friends to it; and that there seemed to be a necessity for preaching up
non-resistance and passive obedience at that time, when resistance was
justified. The duke of Argyle affirmed, that the clergy in all ages had
delivered up the rights and privileges of the people, preaching up the
king's power, in order to govern him the more easily; and therefore they
ought not to be suffered to meddle with politics. The earl of Anglesea
owned the doctor had preached nonsense; but said, that was no crime. The
duke of Leeds distinguished between resistance and revolution; for had
not the last succeeded, it would have certainly been rebellion, since he
knew of no other but hereditary right. The bishop of Salisbury justified
resistance from the book of Maccabees; he mentioned the conduct of queen
Elizabeth, who assisted the Scots, the French, and the states-general,
in resisting their different sovereigns, and was supported in this
practice both by her parliaments and her convocations. He observed
that king Charles I. had assisted the citizens of Rochelle in
their rebellion; that Manwayring incurred a severe censure from the
parliament, for having broached the doctrine of the divine right
of kings; and that though this became a favourite maxim after the
restoration, yet its warmest asserters were the first who pleaded for
resistance when they thought themselves oppressed. The archbishop of
York, the duke of Buckingham, and other leaders of the tory interest,
declared that they never read such a piece of madness and nonsense as
Sacheverel's sermon; but they did not think him guilty of a misdemeanor.
Next day, Dr. Wake, bishop of Lincoln, accused Sacheverel of having made
a strange and false representation of the design for a comprehension,
which had been set on foot by archbishop Sancroft, and promoted by the
most eminent divines of the church of England. He was of opinion that
some step should be taken for putting a stop to such preaching, as, if
not timely corrected, it might kindle heats and animosities that
would endanger both church and state. Dr. Trimnel, bishop of Norwich,
expatiated on the insolence of Sacheverel, who had arraigned archbishop
Grindal, one of the eminent reformers, as a perfidious prelate, for
having favoured and tolerated the discipline of Geneva. He enlarged
upon the good effects of the toleration. He took notice of Sacheverel's
presumption in publishing inflammatory prayers, declaring himself under
persecution