made against it, let us briefly enquire, with what Propriety it h s been fo differently applied by Controvertifts of late Years, to justify their refpective Schemes.

1. It has been applied by the Favourers and Partifans of the abdicated Family to juftify Paffive Obedience and Non-refiftance in Cafes of Civil and National Grievances, and to condemn the Meafures taken at the Revolution to redrefs them. But how can this be made out? Did thofe Perfons, engaged in the Revolution, question the Title of King James to fucceed to the Crown, or fet up the Title of the Prince of Orange in Oppofition to his? Far from it. They allowed, that he had a Title, and a good Title to govern: But not to govern wrong. They acknowledged, that he was the Ordinance of God, as long as he was the " Minifter of God

m

"It has greatly perplexed the Advocates for the Doctrine of unlimited Paffive Obedience and Non-refiftance, to answer this plain Queftion; How can Kings be the Ordinances of God in doing wrong? What Commiffion have they from him, over and above that of being the Ministers to the People for good? And all the Anfwer, which they have hitherto been able to give is this: That as a Judge, or Viceroy doth not vacate his Commiffion by his illegal Proceedings, contrary to the Tenor of that Commiffion; till his Sovereign fuperfedes or revokes it: So here, the Prince ftill continues to be the Minifter of God, though he acts ever fo contrary to the Laws of God, till he calls him away by Death, to give an Account of the Truft committed to him. This, I fay, is the utmost, which both Mr. Kettlewell, and (if

to them for Good. They did not proceed upon the Affair of difputed Titles at all; but upon that of Publick and National Grievances. How then can this Paffage, which wholly turns upon the Affair of difputed Titles, and which fuppofes, that there is no Objection made as to National Grievances, which also grounds the Submiffion to the reigning Powers upon their answering the Ends of Government, how is it poffible, I fay, that this Paffage could be fo far mistaken, as to be brought fo confidently by them to condemn the Revolution? It might with more Propriety_be brought to prove Tranfubftantiation: For

my Memory fails not) a late great Prelate in his Latin Sermon, in Answer to Bp. Hoadley's Meafures of Submiffion, could mufter up. But cannot any one fee, at first View, the Weakness and Inconclufiveness of this Argument? What Pretence can there be to draw a Parallel between the Cafe of the King of Kings, and mortal Sovereigns in this Refpect? The very Reafon and Ground, why good Princes here on Earth do not revoke the Commiffions given to their Minifters the Moment they act contrary to them is, because they must first know what is laid to their Charge, and then hear what the Accufed have to fay in their own Vindication. And therefore it must be a Work of Time, before they can withdraw their Authority delegated to unfaithful Servants. But doth the great God want Informations, before he is to determine, whether his Commiffioner is worthy to be continued any longer? Surely he that made the Eye, can fee: And he that made the Ear can hear. He knows the downfitting and uprifing of every Prince in his Kingdom, and understandeth their Thoughts long before. Whither then fhall they go from his Spirit? Whither can they flee from his Prefence?

though

though it proves nothing for that Doctrine, yet it proves nothing directly against it: Whereas in this Cafe the whole Turn, and peculiar Emphasis of the Argument is quite contrary to what they intended to prove by

it.

2. It has been, and is now applied by the Friends of the present Government to justify Obedience to it, as far as regards Title, and to require the Abjuration of the Title of any other Pretender. This appears at first View to be an entirely different State of the Queftion from the former. For thefe Perfons do not apply the Paffage to countenance abfolute Paffive Obedience, and Non-refistance, in Cafes of Real and National Grievances, but

m

n

A great many Difficulties have been started upon this head by those who have espoused the cause of the abdicated Family. They have demanded, with an Air of Triumph, what is a real and national Grievance? What Criterion is there to diftinguifh that from an imaginary one? How great and general must a Grievance be to justify a Revolution? Are the Populace to be the Judges of the Exigences of Government and Affairs of State? What Security is there, that they may not be practifed upon by ambitious and defigning Men, who vail over their own deftructive Projects with the fpecious Names of Patriotifm and Liberty? What Government thereforecan fubfift upon fuch Principles? And then they close the whole with a kind Caution to the prefent Government, out of their great Tenderness and Regard to it, to beware of the Men, who vent fuch Republican Notions: They are dangerous, factious Spirits, very bad Subjects to every Government, and never ought to be trufted.

Now

1

to condemn Difobedience to, and Refiftance against the prefent Government, the Powers that be, on Account of the Pretenfions of any other Claimant. And from the previous

Now there is a fhort and fatisfactory way of answering thefe Declamatory Objections, without being engaged in endless Altercations about them. As firft feeing that there is nothing in this prefent State free from Imperfections; the wife and prudent Choice is, to have Recourfe to fuch Measures, as are fubject to the least. 2dly, That as Government was defigned for the Good of the People, the Body of the Nation, or their Reprefentatives, are the best Judges, when, and how far this end is answered. They are not infallible; and yet they are much likelier to be right in judging of their own Happiness, or their own Mifery, and have fewer Biaffes to turn them from the Truth, than the Favourites and Dependants of a Court. 3dly, That if a Calculation was made, and a Regifter kept, of all the Inconveniencies attending a mixed Government, such as ours, where the Body of the People are the ultimate Judges of the publick Good, and the Inconveniencies attending an arbitrary defpotick Government where the People have no Share, but to fuffer and obey; It would be found, that the Inconveniences of the latter vaftly exceed those of the former. 4thly, That the Experience of near Sixty Years hath now demonftrated, that a Government can fubfift upon thefe Principles; and that the Men, who maintain them, are no otherwise Republicans, or bad Subjects, than as they maintain, that the Publick Good is the end of all Government. 5thly, That they do not expect Perfection from any thing that is human. They know how to fet a right value upon an Adminiftration that is good in the Main. They are fenfible, that most of the evils complained of, are what Difaffection have made neceffary, and therefore they afcribe them to it, as their true Caufe.

State

State of the Question, and the whole Reafoning upon it, it evidently appears, that the Paffage is full and direct, and is a Cafe in Point to justify Obedience to the prefent Government, and to condemn Resistance against it on Account of Title, even in thofe, who difpute the Justice of the Measures taken at the Revolution. For even they are told by Saint Paul in express Words, that it is their Duty to fubmit to the Powers that be, as long as they are the Minifters of God for Good, and to revere their Title, as being the Ordinances of God. As to thofe, who approve of the Revolution, they need no Exhortation to fubmit to a Government of their own choosing; and nothing need be said to them in Justification of a Title, which they prefer, and furely with great Justice, to any other.

But Mr. Chubb has not yet done with his Objections. For he fays in the Body of his Book, that abfolute Paffive obedience and Non-refiftance is the Doctrine of the Church of England. One thing I am fure of, that the Doctrine I have been maintaining as to Paffive Obedience and Non-refiftance refpecting Controverted Titles, is the Doctrine both of the Church and State of England, having been made a part of the Conftitution both by Common and Statute Laws, and the Decrees of Convocation. As to Paffive Obedience and Non-refiftance in the other fenfe I shall only observe, that whatever Expreffions