REFLECTIONS UPON Our Late and Present PROCEED IN ENGLAND.   depiction of lion 
London: Printed in the YEAR 1689.   

REFLECTIONS Upon our Late and Present PROCEED IN ENGLAND.  
THOUGH no Man wishes better to the Protestant Religion in general, and the Church of England in particular, than I do, yet I cannot prevail with myself to approve all those Methods, or follow all those measures, which some Men propose as the only Security both of the one and the other.  
Never perhaps was there a more proper time, wherein to secure our Religion (together with our Civil Liberties) than now offers itself; if we have but the Skill and Honesty rightly to improve this critical Opportunity; but if we shall either let it slip, or abuse it, we may, in vain, hereafter wish that we had been wise in time, and have cause to repent of our Error, when it will be too late to correct it.  
What we do now, will transmit its good or ill effects to after-Ages; and our Children yet unborn, will, in all probability, be happy or miserable, as we shall behave ourselves in this great Conjuncture. They are likely to enjoy their Religion, Laws, and Liberties, according to the old English Standard, if we shall now take the right course to secure them.  
But if we do engage in wrong Counsels, and build upon false foundations, instead of a Blessing we may leave a Curse to our Posterity, and entail upon them Popery, Slavery, Arbitrary Power, and all the miserable Consequences of a divided Kingdom, which (as sure as the Word of God is true) can never stand.  
Let us not therefore be too hasty, but pause a while, let us make a stop, look about us, and consider, 1. What we have done. 2. With what intent we did it. 3. What it is that some Men would be at: and 4. Whether we can in Honour and Conscience join with them in the Desigus now in hand.  
I shall confine myself to these Heads: But here before I enter upon any of them, I shall take it for granted, that the Prince of Orange hath done a great thing for us, and (under God) hath wrought such a Deliverance for the Nation, as aught never to be forgotten, and can never be sufficiently requited. He must be mentioned with Honour and Gratitude, so long as the Protestant Name shall be remembered: He came not as the ancient Romans and Saxons, to conquer; and lead in Triumph after him our Religion and Laws, our Lives and Liberties; but to defend, preserve and secure us in them all. To this end he undertook this dangerous and chargeable Expedition, which hath hitherto proved as much to our Advantage, as it will be to his lasting Reputation: What he has done argues, that he is moved by an higher Principle than any this World affords, and can over look his own Ease and Security when the public Good, and the Concerns of Christianity require his seasonable Assistance. I could easily make a Panegyric upon his Virtues, and equal him to the most famous Grecian or Roman Captains; but I need not set forth his Praises, which do so loudly, and yet so filently speak for themselves. I need not draw any tedious Parallels betwixt his Highness and the Worthies of other Ages, since I am, I question not, herein prevented by all who have read the History of former times, and are Witnesses of what he (with so much Courage, Mildness, and Prudence) hath done in this.  
1. Things prospered so well under his Conduct, that all of us were ready to submit ourselves to his Direction, and come under his Protection, as the Tutelar Genius of the Nation. The effects of his Enterprise have been so strange, so wonderful and surprising, that had we not seen, we should scarce have believed them.  
As soon as the Prince was landed, with what Joy and universal good Wishes was the News received? How forward were all sorts of People to declare for his Highness? How willing were they to lend him an helping hand for the accomplishing his great Work? How did we all generally concur and unanimously agree to forget our Obligations to our Sovereign, and assist the Prince, rather than the King against ourselves, and his own true Interest?  
Nay, the Army itself soon began to go over, choosing rather to lie under the imputation of Cowardice and Disloyalty (which yet a true-English-Man had rather die than really deserve) than to be instrumental in enslaving their Native Country, and bringing it again under the Papal Yoke.  
In short, all Orders of Men, Ecclesiastic, Civil, and Military, had their eyes fixed upon the Prince of Orange, as their Common Deliverer, were resolved to espouse his Cause; and accordingly (after the King was withdrawn) did put the Regal Administration into his hands.  
2. So far we have gone; this we have done; and we hope that (the Case being extraordinary, and Necessity giving a Dispensation) the intent of our proceeding, will at least excuse, if not justify us, if we have not kept ourselves within the Common Laws of action.  
For, Let every Man lay his Hand upon his Heart, and seriously ask himself, for what reason, and with what intent he became a Party in this general Defection? Was it utterly to ruin the King and subvert the Government? Was it because he was displeased with the ancient Constitution, and had a mind to mould and fashion it to his liking? Was it because he had an intent to shake off the Government (that easy, equal, and well poised, and never enough to be commended Government, as King CHARLES I. calls it) of the English Nation? Was it any honest Man's meaning to subvert this Government, to make way for his own Dreams of some Poetical Golden-Age, or a Fanciful-Millenium?  
Was it (let me ask again) to divest the King of all Power to protect his Subjects, and then to pronounce roundly, that all the Bonds of Allegiance to him are dissolved? Was the end of our uniting together, to bind his Hands, and then prick this Doctrine upon the points of our Swords: Protection and Allegiance are Duties so reciprocal, that where the one fails wholly, the other falls with it. Was it to frighten the King out of his Dominions, and then to vote that he hath Abdicated his Government? Was this the intent, and were these the Reasons of our Declaring for the Prince of Orange? No, certainly; whatever some obnoxious and ambitious Men might aim at, all good Christians and worthy Patriots had other intentions, and were led on by other Motives.  
They were sensibly concerned for the preservation of their Holy Religion, in the first place; their Lives, their Laws, and Liberties in the next. After the way, which some call Heresy, so were they desirous still to worship the God of their Fathers: And after that manner which some might say was Rebellion, so they thought themselves obliged to stand up for the Laws and Liberties of their Forefathers.  
For these Ends, and for bringing about these worthy Purposes, they withdrew themselves from the King's personal Service, that they might be the better enabled to serve his real Interest. They hoped by this means to deliver him from his evil Counsellors, and secure both him and his Subjects from the evil and pernicious Practices of some wicked and unreasonable Men.  
3. These and such like were the Inducements which prevailed with all well-affected and honest Men, to withdraw from his Majesty, and suspend the actual exercise of their Allegiance for the present, that they might afterwards exert it according to the fixed and stated Rules of Law, Conscience, and right Reason.  
But now, how contrary is this to those New Models, which some politic Architects are proposing to, or rather imposing upon the Nation? What is it they would be at? And what are the Ends they are driving on? Are they just and good? Are they generous and honourable? Or are they not rather such as would undermine the Government both in Church and State, and reduce us to a state of Nature, wherein the People are at liberty to agree upon any Government, or none at all?  
Plainly, they would reduce us to the Dutch, or some other foreign Measures (which how well soever they may agree with that Country, where they are settled and confirmed, partly by Custom, and partly by the peculiar Necessity of their Affairs) can never be well received in England, till an Act be passed to abolish Monarchy, Episcopacy, and all the Fundamental Laws established by Magna Charta, and all succeeding Parliaments ever since.  
The Enquiry into the Measures of Submission to the Supreme Authority, is a Treatise calculated for the Times; but surely it is not written according to the Principles and Practice of the Church of England, in the time of the Renowned Queen Elizabeth: I am apt to think, that some regard was then had to the Passages which we find in the Scriptures (especially the Old Testament) relating to the Measures of Submission. But these Examples weigh nothing with our Author, because they are not for his purpose, pag. 5, 6. I am also apt to suspect that Queen Elizabeth would not have thanked any Politician for vending this as a certain and fundamental Principle, That in all Disputes between Power and Liberty, Power must always be proved, but Liberty proves itself; the one being founded only upon a positive Law, and the other upon the Law of Nature, pag. 4. She, I persuade myself, on the contrary, would have challenged any such Statesman to have proved his Liberty; as for her Power (she would have answered) it was ready to prove itself against all who should presume to question it. But what's the meaning of Power being founded only on a positive Law, and Liberty upon the Law of Nature? Is not a Father's Power founded (as he grants) upon the Law of Nature? and is not all Power, even of the greatest Princes, (as far as it is just and honest, and for the benefit of the Subject) derived from this Paternal Authority of the Father over his Son? Besides, Doth not the Law of Nature prescribe the necessity of putting Power into the hands of one or more for the benefit of the whole, which otherwise would be in danger of destroying itself by intestine Divisions? In short, If Liberty be founded upon the Law of Nature, so is all just and lawful Power, since the end of it is only to regulate our Liberty, and in truth to make us more free. Liberty in general is a Right to use our Faculties according to right Reason; and the Law in particular tells us which are those Rules of right Reason by which we must govern ourselves. And what is Law, but the Commands of the Supreme Power (wherever it is lodged, in the hands of the Prince, the Senate, or the People, or of all of them together) ordering what we are to do or avoid, under the sanction of particular Penalties?  
I beg the Learned Author's Pardon for questioning his Measures: in my judgement they are not taken from the English Standard, and therefore, I hope, I may without offence use my Liberty in refusing them (a Right which proves itself) till he can prove his Power to impose them.  
The Enquiry into the present State of Affairs, is a Discourse which seems (by its bold strokes) to resemble the former. I will say no more of it but this, If what he there lays down for a certain Truth be really so, than all that follows must be granted, as reasonable Deductions from this fundamental Principle: but if this be false, all that he hath said falls to the ground, for want of a firm and solid Foundation to support it.  
Now the Position, which (like a first Principle in Mathematics) he takes for granted, is this, It is certain (says he, pag. 1.) that the reciprocal Duties in Civil Societies are Protection and Allegiance, and wheresoever the one fails wholly, the other falls with it. This is his Doctrine which I have mentioned before, but shall now consider a little more particularly.  
'Tis indeed most fit and reasonable, that Protection and Allegiance should always go together, and accompany one another; but that they do not do so, is but too plain in the present case of England: but doth it follow, that because the King is not in a capacity to protect his Subjects, therefore he is no longer to be looked upon as a King? And if he be a King, doth not this suppose that he hath some Subjects? And if so, I would gladly know what kind of Subjects they are who own no Allegiance?  
But let this Question be ruled by his own Instance, The Duty betwixt Father and Son. Suppose my Father to be so destitute that he cannot, and so perverse, that he will not protect and sustain me; suppose him as churlish as Cain, and as poor as Job; yet still he is my Father and I am his Son; that is, he still retains all that Power which (by the Law of Nature) as Father ought to have over his Child: still the Relation holds betwixt us, and whilst it doth so, the Father's Faults or Necessities cannot evacuate the Duty of a Son; which is founded not in the Father's good Will or Abilities to defend him (though it must be confessed they are chief considered) but in that fixed and immutable Relation which God and Nature have established betwixt them, not to be dissolved but by Death. So that if this Learned Author will yield (as he seems to do) that Kingly Power is nothing else but the Paternal, configned (by the common consent of the Fathers of Families) to one Person, upon such and such conditions, (specified in the Contract;) I cannot see how this Relation betwixt King and Subject can any more be utterly dissolved, than that betwixt a Father and his Son.  
I shall say no more to this Discourse; and if what I have already said do offend either against the Principles of Reason, or the Law of England, I am willing to be corrected, and acknowledge my Error.  
There is another little Paper which yet gives such a great stroke to the Government, that it ought not to be passed over without some Animadversion. The Sheet which I mean is, that which is called Advice before it be too late, or, A Breviate for the Convention. This Paper bespeaks its Author to be of the same Complexion and Principles with him who writ The word to the Wise, and The four Questions debated. They do all of 'em suppose, that the Government is fallen to its Centre, or Root from whence it sprang, that is, to the People, (as the word to the Wise expresses our present case.) I know not what can be a more effectual Answer to these Pamphlets, and take away the Foundation upon which they argue, than that Maxim in our Law, received by all honest and learned Lawyers, The King of England never dies. For if so, how is the Government lapsed? And if it be not lapsed, how can the Throne be said to be vacant? And if the Throne be not vacant, we are still a Body Politic, (consisting of Head and Members) though much distempered and out of order, by reason of the Infirmities of the Head. We still live, though we are not in good health; and our Case doth not require the Sexton to make our Grave, but calls for the Physician to apply proper Remedies to cure our Disease. If the King can die, 'tis such a defect in our Government as doth strangely disparage it, and further supposes, that (which hitherto we are all to learn) the Crown is not Successive.  
Now if it be successive, it cannot be disposed of by the Will of the People, but only by the Will of God, who in that very moment calls the Lawful Heir to the Crown, wherein he is pleased to put a Period to the Life of his Predecessor. If it be said that the Voice of the People is the Voice of God, I believe that (should this be granted) it will not do their business: for I doubt not, but that if the Pole was taken, and the Question put to all People who are of Years of Discretion; the Answer would be, That they have still a King, and that they are as willing to keep him as they are desirous to exclude Popery for ever; that which hath made both him and them so unhappy. This, I do not much question, would be the Answer, if we should appeal to the sense of the People in general; who yet (if the Government be fallen to them) must be allowed to have a Right of Suffrage, and a Liberty to speak their Minds as freely as other Commoners in this great Convention.  
Further still, If the King never dies by our Law, How can he be lawfully deposed? For by Deposition the Throne necessarily becomes void for some time. There must be some Interstice, some space of time, before they who deposed a King can set up another; and till the King in Designation be actually invested with the Regal Office, there must of necessity be an Interregnum; that is, The King (contrary to the mind of our Law) may die.  
The Government of England always supposes a Monarch regulated by Law, and therefore 'tis presumed that he can do no wrong; that is, Though he may err, as well as other Mortals, yet the Law, of which he is the Guardian, brings no Accusation against him, but only against his evil Ministers. If therefore the King hath erred, (as doubtless he hath very much) in God's Name let his Ministers be called to an account; but why must the Government be dissolved, and the King arraigned, condemned, and deposed, to make way for any new Scheme of Government whatsoever, whether French, Italian, or Dutch?  
Our History indeed affords two Examples since William the First's time; that of Edward the Second, and the other of Richard the Second: but they did both of them actually resign; and besides, what they did, or was done to them, aught to preclude the Right of no succeeding Prince. These Examples ought no more to be urged than the Stabbing King Henry the Fourth of France, or the Murdering King CHARLES the First of England.  
The Historian, in the Life of Richard the Second, gives no very good Character of that Parliament, which passed the Vote for this Deposition: The Noblemen (says he) partly corrupted by Favor, partly awed by Fear, gave their Voices; and the Commons (commonly are like a flock of Cranes) as the first fly, all the followers do the like. Continuat. Dan. Hist. p. 46.  
Let it be here observed, that I do not dispute whether the King, together with his Parliament, may not regulate and entail the Succession, as shall by them be thought fit; but only whether whilst the King lives, whether the Throne can be vacant, and the Government be truly said to be lapsed? This we deny: But however, supposing that these things may be so, who can make so fair a Claim (and so generally satisfactory to the People) as the next Heir by proximity of Blood; I mean (if the Prince of Wales be proved supposititious) that incomparable Lady, the Princess of Orange?  
These Reflections I have thought fit to make upon some new Notions of our present Statesmen, by which we guess what they would be at. In my opinion, I think it is but too evident, that they are taking advantage of our present Fears and Distractions, to run us into those extremes which the State (as well as the Church) of England, hath always carefully avoided, and taken particular care to provide against.  
4. In this Design can we in Honour and Conscience go along with them; whom yet we cannot but highly esteem and value for their Learning and Parts, and more especially for their happy and successful Labours, in rescuing us from those gross Corruptions of Christian Religion, and Human Nature, Popery, and Slavery?  
But shall we run into Popery, and perhaps Slavery too, when we have been so long striving against both, and are now (thanks be to God) in a great measure freed from the Danger of either? And is not the Deposing a Popish Doctrine? And is it not as Antichristian for any Assembly to put it into practice, as it was for the Council of Lateran at first to establish it?  
And as for Slavery, must not a standing Army be necessarily kept up, to maintain a Title founded only upon the consent of the fickle and uncertain People (granting that the major part of them are willing?) And in such a Case must we not be beholden to the Goodness of the Prince, rather than the Protection of our Laws, if an Arbitrary and Despotic Power be not again introduced?  
We have, as yet, no Law which wholly disables and excludes a Popish Successor from the Throne; and till we have one (which I question not but we shall have soon) I do not see how we can disannul the King's Title, or vacate his Regal Capacity, howsoever his Power may be restrained. Innovations without f●rmer precedent, are always dangerous, especially those of this nature. It will be much more wise, as well as safe, to bear with some Inconveniencies, than bring upon ourselves those Mischiefs, which such unparallelled Proceed may produce.  
The Prince of Orange in his additional Declaration hath these Words: We are confident, that no Persons can have such hard thoughts of us, as to imagine that we have any other Design in this undertaking, than to procure a Settlement of the Religion, and of the Liberties and Properties of the Subjects upon so sure a foundation, that there may be no danger of the Nation's relapsing into the like Miseries at any time hereafter.  
How far some Persons may extend this Clause (That there may be no danger of the Nation's relapsing into the like Miseries for the future) I cannot tell; but for any one to understand it so; as if his Highness meant, that there could be no security against the Nation's Relapse, if the King be not deposed, and he himself put into possession of the Throne, is (I am sure) an Interpretation very disadvantageous to his Honour, and looks more like a Jesuitical Equivocation, than that Candour and Christian Sincerity, which hath brightened and rendered illustrious all the Actions of his Highness, both at home and abroad.  
The Answerer also to the Reflecter upon his Highness' Declaration, will not permit us to harbour any such Suspicions, as if a Crown was the End of this Expedition. All such (says he, pag. 23, 24.) as believe the Prince of Orange has brought this Army, and intends to make War upon England, and subdue it to his mere Will and Pleasure, trample all Laws both divine and human under feet, dethrone his present Majesty, and make himself King; they will stay and fight for him (sc. the King) or at least to the best of their power, in some manner assist and help him: On the contrary, such as believe that the Prince's meaning is nothing of all this, etc.  
Here, you see, that this Author (who, 'tis to be supposed, was not unacquainted with the Prince's intentions) utterly rejects it, as a false imputation, that his Highness came to dethrone his present Majesty, and make himself King. Nay, he thought himself obliged so fully to declare against this scandalous Report, that he seems to have encouraged all those who believed it: To stay and fight for the King; or at least, to the best of their power, in some manner assist and help him. So far was this Gentleman from entertaining any such thoughts of the Prince's Expedition; which some Men, nevertheless, do now so industriously labour to make the effect of it.  
There is another thing which makes well meaning Men apt to suspect the present management, and withholds them from closing with it so fully, as otherwise, its probable they might do. That Paper which goes under the Title of the Prince's Third Declaration, is (as I am credibly informed) none of his, and is disowned by the Prince himself. Now this pretended Declaration (coming out when the Army was in such a dubious Condition, and fluctuating betwixt the King and the Prince) did more harm to the King's Affairs, than all the other Papers (I believe) published at that time.  
And if this was no real, but a sham-Declaration, and yet was permitted without Contradiction; 'tis plain that Sophistry and Tricks are made use of, as lawful Policies, and that any kind of means are permitted, if they will but do the business, and serve the present turn. This makes plain and honest Men, who have no Ends to serve, but what are just, and are willing to use no kind of Means but what are so: This makes them  and cautious of engaging too far in those Designs, which they see carried on by crafty and deceitful Artifices, working under a Military Power and Force ready to defend them.  
I might mention the great number of Papists in the Dutch Army, as another dissuasive from venturing ourselves in this bottom: We are afraid of Papists of all sorts and of all Countries, Germane and Dutch; as well as French and Irish; the Constitutions of the one may be more harmless than of the other; but the Principles of both (we know) are equally destructive; and when occasion serves, who knows but that the Principle may prevail over the Constitution, and the Papist get the better of the Dutchman? 'Tis ill trusting Popery in any shape: This is a Root, which wherever it is planted, can bring forth no good Fruit. The Bogs of Holland cannot (we think) make it less malignant, than those of Ireland.  
To come to a conclusion, there remain several things to be cleared, before we can altogether comply with what is now prosecuted with so much Zeal.  
That the Prince of W. is a supposititious Child: That a League was made by our King with the King of France for the Destruction of his Protestant Subjects, and rooting out our Religion, under the Notion of the Northern Heresy: That the late King was poisoned; and that the Earl of Essex was murdered. These things, we desire, may be proved; and then we cannot but agree, that nothing can be too bad for the guilty Authors.  
These are such damnable Villainies, such horrid Crimes, that both the Principals and Accessories ought to be esteemed, and treated no better than Tories and Banditi, Men of seared and profligate Consciences, forsaken of God, and Enemies to Mankind.  
But then seeing these are such heavy Accusations and grievous Charges, they ought certainly to be well proved before they be believed, and produced as Arguments against the Life, Honour, and Estate of any Person: for si satis esset accusasse, etc. If it be enough to accuse, where should we find an innocent Person?  
If these dreadful things can be made out, it would, I believe, not only confirm Protestants in their deserved Detestation of Popery, but create even in the minds of honest Papists themselves, an Aversation to their own Religion, when they shall see it contriving and executing such cruel and unnatural Works of darkness.  
To see a Father setting up a pretended Son against the Interest of his own undoubted Children; to behold a King bargaining for the Destruction of his own Subjects; to represent to our Minds one Brother preparing the deadly Cup for the other, who yet ventured his Crown rather than he would exclude him from the hopes of it in Reversion; to look upon the same Royal Person plotting and managing the Assassination of a Captive and helpless Peer. These are such dismal Sights and melancholic Scenes, so full of Horror and barbarous Cruelty, that they must needs make sad Impressions upon the Hearts even of the boldest Spectators; insomuch, that if they were proved, they would most effectually prejudice all Men against the Author of such monstrous Barbarities, and go near to extinguish all Obligations of Duty which otherwise they might owe to his Person and Authority.  
We must therefore call again for the proof of these things, or else we cannot (because we ought not to) believe them upon bare Surmise and Hear-say. If these Accusations be cleared once, who can reverence the Person guilty of them, as the Father of his Country, and not rather avoid and fly from him as the worst of Tyrants?  
But if these things be still kept in the Clouds, and wrapped up in uncertain Ambiguities, all wise Men will think that it would have been better, if they never had been mentioned; because this doth but raise the People's Zeal for the present, which (if not kept up by real Evidence) will be apt to turn to the other Extreme, and commiserate the Cause which before it prosecuted with so much violence. The higher Men's Resentments are raised by objecting the most notorious Crimes, the lower will they fall, if Truth and plain matter of Fact doth not back and maintain them. And this is an Advantage which I would not have us give our Adversaries in these things, no more than we have done in the matters of Dispute betwixt them and us. Here we have proved all our Charges against their Religion; let us therefore prove, or else not so eagerly insist upon, these Accusations brought against their Persons.  
I shall add nothing further, but my real Wishes, That I could (though with the loss of all that's dear to me in this World) contribute to the utter Exclusion of POPERY by all lawful means; and I do, and shall always pray for a Blessing upon their Designs, who sincerely endeavour to procure a Settlement of the Religion, Liberties and Properties of the Subjects, upon so sure a foundation, that there may be no danger of the Nations relapsing into the like miseries at any time hereafter.  
FINIS.