<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/css" href="https://hdl.handle.net/20.500.14106/swift.css"?><!DOCTYPE TEI.2
  SYSTEM "https://hdl.handle.net/20.500.14106/swift.dtd">
<TEI.2>
   <teiHeader>
      <fileDesc>
         <titleStmt>
             <title>The sentiments of a Church of England man</title>
             <title type="norm">Sentiments of a Church of England man</title>
         </titleStmt>
         <publicationStmt>
            <p>Unpublished</p>
         </publicationStmt>
         <seriesStmt>
            <title>AHRC SWift Archive</title>
            <idno>2_1_2</idno>
         </seriesStmt>
         <sourceDesc>
            <bibl>
               <title type="source">Miscellanies in prose and verse. The first volume</title>
               <biblScope type="volume">i.</biblScope>
               <biblScope type="pp">87-139</biblScope>
               <pubPlace>London</pubPlace>
               <publisher>Motte, Benjamin</publisher>
               <date>1727</date>
               <idno type="TS">25 (1a)</idno>
               <idno type="ESTC">T39458</idno>
               <!--WARNING: Not transformed:
Miscellanies, 1727, I. 87-139
--><repository>CUL </repository>
               <idno type="shelf">Williams 138</idno>
               <!--WARNING: Not transformed:
library 
--><!--WARNING: Not transformed:
shelfmark 
--></bibl>
         </sourceDesc>
      </fileDesc>
      <revisionDesc>
         <change>
            <date>12.10.08</date>
            <respStmt>
               <name>PSB</name>
            </respStmt>
            <item>Archived</item>
         </change>
         <change>
            <date>15.07.09</date>
            <respStmt>
               <name>PSB and DC</name>
            </respStmt>
            <item>Checked and finished</item>
         </change>
      </revisionDesc>
   </teiHeader>
   <text>
      <body>
         <pb/>
         <pn xml:id="d2e63">87</pn>
         <ornament position="header"/>
         <t>THE<lb/> SENTIMENTS<lb/> OF A<lb/>
                <i>Church-of-England Man</i>
            <lb/> With Respect to<lb/> Religion and
                Government.<lb/>
            <r/> Written in the Year 1708.<r/>
         </t>
         <p>
            <dc>W</dc>HOEVER has examined the Conduct and Proceedings of both <i>Parties</i> for
                some Years past, whether in or out of Power, cannot well conceive it possible to go
                far towards the Extreams of either, without offering some Violence to his Integrity
                or Understanding. A wise and a good Man may indeed be sometimes induced to comply
                with a Number whose Opi-<c>nion</c>
            <s>G4</s>
            <pb/>
            <pn xml:id="d2e105">88</pn> nion he generally
                approves, tho' it be perhaps against his own. But this Liberty should be made use of
                upon very few Occasions, and those of small Importance, and then only with a View of
                bringing over his own Side another Time to something of greater and more publick
                Moment. But to sacrifice the Innocency of a Friend, the Good of our Country, or our
                own Conscience, to the Humour, or Passion, or Interest of a Party, plainly shews
                that either our Heads or our Hearts are not as they should be: Yet this very
                Practice is the fundamental Law of each Faction among us, as may be obvious to any
                who will impartially, and without Engagement, be at the Pains to examine their
                Actions, which, however, is not so easy a Task: For it seems a Principle in human
                Nature, to incline one Way more than another, even in Matters where we are wholly
                unconcerned. And it is a common Observation, that in reading a History of Facts done
                a thousand Years ago, or standing by at Play among those who are perfect Strangers
                to us, we are apt to find our Hopes and Wishes engaged on a sudden in favour of one
                side more than another. No wonder then <c>we</c>
            <pb/>
            <pn xml:id="d2e113">89</pn> we are all so ready
                to interest our selves in the Course of publick Affairs, where the most
                inconsiderable have some <i>real</i> Share, and by the wonderful Importance which
                every Man is of to himself, a very great <i>imaginary</i> one. </p>
         <p>
            <sc>And</sc>
                indeed, when the two Parties that divide the whole Common<hh>-</hh>wealth, come once
                to a Rupture, without any Hopes left of forming a third with better Principles, to
                balance the others, it seems every Man's Duty to chuse a Side, tho' he cannot
                entirely approve of either, and all Pretences to Neutrality are justly exploded by
                both, being too stale and obvious, only intending the Safety and Ease of a few
                Individuals while the Publick is embroiled. This was the Opinion and Practice of the
                latter <i>Cato,</i> whom I esteem to have been the wisest and best of all the
                    <i>Romans.</i> But before Things proceed to open Violence, the truest Service a
                private Man may hope to do in his Country, is by unbiassing his Mind as much as
                possible, and then endeavouring to moderate between the rival Powers, which must
                needs be owned a fair <c>Proceeding</c>
            <pb/>
            <pn xml:id="d2e142">90</pn> Proceeding with the World,
                because it is of all others the least consistent with the common Design, of making a
                Fortune by the <i>Merit</i> of an <i>Opinion.</i>
            </p>
         <p>I have gone as far as I am able in qualifying my self to be such a Moderator; I
                believe I am no <i>Bigot</i> in Religion, and I am sure I am none in Government. I
                converse in full Freedom with many considerable Men of both Parties; and if not in
                equal Number, it is purely accidental and personal, as happening to be near the
                Court, and to have made Acquaintance there, more under one Ministry than another.
                Then, I am not under the Necessity of declaring my self by the Prospect of an
                Employment. And lastly, if all this be not sufficient, I industriously conceal my
                Name, which wholly exempts me from any Hopes and Fears in delivering my Opinion.
                    </p>
         <p>
            <sc>In</sc> Consequence of this free Use of my Reason, I cannot possibly
                think so well or so ill of either Party, as they would endeavour to perswade the
                World of each other, and of them-<c>selves.</c>
            <pb/>
            <pn xml:id="d2e166">91</pn> selves. For
                Instance; I do not charge it upon the Body of the <i>Whigs,</i> or the
                    <i>Tories,</i> that their several Principles lead them to introduce Presbytery,
                and the Religion of the Church of <i>Rome,</i> or a Commonwealth and Arbitrary
                Power. For, why should any Party be accused of a Principle which they solemnly
                disown and protest against? But, to this they have a mutual Answer ready; they both
                assure us; that their Adversaries are not to be believed; that they disown their
                Principles out of Fear; which are manifest enough when we examine their Practices.
                To prove this, they will produce Instances, on one side, either of avowed
                Presbyterians, or Persons of Libertine and Atheistical Tenets; and on the other, of
                professed Papists, or such as are openly in the Interest of the abdicated Family.
                Now, is it very natural for all subordinate Sects and Denominations in a State, to
                side with some general Party, and to chuse that which they find to agree with
                themselves in some general Principle. Thus at the <i>Restoration,</i> the
                Presbyterians, Anabaptists, Independents, and other Sects, did
                    <c>all</c>
            <pb/>
            <pn xml:id="d2e187">92</pn> all with very good Reason unite and sodder up their
                several Schemes to join against the <i>Church,</i> who without, regard to their
                Distinctions, treated them all as equal Adversaries. Thus, our present Dissenters do
                very naturally close in with the Whigs, who profess <i>Moderation,</i> declare they
                abhor all Thoughts of <i>Persecution,</i> and think it hard that those who differ
                only in a few <i>Ceremonies</i> and <i>Speculations,</i> should be denied the
                Privilege and Profit of serving their Country in the highest Employments of State.
                Thus, the Atheists, Libertines, Despisers of Religion and Revelation in general,
                that is to say, all those who usually pass under the Name of
                    <i>Free<hh>-</hh>Thinkers,</i> do properly join with the same Body; because
                    <i>They</i> likewise preach up Moderation, and are not so over nice to
                distinguish between an unlimited Liberty of Conscience, and an unlimited Freedom of
                Opinion. Then on the other Side, the profest Firmness of the <i>Tories</i> for
                Episcopacy, as an Apostolical Institution: Their Aversion to those Sects who lie
                under the Reproach of having once destroyed their Constitution, and who
                    <c>they</c>
            <pb/>
            <pn xml:id="d2e224">93</pn> they imagine, by too indiscreet a Zeal for
                Reformation, have defaced the primitive Model of the Church: Next, their Veneration
                for monarchial Government in the common Course of Succession, and their Hatred to
                republican Schemes. These, I say, are Principles which not only the nonjuring
                Zealots profess, but even Papists themselves fall readily in with. And every Extream
                here mentioned, flings a general Scandal upon the whole Body it pretends to adhere
                to. </p>
         <p>
            <sc>But</sc> surely no Man whatsoever ought in Justice or good Manners to
                be charged with Principles he actually disowns, unless his Practices do openly, and
                without the least room for Doubt, contradict his Profession: Not upon small
                Surmises, or because he has the Misfortune to have ill Men sometimes agree with him
                in a few general Sentiments. However, tho' the Extreams of <i>Whig</i> and
                    <i>Tory</i> seem with little Justice to have drawn Religion into their
                Controversies, wherein they have small Concern, yet they both have borrowed one
                leading Principle from the Abuse of it, which <c>is,</c>
                <pf>3</pf>
                <pb/>
            <pn xml:id="d2e247">94</pn> is, to have built their several Systems of political Faith, not
                upon Enquiries, after Truth, but upon Opposition to each other, upon injurious
                Appellations, charging their Adversaries with horrid Opinions, and then reproaching
                them for the want of Charity; <i>Et neuter falso.</i>
            </p>
         <p>
            <sc>In</sc> order to remove these Prejudices, I have thought nothing could be
                more effectual than to describe the Sentiments of a
                    <i>Church<hh>-</hh>of<hh>-</hh>England Man</i> with respect to <i>Religion</i>
                and <i>Government.</i> This I shall endeavour to do in such a Manner as may be
                liable to the least Objection from either Party, and which I am confident would be
                assented to by great Numbers in both, if they were not misled to those mutual
                Misrepresentations, by such Motives as they would be ashamed to own. </p>
         <p>I shall
                begin with <i>Religion.</i>
            </p>
         <p>
            <sc>And</sc> here, tho' it makes an odd Sound, yet it is necessary to say, that
                whoever professeth himself a Member of the Church of <i>England,</i> ought to
                believe a God, and His Providence, <c>together</c>
            <pb/>
            <pn xml:id="d2e292">95</pn> together with
                revealed Religion, and the Divinity of <i>Christ.</i> For beside those many
                Thousands, who (to speak in the Phrase of Divines) do practically deny all this by
                the Immorality of their Lives, there is no small Number, who, in their Conversation
                and Writings, directly, or by Consequence, endeavour to overthrow it. Yet all these
                place themselves in the Lift of the national Church, tho' at the same Time (as it is
                highly reasonable) they are great Sticklers for Liberty of Conscience. </p>
         <p>To
                enter upon Particulars: A <i>Church<hh>-</hh>of<hh>-</hh>England Man</i> has a true
                Veneration for the Scheme established among us of Ecclesiastick Government; and tho'
                he will not determine whether Episcopacy be of divine Right, he is sure it is most
                agreeable to primitive Institution, fittest, of all others, for preserving Order and
                Purity, and under his present Regulations best calculated for our civil State: He
                should therefore think the Abolishment of that Order among us would prove a mighty
                Scandal and Corruption to our Faith, and manifestly dangerous to our Monarchy; nay,
                he would defend <c>it</c>
            <pb/>
            <pn xml:id="d2e315">96</pn> it by Arms against all the Powers on
                Earth, except our own Legislature; in which Case he would submit as to a general
                Calamity, a Dearth, or a Pestilence. </p>
         <p>As to Rites and Ceremonies, and Forms of
                Prayer, he allows there might be some useful Alterations, and more, which in the
                Prospect of uniting Christians might be very supportable, as Things declared in
                their own Nature indifferent; to which he therefore would readily comply, if the
                    <i>Clergy,</i> or, (tho' this be not so fair a Method) if the <i>Legislature</i>
                should direct: Yet at the same Time he cannot altogether blame the former for their
                Unwillingness to consent to any Alteration, which, beside the Trouble, and perhaps
                Disgrace, would certainly never produce the good Effects intended by it. The only
                Condition that could make it prudent and just for the Clergy to comply in altering
                the Ceremonial, or any other indifferent Part, would be a firm Resolution in the
                Legislature to interpose by some strict and effectual Laws to prevent the rising and
                    spread-<c>ing</c>
            <pb/>
            <pn xml:id="d2e331">97</pn> ing of new Sects, how plausible soever, for
                the future; else they must never be at an End: And it would be to act like a Man who
                should pull down and change the Ornaments of his House, in Compliance to every one
                that was disposed to find fault as he passed by; which, besides the perpetual
                Trouble and Expence, would very much damage, and perhaps in Time destroy the
                Building. Sects in a State seem only tolerated with any Reason, because they are
                already spread; and because it would not be agreeable with so mild a Government, or
                so pure a Religion as ours, to use violent Methods against great Numbers of
                    <i>mistaken</i> People, while they do not manifestly endanger the Constitution
                of either. But the greatest Advocates for general Liberty of Conscience, will allow
                they ought to be check'd in their Beginnings, if they will allow them to be an Evil
                at all, or, which is the same Thing, if they will only grant, it were better for the
                Peace of the State, that there should be none. But while the Clergy consider the
                natural Temper of Mankind in general, or of our own
                    Coun-<c>try</c>
            <s>H</s>
            <pb/>
            <pn xml:id="d2e346">98</pn> try in particular, what Assurances can
                they have, that any Compliances they shall make, will remove the Evil of Dissention,
                while the Liberty still continues of professing what new Opinions we please? Or how
                can it be imagined that the Body of dissenting Teachers, who must be all undone by
                such a Revolution, will not cast about for some new Objections to withhold their
                Flocks, and draw in fresh Proselytes by some further Innovations or Refinements?
                    </p>
         <p>
            <sc>Upon</sc> these Reasons he is for tolerating such different Forms in
                religious Worship as are already admitted, but by no means for leaving it in the
                Power of those who are tolerated, to advance their own Models upon the Ruin of what
                is already established, which it is natural for all Sects to desire, and which they
                cannot justify by any consistent Principles if they do not endeavour; and yet, which
                they cannot succeed in without the utmost Danger to the publick Peace. </p>
         <p>To
                prevent these Inconveniences, he thinks it highly just, that all
                    Re-<c>wards</c>
            <pb/>
            <pn xml:id="d2e361">99</pn> wards of Trust, Profit or Dignity, which the
                State leaves in the Disposal of the Administration, should be given only to those
                whose Principles direct them to preserve the Constitution in all its Parts. In the
                late Affair of <i>occasional Conformity,</i> the general Argument of those who were
                against it, was not, to deny it an Evil in it self, but that the Remedy proposed was
                violent, untimely, and improper, which is the Bishop of <i>Salisbury's</i> Opinion
                in the Speech he made and published against the Bill: But however just their Fears
                or Complaints might have been upon that Score, he thinks it a little too gross and
                precipitate to employ their Writers already in Arguments for repealing the
                sacramental Test, upon no wiser a Maxim, than that no Man should on the Account of
                Conscience be deprived the Liberty of serving his Country, a Topick which may be
                equally applied to admit <i>Papists, Atheists, Mabometans, Heathens,</i> and
                    <i>Jews.</i> If the Church wants Members of its own to employ in the Service of
                the Publick, or be so unhappily contrived, as to exclude from its Communion
                    <c>such</c>
            <s>H2</s>
            <pb/>
            <pn xml:id="d2e385">100</pn> such Persons who are likeliest to have
                great Abilities, it is Time it should be altered and reduced into some more perfect,
                or at least more popular Form But in the mean while it is not altogether improbable,
                that when those who dislike the Constitution, are so very zealous in their Offers
                for the Service of their Country, they are not wholly unmindful of their Party or of
                themselves. </p>
         <p>
            <sc>The</sc>
                <i>Dutch,</i> whose Practice is so often quoted to prove and celebrate the great
                Advantages of a general Liberty of Conscience, have yet a national Religion
                professed by all who bear Office among them: But why should they be a Precedent for
                us either in Religion or Government? Our Country differs from theirs, as well in
                Situation, Soil, and Productions of Nature, as in the Genius and Complexion of
                Inhabitants. They are a Commonwealth founded on a sudden, by a desperate Attempt in
                a desperate Condition, not formed or digested into a regular System by mature
                Thought and Reason, but huddled up under the Pressure of sudden Exigencies:
                    <c>cal-</c>
            <pb/>
            <pn xml:id="d2e401">101</pn> calculated for no long Duration, and hitherto
                subsisting by Accident in the midst of contending Powers, who cannot <i>yet</i>
                agree about sharing it amongst them. These Difficulties do indeed preserve them from
                any great Corruptions, which their crazy Constitution would extreamly subject them
                to in a long Peace. That Confluence of People in a persecuting Age, to a Place of
                Refuge nearest at Hand, put them upon the Necessity of Trade, to which they wisely
                gave all Ease and Encouragement: And if we could think fit to imitate them in this
                last Particular, there would need no more to invite Foreigners among us; who seem to
                think no farther than how to secure their Property and Conscience, without
                projecting any Share in that Government which gives them Protection, or calling it
                    <i>Persecution</i> if it be denied them. But I speak it for the Honour of our
                Administration, that although our Sects are not so numerous as those in
                    <i>Holland,</i> which I presume is not our <i>Fault,</i> and I hope is not our
                    <i>Misfortune,</i> we much excel them and all <i>Christendom</i> besides in our
                Indulgence to tender Consci-<c>ences.</c>
            <s>H3</s>
            <pb/>
            <pn xml:id="d2e432">102</pn> ence. One single
                Compliance with the national Form of receiving the Sacrament, is all we require to
                qualify any Sectary among us for the greatest Employments in the State, after which
                he is at Liberty to rejoin his own Assemblies for the rest of his Life. Besides, I
                will suppose any of the numerous Sects in <i>Holland,</i> to have so far prevailed
                as to have raised a civil War, destroyed their Government and Religion, and put
                their <i>Administrators</i> to Death; after which I will suppose the People to have
                recovered all again, and to have settled on their old Foundation. Then I would put a
                Query, whether that Sect which was the unhappy Instrument of all this Confusion,
                could reasonably expect to be entrusted for the suture with the greatest
                Employments, or indeed to be hardly tolerated among them? </p>
         <p>
            <sc>To</sc> go on
                with the Sentiments of a <i>Church<hh>-</hh>of<hh>-</hh>England Man:</i> He does not
                see how that mighty Passion for the Church which some Men pretend, can well consist
                with those Indignities and that Contempt they bestow on the Persons of the Clergy.
                'Tis a <c>strange</c>
            <pb/>
            <pn xml:id="d2e460">103</pn> strange Mark whereby to distinguish
                    <i>High</i>
            <hh>-</hh>Church Men, that they are such who imagine the Clergy can
                never be too <i>Low.</i> He thinks the Maxim these Gentlemen are so fond of, that
                they are for an humble Clergy, is a very good one: And so is he; and for an humble
                Laity too, since Humility is a Virtue that perhaps equally benefits and adorns every
                Station of Life. </p>
         <p>
            <sc>But</sc> then if the Scribblers on the other Side freely
                speak the Sentiments of their Party, a Divine of the Church of <i>England</i> cannot
                look for much better Quarter from thence. You shall observe nothing more frequent in
                their weekly Papers, than a Way of affecting to confound the Terms of <i>Clergy</i>
                and <i>High<hh>-</hh>Church,</i> of applying both indifferently, and then loading
                the latter with all the Calumny they can invent. They will tell you they honour a
                Clergyman; but talk at the same Time as if there were not three in the Kingdom who
                could fall in with their Definition. After the like Manner they insult the
                    <i>Universities</i> as poisoned Fountains, and Corrupters of Youth.
                    <s>H4</s>
            <c>Now</c>
            <pb/>
            <pn xml:id="d2e502">104</pn>
         </p>
         <p>Now it seems clear to me that the
                    <i>Whigs</i> might easily have procured and maintained a Majority among the
                Clergy, and perhaps in the Universities, if they had not too much encouraged or
                connived at this Intemperance of Speech, and Virulence of Pen, in the worst and most
                prostitute of their Party; among whom there hath been for some Years past such a
                perpetual Clamour against the Ambition, the implacable Temper, and the Covetousness
                of the <i>Priesthood:</i> Such a Cant of <i>High<hh>-</hh>Church,</i> and
                    <i>Persecution,</i> and being <i>Priest<hh>-</hh>ridden;</i> so many Reproaches
                about <i>narrow Principles,</i> or <i>Terms of Communion:</i> Then such scandalous
                Reflections on the Universities, for infecting the Youth of the Nation with
                Arbitrary and <i>Jacobite</i> Principles, that it was natural for those who had the
                Care of Religion and Education, to apprehend some general Design of altering the
                Constitution of both. And all this was the more extraordinary, because it could not
                easily be forgot, that whatever Opposition was made to the Usurpations of <i>King
                    James,</i> proceeded altogether <c>from</c>
            <pb/>
            <pn xml:id="d2e547">105</pn> from the Church of
                    <i>England,</i> and chiefly from the <i>Clergy,</i> and one of the Universities.
                For, if it were of any Use to recal Matters of Fact, what is more notorious than the
                Prince's applying himself first to the Church of <i>England;</i> and upon their
                Refusal to fall in with his Measures, making the like Advances to the
                    <i>Dissenters</i> of all<hh>-</hh>kinds, who readily and almost universally
                complied with him, affecting in their numerous Addresses and Pamphlets, the Style of
                    <i>Our Brethren the Roman Catholicks,</i> whose Interests they put on the same
                foot with their own: And some of <i>Cromwell's</i> Officers took Posts in the Army
                raised against the Prince of <i>Orange.</i> These Proceedings of theirs they can
                only extenuate by urging the Provocations they had met from the Church in King
                    <i>Charles's</i> Reign, which though perhaps excusable upon the Score of Human
                Infirmity, are not by any Means a Plea of Merit equal to the Constancy and
                Sufferings of the Bishops and Clergy, or of the Head and Fellows of <i>Magdalen
                    College,</i> that furnished the Prince of <i>Orange's,</i> Declaration with such
                    pow-<c>erful</c>
            <s>I</s>
            <pb/>
            <pn xml:id="d2e593">106</pn> erful Arguments to justify and promote
                the Revolution. </p>
         <p>
            <sc>Therefore</sc> a
                    <i>Church<hh>-</hh>of<hh>-</hh>England</i> Man abhors the Humour of the Age in
                delighting to fling Scandals upon the Clergy in general; which besides the Disgrace
                to the Reformation, and to Religion it self, casts and Ignominy upon the Kingdom
                that it doth not deserve. We have no better Materials to compound the Priesthood of,
                than the Mass of Mankind, which corrupted as it is, those who receive Orders must
                have some Vices to leave behind them when they enter into the Church, and if a few
                do still adhere, it is no Wonder, but rather a great one that they are no worse.
                Therefore he cannot think <i>Ambition</i> or <i>Love of Power</i> more justly laid
                to their Charge than to other Men, because, that would be to make Religion it self,
                or at least the best Constitution of Church Government, answerable for the Errors
                and Depravity of Human Nature. </p>
         <p>
            <sc>Within</sc> these last two hundred Years
                all sorts of Temporal Power hath been wrested from the Clergy, and
                    <c>much</c>
            <pb/>
            <pn xml:id="d2e626">107</pn> much of their Ecclesiastick, the Reason or Justice
                of which Proceeding I shall not examine; but that the Remedies were a little to
                violent, with respect to their <i>Possessions,</i> the Legislature hath lately
                confessed by the Remission of their <i>First Fruits.</i> Neither do the common
                Libellers deny this, who in their Invectives only tax the Church with an unsatiable
                Desire of Power and Wealth, (equally common to all Bodies of Men, as well as
                Individuals,) but thank God, that the Laws have deprived them of both. However, it
                is worth observing the Justice of Parties; the Sects among us are apt to complain,
                and think it hard Usage to be reproached now after fifty Years for overturning the
                State for the Murder of a King, and the Indignity of a Usurpation; yet these very
                men, and their Partisans, are continually reproaching the Clergy, and laying to
                their Charge the Pride, the Avarice, the Luxury, the Ignorance, and Superstition of
                    <i>Popish</i> Times for a thousand Years past. </p>
         <p>
            <sc>He</sc> thinks it a
                Scandal to Government that such an unlimited Liberty should be allowed of publishing
                Books <c>against</c>
            <pb/>
            <pn xml:id="d2e650">108</pn> against those Doctrines in Religion, wherein
                all Christians have agreed, much more to connive at such Tracts as reject all
                Revelation, and by their Consequences often deny the very Being of a God. Surely
                'tis not a sufficient Atonement for the Writers, that they profess much Loyalty to
                the present Government, and sprinkle up and down some Arguments in Favour of the
                    <i>Dissenters;</i> that they dispute as strenuously as they can for Liberty of
                Conscience, and inveigh largely against all Ecclesiasticks under the Name of
                        <i>High<hh>-</hh>Church;</i> and, in short, under the Shelter of some
                popular Principles in Politicks and Religion, undermine the Foundations of all Piety
                and Virtue. </p>
         <p>
            <sc>As</sc> he does not reckon every <i>Schism</i> of that
                damnable Nature which some would represent, so he is very far from closing with the
                new Opinion of those who would make it no Crime at all, and argue at a wild rate,
                that God Almighty is delighted with the Variety of Faith and Worship, as he is with
                the Varieties of Nature. To such Absurdities are men carried by
                    <c>the</c>
            <pb/>
            <pn xml:id="d2e676">109</pn> the Affectation of <i>free Thinking,</i> and
                    <i>removing the Prejudices of Education,</i> under which Head they have for some
                Time begun to list <i>Morality</i> and <i>Religion.</i> It is certain that before
                the <i>Rebellion</i> in 1642. though the Number of <i>Puritans</i> (as they were
                then called) were as great as it is with us, and though they affected to follow
                Pastors of that Denomination, yet those Pastors had Episcopal Ordination, possessed
                Preferments in the Church, and were sometimes promoted to Bishopricks themselves.
                But, a Breach in the general Form of Worship was in those Days reckoned so dangerous
                and sinful in it self, and so offensive to <i>Roman Catholicks</i> at home and
                abroad, that it was too unpopular to be attempted; neither I believe, was the
                Expedient then found out of maintaining separate Pastors out of private Purses.
                    </p>
         <p>
            <sc>When</sc> a <i>Schism</i> is once spread in a Nation, there grows at
                length a Dispute which are the Schismaticks. Without entring on the Arguments, used
                by both Sides among us, to fix the Guilt on each other, 'tis certain, that in the
                Sense of the Law, the <c>
               <i>Schism</i>
            </c>
            <pb/>
            <pn xml:id="d2e718">110</pn>
                <i>Schism</i> lies on that Side which opposes it self to the Religion of the State.
                I shall leave it among the <i>Divines</i> to dilate upon the Danger of <i>Schism</i>
                as a spiritual Evil; but I would consider it only as a Temporal one. And I think it
                clear that any great Separation from the established Worship, though to a new one
                that is more pure and perfect, may be an Occasion of endangering the publick Peace,
                because it will compose a Body always in Reserve, prepared to follow any
                discontented Heads, upon the plausible Pretexts of advancing <i>true Religion,</i>
                and opposing Error, Superstition, or Idolatry. For this Reason <i>Plato</i> lays it
                down as a Maxim, that <i>Men ought to worship the Gods according to the Laws of the
                    Country;</i> and he introduces <i>Socrates</i> in his last Discourse utterly
                disowning the Crime laid to his Charge, of <i>teaching new Divinities</i> or Methods
                of Worship. Thus the poor <i>Hugonots</i> of <i>France</i> were engaged in a Civil
                War, by the specious Pretences of some, who, under the Guise of Religion, sacrificed
                so many thousand Lives to their own Ambition and Revenge. Thus was the whole Body of
                        <c>
               <i>Puritans</i>
            </c>
                <pf>3</pf>
                <pb/>
            <pn xml:id="d2e765">111</pn>
                <i>Puritans</i> in <i>England</i> drawn to be instrumental, or Abettors of all
                Manner of Villany, by the Artifices of a <i>few Men,</i> whose * <sn>
               <i>Lord</i>
                    Clarendon's <i>History.</i>
            </sn> Designs from the first were levelled to destroy
                the Constitution both of Religion and Government. And thus even in <i>Holland</i> it
                self, where it is pretended that the Variety of Sects live so amicably together, and
                in such perfect Obedience to the Magistrate, 'tis notorious how a turbulent Party
                joining with the <i>Arminians,</i> did in the Memory of our Fathers attempt to
                destroy the Liberty of that Republick. So that upon the whole, where <i>Sects</i>
                are tolerated in a State, 'tis fit they should enjoy a full Liberty of Conscience,
                and every other Privilege of free<hh>-</hh>born Subjects <i>to which no Power is
                    annexed.</i> And to preserve their Obedience upon all Emergencies, a Government
                cannot give them too much Ease, nor trust them with too little <i>Power.</i>
            </p>
         <p>
            <sc>The</sc>
                <i>Clergy</i> are usually charged with a <i>Persecuting Spirit,</i> which they are
                said to discover by an implacable Hatred to all <i>Dissenters;</i> and this appears
                to be more unreasonable, because <c>they</c>
            <pb/>
            <pn xml:id="d2e825">112</pn> they suffer less in
                their Interests by a <i>Toleration</i> than any of the
                    <i>Conforming<hh>-</hh>Laity:</i> For while the <i>Church</i> remains in its
                present Form, no Dissenter can possibly have any Share in its Dignities, Revenues,
                or Power; whereas, by once receiving the Sacrament, he is render'd capable of the
                highest Employments in the State. And it is very possible, that a narrow Education,
                together with a Mixture of Human Infirmity, may help to beget among some of the
                    <i>Clergy in Possession</i> such an Aversion and Contempt for all
                    <i>Innovators,</i> as <i>Physicians</i> are apt to have for <i>Empiricks,</i> or
                    <i>Lawyers</i> for <i>Pettifoggers,</i> or <i>Merchants</i> for <i>Pedlars;</i>
                but since the Number of Sectaries does not concern the Clergy either in Point of
                Interest or Conscience, (it being an Evil not in their Power to remedy) 'tis more
                fair and reasonable to suppose their Dislike proceeds from the Dangers they
                apprehend to the Peace of the Commonwealth, in the Ruin whereof they must expect to
                be the first and greatest Sufferers. </p>
         <p>To conclude this Section, it must be
                observed, there is a very good <c>Word;</c>
            <pb/>
            <pn xml:id="d2e873">113</pn> Word, which hath of
                late suffered much by both Parties, and that is <i>Moderation,</i> which the one
                Side very justly disowns, and the other as unjustly pretends to. Beside what passes
                every Day in Conversation, any Man who reads the Papers published by Mr.
                    <i>L————y,</i> and others of his Stamp, must needs conclude, that if this Author
                could make the Nation see his Adversaries under the Colours he paints them in, we
                had nothing else to do, but rise as one Man, and destroy such Wretches from the Face
                of the Earth. On the other Side, how shall we excuse the Advocates for
                    <i>Moderation;</i> among whom I could appeal to a hundred Papers of universal
                Approbation by the Cause they were writ for, which lay such Principles to the whole
                Body of the <i>Tories,</i> as, if they were true, and believed our next Business
                should in Prudence be to erect Gibbets in every Parish, and hang them out of the
                Way. But I suppose it is presumed, the common People understand <i>Raillery,</i> or
                at least <i>Rhetorick,</i> and will not take <i>Hyperboles</i> in too literal a
                Sense; which however in some Junctures might prove a desperate Experiment. And this
                is <c>
               <i>Mode-</i>
            </c>
            <s>I</s>
            <pb/>
            <pn xml:id="d2e910">114</pn>
                <i>Moderation</i> in the <i>modern</i> Sense of the Word, to which, speaking
                impartially, the Bigots of both Parties are <i>equally</i> entituled. </p>
         <h>SECT. II.<lb/>
                <i>The Sentiments of a</i> Church-of-England <i>Man, with respect to
                Government.</i>
         </h>
         <p>
            <dc>W</dc>E look upon it as a very just Reproach, though we cannot agree where to fix
                it, that there should be so much Violence and Hatred in religious Matters, among Men
                who agree in all Fundamentals, and only differ in some Ceremonies, or, at most, meer
                speculative Points. Yet is not this frequently the Case between contending Parties
                in a State? For Instance; Do not the Generality of <i>Whigs</i> and
                    <c>
               <i>Tories</i>
            </c>
            <pb/>
            <pn xml:id="d2e948">115</pn>
                <i>Tories</i> among us, profess to agree in the same <i>Fundamentals,</i> their
                Loyalty to the Queen, their Abjuration of the <i>Pretender,</i> the Settlement of
                the Crown in the Protestant Line, and a Revolution Principle? Their Affection to the
                Church established, with Toleration of Dissenters? Nay, sometimes they go farther,
                and pass over into each other's Principles; the <i>Whigs</i> become great Afferters
                of the Prerogative, and the <i>Tories</i> of the People's Liberty; these crying down
                almost the whole Set of Bishops, and those defending them; so that the Differences
                fairly stated; would be much of a sort with those of Religion among us, and amount
                to little more than, <i>who should take Place,</i> or <i>go in and out first,</i> or
                    <i>kiss the Queen's Hand;</i> and what are these but a few <i>Court
                    Ceremonies?</i> or, <i>who should be in the Ministry?</i> And what is that to
                the Body of the Nation, but a meer <i>Speculative Point?</i> Yet I think it must be
                allowed, that no religious Sect ever carried their Aversions for each other to
                greater Heights than our State Parties have done, who, the more to inflame their
                Passions, have mixed Religious and Civil
                    Animosi-<c>ties</c>
            <s>I2</s>
            <pb/>
            <pn xml:id="d2e995">116</pn> ties together; borrowing one of
                their Appellations from the Church, with the Addition of <i>High</i> and <i>Low,</i>
                how little soever their Disputes relate to the Term, as it is generally understood.
                </p>
         <p>I now proceed to deliver the Sentiments of a
                    <i>Church<hh>-</hh>of<hh>-</hh>England</i> Man with respect to Government.
                    </p>
         <p>
            <sc>He</sc> does not think the Church of <i>England</i> so narrowly
                calculated, that it cannot fall in with any regular Species of Government; nor does
                he think any one regular Species of Government more acceptable to God than another.
                The three generally received in the <i>Schools</i> have all of them their several
                Perfections, and are subject to their several Depravations. However, few States are
                ruined by any Defect in their Institution, but generally by the Corruption of
                Manners, against which the Institution is no longer Security, and without which a
                very ill one may subsist and flourish: Whereof there are two pregnant Instances now
                in <i>Europe</i>. The first is the <i>Aristocracy</i> of <i>Venice,</i> which
                founded <c>upon</c>
            <pb/>
            <pn xml:id="d2e1041">117</pn> upon the wisest Maxims, and digested by a great
                Length of Time, hath in our Age admitted so many Abuses through the Degeneracy of
                the Nobles, that the Period of its Duration seems to approach. The other is the
                United Republicks of the <i>State General,</i> where a Vein of Temperance, Industry,
                Parsimony, and a publick Spirit, Parsimony, and a publick Spirit, running through
                the whole Body of the People, hath preserved an Infant Commonwealth, of an untimely
                Birth and sickly Constitution, for above an hundred Years, through so many Dangers
                and Difficulties, as a much more healthy one could never have struggled against
                without those Advantages. </p>
         <p>
            <sc>Where</sc> Security of Person and Property are
                preserved by Laws, which non but the <i>Whole</i> can repeal, there the great Ends
                of Government are provided for, whether the Administration be in the Hands of
                    <i>One</i> or of <i>Many</i>. Where any one <i>Person</i> or <i>Body</i> of Men,
                who do not represent the <i>Whole,</i> seize into their Hands the Power in the last
                Resort, there is properly no longer a Government,
                    <c>but</c>
            <s>I3</s>
            <pb/>
            <pn xml:id="d2e1079">118</pn> but what <i>Aristotle</i> and his Followers
                call the <i>Abuse</i> and <i>Corruption</i> of one This Distinction excludes
                Arbitrary Power, in whatever Numbers; which notwithstanding all that <i>Hobbes,
                    Filmer,</i> and others, have said to its Advantage, I look upon as a greater
                Evil than <i>Anarchy</i> it self, as much as <i>Savage</i> is a happier State of
                Life, than a <i>Slave</i> at the Oar. </p>
         <p>
            <sc>It</sc> is reckoned ill Manners, as
                well as unreasonable, for Men to quarrel upon Difference in Opinion; because that is
                usually supposed to be a Thing which no Man can help in himself; which however I do
                not conceive to be an universal infallible Maxim, except in those Cases where the
                Question is pretty equally disputed among the Learned and the Wise: Where it is
                otherwise, a Man of tolerable Reason, small Experience, and willing to be
                instructed, may apprehend he is got into a wrong Opinion, though the whole Course of
                his Mind and Inclination would persuade him to believe it true; he may be convinced
                that he is in an Error, though he does not see where it lies, by the bad Effects
                    <c>of</c>
            <pb/>
            <pn xml:id="d2e1115">119</pn> of it in the common Conduct of his Life, and by
                observing those Persons, for whose Wisdom and Goodness he has the greatest
                Deference, to be of a contrary Sentiment. According to <i>Hobbes's</i> Comparison of
                    <i>Reasoning</i> with <i>casting up Accounts,</i> whoever finds a Mistake in the
                    <i>Sum Total,</i> must allow himself out, though after repeated Tryals he may
                not see in which Article he has misreckoned. I will instance in one Opinion, which I
                look upon every Man obliged in Conscience to quit, or in Prudence to conceal; I
                mean, that whoever argues in Defence of absolute Power in a single Person, though he
                offers the old plausible Plea, that <i>it is his Opinion, which he cannot help,
                    unless he be convinced,</i> ought in all free States to be treated as the common
                Enemy of Mankind. Yet this is laid as a heavy Charge upon the <i>Clergy</i> of the
                two Reigns before the <i>Revolution,</i> who under the Terms of <i>Passive
                    Obedience</i> and <i>Non<hh>-</hh>Resistance,</i> are said to have preach'd up
                the unlimited Power of the Prince, because they found it a Doctrine that pleased the
                Court, and made Way for their Preferment. And I believe there may be Truth
                    <c>enough</c>
            <s>I4</s>
            <pb/>
            <pn xml:id="d2e1158">120</pn> enough in this Accusation, to convince
                us, that Human Frailty will too often interpose it self among Persons of the Holiest
                Function. However, it may be offered in Excuse for the Clergy, that in the best
                Societies there are some ill Members, which a corrupted Court and Ministry will
                industriously find out and introduce. Besides, it is manifest that the greater
                Number of those who held and preached this Doctrine, were misguided by equivocal
                Terms, and by perfect Ignorance in the Principles of Government, which they had not
                made any Part of their Study. The Question originally put, and as I remember to have
                heard it disputed in publick Schools, was this, <i>Whether under any Pretence
                    whatsoever, it may be lawful to resist the Supreme Magistrate?</i> which was
                held in the Negative; and this is certainly the right Opinion. But many of the
                Clergy and other Learned Men, deceived by a dubious Expression, mistook the
                    <i>Object,</i> to which <i>Passive Obedience</i> was due. By the <i>Supreme
                    Magistrate</i> is properly understood the Legislative Power, which in all
                Government must be absolute and unlimited. But the Word
                    <i>Magis-</i>
            <c>
               <i>trate</i>
            </c>
            <pb/>
            <pn xml:id="d2e1186">121</pn>
                <i>strate</i> seeming to denote a <i>single Person,</i> and to express the
                    <i>executive</i> Power, it came to pass, that the Obedience due to the
                    <i>Legislature</i> was, for want of knowing or considering this easy
                Distinction, misapplied to the <i>Administration</i>. Neither is it any Wonder, that
                the Clergy or other well<hh>-</hh>meaning People should fall into this Error, which
                deceived <i>Hobbes</i> himself so far, as to be the Foundation of all the political
                Mistakes in his Book, where he perpetually confounds the <i>executive</i> with the
                    <i>legislative</i> Power, though all well<hh>-</hh>instituted States have ever
                placed them in different Hands, as may be obvious to those who know any Thing of
                    <i>Athens, Sparta, Thebes</i>, and other Republicks of <i>Greece</i>, as well as
                the greater ones of <i>Carthage</i> and <i>Rome</i>. </p>
         <p>
            <sc>Besides,</sc> it is
                to be considered, that when these Doctrines began to be preached among us, the
                Kingdom had not quite worn out the Memory of that unhappy <i>Rebellion</i>, under
                the Consequences of which it had groaned almost twenty Years. And a <i>weak
                    Prince</i> in Conjunction with a Succession of most prostitute Ministers, began
                    <c>again</c>
                <pf>3</pf>
                <pb/>
            <pn xml:id="d2e1254">122</pn> again to dispose the People to new Attempts, which it was, no
                doubt, the Clergy's Duty to endeavour to prevent, if some of them had not for want
                of Knowledge in temporal Affairs, and others perhaps from a worse Principle,
                proceeded upon a Topick that strictly followed, would enslave all Mankind.
                    </p>
         <p>
            <sc>Among</sc> other theological Arguments made use of in those Times in
                praise of Monarchy, and Justification of absolute Obedience to a Prince, there
                seemed to be one of a singular Nature: It was urged that <i>Heaven</i> was governed
                by a <i>Monarch</i>, who had none to controul his Power, but was absolutely obeyed:
                Then it followed, that earthly Governments were the more perfect, the nearer they
                imitated that in Heaven. All which I look upon as the strongest Argument against
                    <i>despotick</i> Power that ever was offered; since no Reason can possibly be
                assigned, why it is best for the World that God Almighty hath such a Power, which
                doth not directly prove that no mortal man should ever have the like.
                        <c>
               <sc>But</sc>
            </c>
            <pb/>
            <pn xml:id="d2e1280">123</pn>
         </p>
         <p>
            <sc>But</sc> though a
                        <i>Church<hh>-</hh>of<hh>-</hh>England</i> Man thinks every Species of
                Government equally <i>lawful</i>, he does not think them equally <i>expedient</i>;
                or for every Country indifferently. There may be something in the Climate, naturally
                disposing Men towards one sort of Obedience, as it is manifest all over <i>Asia</i>,
                where we never read of any Commonwealth, except some small ones on the western
                Coasts established by the <i>Greeks</i>: There may be a great deal in the Situation
                of a Country, and in the present <i>Genius</i> of the People. It hath been observed,
                that the temperate Climates usually run into moderate Governments, and the Extreams
                into despotick Power. 'Tis a Remark of <i>Hobbes</i>, that the Youth of
                    <i>England</i> are corrupted in their Principles of Government, by reading the
                Authors of <i>Greece</i> and <i>Rome</i>, who writ under Commonwealths. But it might
                have been more fairly offered for the Honour of Liberty, that while the rest of the
                known World was over<hh>-</hh>run with the arbitrary Government of single Persons,
                    <i>Arts</i> and <i>Sciences</i> took their Rise, and flourished only in
                    <c>those</c>
            <pb/>
            <pn xml:id="d2e1340">124</pn> those few small Territories where the People were
                    <i>free.</i> And though <i>Learning</i> may continue after <i>Liberty</i> is
                lost, as it did in <i>Rome,</i> for a while, upon the Foundations laid under the
                Commonwealth, and the particular Patronage of some Emperors, yet it hardly ever
                began under a <i>Tyranny</i> in any Nation. Because <i>Slavery</i> is of all Things
                the greatest Clog and Obstacle to <i>Speculation.</i> And indeed, arbitrary Power is
                but the first natural step from <i>Anarchy</i> or the <i>Savage Life;</i> the
                adjusting <i>Power</i> and <i>Freedom</i> being an Effect and Consequence of maturer
                Thinking: And this is no where so duly regulated as in a limited Monarchy: Because I
                believe it may pass for a Maxim in State, that <i>the Administration cannot be
                    placed in too</i> few <i>Hands,</i> nor the <i>Legislature in too</i> many. Now
                in this material Point, the Constitution of the <i>English</i> Government far
                exceeds all others at this Time on the Earth, to which the present Establishment of
                the <i>Church</i> doth so happily agree, that I think, whoever is an Enemy to
                    <i>either,</i> must of necessity be so to <i>both.</i>
                <c>He</c>
            <pb/>
            <pn xml:id="d2e1406">125</pn>
         </p>
         <p>
            <sc>He</sc> thinks, as our Monarchy is constituted;
                a Hereditary Right is much to be preferred before <i>Election.</i> Because the
                Government here, especially by some late Amendments, is so regularly disposed in all
                its Parts, that it almost <i>executes</i> it self. And therefore upon the Death of a
                Prince among us, the Administration goes on without any Rub or Interruption. For the
                same Reasons we have little to apprehend from the <i>Weakness</i> or <i>Fury</i> of
                our Monarchs, who have such wise Councils to guide the first, and Laws to restrain
                the other. And therefore this Hereditary Right should be kept so sacred, as never to
                break the Succession, unless where the preserving it may endanger the Constitution;
                which is not from any intrinsick Merit, or unalienable right in a <i>particular
                    Family,</i> but to avoid the Consequences that usually attend the Ambition of
                Competitors, to which elective Kingdoms are exposed; and which is the only Obstacle
                to hinder them from arriving at the greatest Perfection that Government can possibly
                reach. Hence appears the Absurdity <c>of</c>
            <pb/>
            <pn xml:id="d2e1435">126</pn> of that Distinction
                between a King <i>de facto,</i> and one <i>de jure,</i> with respect to us. For
                every <i>limited</i> Monarch is a King <i>de jure,</i> because he governs by the
                Consent of the <i>whole,</i> which is Authority sufficient to abolish all precedent
                Right. If a King come in by <i>Conquest,</i> he is no longer a <i>limited</i>
                Monarch; if he afterwards consents to Limitations, he becomes immediately King <i>de
                    jure</i> for the same Reason. </p>
         <p>
            <sc>The</sc> great Advocates for
                    <i>Succession,</i> who affirm it ought not to be violated upon any Regard or
                Consideration whatsoever, do insist much upon one Argument that seems to carry
                little Weight. They would have it, that a <i>Crown</i> is a Prince's Birthright, and
                ought at least to be as well secured to him and his Posterity as the Inheritance of
                any private Man; in short, that he has the same Title to his Kingdom which every
                Individual has to his Property: Now the Consequence of this Doctrine must be, that
                as a Man may find several Ways to waste, mispend, or abuse his Patrimony, without
                being answerable to the Laws; so a King may in like Manner <c>do</c>
                <pf>3</pf>
                <pb/>
            <pn xml:id="d2e1483">127</pn> do what he will with <i>his own,</i> that is, he may squander and
                misapply his Revenues, and even alienate the Crown, without being called to an
                Account by his Subjects. They allow such a Prince to be guilty indeed of much Folly
                and Wickedness, but for those he is to <i>answer to God,</i> as every private Man
                must do that is guilty of Mismanagement in his own Concerns. Now the Folly of this
                Reasoning will best appear, by applying it in a parallel Case: Should any Man argue,
                that a Physician is supposed to understand his own Art best; that the Law protects
                and encourages his Profession: And therefore although he should manifestly prescribe
                    <i>Poison</i> to all his Patients, whereof they should immediately die, he
                cannot be justly punished, but is answerable only to God. Or should the same be
                offered in behalf of a Divine, who would preach against Religion and moral Duties:
                In either of these two Cases, every body would find out the Sophistry; and presently
                answer, That although common Men are not exactly skilled in the Composition or
                Application of Medicines, or in prescribing the Li-<c>mits</c>
            <pb/>
            <pn xml:id="d2e1501">128</pn> mits
                of Duty; yet the Difference between <i>Poisons</i> and <i>Remedies</i> is easily
                known by their Effects; and common Reason soon distinguishes between <i>Virtue</i>
                and <i>Vice:</i> And it must be necessary to forbid both these the further Practice
                of their Professions, because their Crimes are not purely personal to the Physician
                or the Divine, but destructive to the Publick. All which is infinitely stronger in
                respect to a Prince, with whose good or ill Conduct the Happiness or Misery of a
                whole Nation is included; whereas it is of small Consequence to the Publick, farther
                than Examples, how any private Person manages his Property. </p>
         <p>
            <sc>But</sc>
                granting that the Right of a lineal Successor to a Crown were upon the same Foot
                with the Property of a Subject; still it may at any Time be transferred by the
                legislative Power, as other Properties frequently are. The supreme Power in a State
                can <i>do no wrong,</i> because whatever that doth, is the Action of all: And when
                the <i>Lawyers</i> apply this Maxim to the <i>King,</i> they must understand it only
                in that Sense as he is Administrator of <c>the</c>
            <pb/>
            <pn xml:id="d2e1536">129</pn> the supreme
                Power, otherwise it is not universally true, but may be controuled in several
                Instances easy to produce. </p>
         <p>
            <sc>And</sc> these are the Topicks we must proceed
                upon to justify our Exclusion of the young <i>Pretender</i> in <i>France;</i> that
                of his suspected Birth being meerly popular, and therefore not made use of, as I
                remember, since the Revolution, in any Speech, Vote, or Proclamation, where there
                was Occasion to mention him. </p>
         <p>As to the <i>Abdication</i> of King
                    <i>James,</i> which the Advocates on that Side look upon to have been forcible
                and unjust, and consequently void in it self, I think a Man may observe every
                Article of the <i>English</i> Church, without being in much Pain about it. 'Tis not
                unlikely that all Doors were laid open for his Departure, and perhaps not without
                the Privity of the Prince of <i>Orange,</i> as reasonably concluding that the
                Kingdom might better be settled in his Absence; but to affirm he had any Cause to
                apprehend the same Treatment with his <i>Father,</i> is an improbable Scandal flung
                upon the Nation by a few bigotted <i>French</i> Scribblers, or the invidious
                    As-<c>sertion</c>
            <s>K</s>
            <pb/>
            <pn xml:id="d2e1579">130</pn> sertion of a ruined Party at home, in
                the Bitterness of their Souls. Not one material Circumstance agreeing with those in
                1648; and the greatest Part of the Nation having preserved the utmost Horror for
                that ignominious <i>Murder:</i> But whether his Removal were caused by his own
                    <i>Fears,</i> or other Men <i>Artifices,</i> 'tis manifest to me, that supposing
                the Throne to be vacant, which was the Foot they went upon, the Body of the People
                was thereupon left at Liberty, to chuse what Form of Government they pleased, by
                themselves or their Representatives. </p>
         <p>
            <sc>The</sc> only Difficulty of any
                weight against the Proceedings at the Revolution, is an obvious Objection, to which
                the Writers upon that Subject have yet not given a direct or sufficient Answer, as
                if they were in Pain at some Consequences, which they apprehend those of the
                contrary Opinion might draw from it. I will repeat this Objection as it was offered
                me some Time ago, with all its Advantages, by a very pious, learned, and worthy
                Gentlemen of the Nonjuring Party.
                    <c>
               <sc>The</sc>
            </c>
            <pb/>
            <pn xml:id="d2e1605">131</pn>
         </p>
         <p>
            <sc>The</sc> Force of his Argument
                turned upon this; That the Laws made by the supreme Power, cannot otherwise than by
                the supreme Power be annulled: That this consisting in <i>England</i> of a King,
                Lords and Commons, whereof each have a negative Voice, no two of them can repeal or
                enact a Law without consent of the third; much less may any one of them be entirely
                excluded from its Part of the Legislature by a <i>Vote</i> of the other two. That
                all these Maxims were openly violated at the Revolution; where an Assembly of the
                    <i>Nobles</i> and <i>People</i> not summoned by the King's Writ, (which was then
                an essential Part of the Constitution,) and consequently no lawful Meeting, did
                meerly upon their own Authority declare the King to have abdicated, the Throne
                vacant, and gave the Crown by a Vote to a <i>Nephew,</i> when there were three
                Children to inherit, though by the fundamental Laws of the Realm, the next Heir is
                immediately to succeed. Neither doth it appear how a Prince's <i>Abdication</i> can
                make any other sort of Vacancy in the Throne, than would be caused by his Death,
                since he cannot abdicate for his <c>Children</c>
            <s>K2</s>
            <pb/>
            <pn xml:id="d2e1640">132</pn> Children,
                (who claim their Right of Succession by Act of Parliament,) otherwise than by his
                own Consent in form to a Bill from the two Houses. </p>
         <p>
            <sc>And</sc> this is the
                Difficulty that seems chiefly to stick with the most reasonable of those who, from a
                meer Scruple of Conscience, refuse to join with us upon the Revolution Principle;
                but for the rest, are I believe as far from loving arbitrary Government, as any
                others can be, who are born under a free Constitution, and are allowed to have the
                least Share of common good Sense. </p>
         <p>
            <sc>In</sc> this Objection there are two
                Questions included: First, Whether upon the Foot of our Constitution, as it stood in
                the Reign of the late King <i>James,</i> a King of <i>England</i> may be deposed?
                The Second, is, Whether the People of <i>England,</i> convened by their own
                Authority, after the King had withdrawn himself in the Manner he did, had Power to
                alter the Succession. </p>
         <p>As for the first, it is a Point I shall not presume to
                determine; and shall therefore only say, that to any <c>Man</c>
            <pb/>
            <pn xml:id="d2e1670">133</pn> Man
                who holds the Negative, I would demand the Liberty of putting the Case as strongly
                as I please. I will suppose a Prince limited by Laws like ours, yet running into a
                thousand Caprices of Cruelty like <i>Nero</i> or <i>Caligula;</i> I will suppose him
                to murder his Mother and his Wise; to commit Incest, to ravish Matrons, to blow up
                the Senate, and burn his Metropolis; openly to renounce God and Christ, and worship
                the Devil: These and the like Exorbitances are in the Power of a single Person to
                commit without the Advice of a Ministry, or Assistance of an Army. And if such a
                King as I have described, cannot be deposed but by his own Consent in Parliament, I
                do not well see how he can be <i>resisted,</i> or what can be meant by a
                    <i>limited</i> Monarchy; or what signifies the People's Consent in making and
                repealing Laws; if the Person who administers hath no Tie but Conscience, and is
                answerable to none but God. I desire no stronger Proof that an Opinion must be
                false, than to find very great Absurdities annexed to it; and there cannot be
                greater than in the present Case; for it is not a bare Speculation that Kings may
                run into such Enormities as are
                    above<hh>-</hh>
            <c>mention'd;</c>
            <s>K3</s>
            <pb/>
            <pn xml:id="d2e1698">134</pn> mention'd; the
                Practice may be proved by Examples not only drawn from the first <i>Caesars,</i> or
                later Emperors, but many modern Princes of <i>Europe;</i> such as <i>Peter</i> the
                Cruel, <i>Philip</i> the Second of <i>Spain, John Basilovits</i> of <i>Muscovy;</i>
                and in our own Nation, King <i>John, Richard</i> the Third, and <i>Henry</i> the
                Eighth. But there cannot be equal Absurdities supposed in maintaining the contrary
                Opinion, because it is certain that Princes have it in their Power to keep a
                Majority on their Side by any tolerable Administration, till provoked by continual
                Oppressions; no Man indeed can then answer where the Madness of the People will
                stop. </p>
         <p>As to the second Part of the Objection; whether the People of
                    <i>England</i> convened by their own Authority, upon King <i>James's</i>
                precipitate Departure, had Power to alter the Succession? </p>
         <p>
            <sc>In</sc> answer
                to this, I think it is manifest from the Practice of the wisest Nations, and who
                seem to have had the truest Notions of Freedom, that when a Prince was laid aside
                for <c>Male-</c>
            <pb/>
            <pn xml:id="d2e1744">135</pn> Male<hh>-</hh>Administration, the <i>Nobles</i>
                and <i>People,</i> if they thought it necessary for the publick Weal, did resume the
                Administration of the supreme Power, (the Power it self having been always in them,)
                and did not only alter the Succession, but often the very Form of Government too;
                because they believed there was no natural Right in one Man to govern another, but
                that all was by Institution, Force, or Consent. Thus, the Cities of <i>Greece,</i>
                when they drove out their Tyrannical Kings, either chose others from a new Family,
                or abolished the Kingly Government, and became Free States. Thus the <i>Romans,</i>
                upon the Expulsion of <i>Tarquin,</i> found it was inconvenient for them to be
                subject any longer to the Pride, the Lust, the Cruelty and Arbitrary Will of single
                Persons, and therefore by general Consent entirely altered the whole Frame of their
                Government. Nor do I find the Proceedings of either, in this Point, to have been
                condemned by any Historian of the succeeding Ages. </p>
         <p>
            <sc>But</sc> a great deal
                hath been already said by other Writers upon this
                    <c>in-</c>
            <s>K4</s>
            <pb/>
            <pn xml:id="d2e1779">136</pn> invidious and beaten Subject; therefore I
                shall let it fall; though the Point is commonly mistaken, especially by the
                    <i>Lawyers;</i> who of all others seem least to understand the Nature of
                Government in general; like Under workmen, who are expert enough at making a single
                Wheel in a Clock, but are utterly ignorant how to adjust the several Parts, or
                regulate the Movement. </p>
         <p>To return therefore from this Digression: It is a
                        <i>Church<hh>-</hh>of<hh>-</hh>England</i> Man's Opinion, That the Freedom
                of a Nation consists in an absolute <i>Unlimited Legislative</i> Power, wherein the
                whole Body of the People are fairly represented, and in an <i>Executive</i> duly
                    <i>limited;</i> because on this Side likewise there may be dangerous Degrees,
                and a very ill Extream. For when two Parties in a State are pretty equal in
                    <i>Power, Pretensions, Merit,</i> and <i>Virtue,</i> (for these two last are,
                with Relation to Parties and a Court, quite different Things,) it hath been the
                Opinion of the best Writers upon Government, that a Prince ought not in any fort to
                be under the Guidance or Influence of either, be-<c>cause</c>
            <pb/>
            <pn xml:id="d2e1818">137</pn> cause
                he declines by this Means from his Office of presiding over the <i>whole,</i> to be
                the Head of a <i>Party;</i> which besides the Indignity, renders him answerable for
                all publick Mismanagements, and the Consequences of them; and in whatever State this
                happens, there must either be a Weakness in the Prince or Ministry, or else the
                former is too much restrained by the Legislature. </p>
         <p>To conclude: A
                        <i>Church<hh>-</hh>of<hh>-</hh>England Man</i> may with Prudence and a good
                Conscience approve the professed Principles of one Party more than the other,
                according as he thinks they best promote the Good of Church and State; but he will
                never be sway'd by Passion or Interest to advance an Opinion meerly because it is
                    <i>That</i> of the Party he most approves; which one single Principle he looks
                upon as the Root of all our Civil Animosities. To enter into a Party, as into an
                Order of <i>Fryars,</i> with so resigned an Obedience to Superiors, is very
                unsuitable both with the Civil and Religious Liberties, we so zealously assert. Thus
                the Understandings of a <c>whole</c>
            <pb/>
            <pn xml:id="d2e1850">138</pn> whole Senate are often
                enslaved by three or four Leaders on each Side, who instead of intending the publick
                Weal, have their Hearts wholly set upon Ways and Means how to get or to keep
                Employments. But to speak more at large, how has this Spirit of Faction mingled it
                self in with the Mass of the People, changed their Nature and Manners, and the very
                Genius of the Nation? broke all the Laws of Charity, Neighbourhood, Alliance, and
                Hospitality, destroy'd all Ties of Friendship, and divided Families against
                themselves? And no wonder it should be so, when in order to find out the Character
                of Person, instead of enquiring whether he be a Man of Virtue, Honour, Piety, Wit,
                good Sense, or Learning; the modern Question is only whether he be a <i>Whig</i> or
                a <i>Tory,</i> under which Terms all good and ill Qualities are included.
                </p>
         <p>Now, because it is a Point of Difficulty to chuse an exact Middle between two
                ill Extreams, it may be worth enquiring in the present Case, which of these a wise
                and good Man would rather seem to avoid: Taking
                    <c>there-</c>
            <s>I</s>
            <pb/>
            <pn xml:id="d2e1869">139</pn> therefore their own good and ill
                Characters with due Abatements and Allowances for Partiality and Passion, I should
                think that in order to preserve the Constitution entire in Church and State, whoever
                has a true Value for both, would be sure to avoid the Extreams of <i>Whig</i> for
                the sake of the former, and the Extreams of <i>Tory</i> on account of the latter.
                </p>
         <p>I have now said all I could think convenient upon so nice a Subject, and find
                I have the Ambition common with other Reasoners, to wish at least that both Parties
                may think me <i>in the right,</i> which would be of some Use to those who have any
                Virtue left, but are blindly drawn into the Extravagancies of either, upon false
                Representations, to serve the Ambition or Malice of designing Men without any
                Prospect of their own. But if that is not to be hoped for, my next Wish should be,
                that both might think me <i>in the wrong;</i> which I would understand as an ample
                Justification of my self, and a sure Ground to believe that I have proceeded at
                least with Impartiality, and perhaps with Truth. <c>AN</c>
         </p>
      </body>
   </text>
</TEI.2>