {U)  Country,'  and  to 
 cry  out,  '  That  Prejudices  and  falfe  Principles 
 
 *  do  fo  blind  the  Men,  that  they  cannot  per- 
 '  ceive  nor  underftand  the  plaineft  and  clear- 
 
 *  eft  ic)  Truths }'  you  muft  give  mc  leave 
 to  fay,  you  put  the  liTue  upon  a  very  dange- 
 rous Proof:  Since  'tis  evident  to  Men  of  mofl 
 unqueftionable  Affection  to  the  prefent  Go- 
 vernment, that  you  have  not  duly  confider'd, 
 how  improper  a  Method  you  have  taken, 
 towards  removing  thofe  Dijfatisfadiions  and 
 Prejudices^  when  you  leem  to  vindicate  the 
 Lawfulnefs  and  Duty  of  ■prayi?2g  for  our  pre- 
 
 fent  King  and  Governor^  upon  fuch  falfe^  or 
 precarious.  Principles^  as  are  properly  appli- 
 cable to  ufurped  Powers,  but  not  fo  to  fuch 
 as  are  indeed  'uefied  with  a  Lawful  and  Right- 
 ful Authority!  However,  lince  you  feem  to 
 lay  fo  much  weight  upon  the  Judgment  of 
 
 that 
 
 (l)  Preface.  fc)  ?3.ge  iS.       , 
 
[46] 
 
 that  Reverend  Author ^  Dr.  Falkner^  I  heartily 
 recommend  to  your  own,  as  v/ell  as  to  every 
 other  Reader's  ferious  Confideration,  what  he 
 has  written  of  Chriftian  Loyalty,  j  and  parti- 
 cularly that  Part  of  it,  Book  ii.  which  afTerts 
 the  Unlawfuhiefs  cj  Siibjecis  taking  Arms 
 againfi  their  King:  And  if  you  are  not  thereby 
 prevail'd  with  to  retraB  many  of  the  Princi- 
 ples and  Inferences  you  have  fo  warmly  in- 
 lifted  on  in  this  your  Vindication^  I  dare  fay, 
 all  whoperufe  it,  without  Prejudice,  will  find 
 good  Reafon  why  you  ought  to  do  fo.  But, 
 becaufe  that  excellent  Treatife  is  not  fo  com- 
 monly handed  about  as  it  deferves  to  be,  I 
 have  hereunto  fubjoin'd  fome  few  fhort  Ex- 
 trads,  in  the  Appendix,  N'^.  I.  to  which 
 I   refer  you. 
 
 You  fay,    'The  Defign  of  Government  is, 
 '  To  keep  Men  in  Peace,  Order,  and  Righte- 
 
 *  oufnefs ;  to  reprefs  and  punifh  all  Ad:s  of 
 
 *  Violence,  Injuftice,  and  [d)  Robbery.'  And 
 again,  you  call  '  Peace,  Godlinefs,  and  Ho- 
 
 *  nefty,  the  chief  Bleffings  of  human  Socie- 
 
 *  ty  j' and  '  the  very  End  of  (e)  Govern- 
 
 *  ment.'  But,  whereas  you  fay,  *  Thefe,  in 
 '  a  great  Meafure,   depend   on  the  good  or 
 
 *  bad  Exercife  of  Power  and  Dominion, 
 '  whatever  the  Perfon's  Title  be  who  has  it ;' 
 and  add,  in  a  Parenthefis,  *  That  makes  not 
 
 *  the  leaft  Alteration  in  the  Cafe,  as  to  the 
 
 '  End 
 
 (</)  Page  1 4.  W.^Page  li- 
 
[  47  ] 
 
 '  End   of  Government,   or  the  Good  and 
 
 *  Welfare  of  the  (/)  Governed  ;'  I  beg 
 Leave  to  think  the  contrary :  I  mean,  that 
 the  Perfon's  having  a  Titkj  or  not  having  it, 
 makes  a  great  Alteration  in  the  Cafe :  Becaufe, 
 unlefs  the  Perfon  who  exercifeth  the  Domi- 
 nion has  a  good  Title  to  it,  no  firm  and  lad- 
 ing Peace  can  be  reafonably  expelled,  as  I 
 obferved  before  j  and  as  to  Godlinefs  and  Ho- 
 nejiyy   you  own,  *  They  are  what  we  our- 
 
 *  felves  muft  {g)  pradlife  :*  And  indeed  it 
 would  be  more  tolerable  living  under  ufurped 
 Powers,   if  Men   were  permitted  fo  to  do, 
 
 without  Interruption  ! But  how,  I  pray 
 
 you,  Sir,  is  it  confident  with  your  good  Senie, 
 to  think,  that  all  ABs  of  Violence^  Injufiice^ 
 and  Robbery^  are  likely  to  be  piiniJ}od\yj  thofe 
 who  hold  their  own  Power  and  Dominion 
 by  thole  very  Means,  and  cannot  expe(fl  to 
 ftand  their  Ground,  if  all  A£fs  of  Violence, 
 Injuftice,  and  Robbery, were  indifferently  and 
 effectually  ptmijh'd?  As  to  Order ^  tis  as  evi- 
 dent as  any  Propofition  in  Euclid,  that  That 
 cannot  be  kept,  when  there  is  fuch  a  Revolu- 
 tion as  fets  up  the  Heels  above  the  Head,  as 
 in  the  Cafe  of  fuccefsful  Rebellions;  or  placeth 
 a  Head  upon  the  Body  which  does  not  na- 
 turally belong  to  it,  as  in  that  of  foreign  In- 
 vafions  and  Ufurpations ;  both  which  are  an 
 Inverfion    or   Defirudion   of  Foundations : 
 
 And, 
 
 {/^^  Page  iS,  (9)  Page  zz. 
 
[48] 
 
 And,  as  to  Rightcouf?iefs,  you  know  who  has 
 faid,  If  the  Foimdations  {b)  be  dejti'ofd^  'what 
 can  the  Righteous  do?  Since  therefore,  on  all 
 thefe  Accounts,  Ufurpation  muft  be  incon- 
 fiilent  with  the  very  End  and  Dejign  of  Go- 
 'uemmenty  according  to  your  own  Conceffion, 
 I  (hould  think  it  more  reafonable  to  conclude, 
 contrary  to  you,  *  That  if  Prayers  for  ou?- 
 '  Governors^  as  fuch,  wholly  refped:  the  End 
 '  of  Government,  and  the  Good  of  God's 
 '  [i)  People,'  as  you  fay,  it  mil  ft  neceflarily 
 follow,  that  we  are  bound  to  pray  for  Right- 
 ful Governors  only,  under  whom  thofe  bleffed 
 Ends  of  Government  are  moft  rationally  to 
 be  expe(aed. 
 
 You  refled:  upon  your  Remarker,  [k)  as  if 
 he  were  '  Not  fenfible  of  the  Difference 
 '  between  Government  and  Governors^  and 
 '  could  not  diftinguifli  between  the  Ofjice 
 '  itfelf,  and  thofe  that  exercife  it ;  between 
 '  the  End  of  Dominion  and  Power,  and  the 
 
 *  perverting  that  End.'  But  to  me  he  feems 
 fo  fenfibly  to  have  dijiinguiJIS d  thefe,  that  he 
 has    produc'd  Authority   to   prove,    '  That 
 
 *  Government,  taken  in  general,  is  indeed 
 '  from  God,  but  fo  is  not  every  Governor;' 
 as  you  yourfelf  have  quoted  (/)  him.  Whereas 
 you  have  laid  yourfelf  more  open  to  the  fame 
 Cenfure  ;  whofe  Arguments,  throughout  this 
 whole  Treatife,  plainly  tend  to  perfuade  the 
 
 Reader^ 
 
 {}:)  Pfalm  xi.  3.  (i)  Page  19.  {k)  Page  20.  [f\  Page  93. 
 
f  49  ] 
 
 Reader,  that  all  aSiiial  Governors^  as  well  as 
 Government  itielf,  are  from  God !  'Tis  true 
 indeed,  you  diilinguifli,  pretty  freely,  between 
 the  E?2d  of  Dominion  and  Poiver^  and  the  per- 
 verting that  End:.  But  the  Ufe  you  make 
 of  that  Dillindion,  is  generally  to  the  Diflio- 
 nour  of  Rightful  Princes;  as  if  they  were  as 
 wicked  as  the  mod  notorious  Ufurpers ! 
 
 Now,  Sir,  admitting  what  you  fay  of  Godli- 
 nefsandHonefty,  '  That  under  the  violent  and 
 '  unrighteous    Adminiftration   of  a  wicked 
 
 *  Prince,  tho'  his  Title  to  the  Crown  be  ever 
 
 *  fo  good,  they  may  prove  both  dangerous  and 
 
 *  (^)  deftrudivej'  yet,  under  Ufurpers,  they 
 can  hardly  everelcape  Danger  and  DeJlruB ion, 
 as  being  utterly  inconfiftent  with  the  Princi- 
 ples and  Pradlices  to  which  they  owe  their 
 Advancement  and  Support:  For,  whatever 
 you  may  fay  of  their  Duty,  you  will  never 
 convince  any  fuch,  that  it  is  their  Interefl^ 
 '  to  encourage  and   maintain  Godlinefs  and 
 
 *  [b)  Honefty,'  fo  long  as  they  perfifl  in  their 
 Ufurpation . 
 
 You  feem  to  think,  the  Remarker  unintel- 
 ligible, where  he  ufeth  this  Expreflion,  *  To 
 '  P^^y  fi^  Godli7iefs  [c)  and  Honejiy ;'  becaufe 
 
 *  we  are  not  enjoin'd  to  pray  for  Godlinefs 
 
 *  and  Honefty,butyor  Kings,  and  all  in  Au- 
 
 *  thority,  that  under  them  we  may  lead  quiet 
 
 *  and  peaceable   Lives,   in  all  GodUnefs  and 
 
 E  '  Honef- 
 
 («)  Page  22.         {b]  Page  19.         [c)  Page  21. 
 
[  50  ] 
 
 *  [d)  Honefty.'  But,  fince  GoJIinc/s  a?2d 
 Honejiy  is  a  principal  End  of  praying  jor 
 Kings ^  the  honeft  and  plain  Reader  will  much 
 fooner  underftand  the  Remarker's  Smfe  in  that 
 Expreffion,  than  your  Reafon  for  propoling 
 the  fame  End  in  praying  for  Ulurpers. 
 
 As  to  the  Cafe  of  Manajfeh^  which  you 
 exemplify,  his  Government  was  indeed  noto- 
 rioully  violent  and  (e)  unrighteous:  But 
 vour  Reader  muft  take  Notice,  that  tho'  his 
 Wickednefs  was  it'or/^,  both  for  open  Idolatry 
 and  cruel  T'yranny^  than  the  very  (/)  Hea- 
 then ;  yet  his  Subjed:s  never  refilled  him,  but 
 left  him  to  God,  the  only  Ruler  of  Princes  ; 
 who  punidVd  him  with  a  Captivity  in  Baby- 
 lon :  Nor,  even  then,  did  his  People  prefume 
 to  fill  his  T'hrone,  as  vacant,  notwithftanding 
 fuch  a  remarkable  Interpofition  of  Provi- 
 dence to  remove  and  difpofiTefs  him,  but  duti- 
 fully adher'd  to  him  ftill  as  their  King  and 
 Gover?ior :  For  which  their  exemplary  Loy- 
 alty, it  pleafed  God  to  reftore  him  to  enjoy 
 his  own  again,  with  his  Heart  fo  happily 
 tiirn'dy  that  he  afterwards  became  a  greater 
 Blefiing  to  them  by  his  Repentance  and  Re- 
 formation, than  he  had  before  been  a  Scourge 
 to  them  by  his  outragious  Wickednefs  and 
 Impiety.  All  which,  if  duly  confider'd,  will 
 fufficiently  confute  the  ftrongeft  of  your  Ar- 
 guments and  Inferences  here,  in  Relation  io 
 
 God'5 
 
 {d)  Page  2  2.  [e)  Page  20. 
 
 (/)  2.  Kings  xxi.  &  z.  Chronicles  xxxiii. 
 
[5-  ] 
 
 God's  Government  of  the  World,  and  his 
 providential  Ways  of  difpofing  of  Kingdoms; 
 in  which,  however,  fome  People  (you  know) 
 have  not  been  content  to  truft  him ! 
 
 Bat  it   feems  to  be  a  Maxim  Vv'ith  yon, 
 That  the  Thrones  of  'Princes  are  eflahlijh\i 
 
 *  in  the  Righteoufnefs  of  their  Adions  and 
 
 *  jiift  Exercife  of  their  Powerj  and  depend 
 
 *  no  more  upon  their  Titles,  than  upon  their 
 
 *  Purple  [g)  Robes.'  But,  where  you  will 
 find  a  good  Warrant  for  that  Interpretation 
 of  the  facred  Text,  I  own  myfelf  yet  to 
 learn.  According  to  your  Notion,  if  Oliver 
 Cromwell  h^d  taken  the  Title  of  King,  as  he 
 was  about  to  do,  his  Thrc?2e  might  have  been 
 eflablijh'd  in  the  Righteoufnefs  of  his  ABions^ 
 and  the  jujl  Exercife  of  his  Power,  between 
 Subjedl  and  Subject,  without  any  Regard  to 
 our  undoubted  Rightful  Kijig  and  Goverjjor^ 
 then  in  Exile,  attainted  and  abjur'd ;  and  the 
 good  People  of  England  muft  have  been 
 bound  in  Duty  to  pray  to  God  to  -proffer 
 their  gracious  King  Oliver!  Nay,  moreover, 
 to  pray  for  King  Charles,  as  their  King  and 
 Governor,  had  been  not  only  tmlawful,  ac- 
 cording to  the  Interpretation  of  Law  in  thofe 
 Times,  but  even  abfurd  in  itfelf  1 
 
 For   thus   you  argue,  *  That   we  cannot 
 
 *  pray  for  one,    as  Governor,   who  is  really 
 not  fo  i  and   that   it  is  abfurd   to  pray  for 
 
 E  2  *  any 
 
 (jf)  Page  2  2. 
 
[  52  1 
 
 *  any  one,  as  King  and  Governor,   who  is 
 
 *  not  King  and  (h)  Governor.'     Which  is  fo 
 
 far  undeniably  true.   But,    when  you 
 
 come  to  explain  what  you  mean  by  the  being 
 really  Governor,  you  exprefsly  affirm,  '  That 
 
 *  the  Prayers  for  the  King  and  the  Govern- 
 
 *  ment,  muft  certainly  be  for  thofe  in  whofe 
 '  Hands  the  Government  is  (/) :'  Nay,  more 
 particularly,  you  pronounce,  that  King 
 Charles  II.  during  his  Bani(liment,  *  was  not 
 
 *  King,    but  in  Name  only  I ' *  That 
 
 *  No-body  can  fay,  that  he  was  all  that  Time 
 
 *  (k)   Governor ! '    And   confequently, 
 
 *  That   he    could  not  be   pray'd  for  as  (/) 
 
 *  fuch!' 
 
 I  have  often  obferv'd,  that  a  Man  who 
 reads  much  of  our  Modern  Controverfies, 
 has  need  of  a  great  Command  of  Temper  j 
 and  I  am  forry  to  find,  that  even  this  Per- 
 formance has  confirm'd  the  Truth  of  that 
 Obfervation.  Excufe  me  therefore.  Sir,  if  I 
 cannot  forbear  to  exprefs  my  Aftonifliment 
 at  fuch  kind  of  Arguing,  or  Reafoning  (call 
 it  what  you  will)  as  I  have  now  before  me, 
 to  prop  up  a  precarious  Hypothecs. 
 
 What!  Was  our  King  Charles  II.  during 
 his  Banifliment,  7iot  King,  but  in  Name  o?iIy  ! 
 Who  then,  I  pray  you,  was  our  King?  If 
 you  fiy  we  had  not  any  King  at  all,  during 
 thofe  Years  of  his  being  forc'd  to  live  abroad,  J 
 
 you 
 
 {h)  Page  23.      (/)  Page  24.     {k)  Page  25.     (/)  Page  26. 
 
[S3] 
 
 you  run  foul  upon  the  Abfurdlty  of  an  In- 
 terregnum^  which  is  inconfiftent  with  the 
 very  Nature  of  an  Hereditary  Monarchy, 
 fuch  as  you  acknowledge  this  of  ours  to  ht{ni) : 
 And,  if  we  had  one,  as  tis  certain  we  had,  it 
 muft  be  either  King  Charles^  or  King  Oliver! 
 The  latter  of  them  indeed  feemstobe  intitled 
 to  your  Suffrage,  fo  long  as  he  had  the  Go- 
 vernment  aclually  in  his  Hands.  And  yet 
 you  acknowledge,  that  the  former  (even  that 
 exil'd,  attainted,  profcrib'd  and  abjur'd  Pre- 
 tender, Charles  II.)  *  had  an  undoubted  Right 
 '  to  the  Crown  and  Government,  even  in 
 '  his  («)  Banifliment.'  How  then  is  it,  I  pray 
 you,  Sir,  that  he  was  not  Ki?ig,  but  in  Name 
 only  ?  Does  not  this  found  more  like  a  Con- 
 tradition  J  than  any  of  thofe  you  have  charg- 
 ed upon  your  Remarker?  At  leaf!:,  I  am  fure, 
 you  have  herein  flatly  contradiOed  the  Re- 
 cognition of  both  Houfes  of  the  Loyal  Con- 
 vention, which  reftor'd  him,  declaring,  that 
 his  Right  and  'Title  was  every  (o)  way  co7n- 
 pleted  by  the  Death  of  his  Father,  For,  ac- 
 cording to  their  Senfe  and  Judgment,  he  was 
 all  that  while,  undoubtedly ^  our  King  and 
 Governor,  not  in  Name  only,  but  completely^ 
 and  every  way,  by  Virtue  of  his  inherent 
 Rights  as  ?7ext  Heir  of  the  Blood  Royal.  Nor 
 is  your  Conclufion  lefs  exceptionable,  that  he 
 could  not  be  prafd  for,  as  our  Kijig  mid  Go- 
 E  3  vernor, 
 
 \ni\  Page  52.     [n)  Page  25,     {o)  See  the  Appendix.  No.  ii- 
 
[  54] 
 
 vernoi\  when  you  plainly  admit  that  he  had 
 an  undoubted  Right  to  the  Crown  and  Goirrn- 
 7nent :  For   you  know,  *  it  is  illogical,   and 
 
 *  againfl  Reafon,  firft  to  grant  the  PremilTes, 
 
 *  and  then  deny  the  (/>)  Conclufion.'  Un- 
 lefs  you  v.'culd  perfuade  us,  that  it  is  abfurd 
 to  pray  for  any  one  under  fuch  a  Title  as  he 
 has  confefTedly  an  undoubted  Right  \.o\ 
 
 You    acknowledge    alfo,    *  That    King 
 
 *  Charles  I.  was  King  and  Governor,  in  the 
 '  Eye  of  the  Law,   and  with  refped:  to  the 
 
 *  Sovereign's  Duty,  even  while  he  was  a  Pri- 
 
 *  foner  in  his  own  (^)  Kingdom.'  And  fo 
 he  was  undoubtedly,  even  upon  the  Scaffold, 
 to  the  laft  Moment  of  his  Life.  But  then, 
 why  do  you  not  admit  his  Son  and  Heir  to 
 have  been  the  fame,  from  the  Moment  of  his 
 Father's  Death  ?  Efpecially  when  you  grant, 
 '  that  in  the  Eye  of  the  Law  the  King  never 
 
 *  (r)  dies.'  Why  truly,  becaufe  he  was  dif- 
 pofl'fsd.  For,  to  you  it  feems  a  T^hing  in  a 
 Manner  feJf-evident^  '  That  the  moft  Right- 
 
 *  ful  King,  if  difpofTefs'd  of  the  Govern- 
 '  ment,  is  plainly  no  longer  our  (j)  Governor.' 
 One  would  think  King  Charles  I.  was  as  ef- 
 fc(ftually  dijpojfefsd  of  the  Government^  when 
 lie  was  not  only  a  clofe  Prifoner  in  the  Power 
 of  his  Enemies,  but  they  had  alfo,  under  the 
 Name  and  Appearance  of  a  Parliamenty 
 refolv'd  to  make  no  more  Addrtjjes  to  him, 
 
 but 
 
 (/.)  Page  47.        [q]  Page  25.        {>■)  Ibid.        (^  Page  26, 
 
Iss] 
 
 but  to  put  him  to  Death  as  a  Traytor :  And 
 yet,  you  are  pleas'd  to  own  him  ftill  to  have 
 been  Khig  afid  Governor,  And  tho'  you  will 
 not  own  his  Son  and  Heir  under  the  fame 
 Characters,  you  muft  give  me  leave  to  put 
 you  in  Mind,  That  the  Xaw  of  the  Land 
 (which  you  feem  to  build  fo  much  upon 
 in  fome  other  Cafes)  (t)  is  exprefsly  againft 
 you ;  and  in  this  very  Cafe,  adjudg'd,  that  he 
 E  4  was. 
 
 (/)  In  the  4/^.  Year  of  King  Ednvardlll.  Roger  Mortimer, 
 Earl  of  March,  was  condemn'd  and  executed,  as  a  Traytor, 
 for  the  Murder  of  King  Edv:ard  J  I.  his  Ki7ig  afid  Leige 
 Lord,  even  after  the  faid  King  was  not  only  dijpojj'efs'd,  but 
 formally  depos'd,  and  his  Son  Ednvard  III.  adlually  poffefled 
 of  the  Crown  and  Government ;  as  is  fully  prov'd  by  the 
 Parliament-Rolls,  and  other  Authorities.  {Prynne's  Plea 
 for  the  Peers,  1658,  in  4^0.  p.  275.  460.  Sc  j^jc).)  And  in  the 
 Parliament  21.  Richard  II.  the  Revocation  of  the  Aft  for 
 the  two  Spencers  Reftitution,  in  the  Parliament  i .  Edivard 
 III.  was  repeal'd,  «  becaufe  made  at  fuch  Time  by  King 
 Ednvard  III,  as  Edijoardll.  his  Father,  being  Very  King, 
 was  living  and  imprifon'd  ;  fo  that  he  could  not  refill  the 
 fame.'     [Ibid.  p.   460.}  It  is  alfo   refolv'd,   both   by  our 
 
 Statutes,   Judges,  Lawyers,  over  and  over,    '  That 
 
 fo  foon  as  the  rightful  Hereditary  King  dies,  the  Crown 
 and  Realm  immediately  defcend  unto,  and  are  aftually 
 veiled  in  the  Perfon  and  PolTeffion  of  the  Right  Heir,  before 
 either  he  be  aftually  proclaim'd  or  crown'd  King :  And 
 that  it  is  High  Treafon,  to  attempt  any  thing  againft  his 
 Perfon  or  Royal  Authority  before  his  Coronation,  becaufe 
 he  is  both  King  de  Jure,  and  de  FaSio  too.'  (Ihid  /\.S^.) 
 Accordingly,  in  the  Cafe  of  the  Regicides,  it  was  refolv'd, 
 that  the  Indiftment  for  the  King's  Murder  Ihould  conclude. 
 Contra  Pacem  nuper  Domifii  Regis,  Coron.  fcf  Dignitat.  fuas, 
 nee  non  contra  Pacetn  Domini  Regis  nunc,  Coron.  isf  Dignitat. 
 fuas :  And  it  was  likewife  agreed,  that  tho'  King  Charles  II. 
 was  de  Fa^o  kept  out  of  the  Exercife  of  the  Kingly  OfEce 
 by  Traytors  and  Rebels,  yet  he  was  King  both  de  FaSio  and 
 de  Jure,     {Ke/yng's  Reports,  fol.  11.  15.) 
 
[S6  1 
 
 was,  all  that  while,  really  our  King  and  Go- 
 vernor, as  well  de  Faclo  as  de  Jure :  And  ac- 
 cordingly Oliver  himfelf,  your  A6fual  Gover- 
 nor, as  well  as  many  of  his  wicked  Agents 
 and  bloody  Inftruments,  were  fairly  and  fo- 
 lemnly  attainted  of  High  Treafon,  by  a  Par- 
 liament truly  and  properly  fo  call'd  j  not  fuch 
 a  Convention  of  ithtWious  Mifcr^^nfs  asthofe 
 were,  who  thirfied  for  the  Blood  of  their 
 Sovereign,  that  they  might  make  a  Prey  of 
 his  Inheritance  I  Can  there  be  any  Reafon 
 then  to  believe,  that,  in  the  Judgment  of 
 our  Law,  and  of  the  Legiflators  themfelves 
 (thofe  very  Legiflators  who  gave  the  laft 
 folemn  Temporal  Sandtion  to  the  then  re- 
 vie  w'd  Englijh  Liturgy)  it  could  be  abfurd  to 
 apply  to  King  Charles  IL  thofe  Prayers  for 
 cur  King  and  Governor,  as  you  reprefent  it  ? 
 No,  Sir.  It  was  univerfally  agreed  to  have 
 been  their  Duty:  And  accordingly,  fuch  of 
 the  Clergy,  as  had  fo  done  their  Duty,  at  all 
 Hazards,  notwithftanding  the  pretended 
 Laws  to  the  contrary,  have  been  ever  fince 
 look'd  upon  and  confider'd  as  glorious  Con- 
 feffors,  by  all  who  befl  underflood,  and  mofl 
 fincerely  adher'd  to  the  Principles  of  the 
 Church  of  England. 
 
 Whether  they  were  wont  in  thofe  Days  to 
 name  the  King  when  they  pray'd  for  him, 
 I  can't  certainly  affirm.  But  this  we  may 
 venture  to  conclude,  That  if  any  of  them 
 did  name  any  King  or  Governor  in  their 
 
 Pravers, 
 
[57] 
 
 Prayers,  it  was  King  Charles ;  whom  alone 
 they  truly  and  honeilly  acknowledg'd  to  be 
 the  King  and  Governor,  notwithftanding 
 they  law  the  Ufurper  Oliver  adnally  poflefs'd 
 of  the  Exercile  of  Sovereignty,  and  in  fuUPof- 
 feflion  of  the  Government.  And  yet,  accord- 
 ing to  your  Principles  here  afferted,  thofe 
 pious,  learned,  and  venerable  Confeilors,  were 
 all  utterly  ignorant  of  their  Duty  !  For  thefe 
 are  your  own  Words :  *  When  the  War  is  at 
 
 *  an  End,  Peace  reftor'd,  and  the  Govern- 
 '  ment  in  fome  fort  fettled,  tho'  an  Ufurper, 
 
 *  a   Cromiveli,    fliould    then    flep   into    the 
 
 *  Throne  in   Prejudice  of  another's  Right, 
 
 *  Mr.  C.  acknowledges,   he  cannot  fee  but 
 
 *  that  That  Perfon,  as  our  Governor,  is  to  be 
 
 *  pray'd  for ;  becaufe  he  does  not  fee,  that 
 
 *  the  Higher  Powers  are  to  be  excluded  our 
 '  Prayers,  even  tho'  they  be  {ii)  Ufurpers.' 
 Your  Reafons  for  this  extraordinary  Opinion 
 fliall  be  confider'd  hereafter.  In  the  mean 
 time,  I  beg  Leave  to  obferve  to  you.  Sir,  that, 
 whether  they  nanid  the  Perfon  they  pray'd 
 tor,  or  not,  they  were  plainly  of  an  Opinion 
 contrary  to  yours.  For  in  their  Ufe  of  the 
 Efiglifi  Liturgy,  'tis  certain  they  never  pray'd 
 for  Oliver  as  being  their  ASltcal  Governor. 
 And  yet,  they  could  not  but  fee,  that,  accord- 
 ing to  your  Notion,  the  War  ivas  at  an  End, 
 Peace  rejiord^   and  the  Government  in  fomc 
 
 Jort 
 
 (u)  Page  4?. 
 
[58  J 
 
 fori  fettled.  But,  forafmuch  as  they  faw 
 an  Ufurper  in  the  '^hrone^  in  Prejudice  of  ano- 
 ther s  Rights  they  judged  it  their  Duty  to 
 pray  for  him  whofe  Right  it  was,  and  not  for 
 him  who  had  fo  got  the  PofTeflion.  We  all 
 know  the  Truth  of  your  own  Obfervation, 
 '  That   in  fiich   troublefome  and  iniquitous 
 
 *  Times,  Men  muft  do  the  heft  they  can, 
 '^  but  cannot  always  do  what  they  would.  — 
 '  There     are    Times  when    neither    Law 
 
 *  nor  Rules  can  be  [x)  obfeiy'd.'  And  there- 
 fore tis  probable  indeed,  that  thofe  prudent 
 Men,  in  that  evil  Time^  not  being  at  Liberty, 
 without  the  utmoft  Hazard,  to  obferve  the 
 very  Letter  of  the  Law  and  Rules  for  read- 
 ing the  Liturgy,  might  fo  far  keep  Silence,  ac- 
 cording to  the  Text  you  have  there  {y)  cited, 
 ,as  to  forbear  to  name  their  King  or  Governor. 
 But  perhaps  you  will  fay,  if  in  fo  doing,  they 
 did  not  intend  and  apply  thofe  Prayers  to  their 
 then  A(ftual  Governor,  and  all  in  Authority 
 under  him,  thd  they  did  not  yiame  him^  '  they 
 
 *  were  all  vain  Words,  and  an  empty  Sound ; 
 
 *  in  that  Cafe  they /)r^jyV  for  No-body,  and 
 
 *  for  (z)  Nothing ! '  For  this  is  your  own 
 Cenfure  upon  fome,  who,  it  feems,  do  not 
 now  name  the  King  when  they  pray  for 
 him ;  on  a  Suppofition  that  they  *  do  not  in- 
 
 *  tend  and  apply  thofe  Prayers  to  King  {a) 
 
 *  George  I     Upon   which;,  tho'  1  am  not  fo 
 
 mad 
 
 \,v)  Page  25.      (j)  Amosv.  13.      {x)  Page  24.      [a)  Ibid. 
 
[  59] 
 
 mad  as  to  make  any  Parallel  between  thefe 
 two  Cafes  j  yet,  I  cannot  but  think,  your 
 Manner  of  treating  this  Subjecft  is  apparently 
 expos'd  to  divers  Objedions,  which  may  be 
 worthy  of  your  farther  and  more  ferious  Con- 
 fideration.  For,  i.  Is  the  King  to  be  thought 
 No-body,  and  the  praying  for  him  Nothingy 
 unlefs  he  is  particularly  iiam'd  in  thofe  Pray- 
 ers ?  2.  Is  not  the  common  Suffrage,  at  the 
 End  of  all  Proclamations,  only  God  fave  the 
 King,  without  naming  him  ?  And  is  that  un- 
 derftood  to  be  Nothing,  but  vain  Words,  aiid 
 an  empty  Sound'i  If  fo,  how  can  the  Judges, 
 or  even  the  Legiflators  themfelves,  efcape 
 your  Reflediion,  for  not  having  authoriz'd 
 a  more  expreffive  and  fignificant  Form  ?  3.  If 
 fuch  a  Form  is  underftood  to  be  fufBcient  in 
 the  folemn  Proceedings  among  Men,  can  it 
 be  lefs  fo  in  their  AddrefTes  to  God  ?  For  he 
 certainly  knows  who  is  the  King,  without 
 being  told  his  Name,  and,  if  he  is  pleas'd  to 
 blefs  him,  will  do  it  as  efFedlually  as  if  he 
 were  exprefsly  naind  in  their  Prayers.  4.  It 
 feems  hardly  confident  with  Chriflian  Cha- 
 rity to  fuppofe,  that  he  who  prays  for  the 
 King,  does  not  intend  and  apply  thofe  Prayers 
 to  him  who  really  is  the  King.  And  more- 
 over, 5.  To  flart  an  Objection  againfl  fuch 
 Prayers,  may  be  deem'd  an  Infinuation,  as  if 
 it  were  doubtful,  whether  the  Prince  adually 
 reigning,  is  really  the  Kiiig;  or  whether  there 
 is  fome  other  more  properly  to  be  pray'd  for 
 
 as 
 
[6o] 
 
 as  fuch.  So  that  upon  the  whole,  whatever 
 thofe  who  do -not  name  the  King  in  their  Pray- 
 ers may  have  to  fay  in  Defence  of  their  Prac- 
 tice, you  will  probably  find  yourfelf  difap- 
 pointed  of  convincing  their  Judgment  by 
 fuch  your  Arguments;  and  may  poffibly  meet 
 with  flow  Returns  of  Thanks  from  others 
 alfo,  for  ftarting  fuch  unfeafonable  Objec- 
 tions. 
 
 It  is  no  lefs  uncafy  to  me,  than  it  will,  I 
 fear,  be  difpleafing  to  you,  that  I  dwell  fo 
 Jong  upon  this  Point :  But,  fince  you  have 
 heap'd  fo  much  of  that  Kind  in  my  Way, 
 I  can't  proceed  without  fairly  endeavouring 
 
 to  remove  it. You  call  it  a  Taking  in  a 
 
 manner  felf-evident ^  *  That  the  moft  Right- 
 '  ful  King,  if  difpolTefs'd  of  the  Government, 
 *  is  plainly  no  longer  our  Governor;'  and 
 confequently  not  to  be  pray  d  for ^  in  the  Terms 
 of  the  Englijh  Liturgy  [b)  as  Jiich.  But 
 Jiow,  fuppofmg  that  fome  of  your  Neigh- 
 bours (whether  your  own  Relations  or  not, 
 'tis  all  one,  unlefs  for  the  greater  Aggravation) 
 had  by  Force  or  Artifice  made  an  Entry  upon 
 your  Houfe,  feduc'd  fome  of  your  Family, 
 and  overpower'd  the  reft,  and  in  fhort,  had 
 utterly  difpolJeJsd  you ^  and  fhut  your  own 
 Doors  againft  you;  Would  it  not,  in  like  man- 
 ner, be  felf- evident,  that  you  are  therefore 
 plainly  no  longer  Mafler  of  the  Houfe,  becaufe 
 
 you 
 
 [b]  Page  26. 
 
'[6i] 
 
 you  are  difpoffefsd^  and  do  not  ad:ually  gover?i 
 it  ?  Be  pleas'd,  Sir,  to  lay  your  Hand  upon 
 your  Heart,  and  conlider  this  coolly  :  And 
 then  oblige  the  World  with  your  Refolution 
 of  this  fnigle  Queflion,  Whether  you  think 
 in  your  Confcience,  that  any  one  could  fairly 
 'vindicate  the  Laivfulnefs  and  Duty  of  your 
 Children  and  Servants,  not  only  reiifring  you 
 themfelves,  h\ii praying  fo7'  the prejmt'^l^.^^^ 
 of  the  Houfe,  in  Oppofition  to  you  who 
 have  an  undoubted  Right  to  it*?  ~ —  I  put 
 the  Cafe  to  you  thus,  the  rather  becaufe,  as 
 you  obferve,  in  Difputes  about  Matters  of 
 Government,  as  well  as  of  Religion,  *  Men 
 
 *  of  all  Sides  have  pretended  Confcience,   to 
 
 *  which  Paflion,  Prejudice,  and  falfe  Princi- 
 '  pies,  more  than  Truth  and  Realbn,   have 
 
 *  too  often  given  the  {c)  Dired:ion ;'  to  which 
 you  add  a  heavy  Complaint  of  the  Obfiinate^ 
 whom  no  Man  can  hope  to  convince^  were 
 his  Reafom  as  clear  as  the  (d)  Sun  I  The 
 Truth  of  this  your  Obfervation  I  am  fo  far 
 from  difputing,  that  the  more  I  read  of  this 
 kind,  the  more  I  am  convinc'd  of  it.  But 
 then,  I  can't  but  wonder  alfo  the  more,  that 
 a  Gentleman  of  your  Learning  and  Experi- 
 ence (to  make  bold  with  your  own  Phrafe) 
 {hould  be  fo  vain,  as  to  imagine^  that  you  can 
 convi?ice  fuch  Men  with  thefe  ReafonSy  which, 
 even  to  me,  your  Friend,  do  not  feem  to  be 
 
 quite 
 
 '{.)  Page  27.  •(/)  7^/V 
 
[62] 
 
 quite  fo  clear  as  the  Sun  !  But  when  you  are 
 pleas'd  to  anfwer  the  Query,  as  I  have  taken 
 the  friendly  Freedom  here  to  put  it  to  you, 
 I  am  charitably  perfuaded,  that  Pajfwn,  Pre- 
 judice^ andfalfe  Principles^  will  foon  give  way 
 to  'Truth  and  Rcafon. 
 
 In    the  mean  time   you  own,  That  '  the 
 
 *  Event  or  Succels  does  not  always  declare 
 '  the  Right  and  Juftice  of  the  Caufe,  nor  ex- 
 '  tinguifh  the  Claim  of  other  [e)  Pretenders.' 
 And  how  then  can  we  know  when  it  does  fo, 
 and  when  not?  For,  on  this  ConcelTion,  there 
 is  no  Regard  at  all  to  be  had  to  the  Eir?7t  or 
 Succefs.     Yes,  you  fay,  '  It  certainly  deter- 
 
 *  mines  the  PolTeflion,  and  fecures  the  Power 
 
 *  and  [f)  Dominion.'  But,  Sir,  how  can 
 the  Pcjfejjion  be  certaifily  determind,  while  the 
 Right  is  controverted,  and  a  Suit  depending? 
 Or  how  can  the  Power  and  Dofjiinion  be  faid 
 to  be  fecurd  to  the  Poffejfor  by  the  Event  or 
 Succejs,  before  the  Suit  is  quite  detcrmin'd  ? 
 No  otherwife  furely,  than  the  intruding  Pof- 
 fefTor  of  your  Houfe,  (in  the  Cafe  laft  fup- 
 pos'd)  can  be  fecurd  in  the  Mafterfhip  and 
 Government  thereof,  tho'  he  knows  not  how 
 foon  he  may,  by  a  legal  Determination,  be 
 forc'd  to  quit  his  ill-gotten  Power  and  Domi- 
 nion, and  be  juftly  punifh'd  for  his  Ufurpa- 
 tion  of  it.  You  fay  indeed,  very  truly,  *  The 
 
 *  quiet   and   peaceable   PofTeffion  of  Power 
 
 *  and 
 
 [r)  Page  27.  {/)  Ibid. 
 
[63  ] 
 
 *  and  Dominion,   the  Dilpute  ended,  deter- 
 
 *  mines   the  Subje(fts  Acknowledgment  and 
 
 *  (g)  SubmilTion.*  But  to  conclude  from 
 thence,  that  the  SubjcBs  Acknowledgment  and 
 Submiffion  is  determind,  while  the  PoJJ'eJjion  is 
 not  quiet  a?id  peacable,  and  before  the  Difputc 
 is  ended^  is  what  you  would  be  far  from  al- 
 lowing, in  a  Difputant  of  the  loweft  Form 
 in  the  Logic-Schools!  And  to  talk  of  Events 
 and  Siiccejs,  T)eterminaiion  and  Secu?'ity^ 
 ^iet  and  peacablc  PoJj'cJJiony  and  Difputes 
 ended j\vh\\t  an  Appeal  to  the  Supreme  Court 
 is  ftill  depending,  and  the  Event  and  Succefs 
 lies  abfolutely  in  the  Breaft  of  a  Judge,  who 
 has  not  yet  declar'd  his  final  Sentence,  is 
 plainly  to  beg  the  Queftion,  and  prefump- 
 tuoufly  to  pronounce  without  Authority  1 
 Neither  is  it  true,  '  that  the  Pofiellion  and 
 '  Acknowledgment  determine  the  Perfon  for 
 '  whom  we  are  to  pray  as  our  King  and  [h) 
 
 *  Governor.'  They  determine  the  Per/on  in- 
 deed, who  has  it  in  his  Power  to  punifti  and 
 perfecute  thofe  who  fcruple  to  comply  with 
 his  Commands,  how  arbitrary  or  unreafonable 
 foever:  But  they  do  not  in  the  lead  determi72e 
 either  the  Right  on  the  one  Side  to  command, 
 
 or  the  Duty  on  the  other  to  obey. You 
 
 may  poffibly  find  Arguments  of  this  Kind, 
 to  prove  to  you  the  Benefit  of  praying  for  all 
 Adtnal  Governors;  but,   however   eafy   you 
 
 may 
 
 Ag)  P'-'ge:;-  Kh)  Ibid. 
 
[64] 
 
 may  think  it,  you  muft  ftrain  them  very  hard, 
 to  convince  any  Man's  fcrupulous  Confcience, 
 of  the  Lawfuhiefs  and  Duty  of  fo  doing. 
 For  tho'  you  are  pleas'd  to  fay,  *  Let  him 
 '  keep  his  Confcience  clear  as  to  the  Righte- 
 
 *  oulnefs  of  his  own  Actions,  and  it  need 
 '  never  be  troubled  about  the  Righteoufnefs 
 '  of  his  Prince's  Title ;  for  that  no  w^ay  con- 
 '  cerns  him,  but  the  Prince  himfelfj  hisCon- 
 
 *  fcience  muft  anfwer  for  that,   and  not  the 
 
 *  (/)  Subjed's:'  Yet,  furely,  he  can  never 
 think  himfelf  quite  unconcern  d,  in  fuch  a 
 Cafe  as  is  here  fuppos'd,  while  he  is  call'd 
 upon  to  make  himfelf  a  Party,  by  fuch  lo- 
 lemn  A(fts  as  Oaths  or  Prayers :  And,  if  he 
 Ihall  be  fo  iil-advis'd  in  the  Queftion,  as  to 
 partake  with  the  wrong  Side  (which  he  runs 
 the  utmoft  Hazard  of  doing,  if  he  follows 
 your  Advice,  not  to  trouble  himfelf  about  the 
 Merits  of  the  Caufe)  I  hope,  you  will  not 
 deny,  that,  in  fo  doing,  he  muft  anfwer  for 
 that^  as  well  as  the  other,  whofe  unrighteous 
 Caufe  he  alTerts,  and  whofe  Sins  he  is  fo  far 
 a  Partaker  of 
 
 You  are  very  angry  with  your  Remarker, 
 for  faying  that  your '  Scheme,at  Bottom, tho' 
 '  gilded  over  in  other  Words,  is.  That  Pof- 
 
 *  felTion  gives  Right,  and  that  Right  without 
 
 *  Poffefilon  is  good  for  [k)  Nothing.*     This 
 you  call  a  Mifiahe^  and  putting  falfe  Colours 
 
 upon 
 
 it)  Page  27  &  i8.  .     {i)  Page  28. 
 
[65] 
 
 Upon  Thhigs!  And,  In  order  to  fet  them  in  a 
 true  Light,  you  grant,    i.  '  That  if  thofe 
 
 *  Words  had  been  found  in  the  Sermon,    or 
 
 *  any  Sentence  equivalent  to  it,  or  which  did 
 
 *  fairly  infer  it,  the  Charge  had  been  [a]  juft.' 
 Now,  whether  your  Ser?no?2  had  any  thing 
 to  warrant  this  Charge,  or  nor,  I  am  not  con- 
 cern'd  to  enquire.  But  fareiy,  your  Re- 
 marker  had,  at  leaft,  a  good  guefs  at  your 
 Scheme 'i  fince,  whatever  was  at  the  Bottom 
 there,  we  find  it  here  come  up  to  the  Top, 
 and  boiling  over.  Inftances  are  (o  numerous, 
 almoft  in  every  Page  of  this  your  Vindica- 
 tion, of  Sentences  eqiiivale?it  to  what  is  here 
 chargdj   or  fuch    as    muft    be    underflood 
 
 fairly  to  infer  it,  that  I  need  not  point  them 
 out  to  the  Reader.  Some  of  thefe  I  have 
 already  taken  Notice  ofj  and  others  will 
 fall  in  my  Way  as  I  proceed.  However,  I 
 may  obferve  here,  once  for  all,  that  I  do  not 
 meet  with  any  thing  material  of  that  kind, 
 but  what  has  formerly  been  fubflantially  con- 
 futed J  and  particularly  in  the  feveral  An- 
 fwers  to  Dr.  Sherlock,  and  Dr.  Higden,  6cc. 
 whofe  Steps  you  are  neverthelefs  content  to 
 follow  in  the  fame  worn-out  Path.  2.  You 
 fiy,  *  The  Subjedl  of  the  Sermon  was  not 
 '  concerning  the  Rights  of  Princes  at  {b)  all.' 
 And  the  fame  may  be  faid  of  this  Vindica- 
 tion of  it  alfo,  in  fome  Senfe  j  becaufe  it  does 
 
 F  not 
 
 {a]  Page  29.  (i)  Ihid. 
 
[66  ] 
 
 not  fcem  to  have  regard  to  any  other  Rights 
 but  that  of  mere  Po[feffion^  or  a5iual  Govern- 
 ment^ which  in  Truth  is  no  Right  at  all. 
 3.  You  fay,  *  The  Right  or  Title  which  any 
 
 *  Perfon  has  to  a  Crown,  and  the  Right 
 '  which  the  Pofleflbr  of  that  Crown  has  to 
 '  the  Subjeds  Duty,  are  two  diftindt  {c) 
 '  Things.'  But  what  Right  has  any  Poffef- 
 for  of  a  Crown  to  the  SubjeBs  Dut}\  other 
 than  by  Virtue  of  the  Right  or  Title  which 
 he  has  to  the  Crown  itfelf  ?  Few  of  your 
 Readers  are  fo  well  acquainted  with  Meta- 
 phyfical  Subtleties,  as  to  think  thefe  to  be 
 different  SubjeBs  or  diflind:  Things:  And 
 therefore  they  will  generally  take  it  for  ^juft 
 Inference^  that  he  who  has  not  a  Right  to  the 
 Crowny  cannot  have  a  Right  to  the  SubjeSfs 
 Duty ;  and  may  be  apt  to  think,  that  to  infi- 
 nuate  as  if  meer  Poffeffion  gave  a  Right,  may 
 one  Time  or  other,  open  a  Way  to  infer  a 
 Right  to  the  Crown  in  the  Perfon  who  aftu- 
 ally  keeps  it  in  the  Tower,  or  even  in  Blood 
 who  ftole  it  from  thence !  You  obferve  in- 
 deed, '  that  with  the  firft  of  thefe  Rights, 
 
 *  'viz.  That  of  any  Perfon  to  a  Crown,  nei- 
 
 *  ther  the  Gofpel  in  s^eneral,  nor  St.  Paul  in 
 '  particular,  ever  [d)  meddle :'  And  elfe- 
 \vhere,  '  that  the  Gofpel  neither  enlarges  nor 
 
 *  diminiilics  any  Superior's  Power;  neither 
 '  adds  to,   nor  takes  away  from  any  Inferi- 
 
 '  or's 
 
 {c)  Page  29.  {d)  Ibid. 
 
[6;] 
 
 *  or's  Right :  In  thefe  Cafes  it  only  confirms 
 
 *  and  explains  the  Obligations  of  Nature, 
 '  and  in  forces  the  Pradice  of  the  refcedive 
 '  Duties  with  flronger  and  more  powerful 
 '  (f)  Motives.'  But  now,  where  you  affirm, 
 '  that  the  lafi:  of  them,  viz.  The  Right 
 '  which  the  Poireilor  has  to  the  Subjeds 
 ^  Duty,  they  (that  is,  the  Gofpel  in  general, 
 
 *  and  St.  Paul  in  particular)  fully  aflert,  and 
 '  bind  upon  all  (/ )  Chriftians ;'  it  cannot  be 
 true,  that  they  qjjert  and  enjoin  a  Duty  to 
 mere  Pojejiofi  alone,  without  any  other  Rigbt 
 or  Title  ;  which  would  be  a  manifeft  Altera- 
 tion and  Diminution  of  the  Rights  and  Obli- 
 gatiom  arifing  from  the  Law  of  Nature^  as 
 well  as  from  the  Law  of  God  in  the  Old 
 Teftament.  For  if  you  look  over  that  whole 
 Code,  you  will  never  find  the  leaft  Authority 
 therein,  to  warrant  this  Principle,  that  m.ere 
 Fojfejfion  alone  gives  a  Right  to  the  SiibjeBs 
 Duty  J  but  enough  to  prove  the  contrary : 
 Witnefs  the  known  Cafes  of  Abimelech^  Ab- 
 
 falom^  Shebay  ^ndAthaliah ;  to  which,  if  you 
 pleafe,  we  may  add  thofe  of  Shallunij  Mejja- 
 hem,  Pekahiah^  Pekah,  and  HoJJjea  -,  fince 
 none  of  thefe  five  laft,  as  you  confefs,  '  had 
 
 *  any   Right  or  Title  to  the  Kingdom   of 
 
 *  Tfrael,  any  more  than  Cromwell  had  to  the 
 
 *  Crown  of  {g)  Great  Britain  j'  and  yet  you 
 cannot  deny,   that  all  of  them  had  the  Pof- 
 
 F  2  fijfion 
 
 [e)  Page  128.         i/'i  Page  30,         [g)  Page  171, 
 
[  68  1 
 
 fcjjton  and  actual  Government,  4.  It  will  be 
 as  hard,  to  maintain  that  Principle  by  the 
 Laws  of  the  Land,  as  by  thofe  of  God  and 
 Nature.  For,  *  tho',  in  fome  Cafes,  Pof- 
 '  feffion  gives  [b)  Right  ;'  yet,  that  is  only 
 allow'd  till  a  better  Right  is  duly  made  out. 
 And  as  to  what  you  add,  '  That  no  Right 
 
 *  in  another  Perfon  {hall  bar  a  King  in  Pof- 
 
 *  feffion,   from  all  that  which  he  claims  by 
 
 *  Virtue  of  that  (/)  PofTeffion ;'  every  one 
 knows,  tis  only  becaufe  the  other  may  want 
 the  Argument  of  Power,  to  fupport  his  Right 
 in  Bar  to  that  of  Pojfejjmi :  But  it  is  not  the 
 Confideration  of  Favft,  or  ad:ual  PofTeffion, 
 but  that  of  Right,  by  which  Men  are  to  be 
 dired:ed   in  a  Cafe  of  Confcience.     And  5. 
 
 *  As  to  the  juft  Right  and  Title  of  the  pre- 
 
 *  fent  Poffieflbr  to  the  Crown  of  thefe  [k) 
 
 *  Realms,'  I  fuppofe,  you  will  not  prefume 
 to  put  it  upon  the  precarious  Iffiie  of  a  mere 
 Fojfejjion  againft  apparent  Right!  And  unlefs 
 you  do  this,  it  is  more  artfully  than  perti- 
 nently mention'd  in  this  Queflion.  But  I 
 muft  beg  Leave  to  admoniffi  you  of  a  great 
 Miftake  in  Law,  where  you  call  the  Solem- 
 nity of  Coronation^  which  is  but  a  (/)  Cere- 
 mony^ *  an  Evidence  of  the  Right,  as  well  as 
 '  of  the  (w)  PofTeffion;  To  which  I  (hall 
 only  add,  that  if  fuch  Arguments  as  you 
 
 have 
 
 (A)  Page  30.  (;)  Ibid.  \k)  Ibid. 
 
 (/)  Sec  the  Note  on  p.  53,  and  55.     (ot)  Page  30. 
 
[69] 
 
 have  here  alledg'd,  are  to  fet  T'hmgs  in  a  true 
 Lights  the  beft  of  our  Law-booh  may  be 
 call'd  Dark-hanthorm  ! 
 
 You   are    pleas'd   to  fay,    That    Crowns 
 
 *  have  no  fuch  unalienable  Property  inherent 
 
 *  to  them  as  private  Eftates  have.     They  are 
 
 *  of  the  fime  Nature  as  other  Places  of 
 '  Ti  uft  and  Power;  tho'  they  be  of  a  higher 
 
 *  Eminency,  becaufe  they  themfelves  are  the 
 
 *  («)  highefl:.' That  the  Crown^  or  King- 
 ly State,  is  an  Office,  or  Place  of  Trufty  is, 
 I  know,  a  favorite  Notion  of  thofe  who  are 
 of  a  Republican  Spirit,  and  difaffeded  to 
 Monarchy :  But  for  you.  Sir,  who  feem  to 
 triumph  in  your  Acquaintance  (p)  with  the 
 haw-booh,  to  aflert  the  fame,  is  fomewhat 
 amazing ;  lince  the  mofl:  eminent  Fathers  in 
 that  Faculty  have  taught  us  the  contrary.  — 
 If  you  call  it  a  Flace  of  'Trufl,  only  becaufe 
 '  Kings  themfelves  hold   their  Crowns  and 
 
 *  Kingdoms  of  the  Majefty  of  Heaven,  by 
 
 *  no  other  Tenure  than  Durante  Beneplacito, 
 
 *  or  ^amdiu  bene  Se  [p)  gefferint^  I  (hall not 
 difpute  that  Point :  But  then,  what  will  that 
 avail  you,  as  to  the  Alienability  thereof?  The 
 moft  zealous  AiTertors  of  the  Divine  Right 
 of  Monarchy  do  agree  with  you,  that  Kings 
 hold  their  Crowm  and  Kingdoms  of  God:  And 
 there  is  no  Doubt,  but  *  he  may  turn  them 
 
 *  out  at  his  Pleafure,  and  put  others  in  their 
 
 *  (^)  Room.'    But,  the  Queftion  is  not  about 
 
 F  3  what 
 
 («)  Pageji.     (o)  Page  30.     (^)  Page  32.     {q\  Ihid. 
 
[7°  J 
 
 what  God  himfelf  nia}'  do  with  thefe  hisVice- 
 gerents ;  but,  whether  any  other  Powers, 
 and  particularly  their  own  Subjects,  have  a 
 fufficient  Authority  to  do  the  like  ?  Efpeci- 
 ally  in  fuch  Hereditary  Kingdoms  as  I  have 
 
 before  fuppos'd. To  argue,  that  becaufe 
 
 God  can  do  this,  therefore  their  ov/n  Subjc<5ts 
 may  do  it,  would  be  a  ftrange  Abfurdity,  in 
 one  who,  every  Day,  does  folemnly  acknow- 
 ledge Almighty  God  to  be  the  only  Ruler  of 
 Priijces!  And  whatever  has  here  dropped 
 from  your  Pen  tending  to  fuch  a  Conclulion, 
 cannot  eafily  be  made  confident  cither  with 
 our  (r)  Laws,  or  even  with  your  own  Con- 
 ceffions. 
 
 For,  fincc  the  King  himfelf  is  the  [s)  High- 
 eft,  and  even  the  High  Court  of  Farlianicnt^ 
 afjhnbkd  by  and  under  him,  as  well  as  all  the 
 fudges  and  Magijirates,  who  aSi  in  their  fe- 
 "ueral  Stations  by  Commifjion  jrom  him,  *  are 
 '  all  Parts  of  the  Adminillration  and  Go- 
 '  vernment  depending  upon  (/)  him  \  it  will 
 not  be  an  eafy  Tailc  for  you,  to  convince  the 
 Confcience  of  any  plain  rational  Man,   that 
 
 any, 
 
 (>•)  By  the   Acl  for  the  Attainder  of  the   Regicides,    1 2 
 Car.  ri.  c.  30.     *  It  is  declar'd,  that,  by  the  undoubted  and 
 
 *  Fundamental    Laws  of  this   Kingdom,   neither  the  Peers 
 
 *  of  this  Realm,  nor    the   Commons,  nor  both  together,  in 
 
 *  Parliament  or  out  of  Parliament,  nor  the  People  collec- 
 «  tively  or   reprefentatively,  nor  any  other  Perfons   whatfo- 
 
 *  ever,  ever   had,  have,  hath,  or  ought  to  have,  any  Coer- 
 
 *  cive  Power  over  the  Perfons  of  the  Kings   of  this  Realm.' 
 
 (0  Page  31.  (/)  Page  24. 
 
[7'  ] 
 
 any,  or  all  thefe  together,  have  a  fufficlent 
 Authority  to  turn  out  the  King^  by  and  un- 
 der whom  alone  they  are  to  adt  in  their  feve- 
 ral  Stations,  and  to  pit  another  in  his  {u) 
 Room  :  Nor  will  you  confequently  be  able  to 
 prove  it  the  Duty  of  the  Subjeds,  in  fuch  a 
 Cafe,  to  pray  for,  that  other  fo  fet  up,  in  Op- 
 polition  to  him  who  is  fo  tiirnd  out !  — — 
 As  to  your  Obfervation,  concerning  the  Law 
 or  Rule,  which  determines  in  -private  («;)  Rro- 
 pertyy  with  Submiffion,  Sir,  tis  foreign  to  the 
 Furpofe.     For,  tho'   '  when  the  Judges  de- 
 
 *  termine  the  Right  to  be  in  one  preferably 
 
 *  to  another,  whether  juftly  or  not,  that  Per- 
 
 *  fon  fhall  take  Poffeffion  of  the  Eftate,  fhall 
 '  receive  the  i^y)  Rents,  &c'  does  it  therefore 
 follow,  that  in  the  Cafe  of  the  Crown,  mere 
 Poffeffion  alone,  without  any  fuch  Determi- 
 nation of  the  Right  by  any  fuperior  fudges^ 
 {hall   entitle  the  Poffeffor  to  '  all  that  is  due 
 
 *  from  the  Subjeds  to  the  [z]  Crown  ? ' 
 Surely,  Sir,  there  is  a  wide  Difference  between 
 a  Determination  of  private  Rights,  by  the 
 known  proper  yz/^^6'5,declar'd  and  pronounc'd 
 in  open  Court,  in  the  ordinary  Legal  Courfe  of 
 Proceedings,  and  fuch  a  Determination  of 
 Sovereign  Rights,  as  you  here  contend  for, 
 without  any  other  Proof  but  that  of  preca- 
 rious aad   doubtful  Events  j  which  are  nei- 
 
 F  4  ther 
 
 (u)  See  the  Notes  on  p.  7,  8,  and  70. 
 (A-)  Page  32.  (j)  ML  [z)  Page  33. 
 
[72    ] 
 
 ther  a  certain  Indication  of  God's  Will,  nor 
 of  the  Juftice  of  the  fuccefsful  {a)  Caufe. 
 So  that,  how  muchfoever  you  may  contemn 
 the  Remarker,  as  imderjlanding  "very  little  oj 
 the  Nature  of  (h)  Government^  he  may  yet  be 
 allow'd  to  imagine^    that  there  is,   at  leaft, 
 
 *  the  fame  Right  to  Crowns  as  to  private 
 
 *  Eftates ;'  and  to  conclude,  that  a  Princi- 
 pk,  which  is  not  at  all  tolerable  in  private 
 Life,  can  hardly  be  honourable  with  refped: 
 to  Sovereign  (c)  Rights,  on  which  thofe  of 
 the  Subjedt  do  fo  much  {d)  depend.  But, 
 where  you  fpeak  of  Subjects  conveying  their 
 Eftates  *  to  what  Ufes  they  think  fit,  fo  as 
 
 *  the  Public  be  not  injur'd  thereby ;  for  the 
 
 *  public  Good  fliall  controul   their   private 
 
 *   Pro- 
 
 [a)  *  The  Juftice  and  Righteoufenefs   of  our  Caufe   will 
 
 *  not  always  fecure  us  of  Succefs ;  For  thofe  who   have  a 
 
 *  very  jull  Caufe  may  deferve  to  be  puniOi'd  ;  and  then 
 '  God  may  juftly  punifh  them,  and  deliver  them  into  the 
 «  Hands  of  their  Enemies.  God  does  not  always  deteniiipe 
 <  what  is  right   and  wrong  by  the  Events   of  War  :  For 
 
 *  he  is  the  Sovereign  Judge  of  the  Vv'orlJ,  and  rr.ay  p unifh 
 
 *  a  wicked  Nation   by  unjuft  Oppreflbrs ;  as   he   often  did 
 
 *  the  Ifraelites.'  (Dr.  Sherlock's  Sermon  the  I'jth.  of  Jutie, 
 1691.  po.  p.  25.)  [b]  Page  31.         (c)  Ibid. 
 
 {d)  The  three  Eftates  in  Parliament  acknowledge,  that 
 upon  the  perfect  Surety  of  the  Kings  Lonuful  SucceJJiou  atid 
 Heirs,  *  dependeth  all  our  Joy  and  Wealth,  ^r.'  (Stat. 
 25   Henry   VIII.  c.  22,)   And  that  in  the  King's    *  Honour 
 
 *  and  Happinefs  confifts  the  Good  and  Welfare  of  his  Peo- 
 '  pie.*  (Stat.  13  C<7;-.  II.  c.  I.)  Agreeably  to  which,  it 
 is  well  obferv'd  by  Dr.  Chandler,  now  Bilhop  of  Durham, 
 '  That  the  King  has  at  leaft  the  fame  Right  with  every  pri- 
 
 *  vate  Perfon  ;  and  a  much  greater  Right,  as  he  fuftains  the 
 
 *  Perfon  and  Fortunes  of  every  private  Man  in  that  Com- 
 
 *  munity.'     (Sermon  the  jih.  oi'  June,  1716.  ^'vo,   p.  11.) 
 
[73  ] 
 
 *  Property  or  (e)  Difpofition ;'  you  feem  to 
 have  quite  forgot  the  Salvo  Jure  Coronce^  fo 
 common  in  Grants  and  Conveyances,  and 
 other  Legal  Ads,  to  fave  the  Rights  of  the 
 Crown,  and  fecure  the  Property  of  the  (/) 
 King:  And  again,  when  you  are  upon  this 
 Parallel,  as  to  the  Determination  of  pubhc 
 and  private  Rights,  and  yet  do  fuppofe,  that 
 the  Jiidges  may,  in  fome  Cafes,  determine 
 [g)  luyiijlly^  it  is  very  ftrange  Cafuiftry,  to 
 teach,  that  we  are,  in  fuch  a  Cafe,  bound  in 
 'Duty  and  Confcience,  to  aiTert  and  maintain 
 the  Party  in  PoiTeffion,  under  fuch  an  unjufi 
 Sentence;  only  becaufe  the  Party  injur'd  has 
 not  any  Means  left  him  to  come  at  his  Right, 
 of  which  he  is  fo  unjujily  difpoffefs'd  1  Thus 
 alfo  you  are  pleas'd  to  fay,  *  That  Honour, 
 
 *  Tribute,  Cuftom,  Prayers,  Allegiance,  De- 
 
 *  fence,  are  all  due  to  the  King  in  PofTeffion, 
 
 *  and  by  Virtue  of  his  {Jo)  Pofleffion.' 
 
 But   your  Readers  will  not  be  convinc'd  of 
 that,  without  futficient   Proofs;    Efpecially 
 
 thofe 
 
 [f)  Page  31.  (/)  By  Statute,     17  Edr.vardW.   A. 
 
 D.  1324.   it  is  enafted,  *  That  when    a  Freeman  fhall  do 
 
 ♦  Homage  to' his  Lord,  of  whom  he  holdeth  in  Chief,  he 
 
 *  fhall  hold  his  Hands  together,  between  the  Hands  of  his 
 <  Lord,  and  fhall  fay  thus;  I  become  your  Man  from  this 
 '  Day  forth,  for  Life,  for  Member,  and  for  worldly  Honour, 
 «  and  fhall  owe  you  my  Faith,  for  the  Lands  that  I  hold  of 
 
 •  you ;  fa'ving  the  Faith  that  I  czfe  unto  our  Lord  the  Kifig, 
 
 *  and  to  mine  other  Lords.'  And  in  other  good  Authorities, 
 
 •  we  have  this  Salvo  thus  exprcfs'd  ;  '  faving  the  Faith  I  owe 
 *  unto  our  So-jsreign  Lord  the  Khig  and  his  Hcirs^  (Prynne's 
 fka  for  the  Lords,  1658.  ^to.  o,  41; 9.} 
 
 {£)  Page  3::.  "      [I,)  Page  33. 
 
[74  J 
 
 thofe  who  have  had  the  Opportunity  of  duly- 
 con  iidering  the  Cafe  of  Allegiance  to  a  King 
 in  Fofjeffion^  and  the  Defence  thereof;  Books, 
 which,  you  know,  have  been  many  Years  in 
 Print,  and  perhaps  may  require  a  better  An- 
 fwer  than  they  have  hitherto  met  with. 
 Whatever  Advantage  you  may  therefore  flat- 
 ter yourfeif  with  having  gain'd  over  your 
 Remarker,  there  feems  to  be  fomewhat  in 
 his  Objections  againft  this  Dodrine,  which 
 will  not  allow  you  an  eafy  Conqueft,  howe- 
 ver you  may  triumph  in  your  own  Opinion 
 of  it.  According  to  your  Notions  here  ad- 
 vanc'd,  we  may  as  eafily  inform  ourfclves 
 who  is  our  King,  and  to  whom  we  are  bound 
 in  Confcience  to  pay  our  Duty  of  Allegi- 
 ance, &c.  as  we  can,  by  looking  up  to  the 
 Weather-Cock,  upon  St.  FauH  Chapel  in 
 Aberdeen^  difcover  which  Way  the  Wind 
 blows!  — —  But,  whether  this  be  really  a 
 fubverting  all  Principles^  or  '  fettling  the  Mat- 
 
 *  ter  in  Queftion  upon  right  Principles,  and 
 
 *  its   true   (/)  Foundation ;'  a    refohing  all 
 into  Fear  and  Force,  or  '  refolving  them  by 
 
 *  Truth  and  {k)  Reafon  j'  a  playing  fafl  and 
 looje  with  all  Governments,  or  the  Way  *  to 
 
 *  make  us  uniform  and  fixed  in  our  Obedi- 
 '  ence  and  (/)  Duty,  ^c!  muft  be  left  to  the 
 impartial  and  difinterefted  Readers  to  judge 
 between  you :  Tho'  I  may  venture  to  pro- 
 nounce, 
 
 10  ^"sge  34.  \h)  Ihld.  (/)  Ihid. 
 
[75] 
 
 nounce,  that  all  fuch  will  foon  be  convinc'd, 
 at  leaft,  of  the  Truth  of  your  Obfervation, 
 
 *  that  falfe  Principles,  and  wrong  Notions, 
 '  unavoidably  involve  Men  into  Inconfiden- 
 '  cies,    Contradictions,   and  Abfurdities;    of 
 
 *  which  one  of  you  has  given  us  feveral  In- 
 '  ftances  in  this  Imall  {m)  Performance.' 
 
 And  here  you  take  Occafion  to  fpeak  of 
 the  Tendency  of  Principles^  and  to  condemn 
 fuch  as  are  maintain'd  by  the  Remarker,  and 
 thofe  of  his  Opinion,    as  naturally  tending 
 
 *  to  eflablifli  Arbitrary  Power  or   Tyranny 
 
 *  in  the  King,  and  Slavery  in  the  People ;  — 
 '  to  make  no  Diflinftion  between  Right  and 
 '  Wrong,  Juft  and  Unjuft,  Good  and  Evil ; 
 '  but  to  refolve  all  into  a  blind  Obedience, 
 
 *  a  flavifh  and  Iheaking  Compliance  to  the 
 
 *  Will  of  the  Prince  j  and  fo  to  play  fafh  and 
 
 *  loofe  with  the  Laws  of  God,  and  the  Laws 
 
 *  of  the  (;?)  Land,  ^c^  Which  of  their 
 Principles  this  Refledlion  is  aim'd  at,  you  do 
 not  tell  us.     If  you  mean  thefe.  That  Sub- 
 
 jcSfion  and  Obedience  are  due  to  Rightful 
 Sovereigns,  and  that  for  Confcience  Sake ; 
 T'hat  Prayers  are  to  be  made  alfo  for  the 
 fame ;  That,  in  order  to  know  whom  we 
 are  to  obey,  and  pray  for,  tis  neceffary  to  ex- 
 amine^ in  Cafe  of  a  difputed  Claim,  on  which 
 Side  the  Right  lies  -,  That  in  all  fuch  Cafes, 
 Authority  is  to  be  more  regarded  than  Power, 
 
 Right 
 
 (w)  Page  35.  («)  Ibid. 
 
[76] 
 
 Right  more  than  PoflefTion,  and  the  Jt/Jiice 
 of  the  Caufe  more  than  Succefs,  ^c.  And, 
 if  fuch  Principles  are  either  plainly  taught  in, 
 or  fairly  inferr'd  from  the  Laws  of  God  and 
 Nature,  as  well  as  the  Laws  of  the  Land  (as 
 the  mofl:  eminent  Divines,  Lawyers,  and  Ca- 
 fuifts  agree  them  to  be)  your  Refledion  mull: 
 reach  to  a  much  bolder  Height  than  to  the 
 Remarker,  and  at  lafl  recoil  upon  your  own 
 
 Head. But,   where  you  mention  their 
 
 making  no  T)ifiinBion  between  Right  and 
 Wrong,  &c.  when,  at  the  fame  Time,  in  your 
 main  Controverfy  with  them,  you  reprefent 
 them  as  too  nice  and  fcrupulous  in  making 
 that  Diftindion,  there  is  fuch  an  Abfurdity 
 and  Contradidion,  as  is  hardly  to  be  match'd ; 
 unlefs  it  be  with  what  follows ;  where  you 
 upbraid  them  with  a  f.avijlj  atid  fncaking 
 Compliance^  who  fuffer  the  Lofs  of  their  All 
 but  Confcience,  for  their  not  being  fo  very 
 complying  as  yourfelf ! 
 
 Another  of  your   Refledions   is,   '  That 
 '  they  adhere  obftinately  to  Titles  long  ago 
 
 *  extinguilli'd,    and    which    fubfift    no    [p] 
 
 *  more.'  Now,  you  might  have  remember'd 
 your  own   Concefiion,    *  That  the  Event  or 
 
 *  Succefs  does  not  always  declare  the  Right 
 
 *  and  Juftice  of  the  Caufe,  nor  extinguifli 
 '  the  Claim  of  other  (/>)  Pretenders.'  Bur 
 you  explain  your  Meaning,   where  you  tell 
 
 us, , 
 
 {o)  P;fge  35   and  36.  ( p)  Page  2-j. 
 
[77  ]     * 
 
 us,  *  Whatever  Right  there  may  have  been 
 
 *  in  others,   on   Account   of  Proximity   of 
 
 *  Blood,  they are,  by  the  prefect  Lav/s 
 
 '  and  Conftitution,    excluded,    their   Right 
 
 *  extinguifli'd,  and  fubfifting  no  [q)  longer.' 
 And  what  is  this,  but  to  tell  us,  as  is  after- 
 wards plainly  confefs'd,  *  that  formerly  Pro- 
 
 *  ximity  of  Blood  was  the  undoubted  Right 
 
 *  by  (r)  Law  j'  but  that  now  the  Conjiitiition 
 is  alter* dy  in  a  Fundamental  Point  j  which 
 elfe where  you  have  pofitively  (^)  deny'd?  So 
 that  what  you  here  offer,  againft  thofe  whom 
 vou  charge  with  Objlinacy^  mufl:  either  prove, 
 that  the  Conftitution  is  not  alter'd,  and  con- 
 fequently  that  the  former  Right  is  ftill  fub- 
 
 fiftingy  and  not  e:/itinguiJ}S d  \  or  elfe,  that 
 you  Impofe  a  downright  Contradidion  upon 
 them,  which  is  not  a  likely  Way  to  convince 
 them. 
 
 Your   Remarker  objected,    that,  by    this 
 your  new  Do£tri?ie,  *  we  muft  flrike  in  with 
 
 *  all  Changes  and  Chances.'  To  which  you 
 reply,  '  And,  pray,  why  may  we  not,  if  it 
 
 *  be  lawful  and  (^)  neceflary?' But,   I 
 
 pray  you.  Sir,  who  is  to  judge  whether  it  is 
 lawful  a?id  neceffdry^  or  not  ?  If  the  Powers 
 actually  in  being  are  always  to  judge  of  it, 
 then  it  was  equally  the  Subjects  Duty  to 
 fir  ike  in  with  all  the  Changes  and  Chances  con- 
 fequent  upon  the  Rebellion  againft  and  Mur- 
 der 
 
 (?)  Pag.  52.     [r)  Pag.  205.     (i)Pig.  118.     (.')Pag.  36. 
 
[78] 
 
 der  of  King  Charles  I.  For  then,  you  know, 
 thofe  Powers  did  gravely,  and  witii  equal 
 AfTurance,  pronounce  all  their  Proceedings  to 
 be  lawful  and  necejjary !  And  yet,  you  cannot 
 deny,  that  the  whole  Courfe  of  their  Pro- 
 ceedings were  an  open  Violation  of  all  Law  j 
 and  that  they  had  no  Pretence  of  NeceJJity, 
 but  what  they  had  brought  upon  themfelves, 
 to  difguife   and  defend   one  wicked  Adl  by 
 
 another.  But   if  the   Subje(5ts   were   at 
 
 Liberty  to  judge  of  it,  as  tis  well  known  all 
 did  but  thofe  who  were  engag'd  in  the  Fac- 
 tion, then  why  may  they  not  judge  in  one 
 Cafe  as  well  as  another?  And  what  is 
 there  in  all  your  Expoftulation  on  this  Sub- 
 je(ft,  but  what  might  have  been  urg'd  by  the 
 Advocates  of  thofe  Times,  even  while  thev 
 themfelves  were  endeavouring  to  jlop  the 
 Coiirfe  of  "Nature^  &c.  for  jirikivg  in  li.ith  all 
 the  Cha?iges  aiid  Chajices  during  that  Ufurpa- 
 tion  ?  For  might  not  any  of  them  have  ar- 
 gu'd,  as  you  do,  *  What  Inconfiftency,  Con- 
 
 *  tradidtion,  or  Abfurdity  is  there  in  fo  doing? 
 
 *  Have  we  Power  to  flop  the  Courfe  of  Na- 
 '  ture,   or  to  fix  Things  immutably  to  our 
 
 *  Schemes  or  V/ays  of  Thinking  ?  Have  not 
 
 *  Changes    and    Revolutions    bappen'd    in 
 
 *  States  and  Kingdoms,  in  all  Ages  and 
 ^  Countries?  And  muft  we  beat  our  Heads 
 '  againft  the  Wall,  becaufe  Things  continue 
 
 *  not  as  we  would  have  them  r  Where  is  the 
 '  Wifdom  or  Reafon  in  fo  doing  ?  Or,  what 
 
 *  Law 
 
[79] 
 
 *  Law  of  God  or  Man  obliges  us  fo  to  do  ? 
 
 *  Do    we,    or   the   Almighty,     govern  the 
 
 *  World  ?  And  whole  Will  muft  take  Place, 
 
 *  His  or  ours?  Is  it  not  faid  exprefly,  That  He 
 '  changeth  the  ^Iimes  and  tht  Seafons?  And  is 
 
 *  it  not  our  Duty  and  our  Wiidom,  to  ac- 
 '  quiefce  and  fubmit  to  that  Change  which 
 '  His  Providence  brings  {ti)  about  ?'  &c.  At 
 this  rate,  People  need  not  to  have  any  Re- 
 gard at  all  to  Authority,  but  are  only  to  have 
 Refped:  to  mere  Power!  Nay,  Juftice  itfelf 
 will  be  quite  out  of  the  Queftion,  if  we  are 
 to  look  upon  every  Cha?ige  and  Revolution 
 that  happens  in  Government,  as  the  immedi- 
 ate Work  of  God,  and  done  according  to  his 
 Holy  Will!  And,  if  fo,  every  fuccefsful  Fvcbel 
 and  audacious  Ufurper  may  juftify  himfclf 
 as  God's  immediate  Inftrument,  whom  he 
 hath  decreed  to  reign  ever  [x)  us!  Surely,  Sir, 
 this  is  launching  out  into  fuch  a  Latitude  of 
 Principle,  as  on  more  cool  and  mature  Confi- 
 deration,  you  muft  be  convinc'd,  will  expofe 
 the  Affertor  to  a  much  more  fevere  Cenfure 
 than  I  am  willing  to  pafs  upon  it.  I  am  per- 
 fuaded,  if  ever  your  Remarker  himfelf  (hall 
 be  difpos'd  to  reply  to  this  your  Vindication, 
 he  will  not  fail  to  fliew,  that  there  is  fome 
 Jnconfiftency,  Contradiction,  or  Ahfurdity  in 
 ftriking  in  ivith  all  Chajiges  and  Chances! 
 That  not  he,  and  thofe  of  his  Opinion,  who 
 
 arc 
 
 {u]  Page  36.  (.V)  Page  37. 
 
[8o] 
 
 are  for  having  Things  run  in  their  Natural 
 Courfe,  but  thofe  who  are  given  to  change^ 
 do  pretend  to  the  Poivcr  to  Jiop  the  Courfe  of 
 Nature^  Sec.  That  the  Phrafe  of  Changes 
 and  Revolutions  happenings  founds  too  mucii 
 according  to  the  Heathen  Notion  of  Fate,  or 
 Fortune,  to  confifl  with  the  Dodlrine  of  Di- 
 vine Providence  1  That  beati?2g  their  Heads 
 againft  the  Wall,  is  more  properly  appUcable 
 to  a(5live  Zealots,  than  to  thofe  whofe  Princi- 
 ples are  always  paffive  under  Authority  ! 
 That  the  Wijdom  of  this  World  \%  indeed  but 
 Foolifhnefs!  That  fince  the  Ah?iighiy  governs 
 the  World,  he  needeth  not  any  Man's  Wick- 
 ednefs  to  bring  his  Purpofes  to  pafs,  &c.  For. 
 thus  we  may  hear  your  Opponents  every 
 where  remarking,upon  the  Comparifon  which 
 you  are  pleas'd  to  make  between  their  Cafe 
 and  that  of  the  fews;  wherein,  indeed,  you 
 have  given  them  no  fmall  Advantage  againfl: 
 you,  fince  the  'Je'ws  were  exprefly  command- 
 ed by  God  to  fubmit  to  the  King  of  Babylon  ; 
 whereas  thofe  whom  you  here  fo  farcaftically 
 refledl  upon,  do  not  appear  to  have  yet  re- 
 ceiv'd  anv  fuch  Divine  Command  :  and  there- 
 fore  think  you  very  uncharitable,  in  infinu- 
 ating,  as  if  ihty  follow  the  Example  of  thofe 
 ye"ji's,  and  are  *  asobftinate  as  they  [y)  were !' 
 Nor  do  they  think  you  lefs  unhappy  in  the 
 Application  of  fomc  of  the  Texts  of  Scrip- 
 ture 
 
 i/i  Pages;. 
 
[8i] 
 
 ture  which  you  have  occafionally  quoted. 
 For,  fay  they,  How  can  we  be  obnoxious  to 
 the  Cenfure  of  tneddling  with  thetn  that  a^re 
 giveJ2  to  change,  while  we  remain  fix'd  upon 
 the  old  Principles,  and  cannot  yet  be  per- 
 fuaded  to  ft r ike  in  with  all  Changes  to  which 
 we  have  been  fo  much  tempted  both  by  Ar- 
 guments and  Example? 
 
 And,  for  the  fame  Reafon,  they  likewife 
 deem  it  an  Abfurdity  in  you  to  compare 
 them  to  '  an  obltinate  Pilot,  that  will  needs 
 '  fail  to  the  Port  he  had  in  (a)  view,  ^c^ 
 Whereas  they  look  upon  themfclves  as  more 
 properly  to  refemble  a  wife  Merchant,  who 
 refolves  to  remain  in  a  fafe  Fort  (the  Port  of 
 old  Principles,  once  common  to  us  all)  and 
 will  not  venture  out  with  every  Wind,  and 
 in  all  Weathers,  for  Fear  of  ^  finking  him^ 
 
 *  felf,  his  Ship,  and  {h)  Crew ! ' 
 
 The  Series  of  your  Vindication  leads  me 
 next  to  confider  the  Proportion,  *  that  Fro- 
 
 *  teSfiofi  and  Allegiance  are  reciprocal -,  which 
 you  are  pleas'd  to  affirm,  as  a  Maxim,  *  not 
 
 *  with  you  only,  but  with  all  Men  who  under- 
 
 *  fland  Reafon  and  the  Nature  of  (<:)  Things.' 
 In  fupport  of  which  you  argue  thus;  '  Are 
 
 *  not  all  relative  Duties  reciprocal?  The  Du- 
 
 *  ties  of  Fluiband  and  Wife,  of  Parents  and 
 
 *  Children,  of  Mafters  and  Servants,  of  Paf- 
 '  tors  and  People,  of  Superiors  and  Inferiors, 
 
 G  *  and 
 
 (a)   Page  38-  [l]  Jhid.  (r)  Page  39, 
 
[82] 
 
 *  and  fo  of  Kings  and  Subjeds,  are  all  reci- 
 
 *  procal.     He  that  difchargeth  his   relative 
 
 *  Duty,  is  intitled  to  the  reciprocal  Duty  in 
 
 '  {d)  return/  But  is  he  not  intitled  to 
 
 it  unlefs  he  difcJjarges  his  own  Duty  ?  Or  is 
 the  Duty  void  on  the  one  Part,  if  it  is  not 
 duly  dilcharg'd  on  the  other?  This,  Sir,  is 
 the  Queftion :  And  this  is  what  you  are  to 
 prove,  if  you  fay  any  thing  material  and  per- 
 tinent to  the  Purpofe.  But,  furely,  you  will 
 not  take  upon  you  to  maintain,  that  if  the 
 Hujbandy  or  Father^  fails  in  his  relative  Duty, 
 the  Wife,  or  Children^  are  thereupon  dif- 
 charg'd  of  theirs :  For,  at  that  rate,  their  Re- 
 lation itfelf  muft,  ip fo  JaBo^  CQ2i{Q',  and  the 
 one  continue  no  longer  a  Father^  nor  the 
 other  an  Hufband'^  than  which  there  can't 
 be  any  thing  more  inconfiftent  with  Reafon 
 and  the  Nature  of  things.  But  if  we  look 
 into  Revelation,  or  even  into  the  L/aws  of 
 our  own  Land,  we  find  this  Point  clearly 
 determin'd  againft  you.  For,  however  the 
 Superior  may  happen  to  fail  in  his  Duty,  the 
 Wife  is  neverthelefs  bound  to  obey  and  fub- 
 mit  herfelf  unto  her  Hulband,  the  Children 
 to  their  Parents,  and  the  Servants  to  their 
 Mailers.     Thus,  Wives  are  commanded  to 
 
 fiibjnit  thenfehes^  and  be  in  SubjeBion  to  their 
 own  Hupands^    as  unto  the  Lo?'d,    in  every 
 thing  y  even  tho'  their  Hufbands  be  fo  wick- 
 ed, 
 
 {d)  Page  39. 
 
[83  ] 
 
 ed,  as  Jiot  to  obey  the  Word  of  {e)  God ;  Chil- 
 dren to  obey  their  Parents  in  all  [f)  Tk>i??gs  -, 
 and  Servants  to  coimt  their  own  Mafiers  wor- 
 thy of  ail  Honour'^  and  iobe  obedient  to  thenij 
 in  all  T'hings^  with  Fear  and  Trembling,  in 
 Singlenejs  of  Heart,  as  unto  {g)  Chrijl :  And 
 all  this  too,  not  only  to  the  good  and  gentle,  but 
 alfo  to  the  (h)  froward.  Now,  Sir,  if  there 
 is  an  Analogy  between  thefe  feveral  Relati- 
 ons and  that  of  a  King  and  his  Subjedis,  as 
 your  own  Argument  fuppofes,  we  may  from 
 thence  alone  conclude,  that  the  Duty  of  yli- 
 legiance  does  indifpenfably  oblige  the  Sub- 
 jedls  to  their  own  Sovereign,  even  tho'  he 
 {hall  fail  in  his  Protedfion  towards  them. 
 But  we  need  not  to  reft  in  fuch  Analogical 
 Conclufions,  fince  the  exprefs  Word  of  God 
 has  dire(ftly  commanded  every  Soul  to  be  fub- 
 jeSi  to  the  higher  Powers,  not  only  for  Wrath, 
 but  alfo  for  (/)  Confcience-fake;  and  that  with- 
 out any  Diftincftion  as  to  ProteBion,  or  even 
 as  to  their  Religion  or  Morals :  For,  I  need 
 not  to  put  you  in  Mind  of  your  own  Re- 
 mark, that  this  very  Injunction  was  given  by 
 St.  Paul  to  the  Chriftian  Subjed:s  of  Nero, 
 a  notorious  Idolater  and  perfecuting  Tyrant. 
 Agreeable  to  which  is  the  Doctrine  of  our 
 own  Laws  -,  of  which  I  beg  Leave  to  lay  be- 
 G  2  fore 
 
 [e)  Ephcjians  V.  12,  24,  33.      ColoJJlans  iii.  J  8.  &:  i.  Viter 
 iii.  I,  CiJ'f.  (/■)  Ephejtajis  vi.  l.  &  ColojJians  iii.  18. 
 
 ig)  Ephefians  vi.    5.      CeJcj/ians  ill.  22.  &J.  Timoihyvi.  I. 
 (h)   i.  Peter  ii.   18.  (j)  Romgnt  xiii.  i ,  <J c. 
 
[  84  1 
 
 fore  you  a  Specimen  [Appendix  N°.  iii.] 
 notwithftanding  you  value  yourlelf  upon 
 your  Acquaintance  with  our  Law-bocks: 
 Wherein  you  may  not  only  find  a  clear  Dif- 
 tinftion,  between  fuch  a  Lvcal  Allegiance  as 
 is  due  on  Account  of  ProteBion^  which  you' 
 leem  to  build  your  Do6trine  upon,  and  the 
 T^atural  Allegiance  which  is  due  by  Birth 
 from  every  Subjedl  to  his  Natural  Sovereign, 
 which  you  do  not  feem  yet  to  have  a  right 
 Notion  of  J  but  alfo  many  other  remarkable 
 Points  folcmnly  adjudg'd,  diredly  contrary  to 
 divers  of  your  Opinions  here  laid  down  for 
 Law:  Which  will  not  only  poew  you  palpa- 
 bly mijlaken  in  thefe  Thifigs,  but  *  may  ferve 
 
 *  to  make  ^0// more  cautious,  and  lefs  pofi- 
 
 *  tivc,  in  others ;'  as  you  fay  of  your  (k)  Op- 
 ponents.    Nay,  the  Proofs  here  produc- 
 ed are  fairly  confirm'd,  even  by  your  own 
 Father,  in  his  Letter  to  a  Friend^  which  you 
 have  here  fubjoin'd  to  your  Vindication: 
 Wherein  he  agrees,  *  That  Allegiance  is  due 
 
 *  to  both  good  and  bad  Kings ;  for  both  are 
 '  of  God:  Even  as  Wives,  Children  and  Ser- 
 
 *  vants  ought  to  do  their  feveral  Duties,  tho* 
 '  the  particular  Behaviour  of  Hufbands,  Pa- 
 '  rents  and  Mafters  do  not  much  encourage 
 
 *  it:  For  no   Mifdemeanour  of  others  can 
 
 *  cancel  the  Obligation  to  obey  (/)  God/ 
 And  now.  Sir,  'tis  to  be  hop'd,  that  you  will 
 
 not 
 
 (/f)  Page  89.  (/)  Page  210. 
 
[85] 
 
 not  infin:,  that  Froteclion  and  Allegiance  are 
 reciprocal^  fince  thefe  Authorities  may  con- 
 vince you,   »  that  all  Men  who  underftand 
 
 *  Reafon  and  the  Nature  of  (m)  Things/ 
 are  not  of  your  Opinion ! 
 
 Another  Argument  you  offer,  '  That  we. 
 certainly  owe  a  Duty  where  we  reap  a  Be- 
 
 *  nefit ;  according  to   that  known  Maxim, 
 
 *  Omne  Beneficiumpojiulat  {n)Officiim:  'Tis 
 true  indeed,  every  Benefit  receivd  obliges  to  a 
 Duty  in  return :  But  ftill  that  JDuty  is  not  to 
 be  extended  beyond  its  proper  Limits.  For, 
 after  you  have  urg'd  it  to  the  utmoft,  you 
 can't  fay,  that  any  Bejiefit  receivd co^n  oblige 
 us  to  a  Duty  out-  of  our  own  Power,  or  to 
 the  Prejudice  of  another  Perfon's  Right. 
 And  therefore  your  Inference  drawn  from 
 hence  will  come  as  far  fliort  of  the  End  for 
 which  you  produce  it,  as  the  former  have 
 done :  For  thus,  what  you  fay  of  a  double 
 Obligation  to  the  Duty  enjoin  d  in  the  T^ext, 
 (yiz.^   I.  *  That  under  them  we  may  lead 
 
 *  quiet  and  peaceable  Lives,  (p)  &c:  And, 
 2.  '  In  return  for  thofe  Benefits  we  adiually 
 
 *  do  enjoy  under  {p)  them  ;')  may  be  briefly 
 refuted,  by  obferving,  that  the  former  of 
 thefe  can't  reafonably  be  expeded,  nor  faith- 
 fully be  pray 'd  for,  where  the  Adual  Governor 
 has  only  the  Power,  in  Oppofition  to  appa- 
 rent Right  and  Authority  J  and  that  the  lat- 
 
 G  3  ter 
 
 {m)  Page  39.     («)  Page  40,     {0)  Ibid.     {/)  Page  41, 
 
[86  J 
 
 ter  can't  warrant,  and  much  lefs  lay  us  under 
 any  Obligation  of  Gratitude,  to  transfer  our 
 Allegiance,  and  offer  up  our  folemn  Prayers 
 and  Thankfgiving  for  fuch  an  one,  as  our 
 King  and  Governor,  in  Prejudice  of  a  Third 
 Perfon  :  For,  even  by  your  own  ConfefTion, 
 
 *  wc  arc  bound  to  the  Duties  of  Juftice 
 
 *  &c.  tho'  we  fhould  reap  no  temporal  Bene- 
 
 *  fit  by   them ;  tho'  Men    fhould   repay   us 
 
 *  with  Hatred  for  our  [q)  Good- will/  If 
 I  do  therefore  the  more  briefly  pafs  over  a 
 great  part  of  what  you  have  added  to  this 
 and  the  like  Purpoie,  it  is  not  that  I  look 
 upon  it  to  be  unanfwerable,  much  lefs  by 
 way  of  Co?iceJjio?i,  as  if  I  had  nothing  to  objc5i 
 againfl  it  (on  which  Suppofition  you  are 
 pleas'd  to  triumph  over  your  Remarker  with 
 your  Maxims  in  Logic  and  (r)  Law)  but  only 
 becaufe  a  few  Words  are  enough,  where  the 
 Subjedt  does  not  need  an  Enlargement,  and 
 the  Foundation  being  thus  fhaken,  your  Su- 
 perffrudiure  muft  fall  of  courfe.  I  muff  not 
 however  leave  your  Reader  to  be  led  away 
 into  an  Error,  by  what  you  build  fo  much 
 upon  J    *  the  End  of  Government^   and   the 
 
 *  Reafon  why  Dominion  and  Power  is  given 
 '  unto  Men.'  You  are  pleas'd  to  fay,  '  It  is 
 '  not  for  their  own  Sakes,  but  for  the  Peo- 
 
 *  pie's,  that  fuch  Power  is  committed  unto 
 '  [s)  them.'     As  if  the  People's  Safety  were 
 
 the 
 
 (q)  Page  40,         [r]  Page  46,  47.         (s)  Page  40,  41. 
 
[8/] 
 
 the  fole  and  principal  End  of  its  Inftitution 
 (/) .     But  this  is  a  very  great  and  dangerous 
 
 Miftake.  ■ Neither  is  that  Phrafe  which 
 
 you  make  Ufe  of,  concerning  a  Moral  (u) 
 Incapacity^  fo  clear  to  the  Underftanding  of 
 all  your  Readers,  as  not  to  admit  of  fome 
 Exception  or  Doubt.  You  do  not  here  in- 
 deed tell  us  what  you  mean  by  it :  But,  if 
 it  be  a  DiiFerence  in  Religion  only,  as  we 
 G  4  may 
 
 (/)  •  This  which  is  comrnonly  affirm'd,  that  the  End  of 
 
 *  Government  is  the  Good  of  the  Inferiors,  mult  be  under- 
 
 *  flood  cum  Gram  Sails.  For,  from  this  Principle  mifunder- 
 «  flood,  fome  have  collefted,  that,  becaufe  the  End  is  aboi-e 
 <  the  Means,  and   more  noble,  therefore  Subjefts  are  above 
 
 *  their  Governors,  and  fo  may  call  them  to  an  Account  for 
 «   their  Mifgovernment,  and  judge  or  punifli  them,  and  re- 
 
 *  move  them  if  they  fee  Caufe  ;  from  which  falfe  Collefti- 
 
 *  ons,  made  by  feditious  and  turbulent  Perfons,  infinite  Trou- 
 
 *  bles,  Confufions,  Rebellions  and  Dcfolations  have  fullow- 
 
 *  ed.     We  muft  know   therefore,    i.  That  to  procure  the 
 
 *  Good  of  Inferiors  is  indeed  the  Duty  of  Superiors,  and 
 ■*  one  E?ici  why  God  committed  the  People  to  them  ;  but  not 
 
 *  the  fole  or  principal  End  of  their  Authority.     For  Princes 
 
 *  receive  their  Power  only  from  God,  and  arc  by  him  con- 
 
 *  ftitated  and  intrufled  with  Government  of  others,  chirjlyfor 
 '  his  oivn  Glory  and  Honour,  as  his  Deputies  and  Vicegerents 
 
 *  upon  Earth  ;  for  they  are  His  Minijiers,  Romans  xVn.     So 
 
 *  that  the  principal  End oi  their  Government  is  the  Advance- 
 
 *  ment  of  Gods  Honour,  who  is  the  Supreme  King  and  Lord 
 
 *  of  all   the  World  :   And  therefoje,  if  they  fail   in  Perfor- 
 
 *  mance  of  this  TruJ},  they  are  accountable  only  to  Him  'vJjo 
 '  intrufled  them;  and  not  to  the  People,  whom  he  hath  put 
 «  under  them,  and  whom  he  never  authoriz'd  to  call  them 
 
 *  to  Account.but  to  appeal  only  to  him.  2.  It  is  not  generally 
 «  true,  that  all  Government  is  only  for  the  Benefit  of  tliole 
 
 *  that  are  govern'd.      For  fome  Government  there  is  merely 
 
 *  for  the  Benefit  of  the  Superior  ;  as  that  of  a  Lord  or  Maf- 
 
 *  ter  over  his  Servants,  ^r.'  (Bifhop  Jndreivs  on  the  Com- 
 mandments 1650./;/.  331.)  {u)  Page  52, 
 
[88] 
 
 may  gather  from  other  Pafl'ages,  it  may  be 
 thought  fbmewhat  improper  to  call  that  a 
 Moral  Incapacity,  and  no  lefs  abfurd  to 
 make  it  a  Bar  to  fuppos'd  Natural  Rights. 
 For,  at  this  Rate,  every  Fanatical  Seft,  when 
 powerful  enough,  may  pronounce  an  ortho- 
 dox Churchman  morally  incapdble  of  govern- 
 ing them^  even  as  Chriflianity  itfelf  has 
 been  formerly  conftrued  a  Moral  Incapa- 
 city^ among  the  unconverted  Heathens  in 
 Bulgaria.  But,  till  we  can  find  out  fuch  an 
 Incapacity  in  the  Laws  of  God  and  Nature, 
 the  fairer  Way  would  be  to  call  it  a  Legal  In- 
 capacity, and  to  reft  it  wholly  on  the  prefe72t 
 Laws  and  Co?iJlitution,  and  the  Principles  of 
 hurnan  Policy,  which  have  not  always  been 
 (at)  infallible. 
 
 The  next  Thing  material,  and  not  yet  ta- 
 ken Notice  of,  is  where,  having  acknowledgd 
 that  this  is  an  Hereditary  Ki?igdom,  you  go  on 
 
 thus ; '  But   what  then  ?  Becaufe  a 
 
 '  Kingdom  is  Hereditary,  muft  the  Crown 
 '  neceflarily  and  unalterably,defcend  always  to 
 
 *  the  eldeft  Son,  or  the  next  immediate  Heir  ? 
 
 *  Or  if  a   more  remote  is   exalted    to   the 
 
 *  Throne,  is  not  his  Title  right  and  good  ? 
 
 *  No  fuch  {y)  thing.'  'Tis  well  you  have 
 anfwer'd  your  own  Objedtion  ;  and  that  too, 
 with  fuch  an  Air  of  Pofitiveneis,  as  might 
 not  have  been  well  takeri  froin  a  Perfon  leis 
 
 ac- 
 
 (atJ  See  the  appendix.  No.  iv.  {y)  Page  52. 
 
[  89] 
 
 acquainted  with  Law-books  and  the  Nature 
 of'  Government,  than  yourfelf.  For  my  own 
 Part,  I  might  poflibly  have  been  of  a  diffe- 
 rent Opinion,  as  many  wifer  Men  may  be  ; 
 efpecially  on  the  Credit  of  fuch  Authorities 
 as  you  will  find  (z)  in  the  Appendix.  . 
 However,  this  I  may  venture  to  fay,  That, 
 in  fuch  a  Country  as  I  have  herein  before 
 (^a)  fuppos'd,  it  would  be  thought  very  ftrange, 
 if  the  Crown  did  not  defcend  always  to  the 
 eldeft  Son,  or  the  next  immediate  Heir^  before 
 all  thofe  who  were  more  remote  I  For  might 
 it  not  be  a  reafonable  Matter  of  Doubt,  in 
 fuch  a  Cafe,  who  could  have  a  fufficient  Au- 
 thority to  make  fuch  an  Alteration  in  the  Or- 
 dinary and  Natural  Courfe  of  Delcent  ? • 
 
 If  it  be  faid,  The  People,  either  colledively 
 or  reprefentatively  ;  would  riot  that  look  like 
 the  inverting  the  Nature  of  Things,  and  fet- 
 ting  up  the  Subjects  above  their  Natural  Sove- 
 reign, which  is  a  downright  Contradi(ftion  in 
 Terms  ?  And  then,  if  a  more  remote  fhould 
 be  exalted  to  the  Throne,  before,  and  in  Oppo- 
 fition  to  the  next  immediate  Heir,  might 
 there  not  feem  Reafon  to  queftion,  whether 
 his  Title  was  right  and  good,  lince  he  could 
 not  have  a  better  Title  than  they  had  who 
 gave  it  him  ?  — •  No !  You  fay,  *  No  fuch 
 
 *  thing!  ' And  therefore  I  (hall  leave 
 
 it  here  with  the  Reader,  while  I  haften  to 
 what  follows. 
 
 {z)  See  alfo  thcNoteson  p.  lo,  55,  72.     («)Seep.  17. 
 
 You 
 
[  9^  J 
 
 You  fay,  *  The  Remarkcr  muft  acknow- 
 '  iedge,  that  the  Kingdom  of  Judah  was  he- 
 
 *  reditary,   being  entail'd  on  David  and  his 
 
 *  Heirs,  by  Divine  Appointment.'    But,  who 
 
 *  fucceeded  Davids  Was  it  his  eldeft  Son  ? 
 
 *  No :  The  younger  of  many  Sons,  even  So-  ' 
 '  lomon  {b).  What  then  ?  May  not  I,  in  my 
 Turn,  now  afk  you,  Sir,  becaufe  Solomo?t  was 
 not  the  eldeft  ^on  oi David,  hniihc  younger  of 
 many  Sons,  does  it  therefore  necelTarily  fol- 
 low, that  in  other  Hereditary  Kingdoms,  it 
 muft  be  equally  lawful  for  a  younger  Son,  or 
 other  more  remote  Relation,  to  fucceed  to  the 
 Throne,  in  Oppofition  to  the  next  Heir  ?  Or, 
 becaufe  Solomon  was  exalted  to  the  Throne 
 by  God's  exprefs  Appointment,  muft  the 
 1'itle  of  any  other  younger  Son,  or  more  re- 
 mote Relation,  fo  exalted  by  the  People,  or 
 a  Party  of  them,  be  equally  7-igj3t  and  goodt 
 No  fuch  thing.  For,  you  may  remember. 
 That  fuch  was  the  univerfal  Opinion  of  an 
 Hereditary  Succeffion,  that,  i.  All  Ifrael 
 look'd  upon  Adonijah^  the  eldeft  Son,  as  the 
 Perfon  who  was  to  fucceed  his  {c)  Father. 
 2.  Adonijah  prepar'd  himfelf  accordingly,  as 
 the  next  undoubted  Heir,  in  Virtue  of  his 
 Natural  Right  of  (^)  Primogeniture.  Yea, 
 and,  3.  Even  the  wife  Solomon  himfelf  ac- 
 knovv^iedg'd,  that  the  Priority  of  his  elder 
 Brother  s  Birth  would  have  given  him  the 
 undoubted  Right  of  Succeffion,  as  in  all  or- 
 dinary 
 
 {^)  Page  51..         ff)  I.  Kings  ii,  15.         [d)  Ibid. 
 
[9'  ] 
 
 dinary  (^)  Cafes,  had  not  God  himfelf  thought 
 fit  to  make  a  fpecial  Entail  of  the  Succeffion 
 in  that  particular  Inftance.     And  it  was  this 
 fpecial  Interpofition  of  God  Almighty  (whofe 
 fole  Prerogative  it  is  to  difpenfe  with  and  fu- 
 perfede  his  own  Laws  and  thofe  of  Nature) 
 which  alone  exalted  Solomon  to  his  Father's 
 Throne,  and  render'd  his  'T'itle  right  and  good: 
 God's  Interpofition,  I  fay ;  not  by  mere  Events 
 (which  you  would  perfuade  us  are  Proofs  of 
 his  Divine  ( /')  Approbation^  and  neceflTarily 
 to  be  underftood  ?s  h^in^^g) accordiJig  to  his 
 Will,)  but  by  exprefs  Revelation  from  God, 
 by  his  Prophet   Nathan.     For,   even  before 
 Solomon  was  born,   there  was  an  exprefs  De- 
 claration made  unto  David  from  God,  of  the 
 Succefilon  being  entail'd  upon  [h)  him,  and 
 that   too   particularly,   and    by   {i)  Name : 
 And,  in  Purfuance  of  this  Divine  Defigna- 
 tion,   King  David  bound  himfelf  with  an 
 Oath,  that  Solomon  fhould  fucceed  him,  as  he 
 did  [k)  accordingly.     From  all  which  it  is 
 evident,  that  Ado7iijah  might  properly  appeal 
 to  the  common  Senfe  and  Knowledge  of  the 
 Queen-Mother  Bathfieba,  that  the  Kingdom 
 was  his,    according  to  the  general  Law  of 
 Hereditary  Succefiion,  and  that  all  Ifrael  did 
 therefore  juftly  regard  him  as  the  next  un- 
 doubted 
 
 {c)   I.   Kings  ii.  22.  (/)  Page  139.       (g)   Page  142. 
 
 (^)  Samuel  vii,  i  2,  ^c. 
 (/")    I  Chronicles  xxii.  9.     xxviii.  5.  &  xxix.  i. 
 {k)    i.Kirrgs  i.  13,  17,30.    - 
 
[    92    ] 
 
 doubted  Heir,  and  Jet  theh  Faca  on  htm  that 
 he  jhouU  reigji,  in  Virtue  of  his  Natural 
 Right  of  Primogeniture,  till  they  had  fuch 
 demonftrative  Proof,  by  exprefs  Revelation, 
 that  the  Kingdom  was  entail'd  upon  his  Bro- 
 ther Solomon,  and  that  //  laas  his  from  the 
 (/)  Lord. 
 
 Bat  now,  to  proceed,   you  confefs,  '■  That 
 
 *  Rehoboam,  in  all  Probability,  was  Solomo}i\ 
 
 *  eldeft  {m)  Son : '  Yet,  in  Hopes  to  weaken 
 the  Arguments  for  Hereditary  Right,  you  are 
 pleas'd  to  go  on  thus: '  But  who  fuc- 
 
 *  ceeded  Rehoboam'^  Not  his  eldeft,    but  a 
 
 *  younger  Son  j  as  is  clear  from  the  {ti)  Hif- 
 
 *  tory.'  Now,  that  he  was  not  the  eldeft  in 
 Stritftnefs  of  Speech,  or  the  firft-born  of  all 
 his  Father's  Sons,  is  not  the  Point  in  Quef- 
 tion.  For  if  he  was  the  eUcJl  furviving  at  the 
 Time  of  his  Father's  Death,  and  his  own 
 Succeflion,  'tis  all  that  is  contended  for  ;  and 
 enough  to  make  good  his  undoubted  Here- 
 ditary Right  to  the  Throne.  And  that  he 
 was  not  the  eldefi  then  furviving,  is  far  from 
 being  clear  from  the  Hifiory.  You  indeed 
 have  labour'd  hard  to  prove  what  you  alTert : 
 But  with  what  Sort  of  Proofs  ?  Why,  truly, 
 with  Inferences  drawn  from  precarious  Pro- 
 portions, and  with  harfli  Refledions  caft  upon 
 Books,  which  you  have  neither  particularly 
 referr'd   to,    nor  nam'd !  So   that  it  will  be 
 
 diffi. 
 
 (/)  I.  King:  ii.  15.      {m)  Page  52.      (»)  Page  53. 
 
[93  ] 
 
 difficult  for  the  Reader  to  difcover,  whether 
 you  have  fairly  and  fully  colle(fted  the  Senfe 
 of  the  Authors,  in  the  PafFages  which  you 
 treat  with  an  Air  of  Contempt ;  and  confe- 
 quently,  whether  your  Reflediions  are  juft  or 
 groundlels.  We  all  know  indeed,  that  fome 
 Books  are  eafily  reflected  on  in  the  general, 
 which  perhaps  would  not  be  fo  eaiily  anfwer- 
 ed,  if  they  were  taken  into  ferious  Confide- 
 rationj  like  fome  Doctrines,  which,  as  Dr. 
 Sherlock  formerly  obferv'd,  witty  Adverfaries 
 endeavour  to  laugh  out  of  Countenance,  when 
 they  find  themfelves  not  able  ferioufiy  to  con- 
 fute them  !  —  But  now,  more  particularly,  as 
 to  your  Remarks  upon  the  Cafe  of  Ahijah^ 
 ox  Abijam-y   i.  Whereas  you  fay,  *  That  he 
 
 *  was  not  Rehoboai7is  eldeft  Son,  there  being 
 
 *  three  nam'd  before  him  j  but  only  the  eldeft 
 '  Son  of  his  third  Wife  {o)  Maachah ;'  that 
 is  not  the  Point  here  in  Queftion,  for  the 
 Reafons  before  given.  2.  You  obferve,  '  That 
 
 *  tho'  he  was  not  his  eldeft  Son,  yet  he  made 
 
 *  him  Chief  and  Ruler  among  his  Brethren, 
 
 *  with  a  Defign  to  make  him  King ;  for  this 
 
 *  Reafon,   becaufe  he  lov'd  Maachah  above 
 
 *  all  his  Wives  and  [p)  Concubines.*  But, 
 furely,  the  King,  in  his  own  Life-time,  and 
 while  all  his  Children  were  equally  his  Sub- 
 jeds,  had  Authority  to  prefer  which  of  them 
 he  thought  fit,   to  any  fubordinate  Otiice  of 
 
 Magi^ 
 
 (")  Page  53.  if)  Ihi 
 
[94] 
 
 Maglftracy  under  himfelf  j  and  it  was  natu- 
 ral tp  make  Choice  of  him,  for  that  Office, 
 whofe  Mother  was  his  moft-beloved  Wife : 
 But  ftill  it  does  not  follow,  becaufe  he  then 
 2\(o  thought  to  make  him  King  f  which  only 
 imports  a  partial  Affedtion  for  him,  but  not 
 a  form'd  Dejign,  and  much  lefs  a  fix'd  Refo- 
 lution,  to  break  through  the  Natural  Order 
 of  SuccefTion)  that  therefore  Abijah  did  af- 
 terwards adtually  fucceed  his  Father,  by  Vir- 
 tue of  that  immature  T'hought,  in  Prejudice 
 of  any  elder  Brother  then  furviving.  3. 
 Whereas  you  urge,  *That  to  compafs  his  De- 
 
 *  lign,  he  (King  Rehoboa?n)  difpers'd  all  his 
 '  other  Sons  into   the  chief  Cities   of    his 
 
 *  Kingdom,  making  them  Rulers   therein, 
 
 *  and  giving  them  ample  Provifion,  that  they 
 
 *  might  live  eafy  and  contented,  and  not  dif- 
 
 *  turb  Abijah^  whom  he  defign'd  to  fucceed 
 
 *  [q)  him  j'  the  utmofl:  that  can  be  fairly  con- 
 cluded from  hence  is,  that  Rehoboam  had  fet- 
 tled, or  intended  to  fettle  a  valuable  Conii- 
 deration  upon  his  elder  Sons,  that  they  fhouJd 
 be  contented  to  waive  their  refpedtive  Claims, 
 in  favour  of  Abijah :  And  as  there  is  not  the 
 leaft  Colour  of  Proof,  that  anv  elder  Son  did 
 afterwards  fet  up  a  Claim  of  a  prior  Right 
 againft  him,  you  muft  either  conclude,  that 
 they  were  all  dead  before  Abijah  mounted 
 the  Throne,  or  elfe  that  they  were  confenting 
 
 to 
 
 (?)  Page  54' 
 
[95] 
 
 to  it  J  which  will  juflify  his  Right  of  Suc- 
 ceilion,  according  to  the  known  Maxim,  Vo- 
 lenti non  fit  Injuria.  And  therefore,  even 
 fuppofing  that  there  was  any  elder  Son  of 
 Rehoboam  furvivins:,  at  the  Time  of  his 
 Death,  which  does  not  appear  by  the  Hi  (lory, 
 it  is  no  Wonder,  4.  '  That,  by  this  wife  and 
 
 *  prudent  Management  of  his,  this  very 
 '  fame  Abijah  did  quietly  fucceed  him  in  the 
 '  (r)  Kingdom/  Thus,  even  upon  your 
 own  State  of  the  Cafe,  Sir,  I  can't  fee  any 
 Colour  for  your  Refledion,  that  this  Succef- 
 iion  of  Abijah  does  not  at  all  agree  with  cer- 
 tain Schemes  and  Notions^  which,  you  are 
 pleas'd  to  fay,  fi:)me  People  have  fanfy'd  to 
 themfehes  indefeafible ;  nor  any  Neceffity  for 
 
 *  fi)me  Way  to  be  found  to  evade  the  F  roof  from 
 
 *  this  T'ext  to  the  [s)  contrary -^  when  the 
 T'ext,  even  with  your  Comment  upon  it,  is 
 no  Proof  at  all  to  th(  contrary  of  their  Prin- 
 ciple, of  an  undifputed,  and  indifputabie 
 Hereditary  Succeffion. 
 
 You  fay,  *  They  will  have  it,  that  Abijam 
 
 *  was  Rehoboanis  eldell  Son  when  he  came 
 
 *  to  the  Crown.  Their  Reafons  are,  i.  That 
 
 *  it  no  where  appears,   that  any  one  of  the 
 
 *  elder  Sons  was  living  at  that  Time:  But 
 
 *  I  think  it  is  every  whit  as  reafonable  to  fay, 
 
 *  that  it  no   where  appears,  that  any  one  of 
 
 *  them  died  before  that  Time :  Ergo^  They 
 
 *  were 
 
[96] 
 
 '  were  all  {t)  living/     But,  with  SabmilTIon, 
 Sir,  to  your  great  Skill  in  Logic,   your  Argu- 
 tfient  does  not  feem  to  be  fairly  concluiive. 
 For,  I.  When  the  facred  Hiftory  teaches  us, 
 that  the  Kingdom  was  exprefsly  entail'd   by 
 God  upon  David,   and  his  Heirs  by  Solomon^ 
 and  that  5o/(?/7?£'«  was  accordingly  fucceeded  by 
 his  Son  Rehoboam,  and  he  by  his  Son  Abijah^ 
 or  Ab'ijam,  we  have  all  the  Reafon  to  believe, 
 that  Abijab's  elder  Brethren  were  dead,  before 
 their  Father,  tho'  the  Holy  Scriptures,  which 
 are  very  brief  in  fuch  Matters,  have  not  re- 
 corded it :  At  leaft,  fince  'tis  agreed,  that  Abi- 
 jah  did  quietly  jucceed,  without  any  Compe- 
 titor, it  wholly  lies  upon  you,  who  deny  his 
 being  the  then  eldeft,  to  prove,  that  there  was 
 an  elder  Brother  living  when  he  came  to  the 
 Crown.  2,  We  have  as  clear  Proof  of  three 
 Sons  of  David,  elder  than  Adonijah  \  one  of 
 whom,  for  ought  appears  from  the  Hiftory, 
 might  have  furviv'd  their  Father  :  And  yet^ 
 becaufe  there  is  no  mention  of  him,  or  his 
 Pretenfions,  at  the  Time  of  their  Father's 
 Death,  but  Adonijah  is  the  next  who  put  in 
 his  Claim  to  the  Inheritance,    'tis   therefore 
 reafonably  concluded,  that  all  the  elder  were 
 dead,   and  Ado?iijah  is  univerfally  efteem'd  to 
 have  been  the  eldefl  furviving  Son  of  David, 
 at   the  Time   of  that  Demifej  and  why  the 
 fame  Argument  fliould  not  be  as  conclufive 
 
 alfo 
 
 (0  Page  54. 
 
[97  ] 
 
 fo  in  the  Cafe  of  Ji^ijab,  requires  more 
 Art  than  I  am  Mafter  of,  to  diftinguiai. 
 And  the  rather,  becaufe  3.  As  Adonijah  in- 
 fifted  on  his  undoubted  Natural  Right  ol 
 Primogeniture,  in  that  Cafe,  as  before  Is  ob- 
 ferv'dj  (o  d:\di  Abijah,  in  this  Cafe,  infift  on 
 his,  without  any  Contradidion,  even  to  the 
 Face  of  Jeroboam  and  his  whole  [a)  Army. 
 Notwithftanding  all  this,  you  proceed  to  ar- 
 gue ?gainft  your  Antagonifts  thus;  2.  *  Had 
 
 *  there  been  any  elder  Brother  living,  it  is 
 '  not  to  be  doubted,  fay  they,  but  we  ihould 
 '  have   heard  fomething  of  his   Pretenlion. 
 
 *  But  this  Objedlon  {you  fay)  is  prevented  by 
 «  the  Text,  which  tells  us,  that  Rehoboam 
 «  dealt  wifely,  and  took  fuch  Meafures  as  to 
 
 *  prevent  thefe  [b)  Pretenfions/     To  which 
 I  {hall  only  add  to  what  I  have  already  ob- 
 ferv'd,    that   if  thefe  Pretenfions  were   wifely 
 prevented,  'tis  much  the  fame  as  to  the  Point 
 in  Hand,  as  if  they  were  naturally  dead  ;  fmce 
 there  could  not  be  any  Law  or  Reafon  to 
 oblige   the  Subjeds  to  affert  a  Right,   which 
 the  Heir  himfelf,  fuppofmg  there  had  been 
 a  nearer  living,   did  not   pretend  to.  ^  The 
 next  Reafon  which  you  undertake  to  invali- 
 date is,  3.  '  That  this  had  been  contrary  to 
 *  the  Law,  in  Deuteronomy  xxi.  15,  16,  17* 
 '  where  a  Man  is  forbid  to  make  the  Son  of 
 «=  the  beloved  Wife,  Firft-born,  before  the  Son 
 
 H  '  o^ 
 
 {a)  ^\  Chronich*  xiii.  4,  ^c.  \,b)  Page  54. 
 
[98  ] 
 
 *  of  the  hated,  which  is  indeed  (c)  the  Firft- 
 *■  born.'  And  is  not  this  very  true  ?  No  1 
 You  fay,  i.  *  This  Law  related  only  topri- 
 '  vate  Inheritances,  and  not  to  the  Kingdom, 
 
 *  as  is(^)  evident.*  But  where,  I  pray  you, 
 Sir,  is  this  evident  f  The  Law  itfelf  is  given 
 in  general  Terms,  j4  Man  j  which  in  com- 
 mon Intendment  of  Speech  includes  Every 
 Man,  Kings  as  well  as  private  Perfons:  And 
 the  very  Reafon  given  tor  that  Law,  becaufe 
 the  Firjl-boffi  is  the  Begimiing  of  his  Father  s 
 Strength,  ver.  17.  undoubtedly  extends  to 
 the  Firft-born  of  Kings,  as  much  as  to  thofe 
 of  their  Subjects.  Belides,  Sir,  one  who  is  fo 
 well  acquainted  with  Maxims  of  Law,  as 
 you  feem  defirous  to  be  thought,  cannot  be 
 ignorant  of  thefe,  which  are  among  the  heft 
 of  them,  Neminem  oportet  ejfe  Sapientiorem 
 LegibuSy   and  Ubi  Lex  non  dijlinguit,  nee  nos 
 
 difiinguere  debevius.  ■    And   this   indeed 
 
 you  feem  to  be  fenfible  of,  by  what  immedi- 
 ately follows:  '  But,  2.  Admitting  it  to  re- 
 
 *  late   to  both,    I   do  not  find,   that  thefe 
 
 *  Kings  were  fo  very  obfervant  of  the  Laws. 
 
 *  The  Law  forbad  their  Kings  to  multiply 
 '  to   themfelves  Wives;    which  La\V   both 
 
 *  Solomon  and  Rehoboam  had  (hamefully  [e) 
 '  tranfgrefs'd.'  And  what  then.  Sir?  You 
 will  not  fay,  that,  becaufe  they  tranfgrefs'd 
 the  Law  relating  to  their  Marriages,  it  necef- 
 
 farily 
 
 .(0  Page  54.         Id)  Ihil        [e)  Ibid.   . 
 
[99] 
 
 farily  mull:  follow,  that  they  were  not  obler- 
 vant  of  it  in  any  other  Cafe,  Does  not  this 
 way  of  conftruingit,  look  like  an  Endeavour 
 to  fiyidout  fome  JVay  to  evade  the  Proof\Jrom 
 this  T'ext,  to  the  contrary  of  your  own  favo- 
 rite Schemes  and  Notions,   which  you  are  fo 
 
 forward   to  cenfure  in  others  ?   But  I 
 
 fhall  forbear  to  pufh  this  fo  home  as  perhaps 
 fome  others  may  do!  5.  Your  next  Reflec- 
 tion is  upon  what  you  ironically  call  the  wi- 
 fefi  Reajon  of  all!  Which  in  Subftance  is, 
 that  the  Pedigree  of  our  BlcJIed  Saviour^  as 
 King  of  the  Jews,  being  derivd  by  St.  Mat- 
 thew through  Abijah,  as  'xcll  as  the  reft  of 
 that  Royal  Line,  the  making  a  Doubt  of  the 
 Right  of  Abijah,  is  in  efeB  to  raife  an  Objec- 
 tion againft  that  of  our  Sa'-jiour  alfi.  To 
 which  you  are  pleas'd,  with  great  Good  Na- 
 ture, to  fay,  *  Sure,  a  Man  mufl:  have  a  very 
 '  ftrong  Prejudice,  that  will  run  the  Hazard 
 *  of  a  ftrong  Objedion  againft  our  Saviour's 
 '  Pedigree,  rather  than  forgo  a  precarious 
 *"  ( /)  Suppofition  1 '  Very  true!  But  if  the 
 Right  of  Abijah  was  good,  as  the  undoubted 
 Heir  of  David  (and  fuch  it  plainly  appeals 
 to  be,  notwithftanding  all  you  have  ofFer'd  to 
 invalidate  it)  there  can  be  no  Hazard  in  de- 
 riving our  Saviour's  Pedigree  through  that  of 
 Abijah:  Tho'  I  muft  be  fo  free  with  you  as 
 to  own  my  Fears,  that,  in  fuch  Times  as 
 H  2  thefe, 
 
 C/)  Page  ;>• 
 
[    100    ] 
 
 thefe,  when  many  Men  are  fo  audaciouflv 
 impious,  as  to  propagate  all  manner  of  Ob- 
 jeaions  againft  our  BlefTed  Saviour  himfelf 
 fuch  a  pretended  Flaw  in  his  Pedigree  w  I 
 be  laid  hold  on,  as  an  Argument  againft  h  s 
 
 being  r^.fe)Wi^.^V/^.  >J,  and 
 therefore,  >../^,   a  Man  mufl  have  a\ery 
 Jirong  Prejudice  againft  the  Docflrine  of  He 
 reditary  Right,  who  will  run  the  Hazard  of 
 a  Jirong  ObjeStton  againft  our  Saviour's  Pedi 
 |r..    and  even  lend  the  common  Enemy  a 
 
 Suppof^t^on  to  the  Preudice  of  that  Right 
 fo  plainly  founded  both  in  the  Laws  of  God 
 and  Nature ! 
 
 This,  I  think,  is  at  leaft  enough,  as  to  the 
 
 main 
 
 ig)  St.  Mattheixj  ii.  2.  The  learned  Dr  W  r...,^      u 
 tofore  Lord  Bifhop  of  Ga//o^ay   Ziln.  o( 'r^P    '  }^'^'. 
 Chrift,  wifely  obferves,  .  That-^hlre  w!s  a  Y.Z'^'^V'^ 
 ^  ufaally    r/ckon'd   a^ong  the   r".      he  one  /' ^/^^^^^ 
 '  other  i\WW.     The  Natural  DeW  was    wh/^'    '^ 
 ♦  Natural   Generation  defcended    of  ^no  h'r     fhe    Lel^Y 
 '  when  one  not  naturally  defcended  of  another'  v^ ftlfA 
 ;   ed,as  neareft  of  K^n,  to  the  Inheritance      K,o^^^^^^^^^^^ 
 
 .  tor      ^.^'t  ^^""^  ^«'-^''^»  making  it  known  how  ChHIf 
 
 '  FaiheT-^  f     t'    'u  ■  ?  "P°"    '^^^  Throne  of  Da^.id  his 
 '   S;^^  1/-.;     V^'  Which  alfo  St.  Matthew  c^M,  him  I'l 
 
 ;ter^;'Sr- ---!:■  sin? 
 
 Ot./,;',  Works,  1629  fol.  591.)     ^  ''*'  ^*'a^-      (Bi/hoj. 
 
[    101    ] 
 
 main  Point  in  Queftion  here  before  us.  ^— 
 As  to  the  Objedions  which  you  have  taken 
 fo  much  Pains  to  make  againft  particular 
 Books,  when  you  think  fit  to  enter  into  a  pro- 
 fefs'd  Examination  of  them,  their  Authors  muil 
 be  oblig'd  either  to  defend  or  retradt  them, 
 which  it  is  not  my  Bufinels  here  to  trouble 
 myfelf  farther  about.  But  thus  much  I  may 
 be  bold  to  fay.  That  I  have  now  in  my  Hands 
 a  late  Performance,  wherein  I  find  fome  Paf- 
 fages,  againft  which  you  feem  to  have  levell'd 
 the  (harpefl  of  your  Reflections;  which  if 
 you  had  carefully  read  through,  with  an  un- 
 prejudic'd  Regard  to  Truth,  rather  than  a 
 Defire  of  Triumph,  might  have  fav'd  a  great 
 deal  of  Writing  on  this  Subjedt,  and  at  leaft 
 have  abated  the  Edge  of  your  Refentment, 
 if  it  had  not  prevail'd  with  you  once  more 
 to  fubmit  to  Principles,  which  for  many 
 Years  you  thought  unanfwerable. 
 
 Before  I  leave  this  Point,  which  you  have 
 fo  much  labour'd,  I  find  it  proper  to  take  no- 
 tice of  one  or  two  extraordinary  Paffages, 
 which  had  well  nigh  efcap'd  my  Obferva- 
 tion. You  afk,  *  What  does  it  fignify, 
 
 *  whether  Ahijam  was  Rehoboams  eldeft  Son 
 
 *  alive,  when  he  came  to  the  Crown,  when 
 
 *  it  is  certain  he  was  not  his  eldeft  (Jo)  Son  ? ' 
 Which  is  no  wifer  a  Queftion  than  thofe 
 Others  which  you  make  fo  little  Account  of. 
 
 H3  If 
 
[    102  ] 
 
 If  there  he  any  Senfe  {i)  in  thefe  Words,  as  you 
 fay  of  the  Remarks,  it  muft  be  found  under 
 a  Din:ind:ion  between  the  eldeft  born  and  the 
 eldeft  furviving :  And  //  fignifics  as  much 
 jis  when  we  fay,  Charles  I.  was  not  the  eldeft, 
 or  firft-born  Son  of  King  "James  I.  But 
 vet,  fince  his  elder  Brother,  Prince  Henry, 
 died  before  the  King,  Charles  was  then  of 
 courfe  the  eldeft  Son  furviving,  and  confe- 
 quently  the  undoubted  Heir.  Again,  fjpeak- 
 ing  of  Rehoboa?ns  Defign  to  prefer  Abijah 
 before  his  elder  Brethren  in  the  Succeffion, 
 you  fay,  *  Againft  this,  tho'  a  Thing  openly 
 '"  known^  wp  find  no  Remonftrances  made, 
 '  either  by  the  People,  or  the  Priefts,  or  the 
 
 *  Prophets  J  whence  we  may  rdafonably  in- 
 
 *  fer,  that  they  knew  of  no  Law  againft  {li) 
 J*. it.'  This,  Sir,  methinks,  is  a  ftrange  Infe^ 
 rence  for  fo  accurate  a  Logician  as  you  to 
 make  ;  and  that  too,  grounded  on  as  ftrange 
 ^Reafon!  Can  it  be  reafonably  fuppos'd,  that 
 IsTo-body  in  thofe  Times  knew  of  any  Law 
 aga'mft  diftnheriting  the  Firft-bcrn,  or  next 
 Natural  Heir  ?  Were  the  Priejls  and  the  PrC' 
 phets,  as  well  as  all  the  People,  utter  Strangers 
 to  the  common  Law  of  Nature  ?  Or  could 
 they  all  have  forgot  the  written  Law  of  Mo- 
 
 Jes?  wherein,  by  the  immediate  Command 
 of  God,  it  was  made  a  Statute  of  yudg- 
 tnenty  or  perpetual  Law,  that  ail  Inheritances 
 
 were 
 
 {i\  Page  36.  ,  ('fjJPage  56. 
 
[  I03  ] 
 
 were  to  defcend  to  the  (/  )  next  of  Kin ;  and 
 wherein  alfo,  to  cite  no  more,  it  was  exprefly 
 provided,  that  the  Right  (m)  of'  the  FirJi-bo7'n 
 ought  not  to  be  defeated  j  as  I  have  already 
 
 obferv'd. But  this  your  Argument,  if  it 
 
 proves  any  thing,  will  prove  too  much.  For 
 I  dare  fay,  among  the  feveral  idolatrous  Kings 
 of  Judahy  as  well  as  of  Ifrael^  there  are  fome 
 Inftances  of  Idolatry,  againfl  which ^  never- 
 thelefs,  tho  a  T^hing  more  openlj  known  than 
 Reboboam^  Dejign  could  be,  we  find  no  Re^ 
 mojijirances  made^  either  by  the  Peopky  or  the 
 Priejisy  or  the  Prophets :  And  yet  you  will 
 not  venture  to  fay,  that  from  thence  we  may 
 reafonably  infer,  that  they  knew  of  no  Law 
 againft  Idolatry !  Now,  if  fuch  an  Inference 
 is  not  reafonable  in  the  one  Cafe,  it  will  not 
 be  eafy  for  you  to  fhew,  how  it  can  be  reafo- 
 nable in  the  other ! As  to  what  you  tell 
 
 us,  from  Dr.  Patrick,  that  this,  of  difinherit- 
 ing  the  natural  Heir,  was  a  Power  claimed 
 by  the  Kings  of  Judah,  and  fometimes  alfo  by 
 the  (?:)  People;  furely,  we  are  not  concerned 
 about  what  they  clai??i'dj  but  what  they  had 
 a  Right  to :  And  fure  I  am,  the  Holy  Scrip- 
 tures plainly  intimate  to  us,  that  they  had 
 not,  nor  thought  themklves  authorized  to 
 claim,  any  fuch  Power  \  wherein  we  are  care- 
 fully taught  the  Reafon  why  Jehoram 
 H  4  fuc- 
 
 [I\  .Numbers  -xxy  11.  8,  i^c.       (m)  Deuteronomy  xxi.  15,  Ufc. 
 ',,7)  P^ge  56. 
 
[  ^^4  ] 
 
 faccecdcd  his  Father  "Jehofaphat^  becaufe  he 
 {o)  ivas  the  Firft-born ;  and  that  j^haziah^ 
 who  was  the  youngefl  Son  of  Jehoraf^iy  iuc- 
 ceeeded  him,  only  becaufe  a  Band  of  Men 
 (/))  had  Jlain  all  the  eLleJi ;  clearly  intimat- 
 ing, that  he  had  not  been  capable  of  it,  if 
 any  of  his  elder  Brethren  had  been  then  alive, 
 and  claim'd  it. 
 
 Having  urg'd  all  you  could  from  the  Cafes 
 of  Solomon  and  Abijah,  you  fay,  '  Was  the 
 '  Kingdom  the  lefs  Hereditary  on   account 
 
 *  of   thefe  Succeffions?  Or   did  any   body 
 
 *  ever  queftion   Solomon's  or  Abijah\  Right 
 
 *  to  the  [q)  Crown  ? '  No,  Sir;  nor  was  there 
 any  Colour  of  Reafbn  fo  to  do.  For  Solo~ 
 mons  Succeffion  being  according  to  the  ex- 
 prels  Nomination  and  Entail  of  God  himfelf, 
 barr'd  all  Pretence  of  queftioning  his  Right : 
 And  Abijah's  being  agreeable  to  the  ordinary 
 Rule  of  Survivorfhip  j  or,  at  leaft,  even  upon 
 your  own  State  of  it,  quiet  and  peaceable, 
 without  any  prior  Claim  ;  there  is  no  more 
 Reafon  for  any  body  to  queftion  his  Rights 
 than  if  we  were  pofitively  aflur'd  (as- we 
 have  good  Reafon  to  believe)  that  his  elder 
 Brethren  were  adlually  dead ;  as  I  have  al- 
 ready prov'd  at  large. •  But,  not  content 
 
 with  thefe  two  Scripture  Proofs,  you  tell  us, 
 
 *  Many  like  In  fiances  may  be  given  in  other 
 
 '  King-. 
 
 {o)  2.  Chronicle!  xxu  3.  [p]  2.  Chronicles -xxii.  I, 
 
 (?)  Page  54,  55. 
 
[   'OS  ] 
 
 *  Kingdoms ;    but,  for  Brevity's  Sake,  we 
 
 '  (hall  mention  but  onci' for  which  you 
 
 would  lead  us  as  far  as  to  (r)  Conjiantinople, 
 But,  I  think,  we  need  not  follow  you  fo  far 
 out  of  our  way  ;  fince  the  Cafe  of  the  Suc- 
 ceffion  there,  in  1 138  (whatever  it  was)  can 
 be  no  Rule  to  us.  However,  at  the  Clofe  of 
 this,    you  fum  up   all   with  this  Remark ^ 
 
 *  The  firftof  thefe  Inflanccs  was  by  Divine 
 
 *  Appointment,  which  fhews  the  Thing  to  be* 
 
 *  lawful :  The  fecond  was  for  no  other  Rea- 
 
 *  fon  that  is  given,  than  the  AfFedion  which 
 
 *  the  King  had  for  one  of  his  Wives  above 
 
 *  the  reft  :  And  the  third  was  for  powerful 
 '  Reafons  of  State.     All  of  them  ihew,  that 
 
 *  fuch  a  Procedure  is  not  inconfiftent  with 
 '  the  Nature  of  an   Hereditary   Kingdom. 
 
 *  And  why  may  not  the  fame,  or  more  pow- 
 
 *  erful  Reafons,  juftify  the  like  Procedure  in 
 
 *  any  other  Hereditary  (j)  Kingdom  ?'  Why 
 truly.  Sir,  in  my  humble  Opinion,  not  one 
 of  all  thefe  three  Inftances  comes  up  to  the 
 Proof  of  what  you  vouch  it  for.  For,  i. 
 Tho'  Solomons  being  preferr'd  before  his  elder 
 Brethren,  by  God's  immediate  Nomination 
 and  Appointment,  Jhews  the  T'hing  to  be  law- 
 ful indeed,  in  that  particular  Inftance;  yet  it 
 does  not  infer,  that  it  will  be  lawful  to  do  the 
 like,  in  other  Cafes,  where  no  fuch  Divine 
 appointments  appear  to  juftify  it  3  any  more 
 
 than 
 
 {r)  Page  55,  [s]  Page  57. 
 
[  io6  ] 
 
 than  Abraham^  offering  up  his  Son  JJaac^  or 
 the  Ifraelites  fpoiling  the  Mgyptiam^  can  be 
 vouched  for  Precedents  to  juftify  6thers  in  the 
 like  Procedure  :  For,  you  know,  Sir,  that  to 
 argue  againft  ordinary  Rules  from  extraordi- 
 nary Cafes,  is  not  good  Logic.  And,  2.  None 
 of  thefe  three  Cafes,  even  according  to  your 
 own  State  of  them,  were  tranfadfed  without 
 tne  Concurrence  of  their  refpecftive  Fathers 
 Sovereign  Authority:  And  therefore,  how* 
 much,  or  how  Httle,  foever  that  may  weigh 
 in  thofe  particular  Inftances,  it  will  at  ieafb 
 fliew  them  to  be  no  way  applicable  to  the 
 Queflion  here  in  Hand  ;  fince  it  cannot  from 
 thence  be  inferr'd,  that  the  next  Heir  to  the 
 Crown  can  be  juftifiably  excluded  from  his 
 Natural  Right  of  Inheritance,  in  any  other 
 Hereditary  Kingdom ,  without  fo  much  as  the 
 Confent  of  his  Royal  Father  j  which  is  nei- 
 ther pretended,  nor  fuppos'd,  in  the  Cafe  in 
 Controverfy.  So  that  J'uch  a  Procedure  may 
 be  inconfijient  with  the  Nature  of  an  Heredi- 
 tary Kingdom,  notwithflanding  all  you  have 
 vet  faid. 
 
 As  to  what  you  mention  of  the  long  and 
 bloody  Ccntefts  between  Bruce  and  Baliolm 
 Scotland,  York  and  Lancafter  in  E?7gland,  and 
 thofe  of  late  in  Poland,  I  lliall  not  trouble 
 myfeU  here  to  enter  into  the  Particulars. 
 Your  Argument  from  thence  is,   *  That  as 
 
 *  eafy  as   it   may   feem   in  Speculation,    to 
 
 *  know,  in  an  Eledive  Kingdom,  who  has  the 
 
 Ma- 
 
[  107  ] 
 
 *  Majority,  or  who  is  the  next  Heir  in  an 
 
 *  Hereditary  one,   it  feems  it  is  not  fo  eafy 
 
 *  to  agree  in  the  Matter,  in  fome  (t)  Cafes.' 
 But,  in  my  Opiniofi,  you  have  fliaken  the 
 Force  of  all  this  to  Pieces,  in  what  follows ; 
 where;  *  fuppofing  it  may  not  be  fo  hard  for 
 '  a  difinterefted  Perfon  to  know  where  the 
 
 *  Right  lies/    you  immediately  add,  '  Does 
 
 *  the  Remarker  imagine,  that  one  whofe  Paf- 
 
 *  lionsandlntereft  areengag'd,  will  fee  Things 
 
 *  in  the  fame  impartial  View  ?  Will  not  any 
 
 *  fmall  Claim  ferve  as  a  Pretence,  to  Men  of 
 
 *  Ambition  and  Power,  to  make  good  their 
 '  Title  to  a  Crown  by  Force  of  Arms,  and 
 
 *  to  take  (w)  Poffeffion  ? '  This  is  indeed  fo 
 evident,  that  he  muil  be  ftrangely  blinded 
 who  can't  fee  the  Truth  of  your  Obfervation ! 
 But  what  is  to  be  concluded  from  all  this? 
 Certainly  not  *  that  PofTeffion,   once  fecur'd 
 
 *  and  fettled,  (hall  determine  the  Subjeds  (x) 
 
 *  Obedience/  For  'tis  impoffible  that  any 
 thing  can  be  more  exprefly  adjudg'd  to  the 
 contrary  of  this  your  AfTertion,  than  was 
 done  in  that  very  Cafe  of  the  Con teft  between 
 the  White  Rofe  of  Tork,  claiming  as  Heir  to 
 Clarence  J  and  the  Red  Rofe  oi  Lam  after ,  {y) 
 when  after  a  long  PolTeffion  of  fixty  or  fe- 
 venty  Years,  it  evidently  appeai''d,  that  no- 
 thing but  Fajfion  and  Intereji  had  fupported 
 
 the 
 
 (/}  Page  58.     {«)  Page  58  &  59.    [x)  Page  59. 
 (j)  See  the  Appendix,  No.  v. 
 
I  io8] 
 
 the  Ambition  and  Power  of  the  younger  Line 
 of  Lancajier,  while  all  dijinterejied  Ferfom 
 knew  that  the  Right  lay  in  the  Duke  of  fork^ 
 as  Heir  to  the  elder ;  and  many  of  them  gal- 
 lantly underv^^ent  great  Hardlhips  for  their 
 honeft  Adherence  to  it. 
 
 And  here  alfo  I  can't  but  exprefs  my  A- 
 mazement,  that  fo  accurate  a  Writer,  and  fo 
 clofe  a  Reafoner,  as  yourfelf,  (hould  fink  fo 
 low,  fo  often,  and  fo  heavily  to  repeat  your 
 Apprehenfions  (as  here  again  you  do) '  That 
 the  Fate  of  the  People  muft  be  very  mife- 
 rable  indeed,  if  they  ihould  be  oblig'd  to 
 throw  up  their  Lives  and  Eflates,  and  ruin 
 their  Pofterity,  becaufe  one  Man  has  got 
 the  Kingdom,  and  another  has  loft  it!  But, 
 this  neither  the  Laws  of  any  Nation,  nor 
 the  Law  of  the  Gofpel  obliges  them  to  (z) 
 do/  'Tis  true,  they  do  not  oblige  them^  vo- 
 luntarily, to  throw  up  either.  But  they  cer- 
 tainly oblige  all  Subjects  to  do  their  bounden 
 Duty,  to  keep  a  good  Confcience,  and  to  refign 
 the  Concerns  of  their  Lives  and  EJlateSj  as 
 well  as  thofe  of  their  Fojlerity,  to  the  wife 
 Providence  of  God,  who  will,  in  due  Time, 
 help  thofe  to  Right  who  fuffer  [a]  Wrong ;  and 
 who  will  make  all  Things  turn  to  the  Good 
 of  thofe  who  put  their  Truft  in  him,  in  fuch 
 a  manner  as  Oiall  be  moji  expedient  for  them. 
 This,  Sir,   vt'ould  have  well  become  you,  a« 
 
 a 
 
 (z)  Page  59.  («)  P/«/wj  cxlvi.  6. 
 
[  109  ] 
 
 a  preacher  of  God's  Word,  to  have  prefs'd 
 upon  the  Confciences  of  your  People :  And 
 io  it  would  alfo,  as  a  good  Subjecft  and  a  true 
 Briton,  to  have  infilled  more  particularly 
 than  you  have  done,  on  the  Miferies  of  Civil 
 Wars,  &c.  naturally  confequent  upon  dif- 
 puted  (b)  Titles,  of  which  thefe  Nations  have 
 had  long  and  woful  (c)  Experience.  Inftead 
 of  which  you  alarm  them  with  tragical  No- 
 tions, as  if  the  Principles  of  thofe  whom  you 
 oppofe,  oblige  Men  to  throw  up  their  Lives 
 and  EJiateSy  and  7'uin  their  Fojierity,  becaufe 
 one  Man  has  got  the  Kingdom,  and  another 
 has  lojl  it  I  Whereas,  the  utmoft  that  can  be 
 inferr'd  from  them  in  the  Cafe  here  in  quef- 
 tion  is,  that  it  is  abfolutely  necejfary  to  have 
 fome  competent  Knowledge  of  the  Matter  both 
 of  our  Oaths  and  Prayers,  and  alfo  a  Convic- 
 tion and  Perfuafon  that  there  is  no  Faljhood  or 
 Injujiice  in  it,  that  the  Oath  may  be  taken,  and 
 the  Prayers  put  up,  without  doubting ;  with- 
 out 
 
 {b)  Page  53.  {c)  In  the  Statute  25  Henry  VIII. 
 
 c.  22.  (made  in  the  very  Crifis  of  the  Reformation)  we  have 
 a  moft  lively  and  pathetical  Defcription  of  the  Miferies  oc- 
 cafion'd  by  difputed  Tit'es.  And  the  only  Remedy  which 
 our  Ancellors  could  think  of  (who  were  as  tender  of  their 
 Liberties  as  we  can  be  of  ours)  was  to  declare,  i .  That  the 
 Sovereign  Jurifdidtion  and  Right  to  the  Crown  is  given  by 
 God  immediately  to  Kitigs,  and  in  SucceJJjon  to  their  Heirs : 
 2.  That  fuch  Sovereign  Right  was  in  that  King,  without 
 any  manner  of  Douht  or  ^ejlion :  3.  That  the  fame  ought  to 
 defcend  to  his  right  Heirs  for  et-er,  according  to  the  Courfe  of 
 lnherita7ice :  And,  4.  That  a//  the  Joy  and  Wealth  of  this 
 Kingdom  depends  upon  keeping  this  Chain  of  Succelfiop 
 intire. 
 
[no] 
 
 out  which  *  it  ought  to  be  rcfui'd^  ivhatevcr 
 
 *  may  be  the  Confequence!  And  this  is  no 
 more  than  is  plainly  afTerted  in  your  own 
 Book,  as  to  the  [d)  Oaths;  and  is  as  fairly  to 
 be  inferr'd,  as  to  the  Prayers.  Neither  is 
 your  Expreffion,  of  one  Man  getting  the  King- 
 dom, and  another  lojing  it^  either  fo  proper,  or 
 fo  decent,  as  it  ought  to  be :  Since  it  is  not 
 the  Cafe  of  ofie  Man^  or  a  private  Lofs,  but 
 that  of  the  King,  and  his  Heirs ;  on  whofe 
 Profperity  that  o^  the  whole  Body  doth  con- 
 felTedly  {e)  depend. 
 
 And  now  we  come  to  the  Rights  of  King 
 and  SubjeSfs:  Where  you  are  pleas'd  to  af- 
 firm, *  That  Kings  have  been  more  ready  to 
 
 *  extend  or  enlarge  the  Prerogative,  than  the 
 
 *  Subjed:  has  been  to  encroach  upon  {f)  it.' 
 This  might  have  been  more  excufable  in  a 
 Rapin,  or  any  other  Stranger  to  the  BriiiJJj 
 Conftitution.  But,  after  the  gracious  Con- 
 cejlion  of  Mag?2a  Charta,  and  the  many 
 fubfequent  Grants  of  Privileges  and  Immu- 
 niiies,  whereby  divers  of  the  faireft  Flowers 
 of  the  Crown  have  been  given  away  by  our 
 Kings,  and  efpecially  by  thofe  of  the  Royal 
 Line  of  Stuart,  fuch  an  Aflertion  feems  to 
 favour  of  Prejudice  more  than  Principle. 
 You  admit,  *  that  the  Laws  afcertain   the 
 
 *  Right  to  the  (^)  Crown  f  But  then  you 
 
 fay, 
 
 [d)  Page  216,  223.  {e)  See  the  Notes  on  p.  72,  ico. 
 
 (/)  Page  59,  60.  (^)  Pageeo. 
 
[  III  ] 
 
 fay,  I.  '  How  often  do  we  fee  that  Men  will 
 
 *  claim  and  contend  for  a  Right,  where  the 
 '  Laws  allow  {h)  none?'  'Tis  true,  Sir,  ws 
 do  fee  this  too  often.  But,  what  are  we  to 
 conclude  from  hence?  That  therefore,  we 
 are  not  to  trouble  ourfelves  at  all  about  the 
 Right,  but  to  engage  ourfelves  by  Oaths,  and 
 endeavour  alfo  to  engage  our  Holy  and  Righte- 
 ous God  by  our  Prayers,  in  behalf  of  him 
 who  gets  the  aSiual  Pojfeffiofi,  right  or  wrong ! 
 I  believe,  all  our  difinterefted  Pleaders  will 
 rather  conclude  the  contrary.  You  likewilb 
 obferve,    2.  *  That  the  Law-makers  cannot 
 
 *  forefee   all  Cafes  or  Inconveniencies   that 
 
 *  may  pofTibly  (/)  happen.'  But  they  may 
 eafily  forefee  the  mferable  inconveniencies  con- 
 fequent  upon  the  Ii^terruption  of  Natural 
 Rights ;  and  therefore,  in  true  Policy,  as 
 well  as  in  good  Confcience,  ought  to  avoid 
 the  Occafion  of  them.  And,  3.  you  infifl-. 
 That  the  Laws  of  Men  are  7nutnble,  and  may 
 be  [k)  cbangd.  Whether  the  Law  of  Nature 
 alfo  may  be  be  chang'd,  is  another  Queftion  ; 
 for  which  the  Reader  may  have  Recourfe  to 
 the  Appendix,  No,  III.  You  fay,  *  There  is 
 
 *  one  immutable  Law  indeed  :  And  that  is, 
 
 *  Salus  Populi  Siiprcma  Lex  efio  ;  T^he  Gcod  of 
 
 *  the  People  is  the  Supreme  Laiv ;  by  which 
 
 *  all  other  Laws  are  to  be  directed,  and  to 
 
 *  which  they  muft  (/)  yield.'    How  unfairly 
 you  have  tranflated  this  Maxim,  by  render- 
 ing 
 
 {h]  Page  60.     (i)  Ibid,     (k)  lb\d.     {/)  Jhid. 
 
[    112    ] 
 
 ing  the  Latin  Word  EJio,  by  the  Englilli  Par- 
 ticle is,  every  School-boy  can  difcern  :  But 
 for  your  Mif-application  of  a  Common- 
 Wealth  Precept  to  an  Hereditary  Monarchy, 
 I  refer  the  Reader  alfo  to  a  full  (m)  Proof  in 
 the  Notes  here  below.  But  here  you  go  on 
 with  it  thus  J  '  When  that  Paramount  Law 
 
 '  re- 
 
 {m)  The  learned  Mr.  Se/den  obferves  of  the  Maxim,  Sa/us 
 Populi  Suprema  Lex,   That  ♦  there  is  not   any  thin;;  in    the 
 
 *  World  more  abus'd.  ■■        For  we  apply  it,  as  if  we  ought 
 
 *  to  forfake   the  known  Law,  when  it  may  be  moft  for  the 
 
 *  Advantage  of  the  People,    when  it  means  no  fuch    thing. 
 
 *  For,  it  is  not  Salus  Populi  Suprema  Lex  ej},  bat  ejlo  ; 
 
 *  it  being  one  of  the  Laws  of  the  Twelve  Tables:  And, 
 <  after  divers  Laws   made,  fome  for  Punifliment,  fome   for 
 
 *  Reward,  then  follows  this,  that  is.  In  ali  the  Laws  yoi; 
 
 *  make,  have  a  fpecial  Eye  to  the  Good  of  the  People  '  ( Ta- 
 ble-Talk,  p.  40.)  And  that  moll  famous  Cafuift,  Biftiop  5^;?- 
 derfoji,  fays,  ♦  There    is   no  fober  Man  will   deny,  that  the 
 
 *  Safety  of  the  People,   that  is,    of  the  whole  Commonalty, 
 
 *  as  that  Word  comprehends  the  King,  together  with  the 
 
 *  Subjefts,  ii  the  Supreme  La-vo :  But,  that  the  Safety  of  the 
 
 *  People,  that  is,  of  the  Subjefts,  the  King  being  excluded, 
 
 *  is  the  Supreme  Law,  there  is  no  Man  will  affirm  it,  unleis 
 
 *  he  be  «  Fool,  or  an  Impojlor  ;  a  Fool,  if  he  doth  believe 
 '  v.'hat  he  himfelf  faith,  and  an  Impofor,  if  he  doth  not  be- 
 
 *  lieve  it.     But,  if  any  Man   will  ferioully    look   into  the 
 
 *  Original  of  this  Aphorifm,  I  do  believe  he  will  more  eai 
 
 *  fily  grant,  that  it  ought  more  precifely  to  be  underltood  of 
 
 *  the  Safety  of  the  Prince,  than  of  the  Safety   of  the  Suh- 
 
 *  jeds.     This  Saying came  to  us  from  the  Romans ; 
 
 *  and  was  then  ufed  by  them,  when  their  Republic  did  flou- 
 
 *  rifh  moll  of  all  under  a  popular  State  :  And  there  is  no  — 
 '   Wonder,  that  the  People's  Safety  was  the  Supreme   Law 
 
 *  with  them,  with  whom  the  People  themfelves  were  the 
 
 *  Supreme  Power.     In  the  Judgment  therefore  of  thofe  wife 
 
 *  Ancients,  who  were  the  firft  Authors  of  this   Aphorifm, 
 
 *  the  Safety  of  the  Supreme  Pon/jer  was  the  Supreme  LaiAJ  ;  of 
 
 *  the  People  indeed  in  a  Democracy,  but  of  a  King  in 
 «  Monarchy.'  (Cafes  of  Confcience  £;jj/.  1660  Left,  ix. 
 §16.) 
 
[  i'3  ] 
 
 *  requires  a  Change,  for  the  Safety  and  Wel- 
 
 *  fare  of  the  People,  then  fuch  Change  may 
 
 *  lawfully  be  made,  and  fhall  alter  the  Laws 
 
 *  before   (landing :  And  the  Law  fo  made, 
 
 *  and  alter'd  upon  that  Fundamental   Prin- 
 
 *  ciple  of  Society  and  Government,  fliall  be 
 
 *  the  {landing  Law,  and  lliall  afcertain  the 
 
 *  Right  to  the  Crown,   as  well  as  the  Right 
 
 *  of  the  Subjed:  to  an  [a)  Eftate/  Now, 
 Sir,  all  this  is  aflerted  with  fuch  a  Dogmati- 
 cal Air,  as  might  pafs  upon  the  unwary  Rea- 
 der for  undoubted  Law  and  Reafon,  were  he 
 not  informed,  that  whatever  Laws  are  made 
 or  alter'd,  are  to  receive  their  whole  Force 
 and  Efficacy  from  the  Sovereign ;  without 
 whofe  Fia(  all  the  Refolutions  of  his  Coun- 
 cil, as  well  in  Parliament  as  elfewhere,  are  but 
 a  dead  Letter.  Can  it  therefore  rationally 
 be  argued,  that  fuch  Laws,  as,  by  the  graci- 
 ous Conceffions  of  Princes,  have,  from  Time 
 to  Time,  afcertain'd  the  Prerogative  Royal, 
 and  limitted  the  abfolute  Monarchical  Power 
 within  certain  Bounds,  for  the  Eafe  and  Be- 
 nefit of  dutiful  Subjects,  JJjdll  a/certain  the 
 Right  to  the  Crown  itfelf  alfo  ?  So  afcertain 
 it,  I  mean,  as  to  make  it  liable  to  a  Forfei- 
 ture, as  the  Eftates  of  Subjects  are  1  For  that 
 is  the  Point  in  Iflue.  But  this  Anti- 
 monarchical  Notion  lies  open  to  divers  Ob- 
 jedions  by  w^ay  of  Enquiry  j  '■oiz.  Who  are 
 
 I  the 
 
 [a]  Page  60. 
 
[  H4] 
 
 the  proper  Judges,  when  the  ftanding  Lawi 
 do  need  an  Alteratio?!  ?  Who  have  a  compe- 
 tent Authority  to  make  fuch  an  Aheration 
 when  'tis  thought  neceflary  ?  Whether  fuch 
 an  Aheration  can  be  vahdly  made,  without 
 the  free  Confent  and  Concurrence  of  the 
 Sovereign  Legiilator  ?  And  whether  fuch  an 
 Alteration,  being  made,  not  only  without  fuch 
 Concurrence,  but  even  to  the  utter  Excluiion 
 and  Difinherifon  of  the  Sovereign  himfelf,  and 
 his  Heirs,  who,  by  the  former  ftanding  Laws, 
 had  an  inherent  and  undoubted  Right  to  the 
 Crown^  can  be  of  Force  to  bind  the  Subjeds 
 in  Point  of  Confcience,  and  determine  their 
 Obedience y    particularly   as  to  the   Cafe  of 
 
 Oaths  and  Prayers?  But    thefe,    and 
 
 many  more  of  the  like  Sort,  muft  be  left  to 
 the  Reader's  further  Enquiry  ;  my  Bufinefs 
 here  not  being  to  make  a  profefs'd  Ledure 
 of  Politics,  but  only  to  conlider  fuch  parti- 
 cular Points  as  your  Vindication  neceflarily 
 leads  me  to. 
 
 You  allow  the  King  to  be  *  the  Fountain 
 '  of  Authority  and  Honour,  but  not  of  [b) 
 *  Property.'  Whether  you  are  miftaken  in 
 Point  of  La'io^  as  to  the  Fountain  of  Pro^ 
 pert}\  I  (liall  not  here  difputej  becaufe  your 
 Conceirion,  that  the  King  is  the  Fountain  of 
 Authority  and  Honour^  is  enough  for  my  pre- 
 fent  Purpofe.     Only  your  Affertion,  '  That 
 
 *  it 
 
 {h)  Page  60. 
 
[  115] 
 
 *  it  is  the  King  in  PofTeffion,   who  is  thus 
 
 *  confider'd  as   the  Fountain  of  Authority 
 
 *  and  Honour,  ^c.  and  not  any  other  Perfon, 
 
 *  whatever  his  Right  might  otherwife  (c)  be/ 
 is  certainly  without  Warrant,  either  in  Law 
 or  Reafon.  For,  what  tho'  the  King  in  Pof- 
 feffion  does  appoint  his  own  Judges  and  Ma- 
 giflrates^  confer  Honours^  has  all  JVrits,  Bonds, 
 and  Deeds  run  in  his  Name,    and  his  Image 
 
 ftampt  upon  the  current  [d)  Coin  ?  All  thele 
 indeed  are  Proofs  of  his  Power,  but  not  of 
 his  Authority;  of  his  PolTeffion  only,  but  not 
 of  his  Right  to  it:  Elfe  why  have  we  fo 
 many  Proofs  on  Record,  of  Honours  confer- 
 red  J  Judgments  pronounc'd,  and  Grants  paf- 
 fed,  &c.  by  Kings  ^^  FaBo,  in  Fojfejjion  of  ail 
 this  Power,  which  neverthelefs  were  fo  far 
 from  being  good  in  Law,  that  they  had  no 
 manner  of  Authority,  but  what  the  Kings 
 de  Jure  have  afterwards  been  pleas'd  to  allow 
 {e)  them  ?  And  therefore,  if  the  Subject  had 
 I  2  not 
 
 (<:)  Page  61.  {d)  Ibid.  [e]  After  the  Acceffion  of 
 King  Ed-vsard  IV.  to  his  undoubted  Right,  he  paffed  an 
 Aft  in  Parliament,  on  purpofe  to  enaft  certain  judicial  A£l!t 
 Honours,  and  other  Grants,  in  the  Times  o^  Henry  IV.  Henrj 
 V.  and  Henry  V  I. «  late  Kings  of  England  fuccefllvely  in 
 *  Deed,  and  not  of  Right,'  to  continue  in  Force,  as  if  done 
 hy,  or  in  the  Time  of,  any  King  la-zufully  reigning,  and  obtaining 
 the  Crtywnbyjuji  Title:  Wherein  thofe  Reigns  are  exprefsly 
 declar'd  to  have  been  but  pre tenfed  Reigns,  and  the  PoiTeflbr* 
 themfelves  but  pretenfcd  Kings,  and  Ufurpers  ;  and  by  necef- 
 fary  Confequence,  ail  their  Afts,  as  fuch,  in  their  own  Na- 
 ture, mere  Nullities.  (Statute  I  EdvuardlV.  c.  I.)  After 
 the  AcceiTion  of  Queen  Mary,  all  the  Letters  Patents,  and 
 
 other 
 
[  "6] 
 
 not  been  of  (o  ferious  a  Nature,  I  (hould  be 
 apt  to  fmile  at  your  Exclamation,  *  What  a 
 
 *  Contradidtion  and  Abfurdity  it  is,  to  deny 
 '  that  Authority,   which,   at  the  very  £\me 
 
 *  Time,  they  actually  do  and  mufl  acknow- 
 '  ledge !  Or  to  refufe  to  pray  for  that  King, 
 '  whom  both  the  Law  and  themfelves,   by 
 
 *  their  own  Adl  and  Deed,  daily  acknow- 
 '  ledge  only  to  be  (/)  King  !  '  How  far  the 
 Law  acknowledgeth  the  King  in  PofTeffion, 
 is  confider'd  elfewhere :  But  how  thofe  whom 
 you  thus  take  all  Occafions  to  refled:  upon, 
 can  properly  be  faid  to  acknowledge  the  Au- 
 thority of  any  Perfon  in  PolTeffion,  only  by 
 fuch  Ads  as  you  have  here  enumerated,  of 
 palling  Money  for  their  necefTary  Subfiftence, 
 which  happens  to  have  his  Image  Jiampt 
 upon  it,  &c.  is  not  within  the  Compafs  of 
 Common  Senfe  to  underftand.  For,  at  this 
 rate,  all  the  moft  fteady  Royalifts  mufl  have 
 
 acknow- 
 
 other  Grants,  i^c.  pafs'd  by  the  Lady  Jane  Grey,  late  Ufur- 
 per  in  PoiTeffion,  are  declar'd  to  have  been,  and  to  remain  ut- 
 terly ^o'ld^  and  of  none  Effeii.  (Statute  i  Mar.  Sefs.  ii.  c. 
 4.)  And,  after  the  happy  Reiteration  of  King  Charles  II. 
 the  ordinary  judicial  Proceedings  under  the  then  late  Ufur- 
 pers,  were  made  valid,  as  in  the  before  mention'd  Inftances. 
 In  which  Aft  of  Confirmation  it  is  declar'd, ' '  That  altho' 
 *•  it  was  neceiTary  to  mention  divers  pretenfed  Afts  and  Ordi- 
 <  nances,  by  the  Names  and  Stiles  which  thofe  Perfons  then 
 «  ufurped,  who  took  upon  them  to  pafs  the  lame ;  ■  the 
 
 *  Names  and  Stiles  aforefaid,  and  every  of  them,   are  moll 
 
 *  rebellious,  wicked,  traiterous,  and  abominable  Ufurpations, 
 
 *  detefted  -  as  oppofite  —  to  his  facrcd  Majelly's  moft  jufl  and 
 «  undoubted  Right,  feV.'     (Statute  1 2    Car.  ii  c.  1 2.) 
 
 (/)  Page  61,  62. 
 
[  "7] 
 
 achio'wledg' d  the  Authority  of  Cromwell,  or 
 the  iipftart  Common-V/ealth,  fo  often  as 
 they  leceiv'd  or  paid  their  Breeches-Mojiey ; 
 which  was  the  current  Coin,  not  only  while 
 thofe  notorious  Ufurpers  actually  had  the 
 PofTeffion  of  the  whole  Government,  and 
 impudently  call'd  themfelves  [g)  the  Supreme 
 Powers,  but  pafled  in  Payments,  even  for 
 foms  Time  after  our  Rightful  Sovereign's 
 Reftoration !  And  furely,  this  was  not  a 
 proof,  or  any  Acknowledgment  of  their 
 Authority  at  that  Time ! 
 
 What  you  fay  of  a  Conqueft  of  the  King- 
 dom by  a  Foreign  Invader,  and  the  Right 
 thereby  accruing  to  {IS)  him,  is  not  to  be  al- 
 lowed without  a  Diftindlion.  For,  in  order 
 to  this,  there  muft  be,  i.  A  juft  Caufe  for 
 carrying  on  the  War  to  a  Conqueft  :  And, 
 2.  The  Submiffion  of  the  King  himfelf,  as 
 well  as  his  People :  In  defedl  of  which  latter, 
 the  Conqueror  can  never  be  properly  faid  to 
 
 *  fettle  himfelf  in  the  peaceable  Pofjef/ion  (i)  of 
 
 *  the  Crown;'  and  in  defe6t  of  the  former, 
 whatever  Succefs  he  may  have,  he  cannot  bfe, 
 as  you  fay,  '  in  the  Eye  of  the  Law,  as  much 
 
 *  King  as  any  other  Perfon  can  [k)  be  \  but 
 only  an  unjuft  Invader  and  violent  Ufurper 
 of  another's  Right,  which,  by  the  Laws  of 
 God  and  Man  both,  he  is  bound  to  reflore 
 
 I  3  him. 
 
 (g)  See  the  Jppendix,  No.  iv. 
 (fc>)  Page  62,  (:)  Ibid,  {k)  Ibid, 
 
[  ii8] 
 
 him.  And  this,  by  the  way,  may  futfice  to 
 reconcile  that  which  you  infinuate  to  be  a 
 Self-contradldion  in  vour  Remarker :  who, 
 it  feems,  *  makes  a  Jeft  of  being  determin'd 
 
 *  by  the  Event  or  (/)  Succefs,'  as  he  very 
 well  may,  in  general ;  and  yet  allows  it,  in 
 the  particular  Cafe  of  the  Romans  conquer- 
 ing [m)  Judea.  But,  if  you  mean  the  Right 
 by  Conqueft  to  be  any  way  applicable  to  the 
 Cafe  in  Hand,  you  may  be  pleas'd  to  remem- 
 ber the  Anfwer  formerly  given  to  Bifhop 
 Burnett  Paftoral  Letter !  And,  as  to  your 
 Refledion,  that  '  becaufe  a  King  has  loft  his 
 
 *  Crown, the  Subjeds  are  not  oblig'd  to 
 
 '  lofe  their  Senfes,  or,  which  is  all  one,  to  a6t 
 '  as  if  they  had  loft  (n)  them  ;'  I  agree  with 
 you  J  admitting  only,  that  in  the  fame  Cafe, 
 they  ought  not  to  lofe  their  Confciences,  or, 
 which  is  all  one,  to  aEi  as  if  they  had  none ! 
 
 As  to  the  Diftindion,   where  you  tell  us, 
 
 *  There  is  a  Difference  between  an  abfolute 
 
 *  unlimited  Monarchy,   where  the  Will  of 
 
 *  the  Prince  is  the  only   Rule  of  Govern- 
 
 *  ment,  and  a  limited  or  mixed  Monarchy, 
 '  fuch  as  that  of  Great  Britain  is,  where  the 
 '  People  have  a  Power  and  a  Share  in   the 
 
 *  Government ;    a    Power    in    making   of 
 
 *  Laws,  that  is,  a  Share  in  the  Supreme  (o) 
 
 *  Power;*  I  muft  take  the  Liberty  to  fay, 
 this  is  new  Logic,  that  where  the  King  is  ac- 
 
 know- 
 
 (/)   Pags  28.     (z«)  Page  71.     {«)  Page  62.     f»)  Page  63. 
 
[119] 
 
 knowledgcd  to  be  the  only  Supreme  (/>)  Go- 
 "uerfior^  there  the  People  have  a  Share  in  the 
 Supreme  Power  I  And  'tis  fomewhat  ftrange, 
 that  you,  Sir,  fliould  need  me  to  put  you  in 
 Mind  of  a  Thing  fo  exprefsly  taught,  in  the 
 very  Articles  and  Canons  of  that  Church,  of 
 which  you  have  fo  many  Years  been  a  Prieft, 
 and  in  which,  I  fuppofe,  you  receiv'd  that 
 Floly  Order  !  But,  not  to  infift  on  the  grofs 
 Abfurdlty  of  this,  or  that  other  arrant  Bull 
 (as  Bifhop  Saimderfon  [q)  calls  it)  of  a  mixed 
 Monarchy ;  your  talking  of  the  People  hav- 
 ing a  Power  in  making  of  Laws,  and  a  Share 
 in  the  Government,  or  Supreme  Power,  is 
 fomewhat  after  the  Do(5trine  of  Forty  One^ 
 when  the  Fa<5tion  pretended  to  a  Co-ordinate 
 Authority  with  the  King,  and  would  have 
 made  his  Majefty  no  more  than  one  of  the 
 I  4  Three 
 
 {/)  See  the  Notes  on  p.  7,  {q)  '  As  for  the  Sove- 
 
 *  reignty,  be  it  as  it  will  be  with  other  States  and  Common- 
 
 *  Wealths,    in  regard  of  their  Conftitution  ;  to  Us  of  this 
 
 *  Nation  it  is  fo  evident  where  it  refideth,  that  we  need  not 
 
 *  to  have  recourfe  to  Statefmen  or  Lawyers  for  Information 
 
 *  in  that  Point.     The  known  Laws  of  the  Land  have  de- 
 
 *  clar'd  it  To  fully,  and  particularly   the  Oath  of  Supremacy 
 
 *  exprefled  it  fo  clearly,  that  any   Man  of  ordinary  Capa- 
 
 *  city  may  underftand  it  as  well  as  the  deepeft  Statefman  in 
 
 *  Che  World.     That  which  fome  talk  of,   a  mixt  Monarchy, 
 
 *  (which,  by  the  way,  is  an  arrant  Bull,  a  Contradi£lion  in 
 
 *  AdjeSio,  and  deftroyeth  itfelf )  and  others  dream  of,  fuch  a 
 '  Co-ordination  in  the  Government  as  was  hatch'd  amidil  the 
 
 *  Heat  of  the  late  Troubles,  but  never  before  heard  of  in 
 '  our  Land,  are  in  very  Truth  no  better  than  fenfelefs  and 
 '  ridiculous  Fancies,  {ffr.'  (Biftiop  Saunderfon%  Preface  to 
 Arch-biihop  Ujher'i  Power  of  the  Prince,  isSc.  id.  Edition 
 I'j-ko.  in  ivo.  §xiv.) 
 
[    120    ] 
 
 Three  Eflates!  Whereas  nothing  is  more 
 certain  in  the  BritiJJj  Conftitution,  than  that 
 there  are  Three  Eflates  {viz.  Lords  Spiritual, 
 Lords  Temporal,  and  Commons)  all  Subjects 
 to  the  King,  and  equally  fubordinate  to  his 
 fole  Supreme'  Authority.  But,  you  fay, 
 '  Thefe  Laws  {hall  bind  the  King,  as  well  as 
 
 *  the  Subject,  and  (hall  determine  the  Right 
 
 *  to  the  Crown,  as  well  as  the  Subjedls  Right 
 
 *  to  an  (r)  Eilate.'  As  how,  I  pray  you.  Sir  ? 
 Shall  they  bind  him  without  his  own  Con- 
 fent  ?  And  that  too,  under  the  Penalty  of 
 forfeiting  his  Right  to  the  Crown?  None  but 
 a  rank  Republican  will  fay  this !  And  no- 
 thing lefs  than  this  will  come  up  to  your  Pur- 
 pofe.  Or,  fuppofing  the  King  to  be  fo  bound. 
 To  whom  can  he  forfeit  his  Right?  The 
 very  Nature  of  the  Thing  fuppofes  it  to  ac- 
 crue to  fome  Superior :  But  the  King  has  no 
 Superior  j  he  being  the  only  Supreme  himfelf, 
 and  the  People  of  all  Degrees  his  Subjedts; 
 and  therefore  he  cannot  forfeit  it  to  them. 
 But  then  you  fay,  *  In  fuch  a  Government 
 .*  the  People  may  fometimes  do,  for  their 
 '  own  Safety  and  the  Public  Good,   what 
 
 *  there  may  be  no  Law  for,  but  yet  what 
 
 *  Neceffity  will  juftify,  and  the  Public  Good 
 
 *  require,    and   therefore  make  lawful;  for 
 
 *  Neceffity,  in  fuch  a  Cafe,  has  no  Law  but 
 
 *  this  one,  Salus  Populi  Suprema  Lex  (i)  efto.^ 
 
 But, 
 
 {r)  Page  63.  (s)  Ibid. 
 
[     I2>    ] 
 
 But,  fuppofing  they  take  upon  them  to  do 
 not  only  ivhat  there  may  be  no  Law  for,  but 
 what  is  exprefsly  contrary  to  Law,  what 
 NeceJJity  will  jujlify  this,  and  make  it  lawful?' 
 
 Or  who  is  to  judge  of  that  NeceJJity?  • • 
 
 But,  for  a  better  Confutation  of  this  your 
 Maxim,  or  rather  of  the  miftaken  Applica- 
 tion of  it,  1  refer  you  to  the  Notes  (/)  here 
 below. 
 
 Speaking  of  the  Rights  and  Titles  ofKi^igs, 
 you  own,  '  that  Time  alters  not  the  Nature 
 
 *  of  Things,  the  Nature  of  right  and  wrong, 
 '  juft  and  [u)  uniuftj'  which  I  fhall  not 
 make  any  other  Remark  upon  at  prefent, 
 than  this,  That  therefore  Pofleffion  alone 
 cannot  be  a  good  Title  againft  Right ;  nor 
 can  T^ime  alter  the  Nature  of  Ufurpation,  any 
 more  than  that  of  other  Wrongs. 
 
 YourRemarker  hadobferv'd.  That,  accord- 
 ing to  your  Dodtrine, '  we  muft  always,  in 
 
 *  a  Difpute  about  the  Crown,  pray  for  the 
 
 *  fortunate  Competitor,  and  againft  the  un- 
 '  fortunate  one,  tho'  injur'd  :  We  are  to  pray 
 '  for  the  a6lual  Governor,  whether  juftly  fo 
 
 *  or  not,  that  he  may  get  the  ViSiory  over  all 
 
 *  his  (:c)  Enemies  1 '  To  which  you  fay,  '  In 
 
 (/)  *Tis  well  obferv'd,  by  the  Lord  Chancellor  Clarendon, 
 That,  in  Difputes  where  NeceJJtty  is  pretended,  '  the  true 
 *  Logic  is,  that  the  Thing  defir'd  is  not  necejpxry,  if  the 
 «  Ways  are  unlawful  which  arepropos'd  to  bring  it  topafs.* 
 {Hiftoiy  of  the  Rebellion,  in  Si^o.  i  705.  vol.  i.  p.  Zll.)  See 
 alfo  the  Notes  on  p.  11 2. 
 
 (a)  Page  63.  {x)  Page  64. 
 
'  [    122    j 
 
 *  a  Dlfputc   ab6ut  the  Crown,  that  Is,  pen- 
 
 *  dente  Lite^  while  the  Difpute  continues,  and 
 
 *  the  Competitors  are  making  good  their 
 ^  Claims  by  Force  of  Arms,  perhaps  we 
 '  cannot  tell  whom  to  pray  for,  or  we  can- 
 '  not  do  what  we  would  ;  bccaufe  thefe  are 
 '  generally  Times  of  Confufion  and  Trou- 
 
 *  ble,  and   of  fore  Evils  upon  Men :  Or,  if 
 
 *  the  Cafe  be  clear,  and  we  at  Liberty,  we 
 '  may  then  pray  as  we  think  right.  But, 
 '  when  the  Difpute  is  once  ended,  and  one 
 '  of  the  Competitors  peaceably  fettled  in  the 
 '  Throne,   we  muft  then  pray,   as  we  muft 
 
 '  obey  J  for  the  Perfon  who  governs 
 
 '  [y)  us.'  Upon  which  you  muft  give  me 
 leave  to  obferve,  i.  That,  in  fuch  an  Here- 
 ditary Kingdom  as  is  here  fuppos'd,  the  Cafe 
 can  hardly  be  ever  fo  perplexed  with  Doubts, 
 but  that  we  may  clearly  enough  diftinguifli, 
 which  of  the  Competitors  is  next  of  Kin ;  and 
 as  fuch  may  eafily  tell  ivhofu  to  pray  for ,  if 
 we  are  truly  guided  by  the  proper  Coniidera- 
 tion  of  his  Right  and  our  Duty,  and  prefer 
 the  Concerns  of  a  good  Confcience  before 
 thofe  of  our  Skin.  But,  2.  If  we  are  influ- 
 enc'd  by  worldly  Motives,  and  confider  not 
 fo  much  what  we  ought  to  do,  as  what  we 
 may  do  with  Safety  to  our  Perfons,  and  with- 
 out incurring  the  Danger  of  thofe  ^'roubles 
 and  fore  Evils  which  you  (peak  of,  then  in- 
 deed 
 
 [y]  Page  64  &  6^. 
 
[    123    ] 
 
 deed  perhaps  ive  ca?inot  do  what  ive  would,  led 
 we  fhould  fuffer  in  our  Perfons  or  Fortunes 
 for  doing  our  Duty :  But  no  Conlideration 
 whatfoever  can  warrant  or  excufe  us  in  the 
 omitting  what  we  ought  to  do,  or  the  doing 
 what  we  ought  not  to  do.  And,  3.  'Tis  cer- 
 tain, IVe  may  pray  as  we  think  rights  even  in 
 T'imes  of  Confufion  aiid  'trouble:  For,  tho* 
 perhaps  ive  cannot  do  this  fo  publickly  as  we 
 wouldy  yet  we  may  acceptably  perform  the 
 Duty  injoin'd  in  your  Text,  by  doing  it  in 
 the  beft  manner  our  Circumftances  will  ad- 
 mit of. But  'tis  fomewhat  extraordi- 
 nary  that  you  fay,  '  We  pray  againfi  no 
 
 *  Man:  We  pray  yor  all  Men,    not agaifijl 
 
 *  any  Man  ;  not  agaifiji  our  greateft  [z)  Ene- 
 
 *  my.'  Now,  one  would  think,  that  pray- 
 ing that  Men  may  be  'uanqidjh'd  and  over- 
 come^  and  cut  off,  &c.  is  a  praying  {a)  againft 
 
 them.  But  perhaps  you  will  not  allow, 
 
 that  vfQpray  againft  our  Enemies,  unlefs  we 
 doom  them  to  Eternal  Damnation !  Even  as 
 you  elfewhere  argue,  *  Tho'  we  fhould  pray 
 '  for  Ufurpers, yet  do  we  not  pray  to 
 
 *  God  to  blefs  them  in  their  [b)  Crimes,  &c^ 
 At  this  rate,  not  only  the  Remarker,  but  al- 
 moft  every  body  elfe,   muft  be  faid  flill  to 
 
 *  miftake  the  Nature  and  End  of  the  Pray- 
 
 *  ers  for  our  (r)  Governors.*     For,  if  (as  Dr. 
 
 Com- 
 
 (%)  Page  6  J.  (<?)  See  the  Notes  on  p.  40. 
 
 {b)  Page  133.  {c)  Page  65. 
 
[   124  ] 
 
 Comher  obferves)  even  in  that  (hort  Verficle, 
 O  hord^  fave  the  Ki?2g, '  we  do  in  one  Word 
 
 *  wifh  the  King  Profperity  and  Peace,  long 
 
 *  Life  and  Health,  Victory  and  Everlafting 
 '  (d)  Felicity:'  And  if  this,  and  the  many 
 other  Bleffings  more  exprefsly  pray'd  for  in 
 the  behalf  of  our  King,  are  to  be  conftrued 
 a  blejjing  him,  and  praying  again  ft  all  his 
 Ene?nieSj  as  'tis  plain  to  common  Senfe  they 
 are  j  then  furely,  the  praying  for  an  Ufurper, 
 in  the  very  fame  Form  of  Words,  muft  be 
 a  bkjjing  him,  and  praying  againji  his  E/iemies, 
 or  the  Enemies  of  his  Ufurpation ;  among. 
 whom  the  Rightful  Pretender,  and  his  Adhe- 
 rents, muft  in  all  reafon  be  look'd  upon  as 
 Principals  :  And,  if  Ufurpation  be  a  Crime 
 (as  till  now  it  has  been  thought)  then,  thus 
 to  pray  for  Ufarpers,  muft,  in  the  very  Na- 
 ture and  End  of  fuch  Prayers,  be  a  praying 
 to  God  to  blefs  them  in  their  Crimes ;  and  that 
 muft  be  confefs'd  to  be  an  Abomination  (e) 
 to  him  I  Yet  neverthelefs,  you  would  have 
 this  Prayer,  That  God  would  give  the  King 
 the  ViBory  over  all  his  Enemies^  to  be  meant 
 only  of  *  thofe  who  are  unjuftly   his   Ene- 
 
 *  mies,  or  the  Enemies  of  the  Government: 
 
 *  For  i^ycu  fay)  if  a  Man  has  juft  Reafon  to 
 
 *  be  his  Enemy,  then  it  is  the  King  who  is 
 
 *  an  Enemy  to  that  Man,  and  not  that  Man 
 
 *  to  the  (/)  King.'     But,    not  to  infift  on 
 
 the 
 
 \d)  Companion  to  the  Temple,  Part  i.  Paitit.  ii.  Seft.  ii.  n.  5. 
 \€)  See  the  Notes  on  p.  34.  (/')  Page  66, 
 
[  i2S] 
 
 the  Singularity  of  this  Conftru6tion,  or  its 
 Inconfiftency  with  the  Words,  j4ll  Ms  Ene- 
 mies ;  thole  who  are  diflatisfy'd  with  the  Ufe 
 of  thefe  Prayers,  will  from  hence  gain  an  Ad- 
 vantage over  you,  which  you  perhaps  are  not 
 aware  of:  For  they  will  conclude,  upon 
 their  Principles,  that  they  cannot  in  Confci- 
 ence  join  in  fuch  Prayers  for  the  Ad:ual  Go- 
 vernor, nor  be  prefent  at  fuch  an  Office,  as, 
 in  common  Senfe  and  the  Nature  of  the 
 Thing,  is  generally  underftood  to  pray  for 
 ViBory  over  him  whom  they  believe  to  have 
 jiiji  Reafon  to  be  his  Enemy. 
 
 You  are  pleas'd  to  fay,  The  Objedlions 
 made  by  the  Remarker  '  may,  with  as  much 
 
 *  Reafon  and  Juftice,  be  made   againft  the 
 
 *  fame  Prayers  put  up  for  one  whom  he  him- 
 
 *  felf  fhall  acknowledge  to  be  a  Rightful  and 
 
 *  Lawful  King  ;  except  he  will  fay,  that  no 
 
 *  Rightful   and   Lawful   King   ever   did   a 
 
 *  wicked  or  unjuft  [g)  Thing,  ^c'  But 
 here  you  fecm  to  have  forgot,  that  the  Quef- 
 tion  in  Controverfy,  is  not  whether  the  Per- 
 fon  to  be  pray'd  for,  as  King,  be  a  wicked 
 King ;  but  whether  he  is  indeed  our  King, 
 or  Nobis  Rex,  (h)  as  the  learned  Biihop  ^/j- 
 drews  well  expreffeth  it. 
 
 And  nosv  I  come  to  the  Cafe  of  Payifig 
 Tribute  to  Ccefar ;  which  you  here  under- 
 take to  (hew,  '  to  be  a  dire&^  clea)\  and  full 
 
 *  ProrJ 
 
 (f)  Page  67.    ,     ("')  See  the  Notes  on  p.  26. 
 
[    126    ] 
 
 '  Proof  of  \\\t  Doclrine-y^  and  which,  you 
 fay,    *  having  been   always   judged   to  bear 
 
 *  hard  upon  the  Opinions  of  the  Remarker 
 
 *  and   his  Party,   he  feems  to  have  taken  a 
 
 *  great  deal  of  Pains  to  get  quite  clear  of  (/) 
 
 *  it/  But  I  think,  Sir,  it  neither  is  fuch  a 
 Pf-oof  nor  needs  much  Pains  to  get  clear  of 
 it.  For,  until  you  have  anfwer'd  your  Remar- 
 ker's  fair  Que  (lion,  *  Who  was  Cafars  Com- 
 
 *  petitor  ?  Or  who  elfe  claim'd  that  Tribute 
 
 *  but  {k)  CcefarV  Ccsfar  muft  be  fuppcs'd  to 
 have  had  an  undoubted  Right  -,  and  confe- 
 quently,  all  you  have  endeavour'd  to  build 
 upon  that  Cafe,  in  favour  of  your  a<ftual  or 
 de  Fa5to  Governors,  will  fall  to  the  Ground 
 for  want  of  a  Foundation.  You  fay  indeed, 
 '  What  was  Julius  Cafar,  and  Auguflus^ 
 '  but  Ufurpers,  in  the  very  fame  Cafe  with 
 
 *  Oliver  Cromwell,  ufurping  upon  the  Rights 
 '  and  Liberties  of  the  Common-Wealth,  as 
 
 *  Cromwell  did  upon  thofe  of  King  (/)  and 
 
 *  People ?  &c'  But  furely,  you  have  forgot 
 your  own  Conceflion,  before  taken  notice  of, 
 that  the  Common- Wealth,  that  is,  the  Senate 
 and  People  of  Ro?ne,  did  recognize  the  Autho- 
 rity of  the  {in)  Caefars :  And  when  you  have 
 prov'd,  that  the  King  did  the  like  for  that  of 
 Oliver  Cromwell,  then  (but  not  till  then)  you 
 may  be  allow'd  to  talk  rationally,  like  your- 
 felf,   of  their  being  in  the  very  fame  Cafe, 
 
 As 
 
 (0  Page  69.         {k)  Ibid.        (I)  Page  70.         (#1)  Page  6. 
 
[  J27  ] 
 
 As  to  the  Right  of  Conqiiejl,  you  know  it  is 
 quite  out  of  our  prelent  Queftion ;  and 
 therefore  needs  no  farther  Examination.  Nor 
 can  the  Event  or  Succefs^  in  that  Cafe  of  the 
 CcefarSj  upon  which  you  arc  pleas'd  to  tri- 
 umph over  your  Remarker,  as  if  you  had 
 him  faft  bound  in  a  {n)  Self-contradidtion, 
 be  in  the  leaft  applicable  to  the  prefent  Con- 
 troverfy,  either  on  account  of  the  Co?2queft  or 
 Recognition  before-mention'd :  And  there- 
 fore, if  the  Remarker  is  fo  merrily  difpos'd, 
 I  don't  yet  fee,  why  he  may  not  ftiil '  make 
 
 *  a  jeft  of  being  determin'd  by  the  Event  or 
 '  {p)  Suecefs,'  as  to  the  Cafe  here  in  difpute 
 between  you,  after  ail  that  you  have  faid  to 
 the  contrary.  You  feem  to  think  you  have 
 him  faft,  when  you  expoftulate  thus ;  '  If  it 
 
 *  was  neither  fliameful  nor  unlawful  for  the 
 '   "Jew^  to  fubmit  to  their  Conquerors,   why 
 
 *  fhould    it    be    (liameful   or   unlawful    for 
 
 *  others  to  fubmit  to  their  Governors,   who 
 
 *  have  a  much  better  Title  than  that  of  Con- 
 '  queft;  viz,  the  onl^  Rightful  Title  which 
 '  the  Law  (/>)  allows?'  Why  truly,  Sir^ 
 where  that  is  indeed  the  Cafe,  it  can  be 
 neither  Jhamejul  nor  unlawful^  but  muft  ra- 
 ther be  their  bounden  Duty,  to  fubmit :  But 
 then,  I  prefume,  the  much  better  Title  which 
 you  fpeak  of,  and  the  only  Rightful  Title  which 
 the  Laiif  allows^  cannot  be  that  of  mere  Pof- 
 
 (n)  Page  38  8i  71.        ■{,)  P25f  28.         [p]  Page  71. 
 
[  «28  ] 
 
 fejjion^  or  aSiual  Government  only,  for  which 
 you  are  fo  ftrenuous  an  Advocate  !  Bciides, 
 your  Remarker  has  wifely  guarded  his  Con- 
 ceflion,  with  this  faving  Claufe,  *  While  they 
 
 *  furrendcr  only  their  own  Right,    and   not 
 
 *  that  of  another,   who  has  a  juft  Right  (or 
 
 *  Title)  to  their  (^)  Allegiance.'  But  all  the 
 notice  you  take  of  that  here,  is  to  evade  the 
 Point,   by  obferving,  that  '  in  the  Conquefl 
 
 *  of  a  Nation,  the  People  neither  furrender 
 
 *  their  own  Right,  nor  that  of  another  j  all 
 
 *  is  taken  by  (r)  Force,  ^cl  Which  is  very 
 true :  And  yet,  when  there  is  not  a  Conqueft, 
 the  People  may  poffibly  take  upon  them  to 
 
 fun'ender  the  Right  of  Another^  without  his 
 own  Confent,  and  endeavour  to  bind  him,  by 
 their  arbitrary  and  partial  Ad: ;  which  will 
 be  a  Cafe  too  hard  for  you  to  juftify. 
 
 Your  AlTertion,  *  That  Allegiance  is  not 
 
 *  perfonal,  but  [s)  political,'  is  contrary  to 
 the  adjudg'd  (t)  Cafes  in  our  Law-books: 
 But  the  Inftance,  by  which  you  would  iiluf- 
 trate  it,  is  contrary  both  to  Law  and  Reafon. 
 You  fay,  *  A  Woman  is  bound  by  the  Law 
 
 *  to  her  Hulband  fo  long  as  he  liveth  ;  but 
 
 *  when  he  is  dead,  fhe  is  loofed  from  the  Law 
 
 *  of  her  Hufband :  So  here,  the  firft  Huf- 
 '  band  is  dead,  and  the  Kingdom  marry'd  to 
 
 *  {ii)  another.'     For,  The  Queftion  here  is 
 
 not, 
 
 iq)  Page  71.  [r)  Ibid.  {s)  Page  72. 
 
 [t]  See  the  Appendix,  "^Q.  iii.  {u)  Page  72. 
 
[    129    ] 
 
 not,  what  (he  may  do,  when  the  fir fl  Huf- 
 band  is  dead-y  for,  in  an  Hereditary  King- 
 dom, as  is  here  fuppos'd,  the  Law  fays,  '  the 
 
 *  King  never  {a)  dies,'  becaufe,  his  next  Heir 
 does  in  the  fame  Moment  of  the  Demife, 
 commence  King,  without  the  leaft  Inter reg- 
 niim^  {J})  or  Vacancy  of  the  Throne.  Sup- 
 poling  then  a  Woman  not  only  to  renounce 
 her  former  Marriage,  but  to  enter  into  Matri- 
 monial A(Ss  and  Engagements  with  another, 
 during  her  Hulband's  Life-time,  can  you  ac- 
 quit her  of  the  Crime  of  Adultery  ?  If  not, 
 confider  how  little  Advantage  you  can  gain 
 by  this  Allufion. 
 
 You  will  not  allow,  that  Prayers  for  the 
 King  are  an  exprejs  and  formal  Recognition  of 
 the  Right  to  the  Crown j  but  only  (r)  of  the 
 PolTeflion  j  becaufe  *  an  exprefs  and  formal 
 '■  Recognition  of  Right  to  the  Crown  is  the 
 '  Matter  of  {d)  Oaths.'  What  you  fay  of 
 Oaths  is  true  ;  as  is  alfo  that  which  follows, 
 
 *  Whoever  is  our  King  and  Governor,  and 
 '  thereby  intitled  to  our  Allegiance  and  Obe- 
 '  dience,  is  alfo  intitled  to  our  Prayers  5  to 
 
 *  all  the  feveral  kinds  of  Prayers  enumerated 
 «  by  the  {e)  Apoftle.'  But  ftill  the  Queftion 
 is,  Whether  he  who  is  aBual  Governor,  with- 
 out any  other  Title  than  mere  Pofejfion,  is 
 juftly  intitled  either  to  the  one  or  the  other. 
 
 K  In 
 
 {a)  Page  25. 
 
 {b)  See  the  Notes  on  p.   53.  &  the  Jppen J/ x.  No      ii,  iii 
 
 (t)   Page  72.  l*')  P^ge  73.  (f)  Ibid. 
 
[  130 
 
 1 
 
 In  an  Hereditary  Kingdom,  fuch  as  is  here 
 luppos'd,  the  Lawyers  utterly  deny  that  mere 
 Poirellioii  gives  a  Right  to  Allegiance;  and  fo 
 do  the  Caluifts  deny  the  fame  as  to  Oatbs : 
 Why  therefore  (lioiild  not  the  Divines  be  as 
 fcrupuloLis  in  refped  of  Prayers,  as  either  of 
 the  other  in  Point  of  Oaths  or  Allegiance  ? 
 But,  to  come  clofer  to  the  Matter  in  Hand  ; 
 furely,  the  praying  for  one  by  Name,  as  our 
 SoverelgHy  and  God's  chojhi  Servant^  acknow- 
 ledging him  to  be  God's  MimJIe?\  and  to 
 have  his  Authority ,  &c\  (as  I  have  before  ob- 
 ferv'd)  may  properly  be  call'd  a  Recog7ntio7i 
 of  his  Right  to  the  Crown^  whether  you  will 
 agree  it  to  be  an  exprefs  and  formal  one  or 
 not :  And  confequently,  a  fincere  Chriflian 
 ought  well  to  confider,  before  he  prefumes 
 to  make  fuch  a  Recognition  in  his  AddrelTes 
 to  God  himfelf,  as  well  as  before  he  calls 
 God  to  witnefs  the  Truth  of  it  by  an  Oath. 
 And  if  we  are  not  bound  in  Duty,  to  put  up 
 all  the  feveral  kinds  of  Prayers  here  eniime^ 
 rated,  at  all  Adventures,  for  all  aSiual  Gover^ 
 nors,  without  regard  to  their  Titles,  right 
 or  wrong  (which  is  the  Sum  of  your  whole 
 Argument)  yea,  and  even  for  Ufurpers  too  in 
 Po&lTion,  much  lefs  can  we  be  bound  to 
 give  Thanks  to  God  for  them;  which  is  as 
 necefl^try  a  Part  of  the  Apoftle's  Injuncftion 
 as  Prayers  are. 
 
 Nor  is  the  Cafe  of  the  feivs  praying  for 
 
 the 
 
[131  ] 
 
 the  King  of  Babylon,  (/)  any  thing  more 
 to  your  Purpofe,  than  all  the  reft,  when  'tis 
 obferv'd  that  they  were  [g)  conwianded  fo  to 
 do,  as  you  confefsj  and  that  the  Commajid 
 was  from  God  himfelf,  who  exprefsly  de- 
 clar'd  to  them  his  Pleafure,  that  they  (hould 
 ferve  ISebiichadnezzar  (by  Name)  King  of 
 Babylon  (how  wicked  a  Tyrant  foever  he  was ! ) 
 and  lliould  jeek  the  Peace  of'  the  City,  to 
 which  he  can  fed  them  to  he  carrfd  away  Cap- 
 tives, and  to  pray  for  it  \  J  or,  in  the  Peace 
 t her eoj  {(diih.  thehovd)  fia/l ye  have  {h)  Peace, 
 But,  where  {hall  we  find  fiich  a  Revelation 
 of  God's  Will,  as  to  the  Cafe  in  Controver- 
 
 fy^ Xill  you  can  produce  it,  I  beg  leave 
 
 to  remind  you  of  jferemiah's  Meffage  to  Ha- 
 naniah,  ^hus  Jaith  the  Lord,  T^hou  haft  broken 
 the  Yokes  of  Wood,   but  thou  Jhall  make  for 
 
 them  Tokes  of  {i)  Iron !  And  whether 
 
 this  Denunciation  is  applicable  to  any  Cafe 
 in  our  Modern  Hiftory,  I  leave  to  your  fur- 
 ther Confideration. 
 
 As  to  all  that  relates  to  the  Jews  Scruples 
 againft  paying  Tribute  to  Ccef'ar,  whether 
 on  account  of  his  being  a  Foreigner,  or  an 
 Idolater,  I  fliall  not  interpofe  between  you 
 and  the  Remarker,  further  than  to  obferve, 
 I.  That  if  they  fcrupled  his  Right  to  it  on 
 account  of  his  Religion,  then  our  Saviour's 
 K  2  De- 
 
 (/)  Page  73.  ig)  Page  73  &  74. 
 
 (/>)   Jeremiah  xxvii.  St  xxix.  7. 
 (i)  Jerimiabxxvm.  13, 
 
[-  132  1 
 
 Determination  (as  you  conftrue  it)  will  (liew, 
 that  Difference  ia  Religion,  and  even  Idola- 
 try itielf,  does  not  morally  incapacitate  a 
 Prince  for  Allegiance,  and  the  other  neceflary 
 Duties  of  his  Subjects.  Or,  2.  If  their  Scru- 
 ple had  refpeft  to  his  being  a  Foreigner,  it 
 was  no  more  than  they  had  a  Warrant  for, 
 in  the  Law  of  God  and  Nature;  which  ne- 
 verthelsfs,  in  fome  particular  Cafes,  God  him- 
 felf  doth  authoritatively,  but  no-body  elfe 
 can  lawfully  difpenfe  with.  But,  3.  As  you 
 obferve,   '  That  the   Reafon  of  the  Jcwip 
 
 *  Scruples  not  being  exprefsly  fet  down  in 
 ^  the  Gofpels,  all.  that  can  he  fa  id  in  this 
 '  Cafe,  either  by  Ancients  or  Moderns,  can 
 
 *  amount  to  no  more  than  probable  [k)  Con- 
 
 *  ]cd:ure  : '  So  we  may  fay  of  our  Saviour's 
 Anfwer ;  the  Reafon  of  which  is  no  more 
 ex  pre  I sh  fit  down  than  the  other.  You  are 
 pleas'd   to  affirm,  *  That  the  Anfwer  given 
 
 *  by  our  Lord,  did  conclude  for  C^/jr's  R^ght 
 
 *  to  demand  the  Tribute,  and  their  Duty  to 
 '  pay  (/)  it/  Now,  ilippofing  this,  why 
 might  it  not  conclude  fo?  Since  Ccefars  Au- 
 thority was  confeffedly  recogniz'd  and  fub- 
 niitted  to,  by  the  only  Perfons  who  had  any 
 Pretence  to  a  better  Right,  as  he  was  now 
 their  Governor  without  any  Competitor. 
 But  to  argue,  as  you,  and  lome  others  do, 
 upon   Afcbciin^  Principles,  that   our  Lord's 
 
 Anfwer 
 
 {k)  Pege  80.  (/}  Page  89. 
 
[  133  ] 
 
 Anfwer  concluded  for  Ccefar^  Rig^^t,  becaufe 
 he  was  in  PoJJeJion  of  the  Sovereig?2  Power, 
 and  had  put  his  Image  upon  their  (m)  Coin,  is, 
 properly  fpeaking,  to  talk  without  Book! 
 For,  as  it  is  evident,  that  the  Queftion  w.js 
 propos'd  to  him  with  a  premeditated  Defign, 
 to  take  Advantage  againft  him  from  his  own 
 Words,  and  to  efijnare  hi?n  in  his  Anjhjcer-, 
 (ii)  fo  was  his  Anfv/er  guarded  with  Caution 
 to  avoid  the  Snare  3  and  amounted  to  no 
 more  than  a  Command  to  render^  or  re/lore, 
 to  every  one  what  is  his  proper  Right  and 
 Due  (in  like  manner,  as  St.  Paul  afterwards 
 commanded  the  Cbrijiians^  to  render  to  all 
 t-heir  Dues-,  T^ribute^  to  whom  Tribute  is  (0) 
 due,  &c,)  not  determining  what  was  particu- 
 larly due  to  CcBJdr,  and  much  lefs  declaring 
 that  it  was  his  Right,  or  any  body's  elfe,  upon 
 fuch  precarious  Principles  as  are  here  con- 
 tended for.  As  to  that  idle  Fable^  which 
 you  have  quoted  from  Dr.  Whitby,  to  prove 
 ic  a  receivd  Principle,  among  the  yews,  and 
 a  Maxim  in  their  Schools,  *  that  the  receive 
 
 *  ing  the  Coin  of  any  Perfon,  as  the  current 
 
 *  Coin  of  the  Kingdom,    was  not  only  an 
 
 *  Evidence   of   his  being  PofTelTor  of    the 
 
 *  Kingdom,  but  alfo  that  he  was  own'd  by 
 
 *  the  Inhabitants  as  their  Lord  and  (p)  Gc- 
 
 *  yernor ; '  it  proves  rather,    that  they  had 
 
 K  3  not 
 
 (_m)  P?.ge  90.  («)  Page  81  &  88. 
 
 [oj  Rcm^. fi s  xn'i.  7.  (/>)  Page  91,  gz. 
 
[  '34  1 
 
 not  common  Senfe,  either  when  they  put  the 
 Queflion  to  our  Saviour,  or  afterwards,  when 
 they  made  it  an  Article  of  his  Impeachment, 
 that  he  forbade  to  give  tribute  to  [q)  CceJ'ar. 
 And  tho'  you  are  pleas'd   to  affirm,   *  that 
 
 *  the  Adls  ot  Parliament  in  Englajjd,    long 
 
 *  before  the  Acceffion  of  the  Scottifi  Race 
 
 *  to  the  Crown  of  Great  Britaijj^  exprefsly 
 
 *  determine  in  favour  of  the  King,    who  is 
 
 *  in  full    and   peaceable  PofTeffion   of   the 
 
 *  Kingdom,  againft  all  Claims    and  Rights 
 
 *  (r)  whatfoever  ;'  every  one  who  is  compe- 
 tently acquainted  with  our  A6is  oj  Parlia- 
 ment^ muft  know,  that  they  exprefsly  deter- 
 mine the  [s)  contrary.  So  that  your  threefold 
 Cord  of  the  jewifh  Rabbi J2ical  Notion,  our 
 Saviours  Decifion,  and  the  Determination  of 
 our  ancient  A£ls  oj  Parliament ^  in  favour  of 
 Toffeffiony  feems  to  me,  Sir,  to  be  quite  un- 
 twiffed. 
 
 The  next  thing  remarkable  is,  your  In- 
 terpretation of  St.  PauFs  Text,   concerning 
 
 the  Powers  that  (t)  be. You  feem  to  be 
 
 offended  at  your  Remarker,  for  putting  you 
 in  mind  of  the  Cafe  of  Cromwell -j  who  was 
 undeniably  for  ibme  Time  the  Higher  Pow- 
 er^ according  to  your  Senfe  of  the  Phrafe, 
 tho'  you  confefs  *  he  overturn'd  (u)  the  whole 
 ^  Conftitution  to  arrive  at  it.*  But,  you  know, 
 
 Sir, 
 
 (yj  St.  Lukexxn'i.  2.  (>)  Page  92. 
 
 (A  See  the  Notes  on  p.  55.  and  the  jippendix.  No.  v. 
 
 {t)   Rcwaas  xVi'u  I.  {u)  Page   96. 
 
[  >3S] 
 
 Sir,  the  Word  Conjiitution  is  varioufly  defin'd, 
 according  to  the  Senfe  or  Intcreft  of  the 
 Powers  in  being.  For  thus,  'tis  plain,  Crom- 
 '■^ellj  and  the  reft  of  the  Ufarpers  of  thofe 
 Times,  tho'  they  had  acflually  overturn'd  the 
 true  and  ancient  Conftitution  of  this  Here- 
 ditary Monarchy,  as  nil  the  World  (x)  kr.cius\ 
 yet,  having  done  this  in  a  Cafe  of  the  laft 
 Neceility,  for  the  Prefervation  of  the  Protef- 
 tant  Religion,  and  the  Security  o^  their  Li- 
 berty and  Property  againft  the  Fears  and 
 Dangers  of  Popery  and  Arbitrary  Power 
 (as  they  demurely  pretended !)  did  not  only 
 plead  Prcjidefice^  to  juftify  what  they  had 
 done  (as  the  Remarker  truly  obferv'd)  but 
 alfo  infifted  upon  the  Benefits  to  the  Public, 
 and  particularly  that  ivhatever  Right  there 
 might  ha'-ce  been  in  other s,  on  account  of  Proxi' 
 mity  of  Bloody  they^  being  all  under  a  moral 
 Incapacity  of  go'verning  this  Nation,  'were 
 now,  by  the  prefent  Laws  and  Confiituticn,  ex- 
 eluded,  their  Right  extinguijVdj  and  fubfijling 
 no  longer  ;  Jo  that  there  could  be  no  Competitor ^ 
 710  other  Perfon  hailing  Right  but  the  Powers 
 then  in  Pcjefiicn  I  Thus,  or  to  this  efFed,  I 
 fay,  the  moll:  notorious  Ufurpers  have  been 
 wont  to  plead,  as  gravely  as  you  do :  And 
 yet,  all  the  World  knows  (and  now  we  need 
 not  fear  to  fay  it,  tho*  in  the  Time  of  their 
 Power  it  might  have  been  call'd  High-Trea- 
 K  4  ^       fon) 
 
 (x)  Page  96. 
 
[  '36  ] 
 
 foil)  that  all  the  Ufe  and  Application  which 
 they  made  of  thofc  Words,  Protefiant  Reli- 
 gion^  Providence^  Liberty  and  Property^  Pub- 
 lic Good^  Law,  Conjlitution,  and  fuch  like, 
 was  '  nothing  but  Cant,  a  common  Topic 
 (  r)  mifapply'd  j'  and  a  downright  Impofture, 
 to  dazzle  Peoples  Eyes,  to  frighten  them 
 with  big  Words,  and  to  cheat  the  Unwary 
 out  of  their  Duty  to  God,  and  his  Vicege- 
 rent the  King.  But,  when  your  Rcmarker 
 fpeaksoF  the  Cafe  of  Refiflajice  ix^^m^x  Crom- 
 iJueUj  you  fay,  '  Tho'  it  was  not  unlawful  to 
 
 *  relift  him,  theQueftion  is,  Whether  it  was 
 
 *  expedient  fo  to  do,  after  he  was  fully  fet- 
 '  tied  in  that  (z)  Power  ? '  But,  I  think,  Sir, 
 the  ^ejlion  here  before  us,  is  not  concerning 
 Expediency,  but  Lawfuhtefs  and  Duty;  as 
 your  own  Title-Page  has  open'd  the  Cafe  to 
 us.  Every  body  knows,  *  that  all  that  is 
 '  lawful  is  not  [a)  expedient:'  And  the  bloody 
 Records  of  thofe  Times  fhew  alfo,  '  that 
 '  they  who  try'd  the  Expediency  of  it,  try'd 
 
 *  it  to  their  [b)  Coft.'  But  whatever  it  coj 
 them,  it  proves  nothing  to  us,  more  than 
 this,  that,  in  Times  of  Ufurpation,  Good 
 Men  may  be  overpower'd,  and  thePrifonerat 
 the  Bar  may  be  condemn'd  to  fufFer  what  by 
 Law  is  more  juftly  due  to  the  Mock-judge 
 upon  the  Bench  who  pronounceth  the  Sen- 
 tence.    You  are  likewife  pleas'd  to  fay,    '  It 
 
 '  is 
 
 (j)  P'"ge  125,  126.       («j   Page  96.       (rt)  Bid.     {h)     Ibid, 
 
[   137  ] 
 
 '  is  certain,   that  the  Refloration    was  not 
 
 *  brought  about  by  refifling  him  or  his  Suc- 
 '  cellor,   or  any  other  Power   fet  up  after 
 
 *  them,  but  by  a  wonderful  Guidance  of 
 '  Providence,  reducing  all  Things  to  the  an- 
 ^  cient  Form  and  Conftitution,  by  fair  and 
 '  juft  Means,  and  by  the  Wifdom,  Courage 
 
 *  and   Condud'   of   one   Man,    General   (c) 
 
 *  Monk'  Now,  Sir,  I  would  not  be  thought 
 to  have  a  lefs  regard  than  you  have  to  the 
 wonderful  Guidance  oj  Providence,  or  to  the 
 Wifdom,  Courage  and  ConduSl  of  that  happy 
 Agent  or  Inftrument,  General  Monk  (of  truly 
 Glorious  and  Im.mortal  Memory  ! )  in  order 
 to  that  Reftoration :  Neither  am  I  fo  for- 
 ward, as  fome  might  be,  to  animadvert  upon 
 the  Antithefn  in  this  Period,  between  the 
 Refifting  iffurpers,  in  order  to  the  Kings  Ref- 
 toration, and  the  Reftoring  him  by  fair  and 
 jufi  Means  (as  if  Refifiance  were  not  a  fair 
 and  juf  Mean  to  fuch  a  juft  and  righteous 
 End !  Or,  as  if  it  might  not  fairly  andjifiiy 
 be  us'd  againft  Ufurpers,  but  only  againfl 
 Rightful  Sovereigns!)  But,  this  I  cannot 
 avoid  to  infill  upon,  that  if  the  whole  Na- 
 tion had  thought  it  their  Duty  to  fubmit  to 
 thofe  Ufurpers,  who  then  were  their  actual 
 Governors  (according  to  your  Dodrine)  it 
 would  not  have  been  in  the  Power  of  Man, 
 to  have  brought  about  the  Reftoration  :  And 
 
 how 
 
 (c)  Pnge  96  &  97. 
 
['38  J, 
 
 how  far  God's  Providence  misbt  have  inter- 
 pos'd,  to  deliver  an  infatuated  People,  againft 
 their  own  Wills,  it  does  not  become  me  to 
 determine.  ■ — -  Againjl  their  Wilh^  I  fay ; 
 becaufe  thsy  mnft  all  have  join'd  in  Iblemn 
 Prayers  to  God  for  the  Continuance,  Profpe- 
 rity  and  Succefs  of  thofe  ufurp'd  Powers,  ac- 
 cording to  your  Dodrine ;  and  then  'tis  cer- 
 tain (as  your  Remarker  properly  obferves)  if 
 their  Prayers  had  been  heard^  ive  JJjould  never 
 have  fecn  a  [d)  Reftoratian.  To  which  give 
 me  leave  to  add  this  Remark,  by  the  way. 
 That  the  ancient  Form  and  Conjlitiition^  which 
 you  own  to  have  been  then  fo  happily  and 
 providentially  reftor'd,  was  that  of  an  Here- 
 ditary Monarchy,  according  to  the  ftrideft 
 Laws  of  Succefiion  by  Proximity  {e)  of 
 Blood. 
 
 When  you  come  to  fpeak  of  *  the  known 
 Conftitution  of  the  Kingdom,  and  land- 
 ing Laws  of  the  Realm,  which  exclude  all 
 Papifts  from  the  Throne,'  you  call  it  *  a 
 Law  agreeable  to  the  Conflitution,  and  ab- 
 folutely  neceffary  to  the  Safety  and  Secu- 
 rity of  a  Reform'd  Nation  ;  a  Law, 
 
 which  a  Free  People  have  as  much  Right 
 to  make,  as  any  King  had  to  the  Crown  j 
 a  Right  inherent  and  inverted  in  them  (the 
 People)  by  the  Law  of  Narure,  by  the 
 Law  of  God,  and  by   the  Conltitution  of 
 
 *  the 
 
 (i)  Page  45.  i/)  See  the  JppcnMx,'^o.  n. 
 
[  ^39  ] 
 
 *  the (/)  Kingdom.'  Batyou  donot  inform  us 
 where   we  may  meet  with  this  Law  of  God 
 i'y^rr^?^^  Scriptures,  nor  quote  (o  much  as 
 Mr.  Hobhs  for  the  Law  of  Nature-,  nor  do 
 you   tell   us  of  how  long  /landing  this  has 
 been   the  known  Conjiitution  of  the  Kingdom 
 And  yet,  this  may  well  be  thought  the  more 
 neceffary  for  you  to  have  explained,  forafmuch 
 as  your  Readers  will  foon  difcover    that  the 
 eMluding  all  Papifls  from  the  throne,  was  no 
 Part  of  the  known  Conjiitution  of  the  Kins;- 
 dm,  at,  or  in  Confequence  of,  the  Reforma- 
 tion ;  nor  ever  was  pretended  to   be  among 
 the  fianding  Laws  of  the  Realm,  till  after  the 
 late  Revolution  :  And,   will  you  fay,  it  was 
 th^nmadea  Law  hy  the  Peopled  If  not   'tis 
 vain  and  abfurd,   to  talk  of  fuch  an  inherent 
 Right  2n  them:  Efpecially  to  the  Subjeds  of 
 Great  Britain,  who  never  were  fuch  'a  Free 
 People    in   refped  to  the  making  of  Laws: 
 Ijor  that  has  always  been  the  Prerogative  of 
 the  King,  tho'  now  not  exercis'd  without  the 
 Advice   and    Confent  of   his  Subjeds,    the 
 1  hree  Eftates  in  Parliament.     And  furely 
 Ki^gs  have  had  a  Right  to  the  Crown  long 
 before  the  People  had  any  thing  to  do  with 
 the  making  of  Laws,  but  only  to  fubmit  to 
 (g)  them.     For  the  more  particular  and  evi^ 
 dent  Proof  of  which  we  need  not  go  to  the 
 Kingdom  of  yw^/,,   or  any  other  abroad; 
 
 fince 
 
 (/)  P^S^  97.  (0)  See  the  Jppcndix,  No.  m. 
 
[   HO  ] 
 
 fince   'tis  demonilrable  from  our  own  Au- 
 thentic (/j)  Records,  that  the  Kings  of  Eng- 
 
 Icind 
 
 (i)  Time  was,  when  thofe  in  Power  did  gravely  t.^lk  of 
 the  Nati'jns  jiiji  and  ancient  Right  of  bcin^Jio-jern^ei h\i  its  oiun 
 Repre/eniati-jes  f  (Appendix,  No.  iv.)  But  the  Truth  is, 
 I .  That  the  luvy  f.rji  Time  that  the  Reprrfer.tatii'es  of  the 
 Commons  appear  to  have  been  call'd  to  Parliav:ent,  was  ^.9 
 Henyy  III.  And  then  they  were  not  eleded  by  the  Free- 
 holders ;  but  fummon'd  by  the  Sheriffs,  according  to  fuch 
 Qualifications  as  the  King  was  plers'd  to  prefcribe.  {Pryms 
 plea  for  the  Lords,  ijfc.  /^to.  1658.  p.  375  )  2.  The  Com- 
 mons had  not  fo  much  as  a  Speaker  of  their  Houfe  till  51 
 Ethvard  Vn.  [Ibid.  p.  184.)  3.  That  the  Reafon  of  fum- 
 moning  them  at  firlt,  and  ever  fmce,  was  only,  to  have  their 
 Conftnt  to  the  Statutes  to  be  made,  ^r.  for  the  common 
 Profit  of  the  Realm  ;  '  rot  to  give  them  the  lealt  Share, 
 *  Right  or  Intereft  in  the  Judicature,  or  Judgments  of  Par- 
 '  liament,  as  it  is  the  Supreme  Court  of  Jullice.'  [Ibid.  & 
 p.  197.)  4-  That  formerly  the  Lav.'s  were  wont  to  run  in 
 this  Stile,  The  Kingunto  his  Jujlices,  gi-eeting  ;  Knotv  ye,  that 
 •xxie  ha've  ordain'd,  ^zc.  (Statute  2i  Henry.  III.)  Ihe  King 
 comTnandcih^  Sec.  (Statute  5 1  Henry  III.)  The  King  ivilleth 
 and  commandeth,  &c  (3  Edward  I.)  Our  Lord  the  King 
 granteth.  Sec.  (l  3  Ed-ivard  I.)  Our  Lord  the  King,  in  his  full 
 Parliament,   hy  a  general  Council  hath  ordain  d^  &:c.      (20  Ed- 
 
 '^vard  I.)  at  the  Injlance  of  the  Noblrs  of  his  Realms 
 
 Z-'^/,6  ^r^^/c't/ and  commanded,  l^c.  (21  Edivard  I.)  The 
 King,  at  his  ParliamiCnt,  at  the  Requeft  of  the  Commonalty  of 
 his  Realm,  hy  their  Petition,  &c.  hath  granted,    l^c.      (i  Ed- 
 
 ivardlW.)  '  The  Prelates,  Great  Men  and  Commons, 
 
 '  feeing  the  Mifchiefs,  i^c.  pray  the  King  in  this  prefent 
 
 '  Parliam.ent to  ordain  Remedy.'     (43  Ediv^nd Ul.) 
 
 Our  Lord  the  Kifig,  by  the  JJfeni  of  his  faid  Parliament,  hath 
 
 ordain  d,  S:c.     (14    Richard  II.)  By  the  JJfent  of    the 
 
 Prelates,  Lords  and  Commons,  hath  made.  Sec.  (20  Richard 
 11]   i  By  the  Advice  and  JJfent  of  his  Lords  Spiritual  and 
 
 Temporal^    and  at  the  Rcquejt  of  the  faid  Comv.ons,    &C.      ( i 
 
 Henrv  IV.) and  bv  Authority  of  the  fa?ne   Parliament. 
 
 II   Henry   VI.    '  Our  faid  Lord  the  King,    by  the  Advice 
 
 *  and   AlTent  of  his  Lords  Spiritual  r.nd  Tem.pcral,   and  at 
 
 •  the  Retjueil  of  his  faid  Commons  in  the  faid  Parliament 
 
 ♦  affem- 
 
 i 
 
[  141  ] 
 
 land  h^d  an  undoubted  and  inherent  i^/V^^ 
 to  the  Crown,  many  Ages  before  the  People  ov 
 their  Reprefentatives,    were  admitted  to  Par- 
 hament  j  and  that  even  to  this  Day  the  Peo- 
 ple (as  free  as  you  would  make  them  ' )  have 
 no  Right  or  Authority  at  all  to  make  Laws 
 nor  can  To   much  as  affemble  to  give  their 
 Confent  to  them,    without  the  Kino-'s  Writ 
 of  Summons :  And  even   then  too,  they  are 
 all  bound  to  feparate  and  return  home  ao-ain 
 whenever   it   pleafeth  the  King  to  give''  the 
 Word  for  their  Diffolution  or  Prorogation 
 bo  that  all  your  Conclufions  from  thefe  Pre- 
 mifes,  for  Pr^^vW^  and  Swearmg,   are  with- 
 out roundation. 
 
 .,  .Jr'  ^^"^^/^^1^«  of  your  Remarker,  as 
 It  he  uitended  to  impofe  on  his  (/)  Readers ' 
 is  too  fevere  at  leaft,  if  not  unjufl  i  Be 
 caufe  tho'  there  does  not  appear  th^  com- 
 mon Mark  of  ^iotation  (which  they  call 
 rurnd  Comma^s)  to  diflingmfi  what  he  has 
 quoted  of  St.  Cbryfifioni,  f.on,  ^^^^  ^^  ^^^ 
 
 added 
 
 »  nf  mS'  "J"^  V.^t^o'-^fy  of  the  fame,  hnth  dedar'd 
 ellabl,(hd  and  enafted  in  the  fafd  Parliament,  ^^c    U    Ed 
 •  luardlY.) To    flip    Tr.'n^  r     '  ^  ^-    V    ^«- 
 
 ;  b.ed.  That  whe..  ^.  plea  J  ,"^0^:;^  ™Higf S 
 
 '  Lord' Spiritual  and  T„po'a|"„dc-        '"''J'^   "'' 
 '  rent  Parliament  affembW  Cominons  ,„  t)„s  pre- 
 
 '  (0  Page  9?.  ^ 
 
[   H2  ] 
 
 added  of  his  ow?2 ;  yet  you  can't  but  know, 
 that  fuch  Overfights  frequently  happen  at  the 
 Prefs;  and  therefore  it  might  reafonably  have 
 been  expe(5led,  that  a  Gentleman  of  Candour 
 would  rather  have  imputed  that  flight  Omif- 
 fion  to  the  Carelefnels  of  the  Printer,  than 
 have  charg'd  it  as  a  defign'd  Impofition  of  the 
 Author !  And  that  too  the  rather,  2.  Becaufe 
 the  very  firft  Page  of  this  your  Vindication 
 is  the  Proof  of  a  like,  or  a  greater,  Inadver- 
 tency, where  the  printed  Title  might  pofTibly 
 be  liable  to  the  fame  Cenfure,  as  if  you  had 
 intended  to  impofe  it  on  your  Readers  for  the 
 Re?narks  on  your  Sermon  j  whereas  the  ne- 
 ceiliiry  Addition  of  thofe  Words  inferted 
 with  a  Pen  [y^?7jwerd  Paragraph  by  Pars- 
 grapb]  (hews,  that  it  is  not  the  Remarks 
 themfelves,  but  an  A?'ijwer  to  them :  And 
 again,  in  a  Recital  of  what  you  have  mark'd 
 for  Paragraph  XI.  of  the  Refnarksj  there  is 
 a  whole  Line  in  the  middle  of  it,  with  the 
 Icime  Marks  of  ^lotation^  and  no  way  dijlin- 
 gii ij?y d  fiom  the  reff;  tho'  I  find,  on  collat- 
 ing them,  that  thefe  Words  here  next  follow- 
 ing [a?7d  that  on  the  'very  Day  of  their  [k) 
 Co?-onatio?i\  are  not  in  the  Remarks^  but  an 
 Infertion  of  your  own.  Nay,  after  all  your 
 Care  to  have  the  Remarkers  Arguments  re- 
 printed (I)  Verbatim,  there  is  a  very  material 
 one,  concerning  Chriji's  Refufalof  the  King- 
 dom 
 
 (i)  Page  51.  (/)  Prefiue  S:  Page  1 4; . 
 
[  H3  ] 
 
 dom  at  the  People's  Hands,  &c.  (m)  quite 
 left  out  of  your  Quotation;  befides  many 
 other  lefs  confiderable  Variations.  All  which 
 Interpolations  and  Caftrations,  &c\  I  impute 
 rather  to  the  Printer's  Overfight,  than  to  any 
 Inte?ition  in  you  to  impofe  on  your  Readers ;  as 
 you,  with  a  little  more  Candour,  might  have 
 done  the  other. 
 
 But,  what  if  the  Words  here  in  Difpute 
 are  '  not  («)  in  St.  Chryfojlom  ? '  Do  they 
 therefore  deferve  no  other  Notice  but  a  mere 
 Quibble  about  the  Typography?  St.  Chry- 
 Jojiom,  explaining  that  Text  of  St.  Paul^ 
 Romans  xiii.  i.  does,  even  according  to  your 
 own  Tranflation  of  it,  obferve,  that  *  Go- 
 '  venimenty  taken  in  geiieral^  is  indeed  from 
 
 *  God,  but  Jo  is  not  every  Governor'  (as  your 
 Remarker  has  fairly  cited  him  from  the  Ori- 
 ginal Greek.)  {o)  '  For  there  is  no  Authority, 
 
 *  fays  he  (St.  Paul)  but  what  is  from  God. 
 
 *  What  fay'ft  thou  r  Is  every  Ruler  then  or- 
 '  dain'd  of  God  ?  I  fay  not  this,  fays  he : 
 
 *  I  do  not   now   fpeak  of  every  individual 
 
 *  Perfon   that   governs,    but  concerning  the 
 
 *  Thing  {p)  itfelf  (Authority)  &c:  Which 
 that  Great  and  Learned  Father  ilkiftrates  by 
 the  Cafe  of  Marriage  j  faying,  '  God  hath 
 
 *  inftituted  Marriage ;  not  that  God  hath 
 '  join'd  every  Man  that  cohabits  with  a  (q) 
 
 *  Wo- 
 
 (m)  Page  76.         («)  PagegS.         fe)  Page  93, 
 (;)  Page  cj.  {g)  Page  99, 
 
[   144  ] 
 
 Woman,  cf?f.'     Upon  which  your  Remar- 
 ker  argues  thus;  '  As  therefore  all  Property 
 
 *  is  from  God,  but  not  if  it  be  obtain'd  by 
 '  Theft  ;   and  as   the   Union  of  Man    and 
 
 *  Wife  is  from  God,  but  not  if  it  be  founded 
 
 *  in  Aduhery  ;  fo  neither  is  the  Relation   of 
 
 *  a  Governor  and  thofe  govern'd  by  him,  from 
 '  God,  if  it  be  founded  in  Ufurpation;  be- 
 '  caufe,  tho*  all  juft  PofTcfiion  be  from  God, 
 '  yet  unjud:  Polleffion  is  (r)  not/  And  what 
 do  you  reply  to  this?  Is  not  the  Inference 
 from  St.  Chryjhflojn  jufl  ?  Why,  you  fay, 
 '  Chryjojiojn  fpeaks  not  a  Word  of  the  Rela- 
 
 *  tion  between  a  Governor  and  thofe  govern'd 
 
 *  by   him,    or  the   relative  Duties  between 
 
 *  King  and  People :  He  only  diftinguilhes 
 '  between   the  Thing   itfelf  (Authority,    or 
 
 *  Power  eflabliili'd  by  God)  and  the  Perfons 
 
 *  who  exercife  it ;  as  Mr.  C.  has  alfo  [s)  done.' 
 But,  Sir,  methinks,  this  your  Reply  is  fome- 
 what  fallacious.  For,  i.  St.  ChryfoJiot?i^  hav- 
 ing fpoken  of  Government  and  Governors, 
 by  way  of  alluiion  to  the  Relation  between 
 Man  and  Wife,  as  is  already  noted,  imme- 
 diately  fubjoins  thefe  Words  (as  you  have 
 tranflatcd  them)  '  For  we  fee  many  cohabit- 
 
 *  ing  together,  not  by  the  Law  of  Marriage, 
 
 *  but  in  Sin  ;  for  we  do  not  afcribe  this  to  (/) 
 
 *  God.'  Now,  would  not  any  one  fairly 
 underftand   by   this,   as  much,  as  if  he  had 
 
 faid, 
 
 W  P^ge  94-         (0  Page  98,  99.         (0  Page  99. 
 
[  145] 
 
 faid,  ill  plain  Terms,  When  we  fee  Gover- 
 nors actually  pofTefs'd  of  the  Power  by  Ufur- 
 pation,  we  do  7iot  ajcribe  this  to  God?  For, 
 I  prefnme,  you  will  not  yet  difpute,  whether 
 Ufurpation  is  a  Si7i !  And,  2.  How  can  you 
 fay,  that  St.  Chryfojlom  only  diftinguiflies  a 
 you  have  dofief  When  he  plainly  diftingulflies 
 between  Authority  and  Poiver,  ufing  the 
 Word  Et^wiccj  properly  and  diftindly,  for 
 the  former;  whereas  you  have  tranflated  it 
 Authority  in  one  Sentence  of  this  Quotation, 
 and  Power  in  another ;  and  ufe  them  every 
 where  indifferently,  as  if"  they  were  [a)  Syno- 
 nymous Terms.  And  fo  likewife  he  does 
 not  fay,  that  eve-ry  Ruler  is  ordaiiid  of  God, 
 or  that  there  is  no  Ruler  but  what  is  of  God  : 
 But  you  have  not  only  faid  this  in  effed:,  but 
 endeavour'd  to  prove  it ;  or  elfe  it  will  not 
 be  eafy  to  underfland  the  whole  Drift  of  this 
 your  Vijidication. 
 
 You  fay,  *  It  lies  upon  the  Remarker,  or 
 '  thofe  of  his  Opinion,  to  prove,  by  Law  or 
 
 *  Reafon,    or  the  Pradlice  of  all  Nations,  or 
 
 *  the  Word  of  God,  that  a  Man's  ufurping 
 '  an  Authority   or  Power  which   he  has  no 
 
 *  juft  Title  to,    does  ipfo  faBo  dilTolve  the 
 
 *  Relation,   between   the  Power  itfelf,   and 
 
 *  thofe  who  are  under  that  Power  ;'  the  con- 
 trary  of  which  you  fuppofe  to  be  [b)  evident. 
 But  I  cannot  tell  how  to  underfland  this, 
 
 L  unlefs 
 
 {a)  See  the  Notes  on  p.  15.  {}]  Pige  :cOj 
 
[  146  1 
 
 unlefs  you  could  firft  prove  a  Relation  be- 
 tween fuch  an  Ufurper  and  the  People  un- 
 der his  Power  5  the  contrary  of  which  feems 
 to  be  evident  by  all  the  Laws  you  have  men- 
 tion'd.  To  talk  of  dijfhhing  a  Relation 
 which  never  properly  fubliiied,  is  an  Abilir- 
 dity  not  worthy  of  a  ferious  Anfwer  :  For 
 the  Relation  is  between  the  Rightful  Prince 
 and  his  Natural-born  Subjects  (as  the  Learn- 
 ed in  the  Law  teach  us)  which  muft  ftill 
 fubfift  and  oblige,  and  cannot  [c)  be  dijjolvd 
 by  any  Ufurper  or  Ufurpation  whatfoever ; 
 as  1  have  alio  more  particularly  exemplify 'd 
 in  the  Cafe  of  an  Intruder  [d)  into  your  own 
 Houfe  and  Family.  'Tis  true,  *  whoever 
 *  has  the  Power,  will  be  obey'd,'  as  you  [e) 
 fay.  But  the  Queftion  is  not  about  the  Pcw- 
 rr,  or  the  Will^  to  enforce  Obedience  j  but 
 the  Right  to  that  Obedience:  Nor  are  we 
 concern'd  to  enquire  what  he  may  claiin^  or 
 his  own  mercenary  Interpreters  of  Laws  may 
 pretend,  to  be  due  to  himj  but  what  is  really 
 due  to  fuch  an  one  by  the  Laws  of  God  and 
 Man  ;  neither  of  which  can  be  fairly  inter- 
 preted to  favour  mere  PoiklTion,  (/)  with- 
 out 
 
 (i)  See  the  Jpper.dix^  No.  I'ii.  [d)  See  p.   6o. 
 
 [e]  Page  99.  (_/)  How  little    regard  the  Law    had 
 
 to  the  Title  of  PoJfeJJion  in  the  three  Henrys  of  the  Line  of 
 Lancajier^  as  well  as  to  that  of  the  Lady  Jane  Grey,  and 
 Olhicr  Ciofnixell,  appears  already  (p.  53,  55,  107,  115.) 
 But,  becaufe  forne  People  lay  a  great  Weight  upon  the  Sta- 
 tute II  Hcniv  vW.  c.  I.  which  feems  indeed  to  fu-vour  the 
 King  for  the  ^fimc  being  in  PcJf,JJion,  it  may  be  proper  to  ob- 
 serve 
 
[  147  ] 
 
 out  and  againft  Right.  And,  as  hard  a  Tajk 
 as  you  may  think  it,  *  to  diiiingui(h  between 
 
 *  thofe  Kings  who  had  their  Authority  from 
 
 *  God,  and  thofe  who  had  it  (g)  not  /  the 
 Diftindion  is  eafy  enough,  when  we  conli- 
 der,  that  Birth-right  itfelf  is  an  Evidence  of 
 
 L  2  a 
 
 ierve  hew  that  Statute  was  Interpreted,  i.  In  the  Cafe  of 
 che  Duke  of  'Northumberland,  whofe  Plea  for  his  Proceedings 
 in  favour  of  Jane^  Queen  de  Fa£io,  in  Oppofition  to  Mary^ 
 Queen  ds  'Jure,  was  grounded  on  this  very  Statute  :  But  the 
 judgment  of  his  Peers  was,  *  That  the  Great  Seal  he  had 
 *•  for  his  Warrant,  was  not  the  Seal  of  the  Queen  of  this 
 '  Realm,  nor  pafled  by  her  Authority;  but  the  Seal  of  an 
 '  Ufurper,  and  therefore  could  be  no  Warrant  to  him.'  And 
 accordingly, the  faid  Duke,  and  feveral  others,  were  attainted 
 and  executed.  Which  Judgment  and  Attainder  was  con- 
 firm'd  by  Aft  of  Parliament  ^l  Mary  c.  \6.)  as  juji  and 
 hgal,  notwithilanding  the  Statute  1 1  Henry  vii.  «  which  ex- 
 
 *  tends  only   to  indemnify  thofe  Subjeds  ^j:ho  do  their  true 
 
 *  Duty  a?id  Service  of  Allegiance  to  their  King  and  Sovereiuri 
 
 *  Lord  ;  which  none  certainly  do  who  adhere  and  join  with. 
 
 *  an  apparent  Ufurper  in    PofTefTion,  againi^   their  Lawful 
 
 *  and    Undoubted  King  and  Sovereign  Lord  ;  as  they  here 
 
 *  adjudg'd,  and  the  Parliaments  of  King  Edward  IV.  long 
 
 *  before,  (^c.  [Prynne's  Plea  for  the  Lords,  1658.  4/0.  p. 
 497,498.)   And,  2.  This   Aft  n  Henry  vii.   c.    i.   '  could 
 
 *  not  fecare  ~— —  thofe  Lords,  Gentlemen,  and  other  En- 
 '  g^'J^  Subjefts,  ,  who  accompany'd,  alTifted  our  late 
 
 *  ^\Vi^{Charles  \.)\n  his  Wars againll  the  Parliament,  tho* 
 *■  King  de  FaFto  and  de  Jure  too,  without  any  Competitor.  -- 
 
 *  How  then  it  can  totally  indemnify  any  apparent 
 
 *  Ufurpers  of  the  Crown  without  Right  or  Title,  who  fhall, 
 
 *  for  fas  aut  r.efas,  get  aftual  Poficiiion  of  the  Royal 
 '  Throne,  and  be  Kings  de  Fatio^  or  fecure  all  thofe  who 
 «  fiithfully  adhere  unto  them  (tho*  to  difpofrcfs  the  King  de 
 
 *  Jure,  or  his  right  [feir,  of  their  juft  Royalty  and  Right, 
 
 *  againil  all  Laws  of  God,  Alan,  all  Rules  of  Jullice,  ilfc.) 
 
 *  tranfcends  both  my  Law  and  Reafon  too.'     [Ibid.  p. 
 
 481.  482.)  See  a'fo  the  Notes  on  p.  55,  1 15,  &  the  Ab^endix^ 
 No.  V.  {g]  Page  150. 
 
[  148  ] 
 
 (i&)   a  Divine   Deiignation    and    Authority. 
 However,  as  to  the  Kings  of  Ifraelj  you  fay, 
 
 *  Thev  had   their  Authority  from  God,  as 
 
 *  much  as  the  Kings  of  "Jiuiah  had  to  the 
 
 *  Throne  of  Judah,  except  the  iail  four  or 
 
 *  (/)  five.'  But  here  you  feem  to  have  for- 
 got,  what  you  have  before  acknowledg'd, 
 
 *  that  the  Kingdom  of  yudah  was  Here- 
 '  ditary,  being  entail'd  on  David,  and  his 
 '  Heirs,  by  Divine  [fz)  Appointment/  And 
 every  one  who  can  read  the  Bible  may  eafily 
 perceive,  that  there  was  no  fuch  Divine  En- 
 tail, and  Hereditary  Succeffion  of  the  Kings 
 of  Ifrael,  after  the  Revolt  of  the  Ten  Tribes 
 under  Jerohoafn,  as  to  warrant  your  Compa- 
 
 rifon.  —  But  of  this,  perhaps,    we  may 
 
 find  another  Occafion  to  treat  more  at  large 
 hereafter. 
 
 Your  Remarker  having  charg'd  you  with 
 endeavouring  to  ?}iake  God  the  Author  of 
 (/)  Vfurpationl  you  flcreen  vourfelf  againft 
 this,  under  what  you  call  a  Frovidcntial  [m) 
 Right;  In  the  Explanation  of  which  you 
 fay,  '  If  the  Mod  High  ruleth  in  the  King- 
 
 *  dom 
 
 {h)  Bifhop  Una,  difcoarfing  of  God^s  Ways  of  difpcjtr.g  of 
 Khigdotr.:,  obfsrves,  *  that  the  Government  being  made  He- 
 '   reditary,  there  was  no  need  of  any  other  Human  Aft  for 
 
 *  the  Continuance  of  it  in  their  Family.     There  is  nothing 
 
 *  more  facred  among  Men    than  a   Right   of  Inheritance^ 
 
 *  Sut  for  the  Derivation  of  that  Right  to  their  Perfons,  they 
 «  owe  it  only  to  God  ;  For  it  comes  to  them  by  their  Birth ; 
 «  and  they  ovv;  their  Birth  only  to  God,'  (Bifhop  of  St. 
 Afap}}i  Sermon  q  Ko-uember-,    1690.  4/0.  p.   i^,  16.) 
 
 (.'j  Page  100.     [k]  Page  52.     (/J  Page  100.     (/»}  Page  joj. 
 
[  H9  ] 
 
 *  dom  of  Men,   and  giveth  it  to  whorafo 
 
 *  ever  he  will,   then  he  (to  whcmlceverhe- 
 
 *  giveth   it)  hath  an   undoubted  Right  and 
 
 *  Title  to  it,  and  doth  no  Iniury  or  Inicftice 
 
 *  to  any,  becaufe  he  receives  it  from  him  who 
 '  has  the  Paramount  Right  to   difpcfe  of  it 
 
 *  according  to  his  {n)  Plea  lure.'  But,  Sir, 
 without  making  the  leaft  Queftion  as  to 
 God's  Prerogative  to  do  this,  may  it  not  be 
 reafonabie  to  afk  for  fome  better  Evidence 
 of  God's  Interpofition,  than  that  of  b?.re 
 Events  or  Succefs?  Forever)'-  fjcceliful  Rebel, 
 or  Ufurper,  may  plead  fach  a  Right  as  this : . 
 And  if  this  be  your  Prasidential  RJgtt, 
 then  you  mufl  either  be  liabie  to  the  Impu- 
 tation of  mahing  Gcd  ice  Authzr  cf  Ufurpa- 
 fio/i,  or  ehe  deny,  that  there  is,  or  can  be,  any 
 
 fuch  thing  as  Ufurpcticn.  For,   where 
 
 you  affirm.,  that  this  PryjId^nti^I  -^/c^"'  *  is 
 all  the  Divine  Right  that  any  King  in  the 
 ♦World  can  pretend  (c)  to,'  you  would 
 make  all  actual  PofTefToro  of  Kingdoms  to 
 have  equally  an  undoubted  Right  ard  Tide; 
 notwithi^anding  the  Prefei'ence  is  fo  evidently 
 given  to  the  Right  of  Primogeuiture  and 
 Proximity  "of  Btood,  in  the  Law  ci- God, 
 as  well  as  th^  general  Laws  of  Nature  and 
 Nations :  For  the  flill  Proof  of , which  I  re-^ 
 fer  to  ibe  Prcrsg^jt/iv  of  Pritncgtr.itwij  &c. 
 i)y  DaviJ  Jenner  B.  D.  in  Src.  1655.  and 
 
 L  3  tbc 
 
 (r    Fageicj.  (.-}  Fige  iz^. 
 
t  '5°] 
 
 the  Jhort  Hijlory  of  the  Regal  SucceJJiony  &c. 
 in  the  Holy  Scriptures ;  ^th.  Edit,  in  8i;o. 
 173 1,  which  being  fairly  examin'd,  and 
 compared  with  your  Enquiry  into  the  Right 
 arid  'Title  cf  the  Kings  of  Judah  arid  Ifrael, 
 &c.  will  probably,  give  all  unprejudic'd  Rea- 
 ders a  much  clearer  Light  into  this  (^)  ContrO" 
 verfy,  than  that  in  which  you  have  fct  it. 
 
 But  you  feem  to  have  furnifli'd  yourfelf 
 with  a  very  fliort  Reply  to  all  Arguments 
 which  do  not  fuit  your  prefent  Taflej  by 
 ridiculing  them  as  *  ^ivild  and  unaccountable 
 
 *  Notions,'  and  reprefcnting  their  Authors  as 
 '  Rnemies  to  the  prefent  Rftahlijhment^  and 
 Men  *  govern  d  by  their  PaJJions  or  [q)  Pre-- 
 
 *  judices,  &c.*  Tho'  your  modern  Zeal  has 
 tranfported  you  fo,  that  you  have  not  conft- 
 der'd,  that  the  Notions  upon  which  you  here 
 pafs  fo  rajh  a  Cenfure,  were  receiv'd  and  al- 
 Jovv'd  as  ancient  Truths,  before  the  prefent 
 ^Jiablifiment  had  any  Being ;  And  therefore, 
 before  you  had  condemn'd  them,  you  fhoulci 
 firfl  have  clearly  difl:ingui(h'd,  in  what  Cafes 
 that  inherent  Right  of  Nature  may  be  bi'oke 
 in  upon  j  what  is  the  7720 ft  urgent  NeceJJity  for 
 fo  doing  J  who  are  to  be  the  Judges  of  that 
 Necejpty ;  and,  after  all  this,  who  has  a  com- 
 petent Authority  to  doitj  as  I  have  already 
 jntimated  to  [r)  you. 
 
 Ypu  fav,  *  God  prefcrib'd  np.  one  Form 
 
 ij>}  fy^f^-i^,       [f]  I'^ge  J  04.       {r)  ,^ee  p.  77,  114  &  1;^;, 
 
[  ^5^  ] 
 
 '^  of  Government   to    all    Nation?,    in    his 
 
 *  Word,    nor  by  any  other   way   that    we 
 
 *  know  of;  but  left  them  herein  to  their 
 '  Choice  and  (j)  Liberty/  But,  you  wil]  ex- 
 cufe  me  here,  if  I  put  you  in  Mind  of  the 
 Beginning  of  Gene/Is ;  where  it  appears,  that 
 ^^Jam,  the  common  Father  of  W/ A^J/;W 
 was  invefled  with  a  Monarchical  Authority* 
 by  God  himfelf,  over  all  who  (hould  proceed 
 from  him:  And  his  eldeft  Son  had  the  like 
 
 Authority  to  rule  over  the  younger.  - .  But 
 
 where  we  fhall  find  the  like  Prefcript  for  any 
 other  Form  of  Govenunent,  or  where  the 
 People  were  left  to  theif  own  Choice  and  Li- 
 berty, it  lies  upon  you  tofliewus;  for,  all 
 you  have  faid  of  it,  is  but  begging  the  Quef. 
 tion.  ^"^ 
 
 You  are  offended  at  your  Remarker,   for 
 anfwenng  one  Text  of  Scripture  with  ano- 
 ther     To   prove  your  Providential  Ri^hf 
 you  had  quoted  Daniel  iv.  7.  that  '  the  Mofl 
 ^  High  ruleth  in  the  Kingdo^n  of  Men,  and 
 giveth  It  to  ix^homfcever  he  (/)  iviir     And 
 A    ^''T/,°">   ^^^^  f^^is  is  not  to  be  under, 
 (tood  abfolutely,   as  if  every   Revolution   of 
 Government  muft  of  courfe  be   afcrjb'd   to 
 t^od's  Approbation,  becaufe  it  cannot  happen 
 without  his  Permiffion,   he  very  pertinently 
 puts  you  in  Mind  (zc)  of  Amos  iii.  6.  where 
 tis  faid,  «  Shall  there  be  Evil  in  a  City,  and 
 L  4  '  th^ 
 
 i'l  P^gs  105.       (/)  Page  loi.       (u)  P.ge   ,  06. 
 
[    152    ] 
 
 *  the  Lord  hath  not  done  it ;'  which  muft  un- 
 doubtedly admit  of  a  Diftindlion.  But 
 
 you  fay,   *  What  is  all  this  to  the  [x)  Pur- 
 
 *  pofe?  &c'  Why  truly,  Sir,  thus  much. 
 That  Revolutions  in  Government,  as  well  as 
 other  Things,  may  be  ^-u/Zand  finful,  by  means 
 of  *  fudden  Infurredtions,   Convulfions,   and 
 
 *  Ufurpations  of  wicked  or  ambitious  Men  j' 
 which,  by  your  own  Confeffion,  '■  are  not  to 
 
 *  be  afcrib'd  to  God  as  the  Author;  for  he 
 '  is  not  the  Author  of  {y)  Sin.'  And,  if  fo, 
 'twill  be  a  ftrange  Stretch  of  Logic,  to  con- 
 clude it  lawful  and  a  Duty  not  only  to  fub- 
 mit  to  thofe  wicked*  or  ambitious  Men,  who 
 may  become  aSiual  Governors  on  fuch  a  Re- 
 volution, but  to  pray  to  God  to  jlrengthen 
 and  profper  them  in  their  Ufurpation  !  'Tis 
 true,  God  may  permit  them  to  fucceed  for  a 
 Time,  to  anfwer  fome  wife  Ends  of  his  Di- 
 vine Providence:  Bat  furely,  the  Subjecfts 
 cannot  be  bound  to  pray,  and  give  T^hanki  to 
 God,  for  their  Succefs  in  fuch  an  £w7,  with- 
 out looking  upon  (2;)  Him  as  the  Author  of 
 
 it. 
 
 (.v)  Page  J 07.  ^      Cr)  Page  105.  _ 
 
 [z)  *  To  deny  God's  Providence,  is  to  ihut  him  out  of 
 «  his  own  World  ;  but  toafcribe  wicked  Aftions  to  the  Di- 
 «  vine  Providence,  is   the  greater  Injury  of  the  two.     For, 
 
 *  the  Englijh  of  God's  Providence  is,  As  Cod  h.vouU  hanie  if. 
 
 *  Now,  when  this  is  apply'd  to  Ufurpation,  which  is  Rob- 
 
 *  bery  and  Wrong  in  the  higheft  Degree,  and  to  the  Con- 
 «  queft  and  Enflaving  of  a  Free  Nation,  which  is  the  moll 
 «  outragious  PppreiTion  1  to  fay,  that  thefe  are  by  God's 
 \  Providence,  is  to  fay  that  Robbery  is  as  God  imiild  ha'ue 
 
 it~. 
 
[  iS3l 
 
 It.  I  need  not  therefore  enter  here  into  a 
 particular  Examination  of  the  Chain  of  ab- 
 furd  Confequences,  which  you  endeavour  to 
 faften  upon  your  {a)  Remarker.  For,  his 
 ObjeBion  being  thus  pertinent  to  his  Ptirpofe^ 
 and  fairly  conclufive  againfh  your  too-general 
 Do(flrine,  will  acquit  him  of  your  invidious 
 Charge  {b)  of  Shiiffiingy  and  whether  he  may 
 not  retort  the  Reiiedion  back  upon  yourfelfj 
 'tis  your  Bulinefs,  not  mine,  toconfider. 
 
 As  to  the  Cafe  of  Abfalom,  you  fay,  it  b 
 not  at  all  to  {c)  the  Purpofe.  But  after  all  you 
 have  objected,  I  cannot  but  be  of  another 
 Opinion.     For,  tho'  you  fay,  i.  *  What  vf^- 
 
 *  Jalom  might  think  or  plead  is  nothing  to 
 
 *  the  Purpofe,  but  what  he  could  in  Truth 
 ^  and  Juflice  {d )  plead  ; '  it  is  at  leaft  thus 
 much  to  the  Purpofe,   to  Ihew,  that  wicked 
 
 and 
 
 *  it,  and  Opprefllon  is  as  God  vsould  ha--ve  It.  But  this,  all 
 «  the  World  knows,  is  contrary  to  God's  known  and  revealed 
 «  Will :  And  therefore,  as  the  Atheiils  deny  God,  fo  thefe 
 
 *  Men  make  him  to  deny  himfelf !  *  [Samuel  yohnfo^H  Ar- 
 gument proving  the  Abrogat.  of  King  James,  &c.  \lo. 
 1692*  Preface,   p.    39,  40. j  *  The    Difpoial  of  all   other 
 
 *  Things  is  attributed  to  God  in  Scripture,  as  well  as  Pra- 
 
 *  motion;  and   if  this   Promotion   be   attain'd   by  wrongful 
 
 *  and  wicked  Means,   fuch  as  Ufurping,    Conquering,    and 
 
 *  Enflaving  a  Nation,  plainly  are,  it  is  Blafphemy  toafcribe 
 
 *  this  ill-gotten  Promotion  to  God.     For  Inftance,  Pro'verbs 
 
 *  xvi.'  33.  'The  Lot  is  cajl  ifito  the  Lap;  but  the  Kvhole  dijp- 
 
 *  f.ng  thereof  is   of  the  Lord.     Now,    I   fay,    to  apply   this 
 
 *  'lext  to  a  foul  Throw  and  Cogging  the  Dice,  is  Blafphe- 
 
 *  my :  And  to  fay,  that  God  has  diipos'd  and  transferr'd  the 
 f  100/.  Stake  to  this  faife  Gamcfier,  and  that  now  he  has  a 
 f  Divine  Right  to  it,  is  repeated  Blafphemy!  '  [Ibid.  p.  41.) 
 ia)  Page  107,      (h)  Hid.      (f)  Page  139,      \d)  Page  109, 
 
[  154  1 
 
 and  ambitious  Men  may  pretend  a  Provident 
 //tf/ Right,  to  juftify  them  in  the  moft  ille- 
 gal and  unnatural  Ufurpations.  And,  fuppo- 
 fing  what   you  fay,    2.  *  That  tho*    all  the 
 
 *  World  knows  now  of  the  Evil  threatned 
 
 *  to  David  for  his  great  Sin,  yet  it  is  a  Quef^ 
 
 *  tion.  Whether  it  was  known  at  the  Time 
 
 *  to  Davids  Subjedls,  or  even  to  his  (f)  Fa- 
 
 *  mily:'  And  if  I  (hould  gratify  you  fo  far, 
 as  to  admit  it  to  be  *  much  more  probable, 
 
 *  that  the  Meffage  from  God  was  deliver'd 
 
 *  by  the  Prophet  to  David  himfelf,  in  pri- 
 '  vate,  and  not  divulg'd  to  (/)  others : '  Yet, 
 ilnce  there  adually  was  fuch  a  Meffage  from 
 Godj  threatning  to  raife  up  that  Evil  againft 
 David  J  which  Abfalom  afterwards  executed, 
 furely,  he  might  have  pleaded,   *  that  what 
 
 *  he  did  was  by  the  unerring  Will  of  God, 
 
 *  by  a  particular  Providence,  and  even  by  an 
 
 *  exprefs  [g)  Prophecy,  &c'  at  leaft  as  pro- 
 perly as  the  like  can  be  pleaded  in  any  other 
 Cafe,  where  there  is  not  any  Pretence  of 
 fuch  a  MefTage,  either  public  or  private.  3. 
 You  juftly  obferve,  '  That  had  Abfalom  been 
 
 *  a  righteous  Perfbn,    ■ he  would   have 
 
 *  faid,  Thd  Evil  is  denounc'd  againfi  my  Fa- 
 
 *  ther^  God  forbid  that  any  of  his  SonSy  — 
 
 *  much  more  that  7,  ——  fhoiild  be  the  Au^ 
 
 *  tbor  of  this   Evil  unto  him ! '  Becaufe   it 
 
 *  might  as  well  have  been  fulfjU'd  by  any 
 
 *  other 
 
 {e)  Page  109.  (/)  Foil  l£)  Page  ip8,  109, 
 
[  ^55  ] 
 
 ^  Other  Perfon,  rather  than  one  of  his  own 
 '  Sons  J  who  could  hardly  be  thought  capa- 
 
 *  ble  of  fo  much  Wickednefs,  as  to  (b)  rebel, 
 
 *  &c.*  But  yet,  this  does  not  prove  ^l?fa- 
 lom's  Cafe  to  be  impertinently  cited  by  the 
 Remarker  :  Since  even  here,  by  your  own 
 Confeffion,  tho'  God's  Denunciation  of  that 
 Evil  to  David  had  been  divulg'd,  and  Ahfa- 
 lom  had  known  it,  he  could  not  be  a  Righ^ 
 teous  Perfon  in  the  fulfilling  it ;  the  Thing  in 
 itfelf  being  a  monflrous  Wickednefs^  to  rebel 
 againft,  and  ufurp  upon  his  Father  and  So- 
 vereign !  ^c.  And  confequently,  the  Peo- 
 ple of  yerufalem  could  not  be  bound  in  Duty 
 at  that  Time,  to  pray  and  give  I'hanks  to 
 God  for  Abfalom,  when  he  thus  became  their 
 ABual  Governor  -,  which  is  the  Point  your 
 Remarker  has  objected  to  (/)  you.  And, 
 whereas  you  fay,   4.  '  Abfalom  could  never 
 
 *  think  or  plead  v/hat  the  Remarker  has  al- 
 
 *  ledg'd  for  him,  becaufe  he  had  no  Com- 
 '•  miffion  from  God  to  do  what  he  did;  no 
 
 *  Prophet   fent  to  him ;  no  Anointing  with 
 
 *  Oil  {k)  before-hand :'  'Tis  true,  without 
 thefe  his  Plea  mud  have  been  unjufl,  and 
 blafphemoufly  prophane.  But  it  does  not 
 necelTarily  follow,  that  a  wicked  and  ambi- 
 tious Man  (fuch  as  you  have  defcrib'd  to  be 
 rTiCfl  apt  to  engige  in  the  like  (/)  Revoluti- 
 
 ops) 
 
 [h]  Page  1 10.  (/)  Page  109. 
 
[  WM 
 
 ens)  might  not  think  or  plead  at  this  rate, 
 however  unjuflly ;  for  you  admit,  that  fuch 
 Men  may  think  or  plead  what  they  cannot  in 
 ^ruth  and  yujiice  (m)  pkad.  And,  with 
 great  Submiffion,  Sir,  it  feems  well  worthy 
 of  your  Second  Thoughts,  whether  your 
 own  Plea,  here  fo  ftrenuoufly  infifted  on,  fo 
 far  as  it  relates  to  your  Providential  Right  of 
 all  ASfual  Governors,  as  fuch,  may  not  lie 
 open  to  the  fame  Objedtion,  and  for  the  fame 
 Reafons  which  you  have  here  obje<5ted  to  that 
 of  Abfalojn.  And,  tho'  you  are  pleas'd  to  fay, 
 5.  *  That  God  did  not  give  the  Kingdom 
 
 *  to  Abfalom,  but  foon  brought  his  Rebellion 
 
 *  and  Ufurpation  to  an  End,  and  himfelf  to 
 
 *  an  untimely  («)  End ;'  Who  could  forefec 
 this  while  it  was  in  its  flourifhing  State  ?  Or 
 what  is  it  to  the  purpofe,  whether  it  was 
 brought  to  an  End  foon  or  late  ?  Your  own 
 Argument,  that  Kings  *  hold  their  Crowns 
 '  and  Kingdoms  of  the  Majefty  of  Heaven, 
 
 *  by  no  other  Tenure  than  Dura?2te  benepla- 
 
 *  citOy  or  quamdiu  bene  fe  (0)  gefferiiit^  fup- 
 pofes  it  to  be  abfurd,  to  objedt  againft  any 
 Providential  Right,  the  (hort  Time  of  pof- 
 fefling  it.     For,  as  '  they  are  only  the  Ser- 
 
 *  vants  of  the  great  God  of  Heaven,  the 
 
 *  Minifters  of   his   Kingdom   upon   Earth, 
 
 *  whom   he  may  turn  out  at  his  Pleafure, 
 
 *  and  put  others  in  their  [p)  room/  it  would 
 
 be 
 
 H  Page  i09     <«)  Page  1 1 0,  i  M  •     W  P^ige  3  j- .     ( /)  Ihi^ , 
 
[  '57  1 
 
 be  very  abfurd,  according  to  your  Scheme^ 
 to  argue  as  if  they  had  a  Grant  for  a  certain 
 Term  of  Years!  You  cannot  but  know,  that 
 fome  have  enjoy'd  the  Kingdom,  and  a^u- 
 ally  had  all  that  which  you  term  a  Providen- 
 tial Right y  fifty  or  fixty  Years  together,  or 
 more,  who  yet  (for  one  lingle  Defed:  in  their 
 Titles)  have  been  confeffedly  as  arrant  Ufur- 
 pers  as  Abfalom  was.  Another  of  your  Ar- 
 guments is  this,  6.  *  David  had  given  no 
 *  Caufe  to  the  People  to  revolt  from  {q)  him/ 
 And  I  grant  you,  that  there  was  7io  Caufe  to 
 juflify  the  People  in  their  Revolt.  For  he, 
 being  their  Sovereign,  was  not  accountable 
 to  them ;  as  he  declares,  even  in  his  folemn 
 Penitentials  to  God,  faying,  Againfi  'Thee^ 
 T'bee  onl)\  have  I  Jinn  d^  a7id  done  this  Evil  i?i 
 thy  (r)  Sight.  But  the  Queftion  is  not,  Whe- 
 ther David  had  given  Caufe  to  the  People  to 
 revolt  J  but,  Whether  the  People  did  not  take 
 occafiou  to  pretend  fuch  Caufe  ?  Now,  'tis 
 evident,  that  Abfalom  had  infmuated  many 
 Defeats  of  Juftice,  and  other  great  Grievan- 
 ces, wanting  Redrefs  in  his  Father's  [s)  Ad- 
 miniftration  :  And  that  fuch  his  Infinuations 
 were  fo  effedual,  among  the  giddy  Multi- 
 tude, that  thereby  he  ftole  the  Hearts  of  the 
 Men  of  {t)  Ifrael ;  and  the  Confpiracy  was 
 Jlrongi  for  the   Feopk  increasd  continually 
 
 iviib 
 
 (y)  P2ge  III.  (r)  p/a/m  !i.  4. 
 
 (/)  2  Samuel  xy.  3,  4.  (/)  Fsrfe  (S, 
 
1 158] 
 
 with  {n)  Abfalom.  And,  in  Truth,  when 
 we  confider,  how  David^  having  firft  defil'd 
 Uriahs  Bed,  did,  in  a  moft  illegal,  arbitrary, 
 tyrannical  and  wicked  Manner,  concert  and 
 procure  the  iniur'd  Perfon  to  be  murder'd, 
 'twill  liut  be  very  eafy  to  fhew,  what  could 
 more  juftly  poflefs  the  People  with  '  perpe- 
 
 *  taal  Fears  and  Alarms  of  deftroying  their 
 
 *  Religion,  Laws  and  (x)  Liberties;'  or  what 
 could  be  a  more  likely  and  natural  Caufe^  to 
 incite  them  to  revolt  from  hiju^  than  fuch  an 
 outragious  Breach  of  the  Laws  both  of  God 
 and  Man,  not  only  attempted^  but  adually  ex- 
 ecuted.   >  But,  becaufe  Cotnparijom  are 
 
 odious,  I  (hall  forbear  to  prefs  this  Point  with 
 all  its  hideous  Aggravations. 
 
 In  the  next  Place,  you  objeil  to  the  Re- 
 marker,  that '  the  Fads  here  are  much  mif- 
 
 *  reprefented,  and  the  Term,  Revolution,  very 
 '  improperly  apply'd.'  For  Proof  of  which, 
 you  fay,   i.  *  A  fudden  Lnfurredlion,  or  Rc- 
 
 *  bellion,  which  never  acquir'd  any  Settlc- 
 
 *  ment  or  PoiTeiTion,   but  was  queli'd  and 
 
 *  fupprefs'd  in  its  Infancy,  was  never  call'd  a 
 
 *  (_)')  RevolutioJi!  But,  before  they  were 
 queli'd  and  fupprefs'd,  I  fuppofe,  even  you  (if 
 you  had  liv'd  within  the  Reach  of  their 
 Power)  would  have  thought  it  proper,  and 
 more  prudent  to  give  them  the  fofter  Term 
 of   Revolutio?is,    rather   than    have   bluntly 
 
 caird 
 
 (a)  Verfe  12.  (^}  Page  iJ2.  [y)  Ihid. 
 
[  159  ] 
 
 caird  them  by  their  proper  Titles.  As  for 
 Inftance  now  in  Corjka^  if  you  were  an  In- 
 habitant there,  under  the  Power  of  their 
 new  King  Theodore ^  would  not  you  be  apt  to 
 call  it  a  Revolution'^  Yes,  furely  j  and  ac- 
 knowledge him  to  have  a  Providential  Right 
 too,  upon  your  Principles  (for  he  is  in  Pojfef- 
 y/(?/z,andnot  yet  quell  d  and  fupprefs'd  -^iho,  if 
 you  liv'd  under  their  Sovereigns  at  Genoa^  no 
 doubt  but  you  would  have  call'd  that  whole 
 Tranfa6lion  a  Rebellion^  and  him  an  Ufurper  ! 
 For  fo  we  commonly  find  the  Terms  Revo- 
 lution and  Rebellion  to  be  convertible,  and  va- 
 rioufly  us'd,  according  to  the  Circumftances 
 of  Affairs,  and  the  Senfe  of  the  Parties  who 
 apply  them :  As  the  Infurredion  of  Mofi- 
 mouthj  being  quell' d  and  fupprcfsd  in  its  In- 
 fancy, pafles  under  its  proper  Title  of  a  Re- 
 bellion y  which  if  it  had  fucceeded,  and  con- 
 tinued till  now,  had  been  call'd  a  Glorious 
 Revolution!  However,  if  you  rather  chufe 
 to  have  all  Infurredtions  againft  Rightful 
 Powers,  call'd  downright  R.ebeliions,  1  (liall 
 not  contend  with  you  about  it.  But,  you 
 infift,  2.  That  *  Abfalom  was  never  A(ftual 
 
 *  (z)  Governor.*  And  why  fo?  Becaufe, 
 *-  to  be  Ad:ual  Governor,  a  Man  mull:  be  in 
 '  the  A(5tual  PofTeffion  of  the  Kingdom;  his 
 
 *  Authority  rccogniz'd,  at  leaft,  quietly  fub- 
 ^  mitted  to  by  the  People  ^  he  muft  appoint 
 
 '  the 
 
 (5:}  Page  112; 
 
[  i6o  ] 
 
 *  the  Judges,  Magiftrates  and  Officers;  the 
 
 *  Laws,  public  Ads  and  Deeds  muft  run  in 
 
 *  his  Name;  and  he  muft  imprint  his  Image 
 
 *  on  the  current  Coin  of  the  Kingdom:  Not 
 
 *  one  Tittle  of  all  which  was  done,  or  could 
 
 *  be  done  by  [a)  Abfalom'  But  was  not 
 Ahjalom  in  the  ABual  Fojejfion  of  the  King- 
 doniy  and,  as  Tuch,  look'd  upon  by  his  Adhe- 
 rents to  be  their  A5iual  Governor?  When  he 
 took  upon  him  to  {b)  reign^  and  the  Hearts 
 of  the  M-m  of  Ifrael  were  pftcr  [c)  him,  and 
 they  attended  him  in  his  (^/)Army;  when 
 he  was  recogniz'd  by  the  People  in  general, 
 under  the  Royal  Title  of  King-,  as  appears 
 not  only  by  Hufoais  Court-like  Addrefies  to 
 him,  in  Compliance  with  the  Mode,  even  by 
 David'?,  own  political  Order  ;  {e)  (all  which 
 had  been  impertinent,  and  could  not  have 
 anfwer'd  the  End  delign'd,  if  Abfalom  had 
 not  been  generally  look'd  upon  to  be  ABual 
 King  and  Governor  over  all  Ifrael,  in  the 
 Place  of  his  difpoflefs'd  Father  Z)(^^7 J; )  but 
 alfo  by  Sbimei's  Words,  ^he  Lord  hath  deli- 
 verd  the  Kingdom  into  the  Hands  of  [f)  Ab- 
 falom.    To  this  lad:  indeed  you  objed,  that 
 
 *  what  Shimei  faid,  was  without  any  Ground 
 
 *  or  Warrant,  and  proceeded  only  from  En* 
 
 *  mity  to  David  J  and  his  Friend  fhip  to  the 
 
 Houfe 
 
 (a)  Page  112   and  113.         (/>)   2  Samuel xr.  16. 
 {c)   Verle  13.  {d)   2  Samttcl  xvu.  24. 
 
 (if)   2  Samuel  xv.  34.  xvi.  16.  and  xvii.  ii^  18,   19. 
 {/)   2  Samuel  xvi.  8, 
 
[  '6i  ] 
 
 '  Houfe  of  (a)  Satilj  &c*  But  whatever  it 
 proceeded  from,  neither  he  nor  Hufiai  had 
 imputed  that  Revolution  to  the  Lord's  Do- 
 ing, if  it  had  not  been  true  in  Fad,  at  leaft, 
 that  the  Kingdom  was  turn'd  from  David  to 
 Abfalom^  and  that  he  was  look'd  upon  to  be 
 adually  in  Poffeffion  of  it.  And  did  he  not 
 appoint  OJicers^  fuch  as  the  State  of  Affairs 
 then  requir'd,  when  he  call'd  to  his  Coun- 
 cil (b)  Achitophel,  and  {c)  Hujljai^  in  the  Pre- 
 fence  of  dll  the  Elders  of  [d)  Ifrael;  and 
 when  he  levied  all  the  Men  of  Ifrael,  and 
 made  Amafa  Captain  of  the  Hofty  i?}Jiead  of 
 {e)  Joab  ;  iiluing  all  fuch  King-Hke  Orders  as 
 Occafion  requir'd  .^  And  if  he  did  not  alfo 
 appoint  Judges  and  other  Magiftrates^  or  /;;z- 
 print  his  Image  on  the  current  Coin,  it  was 
 plainly  not  for  want  of  Power  (or  Authority^ 
 as  you  are  pleas'd  to  call  it)  but  only  becaufe 
 he  had  no  occalion  fo  to  do.  How  then  can 
 you  fiy,  that  J2Gt  one  Tittle  of  all  this  (which 
 you  make  the  Charaderiftic  of  an  ASlual 
 Governor^  was  done^  or  could  he  done,  by  Abfa- 
 
 lom  ? But  you  feem  to  be  fomewhat 
 
 liable  to  your  own  Cenfure  of  fnifreprefenting 
 (f)  Fadis,  not  only  in  what  I  have  already 
 noted,  but  alfo  in  what  follows  j  where  you 
 add  to  all  this ,  3.  That  David  was  not  dif- 
 poffefsd  (£)  of  the  Kingdom,  What  you  fay, 
 M  in 
 
 •'?)  Page  111.  (^)   2  Samuel  xv.    12.  and  xvi.  21, 
 
 )   2  Samuel  xv'u.  ^.       (</)   Verfe  4.        [e)  Vcrfe  24,  25. 
 7")   Page  112.  '^'^  Page  1 13. 
 
[  i62  ] 
 
 in  general,  is  indeed  very  plaufible,  that  '  a 
 
 *  King   is  never   accounted  difpojj'ejs  d  of  the 
 
 *  Kingdom,  who  continues  in  the  Kingdom, 
 
 *  and   has  his   Otiicers,   his  Friends  and  his 
 
 *  Army   about    him,   {b)  (hong  enough  to 
 
 *  beat  the  Rebels.'  But  whoever  duly  ex- 
 amines the  Hiftory  of  that  Revolut'iGn  (for  fo 
 I  think  it  may  yet  be  call'd  without  any  Im- 
 propriety) as  it  is  fet  down  in  the  Holy  Scrip- 
 ture, may  find,  that  David  wasreduc'd  to  fo 
 great  Diftrefs,  that  he  was  forc'd  on  a  fudden 
 to  jiee  for  his  Life  to  efcape  from  (/)  Abfa- 
 lom ;  and  to  go  "where  be  might  hope  to  be 
 {iife  from  his  Enemies ;  being  in  doubt  whe- 
 ther  in  Death  or  (Jz)  Lije:  That  he  wept  as 
 he  went  iip^  and  had  his  Head  cover  dj  and 
 went  barefoot^  and  all  the  People  that  was  with 
 (/)  hi/n^:  Tlaat  it  was  accounted*highly  cri- 
 minal to  correfpond  with  (w)  him :  And 
 that  he  was  driven  to  the  Neceflity  of  flying 
 by  Night  beyond  (/.')  Jordan  ;  whither  alfo 
 Abfaloui  purfu'd,  and  all  the  Men  of  Ifrael 
 with  io)  him.  'Tis  true,  this  Army  was  at 
 length  remarkably  defeated  by  the  Servants 
 of  {p)  David :  But  this  happy  Event  is  not 
 afcrib'd  to  any  Strength  that  David  had,  in 
 his  Friends  and  his  Army  about  him  ;  but 
 wholly  to  the  Providence  of  Gqd,  who  w'as 
 
 pleas'd 
 
 Ih)  Page  113.  (/)   2  Samuel XV.  14. 
 
 {k)  Verfe  20,  z\  and  26.  (/)   Verfe  30. 
 
 (7;;)    2  Samuelxvu.  19.  (»)   Verfe  22. 
 
 (0)  Verfe  24.  (/>)  2  Samuel  xy'm.  7.   ' 
 
[  163  ]        ■ 
 
 pleas'd  firfh  to  infatuate  Abfalcms,  Counfels, 
 in  order  to  bring  Evil  upon  (.^)  him,  and  af- 
 terwards to  bring  him  to  an  untimely  and 
 exemplary  (r)  End,  for  a  Terror  to  all  flich 
 unnatural  and  audacious  Rebels.  And  if  all 
 this  may  not  be  taken  as  a  Proof,  that  David 
 was,  in  the  mean  time,  difpojfefsd  of  the 
 Kingdom^  being  fled  out  of  the  Land^  while 
 the  whole  Power  appears  to  have  been  thus 
 viiibly  in  Abfalom\  Hand,  whom  the  People 
 had  anointed  over  [s)  them,  it  will  not  be 
 eafy  to  know,  how  any  King  may  have  been 
 accounted  dfpoffefsd  of  his  Kingdom^  who  has 
 afterwards  had  the  Happinefs  of  a  Reftora- 
 tion,  as  David  had.  For,  as  to  your  Aiier- 
 tion,  that  '  David  was  not  fo  much  as 
 '  obllg'd  to  leave  Jerufakni,  by  the  Rebels, 
 '  but  might  have  continued  in  it,  if  he 
 '  would ;  for  he  was  able  to  have  defended 
 '  it  againrt  them ;  but  he  left  it  voluntarily, 
 *  the  more  to  humble  himfelf  under  the 
 '  Hand  of  God,  chafciling  him  for  his  Sins, 
 '  and,  by  that  means,  to  prevail  with  God 
 '  the  fooner  to  remove  {t)  the  Rod : '  This 
 requires  fome  better  Authority,  fince  there 
 is  no  Colour  for  it,  but  much  to  the  contrary, 
 in  the  facred  Record.  But  fuppofing  it  well 
 vouch'd,  what  would  it  avail  you  ?  For  if 
 you  would  thence  infer,  even  that  David 
 M  2  had 
 
 [q)    2  Samuel  w'n,  14.  (r)  '2  Samuel  xv'{\\,  9, 
 
 (j)    z  Samuel  X\x.  C),  XQ.  [t]   Page  113. 
 
1 164 1 
 
 had  abdicated  the  Government,  and  left  the 
 Throne  vacant,  this  hovi^ever  is  evident,  that 
 fuch  an  Abdication  was  never  accounted  a 
 Forfeiture  of  his  Right,  or  any  Bar  to  his 
 Reftoration.  Upon  the  whole  Matter,  fo 
 clearly  does  it  appear,  that  David  was,  for 
 fome  Time,  dijpojjtjsdj  and  Abjalom  the  Ac- 
 tual Governor^  that,  according  to  your  Prin- 
 ciples, it  mart:  have  been  the  Subje(lls  Duty 
 to  have  prayd  for  the  latter  rather  than  the 
 former,  Jo  long  as  the  Power  was  in  his 
 Hands.  For  tins  is  the  very  Argument  by 
 which  you  hold  it  to  have  been  lawful  to 
 pray  for  [u]  Cromwell^  whofe  Title  was  no 
 better  than  that  of  Ahfahm,  unlefs  that  the 
 one  died  in  his  Nejl  (as  your  Remarker  («) 
 exprelTes  it)  and  the  other  on  a  Tree ! 
 
 But  now,  that  I  have  had  this  Occafion 
 again  to  mention  Cronnvell^  who  certainly 
 had  all  the  Marks  by  which  you  denote  an 
 ABual  (}')  Governor^  I  fhall  turn  back  to 
 take  a  Review  of  the  Keafons  which  you 
 have  given  for  your  extraordinary  Opinion, 
 that  fuch  an  JJJurper  as  he  was,  is  to  be  prayd 
 for  as  our  [z)  Go''oernor  I  viz.   i.  *  Becauie 
 
 *  the  Higher  Powers,  under  whom  this,  and 
 '  all  the  other  Precepts were  given,   — 
 
 *  were  Ufurpers,    or  thofe  who  deriv'd  their 
 
 *  Power  from  [a)  Ufurpers/     But  your  Mif- 
 
 take 
 
 (//)  Page  s-r.  (.v)  Page  TI4.         Q)  Page  112,  11?. 
 
 [z)  Fage4S..     ■  {a)  Page -48,  49. 
 
[  «6s  ] 
 
 take  in  this  has  been  flifficiently  noted  [b) 
 already.  'Tis  granted,  however,  that  theyze^^/Y 
 T^yrantS't  and  particular^ly  Nero  by  Name, 
 under  whom  all  thej'e  Frecepti  were  ivritten  : 
 
 *  And    yet  to  him  Submiflion,  Obedience, 
 
 *  Tribute,   Honour,  and  for  him  Prayers  are 
 
 *  enjoin'd ;  under   him  did  Chridians  ferve, 
 
 *  and  to  him  take  the  Military  {c)  Oath/ 
 And  what  is  to  be  concluded  from  hence? 
 Not  that  any  of  thefe  are  due  to  Ujurpers\ 
 but  that  they  are  due  to  Rightful  Princes, 
 even  tho'  l^yrants^  as  Nero  was.  So  that,  if 
 you  had  been  an  Advocate  for  King  Charles 
 I.  or  his  Sons,  this  had  been  true  Scripture- 
 Do6trine:  But  to  apply  this  to  Ufurpers,  to  a 
 Cromwell^  &c.  is  gro(ly  abufing  the  Authority 
 of  St.  Faul  and  the  Primitive  Chriflians, 
 who  were  far  from  patronizing  fuch  Revolu- 
 tion Principles.     Your   next  Reafon  is,    2. 
 
 *  Becaufe  our  Prayers,   in   this  Cafe, 
 
 *  have  no  rcfped:  to  the  Titles  or  Rights  of 
 
 *  the  Governor,  but  to  the  Perfon  governing, 
 
 *  and  the  End  of  {d)  Government.'  Which 
 is  begging  the  Queftion,  and  taking  that  for 
 granted,  which  is  a  main  Part  of  the  Con- 
 troverfy  :  Whereas  you  very  well  know,  you 
 muft  prove  this,  it  you  can,  before  you 
 draw  any  Inferences  from  it,  in  favour  of  all 
 Adual  Governors.     But  you  fay,  3.  *  It  is 
 
 *  to  be  obferv'd  likewife,  i .  That  the  Pray- 
 
 M  3  *  ers 
 
 |i}Scep.  35,  (2ff.  5:  126.         (c)  Page  49,        {d)  Ibid, 
 
[  i66] 
 
 *  ers  in  the  EngUfi  Liturgy  could  not  fult 
 '  with  Cromivcll^  nor  his  Title  of  Prctccfor ; 
 '"  they   being  all  put  up   for  our  Kt7ig  a?id 
 
 *  Governor^  which  Cromwell  was  {e)  not.'  — 
 And,    2.  '    That  no  Man  was  oblig'd   to 
 
 *  ufe   the  Pravers   in   the  Liturgy  for  Crom- 
 
 *  well:  On  the  contrary,  the  Liturgy  itfelf 
 '  was   fupprefs'd,   and   every   Man    was   at 
 
 *  Liberty  to  pray  for  him  in   what  Terms 
 
 *  he  pleased,    or  were  mofl   fuitable  to   the 
 
 *  prefent  Circumflances  j  and  this  (you  fay) 
 
 *  he  might  lawfully  do  as  long  as  the  Power 
 
 *  was  in  (/)  his  Hands.'  But,  in  anfwer  to 
 this,  give  me  Leave  to  obferve,  i.  That, 
 tho'  the  Liturgy  itfelf  wa^  Jupprejs  d  in  Crom- 
 wtV/'sTime;  yet  you  know,  Sir,  this  Apof- 
 tolical  Injundion,  in  your  Text  (^that  Sup- 
 plications.  Prayers^  Inter ceffions,  and  Giving 
 of  T'hanks  be  tnade  for  all  Men ;  for  Kings ^ 
 and  for  all  that  are  in  Authority,  6cc.  j  could 
 not  be  fupprefs'd,  or  difpcnfed  with,  being 
 a  Duty  '  at  all  ^times  {g)  blinding!  So  that 
 the  Chriftian  Subjeds  were  indifpenfibly 
 bound  thereto,  whatever  Difficulties  or  Dan- 
 gers they  had  incurr'd  in  fo  doing.  2.  That^ 
 according  to  your  Dodtrine,  they  could  not 
 pray  for  King  Charles  as  their  King  and 
 Governor^  while  he  was  difpoffeJs\i  of  [h)  the 
 Government :    Nor  yet  for  Crom^ail,  becaule 
 
 he 
 
 (e)  Page  50.    -  (/)  Page  50,  51, 
 
[  '67  ] 
 
 he  was  not  their  Kiug  (/)  and  Governor. 
 So  that  here  an  indifpenfable  Duty  could  not 
 be  perform'd  at  all!  But,  3.  Not  to  infift  on 
 the  ftrid;  Terms  of  the  Liturgy,  which  in- 
 deed could  not  fuit  u'/V/?  Cromwell,  nor  bis 
 T^itle  of  ProteBor-y  Will  you  maintain,  that, 
 when  e^jery  Man  'was  at  Liberty  to  pray  for 
 him  in  ivhat  Ter??is  he  pleas  d^  they  who  pre- 
 fiim'd  to  pray  for  him,  as  ProteSfor  and  Go- 
 vernor^ that  he  might  vanqiiijh  and  overcome 
 all  his  Enemies,  &c.  or  in  other  Words  to 
 that  effedl,  and  to  give  T'hanks  to  God  for 
 fuch  his  Succelles  and  Vicflories,  even  over 
 the  King  himfelf,  as  was  common  for  thofe 
 wretched  Time-ferving  Preachers  {k)  to  do, 
 M  4  (will 
 
 (/)  Page  50.  {k)   Mr.  Thomas  speed,   in  a  Thanks- 
 
 jjiviiig  Sermon  at  Brifio!,  for  Oli-ver'i  Vidory  over  the  King  at 
 Worcejler  (on  PJlilm  1.  i  5  )  opens  his  Dilcourle  in  thsfe  very 
 Words ;  '  We  are  this  Morning  met  togeiher,  to  fpeaic 
 '  well  of  the  Name  of  the  m.'ftHigh  God,  for  that  which 
 '  ()iext  to  the  Redemption  of  lojl  Man  through  ChriJI J  we  may 
 <  truly  call  the  greuteji  Dcmonjl ration  of  Grace  that  ever 
 '  Hca-ocn  inade  to  any  of  the  Sons  or  Daughters  of  Men  ; 
 '   for  that  which  is  the  Joy  cf  all  thofe  Hearts  that  i.vij}j  ivell 
 
 *  to  Zion,  and  the  equ^l  Terror  of  all  its  AJ-verfaries  ;  for 
 '  that  which  is  the  Wonder  and  Amazement  of  all  Neigh- 
 '  bouring  Nations  ;  and  which  (through  the  Goodnefs  of  God  J 
 '  may    prove  a    happy    Preamble   to    the  Eliablijhmcnt   of 
 
 *  Truth  and  Peact  in  this  Common' Wealth  !  '  After  which, 
 he  gravely  talks  of  the  unjpeukabk  Mercy  of  a  Deli-vcrance 
 from  '  that  incjvitab'c  Rain  that  was  coming  upon  our  Laijcs 
 
 '   and  Liherties,  our  Birth-rights  as  we  arc  Alcn  ! ' ^— •  Of 
 
 '.  the  Signal  of  Hea-je»'s  Jpprobution,  WCiory  given  in  to  the 
 
 *  moil  Righteouj  Cauie  !  ' Cf  ciieir  derp  Bliv.dncfs 
 
 who  >  canno:  fee  the  Hand  of  God,  when  it  is  fo  glorioufly 
 
 *  lifted  up  on  the  behalf  of  his  People  !  ^c;'     And  con- 
 Isdes    thus;    •  Let   every   Man  v/hen  hg    comes  home, 
 
 *  write 
 
[  i68  ] 
 
 (will  you,  I  fay,  undertake  to  maintain,  that 
 thofe  unfaithful  Difpenfers  of  the  Word  of 
 God)  were  juftifiable,  as  having  done  their 
 Duty^  or  what  they  7nigbt  laiifully  do  as  Jong 
 as  the  Power  was  in  kis  HarJs?  Or  that 
 the  Praying  in  fuch  Terms  as  thefe,  was  not 
 a  Praying  againfi  their  undoubted  injur'd 
 Sovereign  r  I  hope  not !  And  yet,  this  you 
 muft  maintain,  according  to  the  whole  Te- 
 nor of  your  Doclrine,  however  abfurd  in 
 itfelf,  or  inconfiftent  with  the  Laws  of  God 
 and  Man,  or  the  Principles  of  Right  Reafon 
 or  Common  Senfe!  Upon  the  whole  there- 
 fore 'tis  plain,  that  the  Cafe  of  Croniwell  is 
 not  impertinentlv  urgd  again  afid  c^ain  in 
 the  Remarks^  as  you  (/)  would  repreient  it. 
 But  your  infinuating  that  it  was  done  with 
 a  Defign  to  draw  a  Parallel  between  that 
 Cz{'^  Lnd  (w)  the  ReT.oluticn !  and  charging 
 the   Remarker  with    '  f^pp'>fi''g  the  frefent 
 
 *  Government  to  he  [ii]  Vfurpation,^  is  not 
 only  invidious  as  to  him,  but  may  be  unfer- 
 viceable  even  to  the  prefent  Government ;  zs 
 if  the  prefent  Government,  and  the  Revolu- 
 tion upon  which  it  is  founded,  could  not  be 
 fufficiently  vindicated,  without  the  Help  of 
 your  precarious  Hypothefis,  of  the  Autho- 
 rity 
 
 *  write  this  Motto  upon   his  Dcor-Pofis ;  Saved  by  Gcd; 
 
 *  upon  his  Wife   snd  Children,    Zetvcd  by  God;  upon   his 
 
 '  Ei'cate,  Sa-ved  by  Gzd;  upon  his  Libert)' p^e/etrucd 
 
 «  by  God!  &C-*     (Sermon  z/^h.  Oaobcr,    1651.   4/^,  p.    i, 
 l6,  ZA.  2?,  %\  ) 
 
 i/)f^gcfy  N  Page  4--  fsjPageicj. 
 
[    i69  ] 
 
 r'lty  of  all  Acfual  Governors  whatfbever ; 
 which  is  the  main  Point  here  in  Queftion,* 
 and  what  no  Man  of  found  Principles  can 
 ever  agree  to. 
 
 I  have  been  the  more  particular  in  the  Ex- 
 amination of  thefe  Cafes,  to  fliew,   how  lit- 
 tle Foundation  you  have  in  Scripture,  or  any 
 other    authentic   Hilliory,   to    fupport    your 
 Doarine  of   the    Lc-^fulnefs  and  Biit^  of 
 praying  for  all  prefent^  Powers,   oi'Aciual 
 Governors,    as   firch,    without  Diftindion  of 
 their  Titles,    right  or  wrong.     But  I  hope 
 you  will  take  notice,  that  I  do  not  apply 
 what   I  have  here  faid,  to  any  other  of  our 
 prefent  Controverfies  :  Nor  does  it  appear  to 
 me,  that  you,  in  io  doing,  have  done  much 
 Honour   to  the  Caule,  for  which   vou  have 
 enter'd  the  Lifts  as  a   Champion.'   Never- 
 theleff,   becaufe  you  are  apt  to  triumph  over 
 your  Rcmarker,   as  if  every  thing  in   your 
 Sermon  which  he  has  not  'diredly  objected 
 to,   were  to  be  taken /re  ccnfeffo;  and   that 
 you  may  not  have  occafion  to  do  the  like  to 
 me,  I  f.nd  myfelf  under,  a  Necelfity  to  take 
 notice  of  fome  few  Paffages,   in  this   your 
 Vindication,  relating  to  the  Revo/iaicn,  which 
 otherwife  I  did  not  at  all  intend  to  meddle 
 with:  And  from   your  Ingenuity  in  thefe 
 1  Ihall  leave  it  to  the  Reader  to  iud^^e  of  the 
 fell.  "     ^ 
 
 you   tell  us  plainly,    that  vou  '  did  not 
 *  mean  to  juftify  every  Perfon,'  or  every  Ac- 
 
 *  tion, 
 
[  ^70  J 
 
 *  tion,   that   contributed  towards  it ;  nor  do 
 
 *  you  affirm,  that  all  the  Perfons,  or  all  their 
 '  Adlions,  were  (o)  righteous.'  And  what  is 
 this,  ku  to  fuggeft  to  your  Reader,  as  if  there 
 had  been  fome  Abjalom  or  Achitophel,  or 
 fome  other  fuch-like  iinrighteotn  Ferjons^  con- 
 cerned in  the  late  Glorious  Revolution,  whole 
 A£fions  contributing  towards  it,  could  not  be 
 fm\y  j  lift  iff  d  !  If  fo,  you  ^vould  have  done 
 well  to 'have  mention'd  fome  Particulars,  for 
 the  Honour  of  that  great  Event;  that  the 
 Reader  might  be  able  to  diftinguidi,  which 
 of  the  Perfons  or  ABions  thai  contributed 
 towards  it  iiVt  jufiijiabk,  and  which  are  not  ; 
 and  thereby  the  more  effedually  convinc'd, 
 that  '  the:    Revolution    was    the    Work    of 
 
 *  God's  Providence :'  Whereas,  only  to  djjert 
 this,  in   general  Terms,  as  '  a  Change  juft 
 
 *  and    neceilary    in    the    prefent    State    of 
 
 *  Things,*  and,  after  fuch  very  obfcure  Infi- 
 nuations  of  fomewhat  iirijuftifiable  in  it,  to 
 talk  of  the  Wickedjiefs  of  Man  being  o'Der- 
 ruFd  by  (/;)  God^  &c.  is  not  the  way  to  con- 
 vince the  Confciences  of  People  who  are 
 diffatisfy'd,  as  to  the  Lawfuhiefs  and  Duty 
 of  fuch  Praying  and  Giving  'I'hanks, 
 
 You  fay,   The  Revolution  '  was  with  the 
 
 *  general  Confent  of  the  People  of  all  Ranks, 
 
 *  from  the  Higheft  to  the  Lowcft,  both  in 
 '  Church  and  State  5  whofe  Hearts  the  Lord 
 
 *  turn'd, 
 
 \p)  Page  108.  ,  (/>)  Ibid, 
 
[  ^7^  ] 
 
 '  turned,   as  of  one  Man,  to  bring  It  about 
 '  and   to  .ftablifli  {q)  it.'     Now,  this  fuppo- 
 fes  fuch  a  Providentid  Unanimity  aiui  Con- 
 currence in  it,  as  is  not  confiiient  with  what 
 you   tell    us,    immediately   after,    of    many 
 Lives  and  Fortunes  lojl  in  Oppofition  to  (r)  it 
 and    of  many  Attempts  made,    manv  De/ims 
 deeply  laid,  and  maiiy   times  great  Hopes  con^ 
 ceivd  to  overturn  (5)  //.     Nor  does  this  fup- 
 posd   Unanimity  appear   to  be  Matter   of 
 l^ad:,  it  we  may  believe  how  inconfiderable 
 a  xMajority   of  Voices  there  was  to   carry  it 
 m  either  Houfe  of  a  Convention  fummon'd 
 even  by  the  Party  principally  interefled  in  it  • 
 or  the  feemingly  credible  Accounts  which 
 we  have  had   from  Perfons  deeply  concerned 
 in  the  Secrets  of  that  Tmie,  that  not  one  of 
 the  highe/i  Rank  in  the  Church  (the  then  Bi 
 fliops)  had   any  Hand   in  it:  And  ^tis  well 
 known,  that  many  Men  of  all  Ranks,  both 
 m  Church  and  State,   fuffer'd  a  Deprivation 
 ot_  all   their  Preferments,  and   other  Hard- 
 fti!ps,  becaufe  they  could  not  in  Confcience 
 comply  with  it.     You  fay,  <  They  who  op- 
 pos  d  It,  as  they  did  here  in  Scotland,  and 
 in  Ireland,    fell  a  Sacrifice  to  that  Oppofi- 
 '  tion  and  thereby  loft  their  Religion,  Sany 
 of  them   their   Lives   and   Fortunes,    and 
 brought  Mifery  and   Ruin  on  themfelves 
 ,    and  the  Nation,   as  the  Lord  threatned  to 
 
 *  his 
 
[  172  ] 
 
 «  his  People  of  old,  if  they  refus'd  to  fub- 
 '  mit  to  the   King  of   (t)  Babylon!     And 
 how   could    they  expecfl  any  other,    if  they 
 had   then    fuch  an  exprefs  Command  from 
 the  Lord  to  fubmit,   as  the  Jewi  had   for- 
 merly to  the  King  of  Babylon  ?  For  this  you 
 ieem  willing  to  make  your  Readers  believe, 
 (or  elfe  why  did  you  make  the  Comparifon  ?) 
 tho'  you  are  indeed  fo  modeft,  as  not  to  offer 
 any  Proof  of  it.     But  I  pray  you,  Sir,  what 
 do  you  mean  by  their  lojing   their  Religton  ? 
 We  know,  the' whole  Epifcopal  Church  of 
 Scotland  was  then  abolifh'd,  and  Prelbytery 
 fet  up  in  its  room.     But  this,  we  were  told, 
 was  done  agreeably  to  the  Humour  or  Incli- 
 nation of  the  Nation!  If  therefore  you  mean 
 this    you  mull   look  upon   Preibylery  as  no 
 Religion  at  all  (which  fome  of  your  Neigh- 
 bours, I  fuppofe,  will  not  thank  you  for)  and 
 at   the  fame  Time  lay  an  heavy  Imputation 
 upon  thofe  who  promoted  fuch  an  Altera- 
 tion of  the  Conjlitution  there,  as  if  they  chofe 
 to   have  7to  Religion  eftabhfh'd,   rather  than 
 that  true  Religion  which  was  of  Divine  In- 
 £tit.ution  1 But,  be  that  as  it  will,  by  what- 
 ever Means  their  Religion  was  loji,  and  the 
 Nation  brought  to  Mijery  and  Ruin  (as  youj 
 here  affirm)  methinks  'tis  hke  to  be  but  a 
 {lender  Motive  to  Rrayers  and  "Tbank/giving 
 for  thofe  who  may  be  fuppos'd  to  have  been 
 
 the 
 
 [t)  Page  iiS. 
 
[  173  ] 
 
 the  Caufe  of  it !  Nor  can  all  this  be  con- 
 fident with  your  other  Affirmation  ;  that 
 the  Revolution  was  brought  about,  *  without 
 
 *  any  Bloodfhed,  Confufion  of  the  State,  or 
 
 *  Alteration   of  the  Conftitution  in  Church 
 
 *  or  (u)  State:'  And  that  '  the  Conftitutioii 
 
 *  was  hereby  preferv'd  ;  the  true  Religion 
 '  and  Laws,  the  Rights,  Liberties,  and  Prc- 
 '  perties  of  the  People,  and  the  Lives  of  the 
 
 *  Subjeds  were  (.\)  fecur'dj'  which  I  leave 
 you  to  reconcile  (if  you  can)  with  the  fore- 
 going, at  your  Leifure. 
 
 Again,  among  fome  more  Arguments  oi 
 the  like  kind,  under  Pretence  of  juftifying 
 the  Revolution,  as  the  Lord's  Doing,  you  ob- 
 ferve,  '  that  the  many  Attempts  and  Defigns 
 
 *  to  overturn  it,  have  all  been  blafted,  and 
 '  come  to  nought  j  fome  of  them  by  unex- 
 '  pecfted  unforefeen  [y)  Accidents.'  But  the 
 Fallacy  of  this  is  eahly  Cecn  through.  For, 
 your  Readers  have  not  all  forgot,  that  there 
 were  many  Attetnpts  to  overturn  a  former 
 Conftitution,  in  order  to  the  Reftoration  of 
 King  Charles,  and  namely  at  Prejlon,  Dunbar 
 and  I'ForceJler,  &c.  which  were  blajled  and 
 came  to  nought.  And  yet  yOu  cannot  thence 
 infer,  that  the  Conftitution  then  in  being, 
 was  according  to  Gods  JVill,  and  had  his 
 ^Approbation;  fince  you  confefs,  the  Reftora- 
 iion,  which  afterwards  enfued,  was  certainly 
 
 brought 
 
 [u]  Pigp  u8,  ,;.r;  Page  119.  (1}  Ibi-i. 
 
[  174] 
 
 brought  about  by  a  ivondirful  Guidance  of  (z) 
 Providence ;  unlefs  you  can  believe,  that 
 God's  Providence  i^a)  was  on  both  Sides  of 
 the  Caufe,  in  diredt  Oppofition  the  one  to 
 the  other ! 
 
 After  all  this,  and  fomething  more  con- 
 cerning the  Blejjing^  oj  Religion  and  Liberty^ 
 prefervd  and  JecurUi  by  the  Revolution^  you 
 are  pleas'd  to  raife  an  Obje(5lion  againft  it,  in 
 thefe  Words:  '  We  deny  not,  may  fome 
 '  reply,  that  thefe  are  valuable  Bleflings,  and 
 
 *  highly   to  be  priz'd  ;  but  we  ;;;////  not  da 
 
 *  Ftvil  that  Good  may  come.     What  Power 
 
 *  or  Authority  had  they  to  do  this  ?  Was 
 '  not  this  done  again (1:  Lawful  Authority, 
 '  and  contrary  to  the  W^ord  of  God,    which 
 
 *  enjoins  Obedience  to   the  Higher  Powers, 
 
 *  as  well   as   againft  the   Laws  of  the   (^) 
 
 *  Land?'  And,  left  your  Readers  (hould  find 
 it  too  hard  for  them  to  anfwer  this  your  own 
 
 Objec- 
 
 [%)  Page  96.  {a)  The  fame  unhallow'd  Preach- 
 
 er,   in   his  remarlcable  Sermon  lall   quoted,    among    many 
 more  Expreffions  of  the  like  Strain,  fays,  *  If  they  aflc  us, 
 Where   is  our  God ?   We  can   anUvcr  them  with    Joy  and 
 Boldnefs,  that  oar  God  is  the  Living  God,    who  fcatter'd 
 them   in   his  Difpleafure  at  Marjloji.moor  ;  whofe    Power 
 brake  them  in   Pieces   at  Nafeby-Field  ;  who   fmote   their 
 Great  Ones  in  Kent  ;  who,    by  a  Kandful,  put  Thoufands 
 to  Flight  at  St.  Faggons;  the  Stroke  of  whole  Terror  they 
 felt  in  the  North  ;   whofe  Strength  maoe  the  Weak  ftrong, 
 to  ftain  the  Glo.y  of  their  Pride  zlDuhbc  r\   whofe  Hand 
 was  never  drawn  back,  but  was  Arctcht  oui  Itill,  until!  he 
 had  put  on  the  Toplloneof  oar  Delivcrr.nce  at  Worccjler? 
 {Speed,  p.  20.)  See  alfo  the  Njtei  on  p.  38,  14^,  1 5  2,  and 
 167.  {b)  Page  {19. 
 
[  ^75  ] 
 
 Objedion,  you  make  a  Show  of  anfwerinT 
 It  yourfelh  A  S/jow,  I  fay ;  becaule,  to  be 
 free  with  you,  it  would  incline  thofe  who  do 
 not  know  you,  to  fufpedl,  that  you  have  not 
 yet  got  quite  clear  of  your  former  Scruples, 
 the'  you  have  thrown  the  Burden  of  theni 
 cff  your  Back!  The  Sublfance  of  your  An- 
 fwer  thereto  is,  in  (hort,  this.  i.  '  That  if 
 '  we  are  commanded  to  reji/i  the  Devi!,  we 
 
 *  may  furely  refift  the  Evil,  in  order  to'pre- 
 ferve  the  Good  we  enjov,  but  is  in  Dano-er 
 
 *  to  be  {c)  \q^:     I  need  not  inlift  upon  tlie 
 Coarfenels  oi  the   Comparifon   between  ike 
 Devil znd  a  Rightful  Sovereign,  which  fufii- 
 ciently  expofes  itfclf!  The  Weaknefsof  your 
 Argument    is  enough   for  me  to  fhew;  'viz. 
 That  becaufe,  whenever  he  tempts  us  to  Sir 
 we  muft  nfi'lthe  Devil-,  therefore  we  may 
 refift  God's  Vicegerent,    whenever  we  think 
 ourfelves  ifi  Danger  of  lofmg  any  thing  thdi  ;i 
 W/  To  which  you  add  a  Common-Place 
 Defcant    concerning    Selfprefervalion  ;     ot 
 which  you  immediately  del^at  us  again,   by 
 this  Proviyd,  that  *  it  be  not  forbidden  by  the 
 
 *  Law  of  (^)  God,'  as  vou  know  r^//% 
 the  Higher  Powers  exprefsly  to  be.  2.  You 
 heap  up  together  a  Parcel  of  ftranire  Princi- 
 ples concerning  Tyranny,  Slavery,  Poperx, 
 ^/•^/r^;:y  Power.  Opprefwn,  Coronation 
 Oath,  Forfetture,  Free-People,  &c.  which  arc 
 
 aU 
 
 W  Page  120,  ^^  ji^.^^ 
 
[  176] 
 
 all  fo  controverted,  as  not  to  be  adniltted  in 
 Anfwer  to  the  Objedion.  For  tho',  as  ycu 
 obferve,  '  the  People  are  a  free  People,  not 
 *  (e)  Slaves  j'  you  muft  remember,  that  they 
 are  all  Natural-born  Subjects  j  and  confe- 
 quently  bound  to  Allegiance  and  Obedience  to 
 the  Sovereign,  from  their  very  Birth,  without 
 the  additional  Tye  of  any  (/)  Oaths  j  on 
 which  account,  the  vulgar  Notion  of  a  Free- 
 born  SiibjeB  is  a  downright  Abfurdity  and 
 Contradidlion  in  Terms. 
 
 For  this  is  as  much  a  Law  of  Nature,  as 
 your  Self-prejervation  is :  So  that  if  you  will 
 put  the  latter  in  Oppofition  to  the  former, 
 you  will  make  the  Law  of  Nature  incon- 
 iiftent  with  itfelf,    and  confequently  of  no 
 
 Force  at  all. That  we  may  lawfully 
 
 defend  our  Lives  and  Fortunes  againft  all 
 unlawful  Attempts,  is  granted  us  even  by  the 
 gracious  Conceffions  of  our  Kings  themfelves, 
 whofe  ordinary  Judges  are  fworn  to  do  equal 
 Juflice,  between  the  King  and  every  Subjecft, 
 as  well  as  between  Subjedt  and  Subjed;.  But 
 your  Obje^5lion  fuppofes  a  Refiftance  of  Sove- 
 reign Authority  after  another,  and  more  ex- 
 traordinary Manner ;  which  the  Anfwer  you 
 have  made  to  it  has  not  yet  accounted  for, 
 and  which  even  your  own  Author  Dr.  Falk^ 
 ner  (g)   utterly  difallows. 
 
 Your  Affertion,   that  the  People   '  are   to 
 
 '  be 
 
 (f)  Page  I  20.  [f]  See  the  JppenJi.x,  No,  iii.  &  v, 
 
 ig)  See  the  Appendix,  No.  i. 
 
[  ^ir  ] 
 
 *  be  govern'd  by  their  own  Laws,  which  they 
 
 *  themfelves  {a)  make/  has  been  already  {b) 
 prov'dtobe  aMiftake  too  great  to  be  excus'd 
 in  a  Gentleman  who  talks  fo  much  of  Law, 
 unlefs  you  could  produce  fome  one  Authentic 
 Voucher  to  fupport  it.  Neither  is  it  true  in 
 Fad,  that  *  the  King  is  bound  by  Oath, 
 
 *  as  much  [c]  as   the  People  are  bound  to 
 
 *  Allegiance  and  Obedience.'  For  'tis  fo  well 
 known,  that  I  dare  even  appeal  to  your- 
 felf  for  the  Truth  of  it,  that  the  King's 
 Pvight  commenceth  immediately  from  the 
 Death  of  his  Anceftor3  fo  that  his  Subjeds 
 are  all  hound  to  Allegiance  and  Obedience  to 
 him,  [d)  whether  he  is  ever  crown'd  or  not ; 
 and  till  his  Coronation  there  is  never  any 
 Oath  taken  by,  or  tender'd  to  him.  But,  as 
 to  what  you  infer  from  thefe  falfe  Premifes, 
 that  *  if  a  King  of  Great  Britain  (hall  break 
 
 *  through   the  Laws,    and    his  Coronation- 
 
 *  Oath,   endeavour  to  fubvert   and  overturn 
 
 *  the  Conftitution,  introduce  Arbitrary  Pow- 
 
 *  er,  a  falfe  Religion,  &c, he  may  forfeit 
 
 *  the  People's  Allegiance,  as  well  as  the  Peo- 
 
 *  pie,  by  their  Dilobedience  to  his  juft  and 
 '  Liwful  Commands,  may  forfeit  their  Title 
 
 *  to  his  (f)  Proteiftionj'  'tis  fuch  a  dangerous 
 Conclufion,  as  may  afford  a  Handle  to  more 
 Revolutiofis  than  you  would  be  thought  an 
 Advocate  forj  (ince,  if  this  be  once  allow'd, 
 
 N  cither 
 
 {a]  Page  120.  [l)  Seep.  139.         U]  Page  129 
 
 4]  Sep  the  Jppen.'fix,  No.  ii.  iii.  if)  Page  ,121. 
 
[  178  ] 
 
 either  to  b^  good  Law,  Reafon  or  Equity, 
 What  may  not  fome  Fanatical  Party  or 
 other  conftrue  to  be  a  Breaking  through  the 
 Laws  and  the  Coronation-Oath^  and  a  Suh- 
 rjerting  and  Overturning  the  Conflitiition  ;  or 
 at  lead  an  Endeavour  (o  to  do  ?  (For  you 
 leave  them  to  judge  for  ihtmfelves!)  And 
 what  will  all  we  can  fay  to  the  contrary 
 avail  us,  if  they  have  once  got  Power  enough 
 to  maintain  their  Allegations  by  the  all-con- 
 vincing Sword  arid  Gun  ?  And,  3.  Tho'  'tis 
 true,  '  there  is  nothing  in  the  Word  of  God 
 *  that  forbids  Men  to  preferve  and  fccure 
 ,*  their  Lives  and  Liberties,  their  Relieion 
 ^  and  (/)  Conilitution  ;'  that  is  to  fay,  by 
 any  lawful  Means;  yet  if  this  cannot  be 
 done  without  forcibly  refifling  the  Higher 
 PoiverSj  you  would  do  well  to  obferve,  that 
 the  Word  cf  God,  which  exprefsly  forbids 
 Juch  Refijlaftce,  has  in  the  mofl  effedual 
 Manner,  forbidden  us  fo  to  preferve  and  fe~ 
 cure  ourfclves  here,  under  the  Penalty  of 
 Damnation  hereafter  :  And,  likewife  to  con- 
 sider with  what  Propriety,  an  Event  brought 
 about  by  fach  Means,  fo  contrary  to  the  Word 
 of  Gody   can  ever  *  be  prefum'd  agreeable  to 
 
 '  his  {g)  Will  I ' So  that,   whether  you 
 
 or  your  Remarker  is  more  juflly  liable  to  the 
 Ccnfure  of  *  dazzling  the  Eyes  of  the  Igno- 
 '  rant,  and  fuch  as  fee k  not  Truth,  but  only 
 f  to  be  confirci'd  in  their  Prejudices  and  (/?) 
 
 *  Errors, 
 
 (/']   Paget?  I.  [g]  Page  122.  {h)  Page  124. 
 
[  '79  ] 
 
 '  Errors,   &c^  I  fliall  not  take  upon  me  to. 
 determine  ;  but  leave  it,  upon  the  Whole,  to. 
 all  Me?!  of  Se?ife  and  juft  Rcafoning^  to  judge 
 for  thcmfelves  indifferently  between  you. 
 You  confcfs,  *  It  is  certain,  God  does  not 
 
 *  always  approve  what  he  permits :  For  he 
 
 *  does  not  approve  Sin,  and  yet  he  permits 
 
 *  it  j  but  is  fo  far  from  rpproving,  that  he 
 
 *  will  feverely  punifli  (/j  it.'  Why  then,  Sir, 
 are  you  fo  highly  offended  with  your  Re- 
 marker  for  diftinguiiliing  in  all  the  Events 
 that  happen  between  God's  Permijjion  and 
 {Ji)  Approbation^  by  his  Word?  How  can  you 
 affirm,  that,  *  in  outward  Events, God's 
 
 *  Will   of  Permiffion,  and  his  Will  of  Ap- 
 
 *  probation,  is  one  and  the  (/)  fame? '  And 
 with  what  Sincerity  can  you  fuggeft  and  infi- 
 nuate  to  your  Readers,  that  the  Words,  Pro- 
 iiidence^  Injujlice^  Punijhjnefjt^  Permijjion  and 
 Approbation,  are  made  ufe  of  by  the  Remar- 
 ker   to  no  other  End,    but  *    to  mifapply 
 
 *  Words,    to  call  Evil  Goody   and  Good  (m) 
 
 *  Eviir 
 
 You  are  pleas'd  very  gravely  to  afk,  '  Is 
 
 *  the  Prefervation  of  God's  true  Religion,  of 
 
 *  the  Laws,   Lives,  Liberties  and  Properties 
 
 '  of  the  People,  &c. a  Punifhment 
 
 '  that  proceeds  from  God's  {n)  Wrath  ?  &cJ 
 No,  Sir !  Not  in  themfelves.  But  yet,  the 
 moft    notorious    Ufurpations    having    been 
 
 N  2  fome> 
 
 (/)  Page  127,  128.  (k)  Page  125, 
 
 {/)   Page  139.  tm)  Pa^e   iz6.  (»)  Bid. 
 
[  >8o  1 
 
 rometimes  brought  about  by  the  mere  Pre- 
 tence of  fiich  Prefervatioriy  which  never- 
 thelefs  have  prov'd  the  utter  Subverfion  of 
 God's  true  Rrligion,  as  well  as  of  the  LawSj 
 Lives,  Liberties  and  Properties  of  the  People^ 
 (known  Inftancesof  which  need  not  here  to 
 be  repeated)  fuch  Ufurpations,  at  leafl:,  may 
 properly  be  iook'd  upon  as  Punijhmefjts  jrro- 
 ceeding  from   Goits  Wrath  •■,  *  and   may   be 
 
 *  compar'd    to    Plagues,     Hurricanes     and 
 
 *  Earthquakes,    as   the  greateit  Evil  of  the 
 
 *  (p)  two,'     And  again,  you  aflc,  '  Are  A,r- 
 
 *  bitrary  Power,  Oppreffion,  Slavery,  ^c.  on 
 '  Pretence   of  Religion   Bleflings  and 
 
 *  Mercies,  which  we  ought  to  wifli  and  pray 
 
 *  (/')for.'  Who  fuppoles  it,  Sir?  By  this 
 time,  furely,  all  Men,  who  have  not  loft 
 their  Senfes,  muft  be  convinc'd  of  the  con- 
 trary. But  yet,  even  thefe  are  not  to  be  op- 
 pos'd  in  any  way  that  is  contrary  to  the  Laws 
 of  God,  the  Laws  of  Nature,  and  the  Fun- 
 damental Laws  of  the  Land.  So  that  the 
 wild  and  unreafonahk  {rj)  Opinions  which  you 
 exclaim  againft,  may  return,  without  a  Ccm- 
 plimenr,  to  thofe,  who  looking  through  your 
 Sp^<5lacles,  may  be  more  apt  to  fee  all  things 
 i?iverted !  and  fo  learn  to  mifapply  Words, 
 calling  Evil  Good,  and  Good  Evil  I 
 
 Among  the  other  Arguments  here  brought 
 to  prove,  that  the  Nation  did  not  any  Injuf- 
 
 ticc 
 
[  i8.  ] 
 
 tice  to  King  James  (which  I  am  not  dlfpos'd 
 to  dilpute  with  you)  you  meiuiun  am  ns  one, 
 that   both   his  Daughters  reign  d  fucccjjiveiy 
 after  (r)  him.     But  your  calling  them  '  the 
 *  only    Peifons  of  the   Royal  Family  who 
 '  were  of  Age  to  [s)  govern,*  Icems  to  be  a 
 fall   Concefiion,    that  there  was  fomc  other 
 Perfon    of   the   fame   Family,    who   might 
 have  fucceeded  with  Icfs  Injufticc^  had  it  not 
 been  for  want  of  jige  to  gover?i!  Now,  whe- 
 ther oar  Laws  have  afcertain'd  any  particular 
 y^gej   as  the   neceilary   C^ialihcution   to  the 
 Crown,  or  what  it  is,  you  have  not  told  us; 
 nor   whether   the  Perfon   you  mean  by  this 
 ,  Diltindliion,  did  ever  yet  arrive  to  the  ylge  to 
 govern.     You   feem   willing   to   make  your 
 Readers  underftand  you,  ot  the  Child  bora 
 the    loth  of  Ji^f/e    1608,   whofc  Birth  was 
 then    acknowleds'd    aiid    coi^srarulated,    bv 
 Addrefles  from    the  Prir.ce    nnd  Piincefs   of 
 Orange^  and  all  Ranks  and  Oroers  of  Men, 
 as  well  as   in  the  more  folemn  Prayers  and 
 Thankfgiving  of  the  whole  Church  of  Eng- 
 land, for  hin:!,  as  undoubted  Prince  of  l^ales 
 (c)S  appears  by  the  London  Gazftte^  and  thoie 
 Original    Oliices,    publilh'd   by   Authority.) 
 And  that  this  was  your  Defign,  is  the  more 
 probable,   from  divers  other  PaiTiAges  in   this 
 very    Book;    where,    fpeaking  of   the  fame 
 Perfon,  and   of  his   Legitimacy,    you   have 
 N  3  pub- 
 
 (<•)  Page  127.  (;J  I'jii. 
 
[  i82  J 
 
 publifh'd  thefe  remarkable  Words :  *  Howe- 
 ver the  Words  of  the  Oath  of  Abjuration 
 found,  yet  it  cannot  be  fuppos'd,  or  pre- 
 tended, that  they  require  any  one,  wlio 
 takes  it,  to  believe  The  Pretender  to  be  Ille- 
 gitimate, becaufe  that  Point  never  came 
 before  the  Parliament,  but  was  carefully 
 avoided;  and  becaufe  the  chief  and  lead- 
 ing Men did  own   and  fuppofe   the 
 
 Legitimacy  of  his  Birth,  at  Dr.  Sacheve- 
 relN  {t)  Trial.'  And  again,  '  A  generous 
 A  (ft  of  Favour  and  Refped  to  T'he  Pre- 
 tender^ abftradly,  as  a  Prince  royally  de- 
 jcendedy  is  neither  a  Sin,  nor  inconfiflent 
 with  this  Oath :  For,  the  denying  him  a 
 Legal  Title  to  the  Crown,  does  not  render 
 him  incapable  of  all  Honour  and  Refpe<5l, 
 due  to  his  Dignity,  Qiiality  or  [u]  Merit.' 
 With  what  Defigii  you  have  publKh'd  fuch 
 Expreffions  as  thefe,  God  and  your  own 
 Confcience  can  only  know  :  But  many  Peo- 
 ple will  not  be  perfuaded  to  believe,  that  a 
 Gentleman  of  your  Judgment  could  ferioufly 
 propofe  all  this,  as  any  Motive  to  the  taking 
 Oaths  to,  and  praying  for,  the  prefent  Go- 
 vernment, whatever  Zeal  you  may  expref> 
 for  it. 
 
 And  the  like  Objeclion  may  be  made  to 
 the  Arguments  by  which  you  fay,  *  We 
 *  may  reafonably  infer  God's  Approbation  or 
 
 Dif- 
 
 (/)  Page  208.  [u)  Page  223,  224.. 
 
[  i83  ] 
 
 c  Difapprobatlon; that,  In  this  Cafe, 
 
 «  there  was  not  only  Pcrmiflion,  but  {x)  Ap- 
 '  probation,  ef.;  For,  i.  Giant ing,-m  ge- 
 neral that  '  where  there  is  no  Frohibuion, 
 '  by' any  Law  of  God,  there  certainly  is  a 
 
 *  Permillion  j  and  what  we  have  Liberty  to 
 '  do   and  tranfgrefs  no  Law  by  doing,  that 
 
 *  we  may  lawfully  {y)  do:'  Yet,  what  wi.l 
 you  lay  down  for  your  Affumption,  or  ^.l- 
 nor  Propofition,  to  ground  a  Logical  Con- 
 cUifion  upon  ?  If  you  fay,  there  uvzr  no  Fro-^ 
 hibition,  by  any  La^cv  of  God,  novcmy  Law 
 trangrejsi  in  the  Cafe  in  Q:^^f^^^]y]^' 
 muft  exoea  to  be  told  of  the  Prohibitions 
 a^ainft  SubjecJs  re/ifiing  the  Higher  Fou^en, 
 and  Children  dljobejing  their  Pcirents,  &c. 
 And  if  this  was  a  Sin,  and  on\y  permitted  by 
 God!  for  wife  Reafons  (as  he  '  was  pleas'd  to 
 
 <  permit  Satm  to  bring  all  thofc  Evils  upon 
 ^  Job  which  are  recorded  in  that  (2;)  Book  j 
 then  'by  your  own  Confeilion,  God  dees  net 
 apprGve\  '  and  yet  he  permits  it;  but  is  io 
 
 <  far  from  approving,   that  he  will  ^feverely 
 
 *  (a)  punidi  it.'  Nor  can  you  repiy,  that 
 there  was  no  Refiflance  in  the  Cale  in  Quel- 
 tion  fmce  vou  have  publiQVd  this,  for  an  un- 
 deniable  Truth,   that,     *  in    all   preceding 
 
 *  Reigns,  Refiflance,  upon  any  Pretence 
 '  whatfoever,  was,  by  many  Statutes,  unlaw- 
 
 *  ful  •  but  now  the  Lawfulnefs  of  it  is  mam- 
 
 ]ST   4  '  tain'd, 
 
 (.)  Page  129.  b)  'f*^'^-  Hr'^£ei39. 
 
 («)  Page  12-,  !  23. 
 
[  i84  ] 
 
 *  tain'd,  and  made  the  Foundation   of  the 
 
 *  prelent  Conftitution,   as  without  doubt  it 
 
 *  is:    For,  unkfs   Refinance  be   allow'd   in 
 
 *  fome  Cafes,  the  Revolution  cannot  be  (h) 
 '  defended.'  And,  unlefs  you  can  fairly 
 maintain  this  your  firft  -Argument,  the  next 
 will  not  be  thought  worthy  of  any  Confi- 
 deration  at  all.     For,    where  you  fay,    2. 
 
 *  What  the  Nation  had  thus  a  Permiffion  to 
 
 *  do,  or  might  lawfully  do,  without  tranf- 
 
 *  greiling  any  Law  of  God,   may   be  pre- 
 
 *  ium'd  to  be  agreeable  to  the  Will  of  God, 
 :'  and  to  have  his  (c)  Approbation  j'  all  this 
 will  be  look'd  upon  to  be  (as  indeed  it  is) 
 but  a  Begging  the  QneAion,  which  ought 
 firft  to  have  been  prov'd  ;  viz.  that  there 
 was  ?20  Prohibition,  by  any  Law  of  God,  nor 
 any  "TranfgreJioJi  of  a?iy  LaiVy  in  the  Refift- 
 ance  then  made.  For,  'tis  not  enough  to 
 fay,  that  '  the  Natural  Rights  and  Liberties 
 '  of  Mankind,    Chrift's  true   Religion   pre- 
 
 *  ferv'd,  &c.  • are  Things  certainly  agree- 
 
 *  able  to  God's  Will,  and  have  his  [d)  Appro- 
 
 *  bation  j'  becaufe  the  fame  has  been  plead- 
 ed, with  as  much  Confidence,  in  fome  other 
 Cafes,  where  the  Means  have  been  evidently 
 unlawful;  and  which  even  yourfelf  cannot 
 prejume  to  have. been  agreeable  to  the  Will  of 
 Gody  and  to  have  had  his  Approbation ;  as 
 I   have  already  obferv'd.     And,  for  the  fame 
 
 Reafon, 
 
 {f>)  P.iges  206,  207.  (f)  Page  129.         {d)  Ibid, 
 
[   ^^5  ] 
 
 Reafon,  I  would  not  have  faid  any  more  of 
 what  you  offer,  as  the  next  Argument;  viz. 
 3. '  The  wonderful  Manner  in  which  k  wi* 
 '  brought  about,  the  many  fignal  Providen^ 
 *  ces  that  have  attended  it,  the  Blading  all 
 J  the  Defigns,  and  Bringing  to  nought  all 
 .-*  the  Attempts  that  have  been  made  from 
 '  Time  to  Time  to  overturn  (r)  it:'  Bu*^ 
 fince  you  are  pleas'd  to  call  thefe  a  vifibk 
 Approbation  from  Henven,  and  to  declare 
 that  you  can  fee  no  reafon,  ivhy  tbey  jloJd 
 not.  bealhwd  to  fignlfy  God's  (/)  Apprda^ 
 tion;  I  beg  Leave  to  fay,  this  Argument 
 proves  too  much,  and  therefore  ought  not  to 
 be  admitted  for  any  Proof  at  (g)  all. 
 
 After  this    as  if  you  were  (like  'Afcham 
 whom  you  have  gravely  {h)  quoted)   a  pro! 
 
 fel^'d 
 
 !1  oT  '^^'  ^30.  (/)  Ibid. 
 
 .      te)  B.lhop  Burv.ct  truly  obferves.  That  this  from   Pr^^^ 
 
 ■)re  to 
 
 d.nce   is  a  Ju^gerous  and  deceitrul  ArgumaU,   ^nd  th.rk 
 \^touclfd^uh  Cautlor:.      And  t.en  he  ftv,,  '    iIT  t^^ 
 '   that  God,  tor  the  pwvjkw.  of  Nation/  ^\xel  >  "?    ' 
 '  fnrh   n  Tor,.<.^>^    ^r  c        "^        ^^"^iuii^,  gives   lometiiues 
 luch   a  1  orrent   of  Succeis  to  tho:e  wivo  are  the    inJSn. 
 uT   °f/t^"-   Correaion,   that  this  n.ay  be  U".   a 
 Mark   of   h,.  i),/,V..A,.  .gainft  thofe  u'ho   are  to   b« 
 brought  low.  than  of  his  fa^.urirrr  tho^e  who  ar^  lif^!1 
 ;  'i:h-e  are  alfo  fuch    Alyfuries  .n  thr.t  le   c'Si- 
 '   the  World,  that,  tho'  our  Partiality  mojo  s  ;,,  ^n^ 
 ;nif^allthatweke.>et,.fwei;^t:c:::^:;:ii 
 •  be  in  danger   to  be  often  cut  of  Countenance     v>cn  iii 
 fame  Argument  turns  againlt  us  :  Therefore'hefor"  -  ^ 
 
 are  good.'     (.W.«  .,  St.  Ja.us.  the  ^^d  of  DluJjr 
 16S..  4/..  p.  9.  10.)  See  alfo  the  Notes  on  p.  7.    ,  .fTgl 
 '  74.  and  the  .%V;;.//.v,  No.  iv.  v.         (/-j  P.ge'Jo    n     '* 
 
[  i86  J 
 
 fefs'd  Advocate  for  Ujurpation,  you  treat  your 
 Remarker  with  an  Air  of  Contempt,  for  his 
 ikying,  that  '   in  Ufarpation  there  is  always 
 
 *  GuiU  and  Perverjhiefs  in  the  Will-,  it  is 
 
 *  founded  in  hijuftice^  and  thrives  by  Perjury ^ 
 
 *  Bribery  and  {J)  Opprejjionr  But,   what  do 
 you  anfwer  to  this  ?  Is  it  not  true  ?   ■ 
 Indeed    you    do   not    think    fit  to  f^y  that: 
 But  — ■  '  Alas-a-day  !  good  Man,  how  Ht- 
 
 *  tie  he  knows  of  (k)  the  World ! '  As  if  to 
 luiow  the  IVorld  were  only  another  Phrafe  for 
 being  a  Friend  to  Ufurpers!  Or,  as  if  the 
 more  that  a  Man  P.nows  of  the  World,  he 
 will  fee  the  lefs  Guilt  of  Perjury ^  Bribery  and 
 Oppreffion,  in  Ulurpation  !  If  fo,  I  fanfy,  few 
 of  your  Acquaintance,  or  mine,  do  yet  btotu 
 much  of  the  IVorld.  Iloweverj  to  iliew,  that 
 all  tlyfe  Crimes  are  not  conjlnd  to  Ufurpers 
 and  their  Reigns^  ycu  are  pleas'd  to  throw 
 Dirt  upon  the  Memory  of  our  Rightful 
 Kings;  and,  namely,  to  charge  Henry  VIII. 
 with  Guilt  and  Perverjenefs  in  the  IV ill;  and  > 
 even  the  Royal  Martyr,  Charles  I.  with  Op- 
 preJJion\  and  his  Son,  Charles  II.  with  Bri- 
 bery and  Corruption -y  and  all  of  them  with 
 (/)  Ifijuflicel  Now,  tho'  it  is  not  my  Bufi- 
 nefs  here,   to  engage  in  the  Vindication  of 
 
 I  thcfs,   or  any   other  of  our  Rightful  Kings  ; 
 
 ■yet  I  may  be  allow'd  to  remind  you,  that 
 the  Church  in  Vv-hich  you  officiate  as  a 
 Plied:,    and   whofe  folemn  Offices  I  fuppofe 
 
 you 
 
 (/)  Page  125.         [k]  Page  131,         (/)  Page  132. 
 
[  187] 
 
 you  pundually  obferve,  does,  at  kaO;  once 
 in  every  Year,  folemnly  pronourxe  one  of 
 thefe  Kings  to  have  been  [m)  innocent  \  which 
 might  well  have  fcreen'd  him  from  yonr 
 Afperiions:  But,  after  you  have  laid  the 
 worft  you  can  of  them  all,  it  will  not  follow^ 
 that  the  Reign  of  any  Ufurper  can  be  fo 
 free  from  thefe  and  fach  like  Crimes,  as  that 
 of  a  Rightful  King  may  be;  fince  a  King-, 
 however  perfonally  vitiou?,  may  have  a  great: 
 many  Public  Virtues  and  Royal  Qualities  to 
 counterballance  his  private  Vices;  whereas 
 an  Ufurper,  whatever  perfonal  Virtues  miy 
 be  afcrib'd  to  him,  mufi  necelfarily  be  charge- 
 able with  the  public  Crimes  here  fpecify'dj 
 which  are  eflential  to  the  very  Nature  of  (?/) 
 Ufurpation.  So  that,  .after  all,  your  Reraar- 
 ker  may  be  a  very  good  Man,  without  am 
 Irony,  tho'  he  may  know  fo  little  of  tbe 
 World,  as  poffibly  to  prefer  the  Government 
 of  the  very  worit  of  our  Rightful  Kings,  be- 
 fore that  of  the  bed  Ufurper  you  can  name  or 
 patronize.  For  tho'  'tis  true,  as  you  obferve, 
 tliat  even  '  Oliver  Cromivell,  after  he  becDnie 
 
 *  Prote(!?tor,  maintain'd  the  Honour  and  In- 
 
 *  tereft   of  the  Nation   abroad,  however  tv- 
 '  rannical    he    was   in   his   Government  at 
 
 *  {p)  home ;'  and    '  fet   himfelf  to  advance 
 *■  the  Interell:  of  the  Nation,  and  its  Power 
 '  (/>)  abroad:'  Yet,  how  popular  or  advan- 
 tageous 
 
 {m)  loth  Q?  yaniiary.  {n)  See  the  NotCi  en  p.  21,  22. 
 
 {0)  Page  70.  {p)  Page  117. 
 
[  a88  ] 
 
 tageous  foever  it  might  be,  to  curb  the  De- 
 predations and  Encroachments  of  the  Spa- 
 ?iiards,  Dutch,  and  other  iniblent  Foreigners, 
 all  this  could  not  acquit  him,  or  any  other 
 Ufurper  whatfoever,  of  the  Guilt  of  Ufur- 
 pation,  or  counterballance  the  many  other 
 heinous  Crimes  which  necefTarily  accompany 
 it :  But  if  you  will  name  any  of  our  Rightful 
 Kings,  who  were  tyrannical  in  their  Govern- 
 ment at  home,  and  at  the  lame  time  carelefs 
 of  the  Honour  and  Intereji  of  the  Nation 
 abroad^  tho'  you  fliould  fay,  they  w'ere  worfe 
 in  that  refpc6l,  than  even  Cromivell  himfelf, 
 I  fhall  not  difpute  that  Point  with  you. 
 
 A  great  deal  more  might  be  added,  to  fliew 
 the  Weaknefs  of  your  Arguments,  by  which 
 you  feem  willing  to  fupport  a  ftrange  and 
 precarious  HvpotheJiSj  of  ihe  Lmvfuhicfs  and 
 Duty  oj  Fraying  for  all  forts  of  ABiial  Go^ 
 pernors,  for  the  Time  being,  without  Diflinc- 
 tion  of  their  Titles,  right  or  wrong;  as  well 
 as  the  Unfeafonablenefs  of  many  things 
 which  you  have  here  offer'd  by  way  of  Ap- 
 plication thereof  But,- 1  think,  there  is  no 
 occafion  for  more,  to  fvtisfy  any  Man  of 
 Senfe  and  juji  'Reafoning,  provided  he  be  dif- 
 interefted  as  I  am,  and  equally  free  from  Pie- 
 judices;  and  to  thofe  who  are  not  fo,  all  that 
 can  be  faid,  will  be  but  loft  Labour.  How- 
 ever, I  cannot  but  again  take  notice  here, 
 that  you  have  made  great  and  frequent  Ule 
 of  one  Subterfuge,  unworthy   of  your  Cha- 
 
 rader, 
 
[  i89  ] 
 
 rader,  where  you  endeavour  to  debar  your 
 Antagoniils  of  a  juft  Liberty  of  fair  Debate, 
 by  reprefenting  them  as  Enemies  to  the  pre- 
 fent  Government,  only  for  controverting  the 
 Principles  of  Ufurpation.  Thus  you  are 
 pleas'd  to  fay,  '  The  Remarker  here,  and 
 ^  all  along,  fuppofes  the  prefent  Government 
 
 *  to  be  nothing  but  Ufurpation ;  and  upon 
 
 *  this  Suppofition  has  founded  all  that  he 
 
 *  has  faid  again  ft  the  Sermon ; but  has 
 
 *  not  ofFer'd  one  fingle  Argument,  or  Shadovsr 
 
 *  of  one,  to  prove  it  (g)  fo.*  How  then. 
 Sir,  do  you  know,  that  he  argu'd  on  that 
 Suppofition  ?  Tho*  I  know  nothing  of  him, 
 more  than  he  has  difcover'd  of  himfelf  in 
 tbofe  Remarks,  which  gave  occafion  for  your 
 Vi?idication  and  this  Epiflle,  I  cannot  but 
 think,  he  has  offer  d  divers  fubftantia.  Argu- 
 ments to  prove,  what  he  undertook;  viz,  that 
 there  are  fome  ftrange  TjoBrines  in  your  Ser- 
 mon,  which  are  capable  to  do  barm^  and 
 therefore  ought  to  be  (/)  checlid:  For  to 
 ftrengthen  his  Proofs,  you  have,  in  this  your 
 Vindication,  ]\i{^\^y'd  all  he  had  charg'd  upon 
 your  Sermon,  by  defending  and  enforcing 
 the  flrajigejl  of  thofe  DcBrine,  in  fuch  a 
 manner,  that  the  greateft  Enemy  of  the  pre- 
 fent Government  needs  not  to  wifli  for  more 
 Advantage  againft  it  in  Difputation,  than 
 ^ou  have  here  afforded  him. 
 
 And 
 
 •(f)  Page  134,  X3^.  (r)  F2gei43, 
 
[  ^90  ] 
 
 And  now,  as  you  have  honourably  de- 
 ckf'd,  that  if  you  was  Jhifihk,  that  you  kad 
 deliver  d  any  Error  in   your   Sennon^     you 
 
 *  would  think  it  no  Shame  at  all  to  retrad  (j) 
 '  it/  I  am  the  more  cncourag'd  to  call  upon 
 you.  Sir,  in  the  moll  folcmn  manner,  as  a 
 Gentleman,  a  Scholar,  a  Briton^  a  Chriftian,  a 
 Prieft,  and  a  Preacher  of  the  Word  of  Truth, 
 to  retraB  the  Errors  which  I  liave  here 
 proved  in  this  your  Vindication:  And  efpe- 
 dalfy  thefe  which  follow  in  your  own 
 Words  J  vi-z.  *  That  'Julius  Ccefar^  and  Au~ 
 
 *  gujiu^^   were  (/)  but  Ulurpersj  confefiedly 
 
 *  {u)  Ufurpers;  in  the  very  fame  Cafe  with 
 '  Oliver  (x)  Cromwell*  That  the  Higher 
 PcwerSy  under  whom  the  Gofpel-Precepts 
 were  all  given,  ^  were  Ufurpers,  or  thofe  who 
 '  deriv'd  their  Power  from  {y)  Ufurpation/ 
 That   Charles    II.  during    his   Baniihment, 
 
 *  was  not  King,  but  in  Name  [z)  only.'  That 
 the  King  in  Poff'rJJion  is   *  the  Fountain   of 
 
 *  Aothoriiy  and  Honour,  &c.  and  not  any 
 '  other  Perfon,   whatever  his  Right  might 
 
 *  (<3)  other  wife  be.'  That'  the  Law  has  no 
 ^  regard  to  any  Right,  Claim  or  Title,   but 
 
 *  to  that  of  the  King  in  Pofleffion  [b)  only.* 
 That  '  a  Governor's  Title,  whether  juft  or 
 
 *  unjurt-,  concerns  not  us,   as  we  are 
 
 '  {c)  Chriilians.'     That  '  Allegiance  is  not 
 
 *  perfo- 
 
 (j)  Pn.ge  J  44.  {t)  Page  6.  («)  Page  20. 
 
 ;.r)  Psge  70.  ( V)  Page  48,  49.  [z]  Page  25. 
 
 ia)?z7'^6i.  \b)  Ibid,  (f)  Page  28,  65. 
 
1 191  ] 
 
 «  perfonal,  but  (d)  political/  That,  even  in 
 ail  Hereditary  Monarchy,  *  the  Good  of  the 
 
 *  People  is   the   Supreme  Law  j  by    which 
 
 *  all  other  Laws  arc  to  be  direded,    and  to 
 
 *  which  they  mufl  (e)  yield/  That  the 
 People  have   *  a  Share  in  the  Supreme  (/) 
 
 *  Power  ;  arc  to  be  govern'd  by  their  own 
 '  Laws,  which  they  themfelves  (g)  make/ 
 and   *  have  as  much  Right  to  make  Lriivs 
 
 *  (for  their  owfi  Safety)   as  any  King  had  a 
 
 *  Right  to  the  (Jj)  Crown,  &c' 
 
 I  forbear  to  mention  any  more  Particulars 
 of  this   kind ;  tho'    many  may  be  colleded 
 out  of  this  flmie  Performance.     Nor  do   I 
 take  upon  me  thus  to  call   upon  you  for  a 
 Retra(fl:ation,   as  having  any  Authority  over 
 you;  but  merely  as  a  Friend  to  the  Truth,  to 
 make  that   more  evident,    to  the  Glory  of 
 God,   your  own  Honour,  and  the  undeceiv- 
 ing of  many    pious,   but  mifguided  People. 
 I  know,  Sir,  you  need  not  me  to  put  you  in 
 Mind  of  the  indifpenfable  Obligations  upon 
 every  good  Man   to  endeavour  all  he  can  to 
 reduce   into  the  Way  of  Truth  thofe  efpe- 
 cially,   whom  by  any  Miftake  of  his  own, 
 he   may  have  been   the  Occafion  of  leading 
 into  an  Error.     As  the   Proof  which  you 
 formerly  gave  to  the  JVorld,    '  that  not  Inte- 
 *  reft,   but  Convidion  prevail'd  with  you^  in 
 '  the  Matter  now  before  us,  ivhen you  volun- 
 tarily 
 
 {d)   Page  72.     (0  Page  60.     (/)  Page  63. 
 {g)   Page  120.       (/■)  Page  97. 
 
[    192    ] 
 
 *  farily  parted  with  All,  rather  than  enter 
 '  into  Engagements  contrary  to  your  then 
 '  (/)  Sentiments,'  was  a  ftrong  Argument  of" 
 your  Sincerity  ;  fo  the  Reputation  of  that 
 Sincerity  will  be  apt  to  make  thofe  of  weaker 
 Jjdgmenis  give  entire  Credit  to  whatever 
 comes  from  your  Pen  or  Pulpit,  without 
 examining  ( ,s  the  Noble  Beream  did  by 
 even  St.  Pciuf^  Doctrine,  and  whom  he 
 highly  (/■:)  C'.)mmends  for  it)  whether  thofe 
 things  are  Jb^  as  you  teach  them,  or  not. 
 V/hich  Confideratlon  HioLili  not  only  prevail 
 v.'iih  YOU  to  be  vervcarefal  of  your  own  Doc- 
 irine,  but  alfo,  methinks,  to  be  particularly 
 tender  of  cafting  any  Refle<^ions  upon  thofe 
 who  ftill  labour  under  the  fame  Difficulties 
 of  your  own  former  Scntl?7icnts^  and  arc  con- 
 fequently  as  fairly  entitled  to  the  favour. ble 
 Flea  of  Difintereftednefs  and  Sincerity  as 
 yourfelf. 
 
 Inflead  of  which,  'tis  not  a  little  Abate- 
 ment to  the  Characler  which  you  havi\  *  of 
 c  good- natw\i  and  agreeable  (I)  Gentkwan^ 
 to  find  you,  on  every  Occafion,  charging 
 thole  very  Men,  with  whom  you  agreed  in 
 iScVZ/Z/z^i'/z/i  many  Years,  in  the  Strength  of 
 your  Age  and  Judgment,  with  *  Ignorance^ 
 *  Prrjizdices  and  {rri)  Party-Notiom  I '  with 
 being  '  as  o/y/fi/iate  zs  the  yews  (n)  were!* 
 with  pretending  to   '  6e  wifer  than  Cqd  (o) 
 
 *  him- 
 
 (/i  P.ige  i4.q,         f/'   Jc'ls  xvii.  ji.  (/)  Page  143. 
 
 (w)  Page  35.  ('■}  P'-S=  57-  («}  P-^g^  43; 
 
 I 
 
[  ^92  ] 
 
 *  himfelf!'  with  being  *  wilfully  {a)  blind  I ' 
 with   being  *  geJierally  pojiti'ue^    and  conceited 
 
 *  of  their  (/;)  Opinions  !  '  v/ith  *  beijjg  bound 
 
 *  dow?i  by  falfe  Principles  and  (c)  Prejudices!* 
 with  *  ivilfully  refiling   that  Power  ischich 
 
 *  God  has  fet  over  [d)  them!'  with  *  wild 
 
 *  a?2d  unreafonable  Opinions^  and  *  feeing  all 
 
 *  T'hifigs  [e)  inverted! '  with  *  mi/leading  the 
 
 *  People  J    a  fid  teaching  them  ladings   dircBly 
 
 *  cofitrary  to  their  (J  )  Duty  /'  with  '  fla?idi?ig 
 
 *  /;/  Oppofition  to^  and  dircBly  gainfayijig^  aft 
 '  exprefs  Cofntnafidifi  the  Gofpel^  a  fid  the  Prac- 
 
 *  tice  of  the  whole  Chriftian  (,q-)  Church!* 
 with  '  hardenifig  their  Hearts  [h)  agaifif  the 
 
 *  Truth  /'  And  a  great  deal  more  of  the  like 
 kind,  much  eafier  for  the  Reader  to  colle([^, 
 than  for  the  Writer  to  juftify  or  excufe. 
 
 But  if  all  thele  Charaders  were  fo  plainly 
 difcernable  in  thofe  whom  you  have  left,  as 
 you  would  now  reprefent  them,  'tis  fome- 
 what  ftrange,  that  a  Gentleman  of  your  Pe- 
 netration could  not  difcover  them  in  lefs  than 
 ten  or  twelve  Years !  And  ftranger  flill,  that 
 few  or  none  among  thofe  of  that  Sentiment, 
 have  yet  been  fo  efFed:ually  confined  as  to 
 follow  your  Example !  I  would  not  infmu- 
 ate  a  Sufpicion,  that  either  St.  Dunftafis  Lec- 
 ture in  Fleet-Jireetj  London,  or  St.  Pauls 
 Chapel  in  Aberd'-cn^  could  polTibly  have  fuch 
 O  a 
 
 [a)  Page  8g.  {b)  V?'^;-.  Sg  [c)   Pape  94. 
 
 [d  ]   P^gcQi;.  (f)   Pige  126.  (/)   Page  130, 
 
 ^)   Page   liS.  (/'f  P-we  HJ- 
 
[  194  ] 
 
 a  Charm  as  to  open  your  Eyes  at  laft  ;  nor 
 yet  do  I  believe,  that  you  had  an  Illumina- 
 tion immediately  from  Heaven,  as  St.  Paul 
 had.  But  this,  at  leaft,  I  may  be  allow'd  to 
 £iy,  that,  fince  it  requir'd  fo  many  Years 
 Time,  and  lb  much  Pains,  as  you  tell  us,  to 
 examine  I'hings,  and  iveigh  tbem  impartially^ 
 as  you  did,  before  you  could  be  convincd  of 
 sour  (/')  Mijlake,  great  Indulgence  ought  to  be 
 granted  to  others,  who,  tho'  not  yet  con- 
 vinc'd  oF  a  Miftake,  may  be  as  fincere,  and  as 
 Lr  from  hardenifig  their  Hearts  againfl  the 
 ^Trnth,  as  yourfeU. 
 
 After  all,  you  are  pleas'd  to  '  acknowledge 
 '  the  Remarker's  Humility  and  Modefty 
 '  here,  and  his  good  Nature,  in  having  kept 
 
 *  his  Temper  fo   well  as  he  has  done  in  the 
 '  Remarks;  a  Thing  (you fay)  not  very  ufual 
 
 *  in  thofe  of  his  Opinion,  when  their  Senti- 
 
 *  ments  are  [k]  oppos'd ! '  Whether  you 
 '  have  been  behind -hand  ivith  him  i?i  (/) 
 ^  Civility^  the  Reader  will  now  judge.  But 
 you  feeni  to  me  to  have  given  an  ample 
 Proof,  that  thofe  of  his  Opinion,  whom  you 
 condemn  for  it,  are  not  the  only  Perfons  who 
 do  not  keep  their  Temper  very  well,  ivhen 
 their  Sentiments  are  opposd.  Whether  thofe 
 many  harOi  Reflediions  which  you  have  dealt 
 about  fo  freely,  among  thofe  who  cppoj'e 
 your  prefent  Sentiments^  may  futiice  to  apolo- 
 gize 
 
 (;•)  Page  145.  r/j  Pnge  147.  (/;  IliJ. 
 
[  195  ] 
 
 gize  for  fuch  feeming  Want  of  temper  in  any 
 Expreffion  that  may  have  efcap'd  my  Pen, 
 I  leave  to  your  cooler  Confideration.  I  own, 
 'tis  natural  to  me,  to  feel  a  generous  Warmth 
 of  Indignation  and  Refentment,  whenever 
 I  fee  an  Infult  offer'd  to  any  Party  that  is 
 Down.  And  yet,  fo  far  am  I  from  refting 
 in  the  Confidence  of  this  fair  and  reafonablc 
 ExcLife,  that  if,  contrary  to  my  Intention, 
 I  have  given  Occafion  of  Offence  to  any 
 unprejudic'd  Reader,  I  heartily  wifh  it  un- 
 faid,  and  fincerely  afk  Pardon  for  it. 
 
 To  conclude  all,  in  the  Words  of  an  Emi- 
 nent Writer,  *  God  grant  us  the  Bleffing  of 
 
 *  benign  Temper ;  and  that  while  we  differ, 
 
 *  it  may  be  done  without  Breach  of  Cha- 
 '  rity ;  that  we  may   at  leaft  referve  good 
 
 *  Wifhes  for  our  Old  Friends,  and  contribute 
 
 *  our  Prayers  for  the  Benefit  of  each  other  1 ' 
 
 London^  2  9 .  Ma^,  1738. 
 
 o  a       F  o  s  r- 
 
[  19-6  ] 
 
 POSTSCRIPT. 
 
 HA  D  your  Vindication  come  fooner 
 to  my  Hands,  it  had  found  me  more 
 at  Leifure,  and  met  with  a  quicker  Difpatch: 
 But  ever  lince  it  came  to  me,  divers  other 
 Affairs  have  lb  much  interfer'd  with  it,  that 
 I  could  not  fit  clofe  to  it ;  and  therefore  'tis 
 no  Wonder,  if,  after  frequent  Interruptions 
 and  Avocations  of  many  Da\  s  (and  fome- 
 times  Weeks)  fome  Repetitions  may  have 
 liappen'd,  and  pollibly  feveral  Paffages  have 
 efcap'd  my  Memory,  which  otherwife  had 
 not  pafs'd  me  without  due  Notice. 
 
 This  I  think  neceflary  to  acquaint  you 
 with,  that  you  may  not  take  the  Advantage 
 of  any  fuch  Overfight,  and  call  it  a  Concejjion 
 of  the  Truth  of  every  thing  which  I  have 
 not  particularly  granted  or  denied. 
 
 I  do  afTure  you.  Sir,  I  have  not  knowingly 
 pafs'd  over  any  material  Part  of  this  Con- 
 troverfy,  through  any  Difficulty  that  appear'd 
 to  me,  or  a  Diffidence  in  my  own  Capacity 
 ((lender  as  it  is)  to  give  it  a  proper  Anfvver. 
 But,  I  believe,  when  the  feveral  Remarks  con- 
 tain'd   ia  the  foregoing  Epiftle  (which   have 
 
 fweird 
 
I:  »97  J 
 
 Cvfetl'S  i(  to  a  Bulk  much  larger  than  at  firft 
 I-  expedted)  are  fairly  cofilider'd,  they  will  hd 
 found,  at  Icaft,  by  rational  rnferenceSj  to  fur- 
 nitli  a  futficient  Anfwer  to  every  Part  of 
 your  Vindication,  io  far  as  materially  relates 
 to  the  main  Point  in  Quefiion  between  you 
 and  me  J  viz.  the  Lawfulnefs  and  Duty  of 
 praying  J  or  all  A5lual  Governors^  as  fuch  1 
 As  to  your  *  Enquiry  into  the  Right  and 
 
 *  Title  of  the  Kings  of  Judah  and  IJ'rael,  to 
 
 *  their  refped:ive  Kingdoms/   I  would  have 
 taken   it  into  a  particular  Examination,  as 
 
 *  being  a  Continuation  of  the  Anfwer  to  the 
 
 *  Remark*; :'  Bat,  that  Subject  being  fully  and 
 profelledly  treated  of,  in  the  Short  Hijiory  of 
 the  Regal  Siiccefton^  &c.  before  referr'd  to, 
 there  feem'd  not  to  be  any  Occafion  to  en- 
 large upon  it  here ;  and  the  other  Fapcn 
 relating  to  the  Oaths,  not  being  a  neceflliry 
 Part  of  the  Prefent  Queftion,  I  contented 
 myfelf  with  touching  them  occafionally  by 
 the  bye.  However,  if  it  be  your  Pleafuni 
 to  call  upon  me  for  a  Continuance  of  this 
 Correfpondence,  you  (liall-  find  me  willing 
 and  ready  to  fupply  what  is  defcdive,  and 
 to  retracfl  what  is  erroneous,  as  well  as  to 
 maintain  what  is  defenlible,  in  the  foregoing 
 Epiftle.  In  the  mean  time,  if  you  think 
 I  am  mlflaken  in  the  Points  and  Principles 
 here  controverted,  you  m.ay  perceive,  that 
 I  have  Choice  of  Authorities  on  my  Side 
 (and    fuch    as    yon    cannot    fairly    except 
 
 Q  3  '    againa} 
 
[  '98  ] 
 
 againft)  by  the  Specimen  here  laid  before 
 you,  in  the  foregoing  A7b/^j,  and  the  fol- 
 lowing Appendix. 
 
 C'   ,■ 
 
 A  P  P  E  N. 
 
[  199  ] 
 
 APPENDIX. 
 
 N  U  M  B  E  R     I. 
 
 DOCTOR    Falkner    proves,     That 
 *  Temporal   Dominion    is  not  origi- 
 
 *  na!ly  founded  in  the  entertaining  the  true 
 
 *  Dodrine    of   Religion,    or    the    Faith  of 
 
 *  Chriftianity.*     Chrijlian  Loyalty^  2d,  Edit. 
 1684.  8w.  p.  322. 
 
 That  *  Dodrines  allowing  SubjccftSj  or 
 '  others,  to  depofe,  or  murther  Princes,  are 
 '  heretical.'     Z:^/^.  p.  325. 
 
 That  the  Senfe  of  this  Claufc,  T'hat  it  is 
 not  lawful,  upon  any  Pretence  whatjoe^'cer^  to 
 take  Arms   againfi  the  King^   '  is  nothing 
 
 *  more,   than  what  the  Church  of  England^ 
 
 *  and   the  eminent  Members  thereof,    hath 
 
 *  conftantly  acknowledg'd.'     7/^/V/.  p.  338, 
 
 That,  '  if  it  be  allow'd  lawful,  for  Sub- 
 '  iefls,    in   any  Cafe,   to  take  Arms  again (l 
 
 *  their  Sovereign,  this  muft  include  a  Right 
 
 *  in   ih^m  o^  judgi?igy   whether  their  prefent 
 
 *  Cafe  be  fuch,   in  which  they  may  lawfully 
 
 *  re/ijl  or  no:  Otherwife,   they  muft  either 
 
 *  have  a  general   Power  of  Refiftance  and 
 
 *  taking  Arms,   \vithou:  Diftindion  of  any 
 
 O  4  *  Cafes-, 
 
[  zoo  ] 
 
 Caf^s;  to  afTsrt  which  would  be  all  one  as 
 to  declare  them  to  be  710  Subje5lsy  or  under 
 no  Government;  or  eliethey  mull:  refift  in 
 no  Cafe  at  all.  But  to  aflert,  that  the  Peo- 
 ple, or  Inferiors,  are  of  right  "Jiidgci  of 
 the  Cafes,  in  which  they  may  refift  their 
 Superiors,  is  as  much  as  to  fay,  they  are 
 bound  to  Subjet^ion,  only  fo  far  as  them- 
 felves  fliall  think  fitj  and  that  they  may 
 claim  an  Authority  over  their  Governors, 
 and  pafs  Judgment  upon  them,  and  de- 
 prive them  of  their  Dignity,  Authority, 
 and  Life  itfelf,  whenfoever  they  (hall  think 
 it  requiiite  and  needful.  But  this  cannot 
 be  other  wife  than  a  Foundation  of  great 
 and  general  Cojifiifion  in  the  World.*     Ibid. 
 
 That  *  it  is  againft  all  Pretence  of  Reafon, 
 that  the  Rights  of  Superiors,  which  are  the 
 greateft,  and  072  ivhich  all  inferic?'  Rights 
 ha've  DependancCj  (hould  be  leaft  regarded ; 
 as  if  it  were  fit,  that  the  Interefts  of  a 
 Child,  or  Servant,  (hould  be  preferv'd,  and 
 not  thofe  of  a  Father,  or  a  Maiterl'  Ibid. 
 
 *•  375- 
 That  our  Saviour  *  took  care  of  the  Pre- 
 
 fervation  of  the  Juji  Royalty  and  Right  of 
 Princes,  and  did  not  intend  to  debafe,  lefien 
 or  dlminiih  that  Sovereignty  and  Autho- 
 rity which  they  had  a  Right  before  to  en- 
 joy/    Ibid.  p.  469. 
 
 Jhat  *  hii.d  tlie  Holy  ye/us  intended  to 
 
 *  hav.5 
 
[    20I    ] 
 
 *  have  his  Perlbn  refcu'd  out  of  the  Hands 
 
 *  of  the  y^it-i,   he  could  have  effected  this 
 
 *  by    Legiom  of  Angeh,    who  are  under  no 
 
 *  Obligation   of    Subjection    to  Men.     But 
 
 *  God's  PrcviJcncc  can  never  be  fo  at  a  lofs, 
 '  as  to  need  the  Help  of  any  unlawful 
 ^  Mea.ns.'     loid.  p.  478. 
 
 That  as  to  Self-defence  end  Frcfevcafion^ 
 ^  we  muft  diftinguilh  between  the  uling  that 
 
 *  Right  againft  Thieves  and  private  Perfons, 
 
 *  againft  whom  it  may  be  us'd  by  the  Au- 
 '  thority  of  the  Laws ;  and  the  defigning 
 '  any  Violence  againft  the  Rule   and  Ccm- 
 
 *  mand  of  the  Sovereign  Power.'  Ibid, 
 p.  481. 
 
 That  *  there  is  no  Heref\'  mere  Dernlclous ; 
 
 *  the  Precepts   of  Chrifi:  decrying  this,   the 
 
 *  whole  Life  of  Chriit  being  oppolite  to  it, 
 
 *  the  Apc/loiical  Doctrine   teftifying   again  ft 
 
 *  it ;  it  being;  alfo  receded  bv  fo  manv  Thou- 
 
 *  fands  of  Martyrs^  and  contradicted  by  the 
 
 *  Ancient  Interpreters.'     Ibid.  p.  48 2. 
 
 That,  by  Kfi,t<a,  which  we  render  Ddn- 
 nation,  in  Reman:  xiii.  2.  *  the  Apoftle  dcth 
 '  both  under ftand  the  judgment  of  Man,  or 
 
 *  Punifhment  bv  the  Hand  of  Juftice  by  the 
 
 *  Magiftrate,  and  alfo  the  fudgment  of  Gcd, 
 
 *  or  the  Sentence  of  his  Condemnation.' 
 Ibid.  484,  49  r. 
 
 That  '   the  Spirit  of  God  fpeaketh  much 
 
 *  in  favour  of  Monarchical  Gcvernni'^nt,  tho* 
 
 *  then  Pagan  j  but  gives  no  Encouragement 
 
 *  to 
 
[    202    J 
 
 to  the  Notion  of  them  who  would  em- 
 brace a  Popular  Sovereigfjty.  Ibid,  p.  4.88. 
 That  *  it  is  Matter  of  Wonder,  that  any 
 Men  fliould  have  the  Confidence,  to  make 
 Chriftianity  a  Foundation  for  the  higheft 
 Refijlance  againft  Princes,  to  depoje  them 
 from  their  Crowns,  and  forbid  Subjeds  to 
 yield  them  Obedience  !'  Ibid.  p.  489. 
 That  '  the  Examples  of  Arms  taken 
 againft  Kings,  who  governed,  not  by  a  pre- 
 carious, but  by  their  own  proper  Right, 
 cannot  be  commended  without  violating 
 Piety,  wliatfoever  Pretence  or  Succefs  they 
 had/     Ibid.  p.  491. 
 
 That,  whereas  '  fome  have  pretended, 
 that  where  fuch  Attempts  have  met  with 
 Succefs,  this  Succefs  was  a  Teflimony  of 
 Gcd's  Pf-cvidcnce  cpprcviTig  them,  fuch 
 Pleas  are  of  a  very  dangerous  and  evil  Na- 
 ture: Efpecially  becaufe,  i.  They  are  in 
 fome  Degree  Blafpbcwous;  as  if  the  Holy 
 God,  who  hateth  all  Evil,  and  hath  given 
 ftridl  Commands  againft  it,  were  to  be 
 efteem'd  an  Appro^-oer  of  all  that  Wicked- 
 nefs  in  the  World,  where  he  doth  not 
 either  forcibly  reftrain,  or  immediately  de- 
 ftroy,  the  Offender:  2.  This  Pretence  is 
 greatly  oppofite  to  the  Principles  of  Chrif- 
 tianity,  both  in  defpifing  and  abufmg  the 
 Patience  and  Long-fuffering  of  God  j  and 
 in  building  upon  fuch  Foundations  as  can 
 bear  no  Weight,  unlefs  Men  overlook  and 
 
 *  difre- 
 
[  203  3 
 
 *  difregard  the  future  Account,  and  the  Re- 
 '  wards  and  Punifhments  of  another  World/ 
 Ibid,  and  p.  492. 
 
 N  U  M  B  E  R     IL 
 
 A  Proclamation  of  both  Houfes  of  Par^ 
 U anient y  for  proclaiming  of  his  Majejiy^  &c. 
 
 *  A     LTHOUGH  it  can   ;?o  way^  be 
 
 *  J\,  doubted,  but  that  his  Majefty's  Right 
 
 *  and  Title  to  his  Crowns  and  Kingdoms,  is, 
 
 *  and   was,    every  way  completed^     by   the 
 
 *  Death  of  his  moft  Royal  Father,  of  Gio- 
 
 *  rious  Memory,    without  the  Ceremony  or 
 
 *  Solemnity  of  a  Proclamation ;  yet,   fince 
 
 *  Proclamations  in  fuch  Cafes  have  been  al- 
 
 *  ways  us'd,  to  the  end  that  all  good  Subjects 
 '  might  upon  thisOccafion  teilify  their  Duty 
 
 *  and    RefpecSts ;   We  therefore,  the 
 
 '  Lords  and  Commons  do,  acccording 
 
 *  to  our  Duty  and  Allegiance,  heartily,  joy- 
 
 *  fully  and  unanlmouily  acknowledge  and 
 
 *  proclaim.  That  immediately  upon  the  De- 
 
 *  ceafe  of  our   late   Sovereign    Lord    King 
 
 *  Charles,  the  Imperial  Crown  of  the  Realm 
 
 *  of  Ejigland,  and  of  ail  the  Kingdoms,  Do- 
 
 *  minions  and  Rights  belonging  to  the  fame, 
 
 *  did,  by  Inherent  Birth-right,   and  Lawful 
 
 *  and  Undoubted Succce/Jion,  defccnd  and  come 
 
 *  to 
 
[    204   ] 
 
 *  to  his  mofi-  excellent  Majefty  Charki  II,  as 
 
 *  being  lineally,   juftly  and  lawfully,    next 
 
 *  Heir  of  the  Blood  Royal  of  this  Realm.  — 
 '  And  thereunto  we  moft  humbly  and  faith- 
 
 *  fully  do  fabmit  and   oblige  oiirjehes^    our 
 
 *  Heirs  and  Poflerities  for  ever.     Dated  the 
 
 *  %tb  Day  of  May,    1660.' 
 
 *  God  fave  the  King* 
 
 And,   long  before  this  Time,  particu-kriy 
 *■  in  the  Cafe  of  Watjon  and  Clarke,  i.  ^ac.  i. 
 
 *  it  was  clearly  refolv'd  by  all  the   Judges' 
 
 *  of  England,   That  prefently,   by  the  De- 
 
 *  (cent,  his  Majefty  was  completely  and  abfo- 
 
 *  lately  King,  without  any  elTential  Ceremony 
 '  or  h€t  to  be  done  Ex  poft  Fa^o ;  and  that 
 '^Coronation  was  but  a  Royal  Ornament,  and 
 
 *  outward   Solemnization   of   the   Defcent. 
 
 *  And  this  appeareth  evidently,  by  infinite 
 
 *  Precedents,  ^c'  {Coke's  Report  of  Cahins 
 Cafe>  fol.  II.) 
 
 ^\  i  '■%  i'--^  y^K  ^r.*:  r^  r^  y-^  r^  i't  -"V.  .*v,  :^  i^  ^^ . -^  ^•*,  ^-^  ♦-. 
 
 ■»»♦  ♦*♦  *»♦  ♦i*  *i*  ♦*»  ♦«*  *x*  *x»  ♦»■•    »*'•*«+♦*♦  f^  ♦**  *>(♦  *if»  »i^  ♦•«♦ 
 
 NUMBER     IIL 
 
 IN"  the  Great  CaCe  of  the  Po/lnati,  or 
 Cahi7i\  Cafe,  6.  yac.  i.  which  -zc^-jj  as 
 elaborately^  fubfiantially  and  judicially  argiid, 
 by  the  Lord  ChaJtcellor,  and  all  the  Judges^  as 
 ever  ivas  any  ;  and  which  has  this  peculiar 
 Charader,    that   no  one  Opinion  in  all  our 
 
 Books 
 
[    205   ] 
 
 Books  is  againjl  this  'Judgment-.,  it  was  moll 
 folemnly  adjudg'd,  i.  *  That  Ligeance,  or 
 '  Obedience  of  the  Subje(5t  to  the  Sovereign, 
 
 *  is  due  by  the  Law  of  Nature :   2.  That  this 
 
 *  Law   of  Nature  is   Part  of  the  Laws  of 
 
 *  England:    3.   That  the  Law   cf  Nature 
 
 *  was  before  any  Judicial  or  Municipal  Law 
 '  in  the  World :  4.  That  the  Law  of  Nature 
 
 *  is  immutable,  and  cannot  be  chang'd.'  folio 
 4.  and  12. 
 
 That  '   Ligeance  is  a  true  and  faithful 
 
 *  Obedience   of  the  Subjedt   to   his   Sove- 
 
 *  reign: An  Incident  infeparable  to 
 
 *  every  Subje<fl ;  for  as  foon  as  he  is  born,  he 
 
 *  oweth  by  Birth-right,  Ligeance  and  Obedi- 
 
 *  ence  to  his  Sovereign.'    folio  4. 
 
 That  *    Ligeance  doth  not  begin  by  the 
 
 *  Oath  in  the  Leet:  For  many  Men  owe 
 
 *  true  Ligeance,  that  never  were  fworn  in  a 
 
 *  Leet.'    folio  5. 
 
 That  there  is '  Ligeantia  Localisy  wrought 
 
 *  by  the  Law :  And  that  is,  when  an  Alien 
 
 *  that  is  in  Amity  cometh  into  E?2gland ; 
 '  becaufe,   as  long  as  he  is  within  E?igland, 
 
 *  he  is  within  the  King's  Protedion:  There- 
 
 *  fore,  fo  long  as  he  is  there,  he  oweth  unto 
 '  the  King  a  Local  Obedience  or  Ligeance  -, 
 
 *  for  that  the  one  draweth  the  other.'     Il?id. 
 
 That  there  is  alfo  Ligeantia  Localis^  call'd 
 Suit  Rosa  If  becaufe  the  Ligeance  of  the  Sub- 
 ject is  only  due  unto  the  King.  *  This  is 
 '  the  Oath  of  Ligeance  ftill  us'd  in  Courts- 
 
 *   Leet; 
 
[    206    ] 
 
 Leet ;  the  TLfftd:  whereof  is ;  2W  fiall 
 fwear^  that,  Jrom  this  Day  forward,  you 
 jhall  be  true  and  faithful  to  our  Sovereign 
 LordYJxn^l,  James,  and  his  Heirs,  andl'ruth 
 and  Faith  Jhail  bear,  of  Life  and  Member, 
 and  terretie  Honour ;  and  you  Jl:aU  neither 
 know  nor  hear  of  any  III  or  Damage  intended 
 unto  him,  that  you  fall  not  defend:  So  help 
 you  Almighty  God.  The  Subllance  and 
 Effcd:  hereof  is  due  by  the  Law  of  Na- 
 ture ; the  Form  and  Addition  of  the 
 
 Oath   is  ex  Provifone  Hominis.     In    this 
 
 Oath  were  obferv'd,    i.  That  for  the 
 
 Time  it  is  indefinite,  and  without  Limits 
 from  this  Day  forward:   2.  Two  excellent 
 QuaHties  are  requir'd,   that  is,   To  be  true 
 and  faithful:    3.  To  whom  ?    ^0  our  Sove-  . 
 
 rei^n  Lord  the  Kina;,  and  his  Heirs : 
 
 4.  In  what  manner  ?  And  Faith  and  Troth 
 jhall  bear,  of  Life  and  Member,  &c.  that 
 is,  until  the  letting-out  of  the  laft  Drop  of 
 our  deareft  Heart- blood  :   5.  Where,  and  in 
 
 what  Places  ?  • In  all  Places  whatfocver :i 
 
 For  you  Jhall  neither  know  nor  hear  of  any 
 III  or  Damage,  &c.  fo  as  Natural  Ligeance 
 is    not   circumfcrib'd   within   any   Place.' 
 folio  6, 
 
 That  there  is  a  two-fold  Homage,  Lige- 
 tim,  and  Feodale;  the  latter  of  which,  being 
 by   Tenure,  may  be   refpited  :  *    But  Homa- 
 
 *  gium  Ugeum^    i.  e,    Ligeantia,    is  inherent, 
 
 *  and   inftparablf,    and  cannot   be  refpited/ 
 fcliG  7.        '  '  That 
 
[    207    ] 
 
 That  *  Ligeance,  Faith  and  Truth,  which 
 
 *  are  here  Members  and  Parts,  are  Qualities 
 
 *  of  the  Mind  and  Soul  of  Man,   and  can* 
 
 *  not  be  circumfcrib'd  within  the  Predica- 
 
 *  ment  of  Ubi :   For  that  were  to  confound 
 
 *  Predicaments,  and  to  go  about  to  drive  (an 
 
 *  abfurd  and  impoffible  Thing)  the  Fredica- 
 
 *  ment  of  Quality  into  the  Predicament  of 
 
 *  Ubi!    folio  7.  and  9. 
 
 That  *  the  Ligeance  of  a  Natural-born 
 f  Subject  is  not  local,  and  confin'd  only  to 
 '  England!    folio  8. 
 
 That  it  is  to  be  obferv'd,    i.  *   That  the 
 
 *  King  hath  Fidem  and  Fideles  in  Partibus 
 
 *  traiifmarinii:    2.  That  he   hath  ProteSiio- 
 
 *  7iem  in  Partibus  tranfmarinis:  3.  That  he 
 '  hath  Potefiatem  in  Partibus  frafijmarinis!. 
 Ibid. 
 
 That  *  Ligeantia  Naturalis  nullis  Claujlris 
 ^  coercetur^    nullis  Metis   refrcenatiir^    nullis 
 
 *  Finibus  premitur!  folio  10. 
 
 That  Ligeance  is '  due  to  the  Natural  Per- 
 
 *  fon  of  the  King  (which  is  ever  accompa- 
 '  ny'd  with  the   Politic  Capacity,   and  the 
 
 *  Politic  Capacity,  as  it  were,  appropriated 
 '  to  the  Natural  Capacity)  and  is  not  due  to 
 
 *  the  Politic  Capacity  only ;  that  is,  to  his 
 '  Crown  or  Kingdom,  diftindt  from  his  Na- 
 
 *  tural  Capacity.'     Ibid, 
 
 That*  the  King  holdeth  the  Kingdom  of 
 
 *  England  by  Birth-right  inherent,  by  De- 
 '  fcent  from  the  Blood  Royal,   whereupon 
 
 *  Succe{^ 
 
[  2o8  ] 
 
 *  SucccefTion  doth  attend:   And  therefore  it 
 
 *  is  ufually  faid.  To  the  Kijig^  his  Heirs  afid 
 
 *  SucceJjors\    wherein  Heirs  is   firft   nam'd, 
 
 *  and  Siicceffbr  is  attendant  upon  Heirs.'  Ibid. 
 
 That,  *   by  Queen  Elizabeth's  Death,  the 
 
 *  Crown  and  Kingdom  of -E/zg-ZfiW  defcend- 
 
 *  ed  CO  his  Majefty  (King  J  aims)  :  And  he 
 '  was  fully  and  abfolutely  thereby  King, 
 '  without  any  EiTential  Ceremony,  or  Ad:  to 
 
 *  be  done  Ex  po/l  FaBo.     For  Coronation  is 
 
 *  but  a  Royal  Ornament,  and  Solemnization 
 
 *  of   the  Royal  Defcent,  but  no  Part  of  the 
 
 *  Title.'  hs  was  clearly  refolv'd,  hy  all  the 
 yudges  of  England^  in  tke  Cafe  of  Watfon 
 and  Clarke^  i.  "Jac.  i.  and  appeareth  evident- 
 ly, by  injinite  Precedents  atid Book-Cafes: 
 
 *  By  which  it  manifeflly  appeareth,  that,  by 
 
 *  the  Laws  of  England^  there  can  be  no  In- 
 
 *  terregmnn  ^ix^'ii'ii  the  fame/    folio  lo,    ii. 
 
 That   *  in  the  Reign  of  Edward  II,  the 
 
 *  SpencerSj   the  Father  and  the  Son,  to  cover 
 
 *  the  Treafon  hatch'd  in  their  Hearts,  invent- 
 
 *  ed  this  damnable  and  damiid  Opiriioji^  Tliat 
 
 *  Homage,  and  Oath  of  Ligeance,  was  more 
 
 *  by  reaion  of  the  King's  Crown  (that  is,  of 
 
 *  his  Politic  Capacity)  than  by  reafon  of  the 
 
 *  Perfon  of  the  King ;  upon  which  Opinion 
 
 *  they  inferred  execrable  and  detejiable  Coyife- 
 
 *  qiierts^  all  which  were  condemn'd  by 
 
 '  two  Parliaments.'     folio  ii. 
 
 That  *   it  manifefily  appeareth,   that  the 
 
 *  Ligeance  or  Faith  of  the  Subjed:  is  Pro- 
 
 *  priiim 
 
[    209    ] 
 
 *  prium  quarto  modo,  to  the  King,  omni  foli^ 
 '  &  femper.'    folio  12. 
 
 That,  where  we  fpeak  of  the  Law  of 
 England,  *  the  fame  is  the  King's  Law.'   3Id. 
 
 That  '  our  Ligeance  is  due  to  our  Natural 
 Liege  Sovereign,  defcended  of  the  Blood 
 Royal  of  the  Kings  of  this  Realm.'     3id. 
 
 That  '  jfus  Nat ur ale  e/l,  quod  apud  omna 
 
 Homines  candem  ha  bet  Potenfiiim. And 
 
 the  Reafon  hereof  is,  for  that  God  and 
 Nature  is  one  to  all;  and  therefore  the  Law 
 of  God  and  Nature  is  one  to  all.'  folio  12. 
 and  13. 
 
 That'itappearethbydemonftrativeReafon, 
 that  Ligeance,  Faith  and  Obedience  of  the 
 Subject  to  the  Sovereign,  was  before  any 
 Municipal  or  Judicial  Laws;  i.  For  that 
 GovernmentandSubjcdion  were  long  before 
 any  Municipal  or  Judicial  Laws:  For  that 
 it  had  been  in  vain  to  have  prefcrlb'd  Laws 
 to  any,  but  to  fuch  as  ow'd  Obedience,  Faith, 
 and  Ligeance  before,  in  refped:  whereof 
 they  were  bound  to  obey  and  obferve  them--. 
 Seeing  then,  that  Faith,  Obedience  and  Lir 
 geance  are  due  by  the  Law  of  Nature,  it 
 followeth,  that  the  fame  cannot  be  chang'd 
 or  taken  away.*    folio  13. 
 
 That  *  tho'  the  King  be  in  a  Foreign 
 Kingdom,  yet  he  is  judged  in  Law  a  King 
 there.'    folio  15. 
 
 That  *  whatfoever  is  due  by  the  Law  or 
 Conflitution  of  Man,  may  be  alter'd  :   But 
 
 *  Natural  Ligeance  cannot  be  alter'd; 
 
 P  '  Ergo 
 
[    210    ] 
 
 '  Ergo,  Natural  Ligeance is  not  due  by 
 
 *  the  Law  or  Conftitution  of  Man.     Again, 
 
 *  Whatfoever  is  due  by  the  Law  of  Nature, 
 
 *  cannot  be  alter'd  :  But  Ligeance,  and  Obe- 
 
 *  dience  of  the  Subje<5t  to   the  Sovereign,    is 
 
 *  due  by  the  Law  of  Nature  ^  Ergo,  It  can- 
 
 *  not  be  alter'd.'    folio  2 y 
 
 •It'  ■-*•  -i'  •*•  *>  '*•  'f-  '$'  •*■  '^'  '*'  -it  -*•  '5  ■$.-  ■$•  -f-'  •*•  ■*■  Jt' 
 
 tiS;  i5«3  t£z  '^^  :r^  dS:  ia-;  'Jiiti  'jjb  vis  ta^;  tiS;  tii  tSlii  ife  uju  tii;  6.0  ulo  tJb 
 
 N  U  M  B  E  R      IV. 
 
 An  A<5t  for  the  AholiftAng  the  Khigly  Office 
 in  England,  ^c.    1648. 
 
 *  WT  tIEREAS  Charles  Stuart,   late 
 
 *  \  V      King hath,   by  Authority 
 
 *  deriv'd  from  Parliament,  been  ■ at- 
 
 '  tainted  of  High  Treafon,  whereby  his  liTue 
 
 *  and  Pofterity,  and  all  others  pretendi?ig  'Ti- 
 
 *  tie  under  him,  are  become  iincapable  of  the 
 
 *  fiiid  Crowns,  &c.  Be  it  therefore  enaded  — , 
 
 *  Thar  all  the  People  of  Enghi?7d,  ccc. 
 
 *  are  dijchargd  of  all  Fealty,   Homage  and 
 
 *  Allegiance  pretended  to  be  due,   &c.  — 
 
 *  any  Laws,   &c.  to  the  contrary  hereof  in 
 
 *  any  wife   notwithftanding.     And  whereas 
 
 *  it  is,  and  hath  been,  found  by  Experience, 
 
 *  that  the  Office  of  a  King  in  this  Nation  — 
 
 *  is  unneceffiary,  burthenfome  and  dangerous  to 
 
 *  the  Liberty,   Safety  and  Public  Interefl  of 
 
 *  the  Peopky  &c. If  any  Perfon  or  Per- 
 
 *  fons 
 
[    211    ] 
 
 fons  (liall  endeavour the  reviving  or 
 
 fetting  up  again  of  any  pretended  Right,  — 
 every  fuch  Offence    lliall   be  deem'd  and 
 
 adjudg'd  High  Treafofi,  &c. And 
 
 whereas a  moft  happy  Way  is  made 
 
 for  this  Nation to   return    to  its  jujt 
 
 and  ancient  Right  of  being  govern'd  by  its 
 
 own   Reprefentatives  ,    it  is  therefore 
 
 rcfolv'd, That,  fo  foon  as  may  poffibly 
 
 ftand  with  the  Safety  of  the  People , 
 
 and  with  what  is  abfohttely  necefary  for  the 
 preferving  and  upholding  the  Government 
 now  fettled,  they  will  carefully  pro- 
 vide for  the  certain  chuling,  meeting  and 
 fitting  of  the  next  and  future  Reprefenta- 
 tives,   ai  of  Right  is  due  unto  the  Su- 
 preme Authority  hereby  declar'd,  &c.* 
 
 N  U  M  B  E  R     V. 
 
 Extradt  of  the  Proceedings  on  the  Claim  of 
 Richard  Duke  of  York,  againjl  Henry 
 V\,  from  the  Parliament-Roily  39  Hen- 
 ry VI.  n.  iCj  ^c. 
 
 THE  Duke's Counfel exhibited hisCIalni 
 of  the  Crown,  to  the  Lord  Chancel- 
 lor, to  be  open'd  to  the  Houfeof  Peers;  fet- 
 ting forth  his  Pedigree,  as  Son  and  Heir  to 
 Anne,  Daughter  and  Fleircfs  to  Roger  Mortis 
 
 P    Z  mer. 
 
[    212    ] 
 
 mer^  Eail  of  March,  Son  and  Heir  to  Phi^ 
 lippa.  Daughter  and  Heirefs  to  Leonel  Duke 
 of  Clarence,  Third  Son  of  King  Edwa?'^  III. 
 to  whom  the  Crown  of  Right  appertaineth, 
 before  any  liTuc  of  jfolm  of  Gaunt,  Fourth 
 Son  of   King  Edward  III. 
 
 The  Lords  agreed,  his  Claim  ought  to  be 
 heard,  bat  iiot  to  be  anjwcrd  'without  the 
 King's  Commandment',  the  Matter  being  Jo 
 high,  and  of  jo  great  Weight,  &c. 
 
 The  Duke's  Counfel  defiring  an  Anfwer, 
 the  Lords  went  together  to  the  King,  to  un- 
 derftand  his  Picafure:  Who  commanded 
 them  all,  to  fearch  all  fuch  Things  as  might 
 be  objected  againfi  the  Duke's  Claim. 
 
 The  Lords  fent  for  the  Judges,  to  have 
 their  Advice:  Who  begg'd  to  be  excus'd,  the 
 M(^'tter  being  ahoije  the  Laiv,  and  pa  ft  their 
 Learning.  Whereupon  the  King's  Serjeants, 
 r.nd  other  Counfel,  being  cali'd,  offer'd  the 
 like  Excufe. 
 
 The  Lords  thereupon  agreed,  every  one  to 
 i-<vj  'ivhat  he  could,  in  fortifying  the  King's  7z"- 
 >/t%  a?2d  defeati?7g  tb  Duke's  Claim  :  The 
 ^ubftance  of  which,  together  with  the  Duke's 
 Anfwers  thereto,  here  follows. 
 
 I.  They  obit'dled  their  Oaths  made  to  the 
 King,  "which  they  might  not  break.  To  which 
 be  aiifeer'd,  That  every  Man,  under  Fain  of 
 Damnation,  is  bound  to  obey  the  J^aiio  of  God^ 
 whereby  Truth  and  Juftice  ought  to  be  pre- 
 ferred,  of  which  D'^iy  noMan  may  difcharge 
 
 hi. '/If 
 
[   213   1 
 
 himjelf  by  his  own  A5i  or  Oath:  That  *  aft 
 
 *  Oath  made  by  one  Perfon  to  the  Prejudice 
 
 *  or  Hurt  of  another,   contrary  to   Truth, 
 
 *  Juftice  and  Charity,  in  the  which  ftandeth 
 
 *  the  Plenitude  and  Perfedtion  of  God's 
 '  Law,  is  void  and  of  none  EfFedt,  neither  in 
 '  any  wife  obligatory  j  and  that  the  Virtue 
 
 *  and  Nature  of    an    Oath   is  to  confirm 
 
 *  Truth,   and  in  no  wife  to  impugn  it,  G?f.* 
 
 2.  They  obje(fled  certain  ABi  of  Parlia- 
 tnentj  as  of  Authority  to  defeat  any  manner  of 
 Title  made  to  any  Perfon:  As  alfo, 
 
 3 .  Divers  E?itails  of  the  Crowji^,  made  to 
 the  Heirs  Male.  To  both  which  the  Duke 
 anfwer'd,  That  there  were  no  fuch  AHs  and 
 Entails  made^  but  only  y  Henry  IV.  who,  if 
 he  might  have  obtain'd  the  Crown  by  Inheri- 
 tance^ neither  needed,  nor  would  have  defir'd 
 a  Grant  of  it  by  fuch  an  A6t ;  '  which  tak- 
 
 *  eth   no  Place,  neither  is  of  any  Force  or 
 
 *  EfFecft  againft  him   that  is  right  Inheritor 
 
 *  of  the  faid  Crowns,  as  it  accordeth  with 
 
 *  God's  Law,  and  all  Natural  Laws,  ^c^ 
 
 4.  They  objedted  his  bearing  the  Arms  of 
 Edmund  Eangle\\  Duke  of  Tork^  and  not 
 thofe  of  Leonel^  Duke  of  Clarence^  under 
 whom  he  claim'd.  To  which  he  anfwer'd. 
 That  tho'  he  might  lawfully  have  borne  the 
 Arms  of  hccnel^  and  even  of  King  Edward 
 III.  yet  he  abflain'd  for  a  Time,  as  he  did 
 alfo-from  puifuing  his  Right  and  Title,  ^or 
 Caufei  not  unknown  to  all:  But  *  tho'  Riglit 
 
 *  for 
 
[214] 
 
 '  for  a  Time  reft,  and  be  put  to  Silence,  yet 
 
 *  it  rotteth  not,  nor  (hall  periQi.'     And, 
 
 5.  That  Henry  IV.  on  his  Taking  upon 
 him  the  Crown,  faid,  He  enter  d  as  I't^t Inhe- 
 ritor to  King  Henry  III.  and  not  as  a  Con- 
 queror. Which  (the  Duke  faid)  could  not  be 
 true\  but  was  '  only  to  (liadow,  and  colour 
 
 *  fraudulently   his  unrighteous  and   violent 
 
 *  Ufurpation,  and  by  that  Means  to  abufe 
 
 *  deceivably  the  People  ftanding  about  hifn.* 
 
 After  which  it  was  thought,  by  all  the 
 Lords y  *  That  the  Title  of  the  faid  Duke 
 
 *  could  not  be  defeated:'  But,  in  efchewing  the 
 great  Inconveniencies  that  might  enfue,  a 
 Mean  was  found  to  fave  the  King's  Honour 
 and  Eftate,  and  to  appeafe  the  faid  Duke,  if 
 he  would',  viz.  That  the  King  might  keep 
 the  Crown  and  Dignity  Royal  during  his 
 Life,  and  the  Duke  and  his  Heirs  fucceed 
 him.  Which  Propofal  was  accepted  by  both 
 Parties,  and  a  Concordate  made  accordingly. 
 
 FINIS. 
 
'H. 
 
 fv#F^ 
 
 ^% 
 
,.<_■/ 
 
 ,?),; 
 
 m^ 
 
 ^'flV,'-^ 
 
 \f\'A\ 
 
 fv 
 
 '2^.i'M 
 
 i^j 
 
 >>r  ^y- 
 
 '.CX*S«-^'^^ 
 
 -V' 
 
 v^^r 
 
 '^   > 
 
 m 
 
 '/^ 
 
 ^^^7/ 
 
 •:«.. 
 
 ■/i4- 
 
 >^. 
 
 ^•1, 
 
 yf 
 
 ^:^¥:m% 
 
 *^.* 
 
 ^