not avovvedly exercised that cuivis licet supplicare protestari yet the late Parliament concluded contrary to the lavv of nature and nations That petitions vvere seditious and treasonable So that hovv arbitrarily soever King or Parliament yea or Council or any deputed by them did rage or should opprresse injure the Subjects vvhether in conscience body or goods there vvas no remedy nor hope of redresse no petition or supplication how humble soever might be once presented by the grieved subjects yea nor durst they meet together to poure out their complaint unto the God of heaven the hearer of prayers the righteous judge of heaven earth What height of opprression tyranny this is Let all the vvorld judge Twelvethly It is uncertaine yea much doubted if Sr. Iames Turner that singular instrument of barbarous cruelty had any commission form King or Council impovvering him to such illegal exorbitancies whatever he might have had under hand from some Members of Council vvho had most sold themselves to cruelty and to the utter extirpation of all who would not run vvith them to the same excesse of riot sure if any such thing be the records vvill manifest it but since they cashired him and some of his associats and made an offer of causeing him ansvvere for vvhat he had done it is very probable he had no formal commission for vvhat he did and yet since he and others are permitted to live after such crueltyes barbarities and un heard of vvickednesses and no reparation made to the persones injured it is certane he is but too vvell approved in all he did and of vvhat use this shall be vvill appeare afterward Thirteenthly The intent and designe of those poor people who rose in armes was not to dethrone the King to enjure him or to lessen his just and legal authoritie but to resist repel and defend themselves from unjust violence and oppression and to seek reparations of the wrongs done them and the removal of that detestable and abjured Hierarchy the establishing and upholding of which as it was is a great provocation of the anger of God against the land so it was the fountaine and rise of all these horrid oppressions which they suffered and of the making of such grievous statutes and establishing iniquitie into a law and was to be a lasting cause and occasion of violent unjust and illegal oppressions and intolerabel vexations to all the faithful of the land and withal to have security for their lives lands libertyes consciences and Religion conforme to the agreement made with his Majesty and the National Covenant and the Solemne league and covenant which he solemnely swore once and againe and vowed and promised to defend and prosecute in all their ends and that for this end all such lawes made for prelacy and against the work of God and the reformation which through Gods blessing we had attained to might be repealed annulled and rescinded This and nothing else could be the intent and designe of these valient though naked worthyes That they intended no harme to the King or to his just lawful government authority is notoure by the last speaches testimonies of such as were apprehended publickly executed the petition Which they sent in to the Council with William Lauwry Tutor of Blakewood doth aboundantly testify that they would have had the free exerciso of their covenanted Religion freedom from the domeneering tyranny of Prelats their adherents their renewing of the League Covenant doth sufficiently cleare that they intended no insurrection or rebellion against the Kings just and lawful authority for they swore to defend the Kings Majestyes person and authority in the preservation and defence of the True Religion and libertyes of the Kingdoms From these considerations we shall now lay downe the true state of the question thus Whether or not when the whole body of a land Magistrats higher and lower People are engaged by solemne vowes made to the most high God joyntly severally to promove a reformation and to extirpat Prelats the same covenanted work is becom a chief corne stone of the constitution of the Kingdom and one of the mane conditions on which the King is installed on his throne and when these same Magistrats Supreme and inferiour renunce their covenant with God and with the People overturne the work of reformation formerly sworne to make lawes and statutes to fortify this defection to compel all their subjects to run to the same excesse of perjury and wickednesse and execute these lawes upon the faithful stedfastly loyal subjects not in a civil orderly manner but most imperiously and tyrannically with meer force cruelty and the edge of the sword of souldiers leavied of purpose for this very end to crush and oppresse all such as made any conscience of their vowes and engagements unto God and when these barbarous souldiers exceed their commission or oppresse plunder harash spoile rob and pillage the people and lay waste the land without law or expresse order from King or Parliament yea contraire to the expresse letter of the law and when the oppressed have not so much as liberty to supplicate or petition for help or releefe may privat persons without the conduct of a Parliament stand to their owne defence against unjust illegal oppression and tyranny and oppose such as without expresse commission endeavour their utter ruine and destruction though pretending warrant from the superiour Magstrats and allowed of them and seek a redresse of these grievous intolerable injuries and liberty for the free exercise of the covenanted reformed religion with the extirpation of abjured Prelats the spring and fountane of all these miseries already come and to be feared while in the mean time they intend no harme to the supream Magistrat's person or just authority but sweare to mantaine the same in the defence of the true religion and liberties of the Kingdome Or a if you will have it shorter Whether or not when King and Parliament and Council have abjured a covenant overturned a reformation which they solemnely swore to defend in their places capacities and made their subjects do the same and now with illegal force compel the subjects to the like perjury and wickednesse may these privat subjects when there is no hope or possibility otherwise of releefe stand to their owne defence and withstand the mercylesse cruelty of their bloody Emissaries acting without their commission or with their allowance yet contrare to expresse law and seek releef and security for Religion lives lands and liberties having no intention to wronge the King's person or just government That this is the true state of the question is abundantly cleare from the particulars forementioned and I think no Scottish man who knew the then state of affaires and hath not renunced common sense and resolved to beleeve nothing though he should both heare it see it and feele it and it were as
And what if his adversaries say and prove also that the King of Britane is not such a King as he accounts truly so His saying that the King of Britane is absolute will note prove that he is so and will be found but a weak defence for his life if he be not able to prove him above all judgement and punishment which we have not yet seen and dispaire to see done 2. These words 1. Pet. 2 ver 13. may be as well rendered The King as supereminent and can import no more but one who had a supreme or supereminent place in the administration of government notwithstanding whereof he might be was accountable to the Senat of Rome for learned politicians and lawyers prove that the supreame power of government was in the Senate even at this time which clearly appeared in their judging and condemning Nero and other impious and tyrannical Emperours So that even hence we see that one may be supreame in order of civil government and yet both judgeable and punishable 3. His adversaries will not much care how he call that government Royal or not and whether he call the government of Britane Royal or not Names in these matters and titles which goe much by fashion or fancy are but weak arguments and he will never be able to stop the mouth of his adversaries who would plead for calling King Charles to account and for judging him and punishing him by saying he is a King and the government is a Royal government they would account these but thinne wals and uselesse cloaks of fig leaves to preserve and defend intolerable tyranny Hath this man no better arguments then thise wherewith to defend his Majestie 's Royal life and person Or hath the King no better advocate to defend his cause But it may be this profound Statist will speak more nervously in the following observations Therefore Let us hear what he sayes in the 2 place It is certane sayes he no man can be judged or punished but by his owne judge who is above him and hath authority over him by lawful commission from God or from men authorized by God to give such commission now who shall be judge to these invested with Soveraigne Majesty seing Every soul under them is commanded to be subject to them Rom. 13 ver 1. and seing the Supreame Power of the sword is committed unto them and not to others but by deputation and in dependence upon them in a true Monarchy there must be an exemption and impunity as to subjects of the person invested with Soveraignity and Majesty God's Law Natures Light and sound reason are all for this that such as are invested with Soveraigne Majesty having the legislative power the jurisdictional power the coërcive and punitive power originally in himself must enjoy exemption and impunity as to subjects actings against them the contrary tenet overthrowes the order of God And Nature and precipitates humane societies in a gulf of endlesse confusions Answ 1. Here is enough to satisfy his adversaries For 1. They will tell him that he hath not yet proved the government of Britane a true Monarchy in his sense and so he but begs the thing in question here 2. They will tell him that the King hath not the sole legislative power nor sole jurisdictional power nor sole cöercive and punitive power far lesse all these solely and originally in himself And it is but to such Soveraignes that he pleads for this exemption impunity Doth not his Advocat deserve a singular reward who pleadeth his Master's cause so dexterously by proving an uncertanty by that which is more uncertane founding all upon his bare word A noble champion forsooth or rather a Monster whose word must be a law an irrefragable reason too Thus it seems what ever power he give to the King there is the Dictators power that the thinks is solely in himself and that originally but for all this he hath one disadvantage that he is of little authority and of as little credite with sober rational persons 2. He will grant that such Monarchies as he accounts only true are not every where no not where there are persons called Kings and Emperours How cometh it then that the order of God and nature is not overthrowne in these Dominions and Republicks and that their Societyes are not precipitated into a gulf of endlesse confusions Shall nothing preserve the order of God and nature but that which is the most ready mean to destroy it viz. an uncontrollable power in one Tyrant to destroy all his Kingdome Man Wife and Childe 3. Politicians will tell him that the Ephori the Parliament are his judges and that the People who by a lawful commission from God made him King and authorized him are above him and have authority over him in case he turne a Tyrant and pervert the ends of government 4. Though it be requisite there be an ordinary standing judge to cognosce of controversies which fall out betwixt one private person and another yet it is not alwayes necessary there be one condescended on to judge betvvixt the Soveraigne and the People vvhen the controversy falleth out betvvixt them more then that there should be a standing ordinary judge to decide controversies falling out betvvixt tvvo distinct and independent Kingdomes 5. What commission from Man authorized by God had the high Priest and such as joyned vvith him vvhen they deposed and killed Athaliah if he say she was an usurper True yet she possessed the place six years peacably without molestation and who was judge whether she was an usurper or not Had the matter been referred to her she would have been as far from calling herselfe an usurper as a Tyrant now will be from judging himself a Tyrant And so as in this case the Tyrant sine titulo had a judge above her though she was invested with Soveraigne Majesty so in the other case The Tyrant exercitio though invested with Soveraigne Majesty hath a judge above him 6. The place Rom. 13. is to be understood as was shewed above of inferiour Magistrates as well as of the supreame And it sayes of all in authority that such as are under them should be subject unto them In so far as they are subjects unto them so in poynt of administration of justice according to equity all are subject to the supreame or supereminent governour but when he becometh a Tyrant he becometh subject unto them who gave him that power and set him up under God 7. He insinuats that inferiour Magistrates are not essential Magistrates but deputation from and in dependence upon the King But Lex Rex Quest 20. hath by many cleare and unanswereable arguments evinced the contrary In the third place he citeth some sentences of Tertullian calling the Emperours second unto God and above all men and only subject unto God Of Optatus saying that none are above them but God And of Ierom speaking of Psal 51. against thee thee only have
the King had violated the conditions made had caused burne by the hand of the Hangman a paper containeing explications of some tearmes used by him in the treaty of Peace had denyed accesse to their commissioners afterward when he had signified his willingnesse to heare such as they should send such as were sent were committed to prisone and one of them viz. The Lord Lowdon ordained secretly to be beheaded in the Towr of London and in the meane while warre was concluded against the Realme of Scotland in the King's Council The Earle of Northumberland was made General a Parliament was convocated both in England and Irland for raising of subsidies to the carrying on of this warre The Deputy of Irland with some there had promised much assistence The Prelates of England had offered great summes to carry on this Bellum Episcopale as they named it Scottish shipes were intercepted their goods taken away and the seamen cast into prifsones and miserably handled The sea ports were closed up with frigots The castle of Edinbrugh oppressed the City with their shot and killed many both young and old Were all these things no beginnings of a warre nor no acts of hostility How can he or any else then say that the King was not the first aggressor or that Scotlands warre was not purely defensive 2. As to these things wherein he would make his reader beleeve that the Honest people of Scotland were the first invaders what a malitious fool doth he manifest himself to be for 1. How or what way was his authority invaded was it because they would not receive a masse book in English obtruded upon them by his sole authority without the concurrence of Church or State 2. What lawes were troden upon Weknow no lawes but acts and statutes of a lawful Parliament made for the glory of God and the good of the land and what such were trode upon 3. What way were his proclamations despised Is it to despise a King's proclamation for free subjects to vindicate them selves of what is unjustly laid to their charge in this proclamations by faithful and humble protestations of their innocency 4. What were those castles seised upon Some be like in Vtopia for before this warre was begun Anno 1639. The Covenanters seised upon none of the King's castles When they savv the King bore a hostile minde against them and intended no good they watched the castle of Edinbrugh that more ammunition and provision should not be carryed into it And this was all they did until they were necessitated to put themselves into a posture of defence then they seised upon some houses here there the lawfulnesse of which is demonstrated by Lex Rex the Apology 5. What illegal courts were those which were set up Sure those tables as they were called were no courts assumeing to themselves any judicial determination in any matter of State civil or Ecclesiastical nor conventions for disturbance of the peace or usurpation against authority but meer meetings allowed by the light and law of nature for consultation and advice anent the matter and manner of supplications which they were to present to his Majesty and his Council and of propositions to be presented to the lawful State and Church-judicatories 6. Who were those subjects walking according to the lawes who were persecuted We know of none who were troubled at that time except the Prelates the Troublers of our Israel and all the persecution they met with was that the honest Covenanters did give in complaints against them and offered to make good what they allaiged upon the highest perill and did supplicate the Council whereof some of them were Members that they might not fit there as judges but stand as Rëi and answere for themselves and that the General assembly indicted by his Majesty after mature deliberation and full examination did excommunicate them for high and notorious crymes to be seen in the registers of that Assembly But 2 will these things to judicious persons lay the ground of a lawful warre by the Magistrate against his owne subjects Are these who cannot yeeld obedience unto unlawful commands who humbly protest for their owne innocency who meet together for drawing up supplications and ordering matters thereanent and who give in complaints against the Pests Troublers of the land and exerce Church censures upon the scandalous invaders of the Soveraign's authority And when a King upon these grounds invadeth his subjects with an army of armed men can any man of common sense think that his war is not an invasive vvarre Hath not Magistrats other lavvfull vvayes to defend their ovvne authority and lavves and orderly subjects and to reduce the disorderly then fire and svvord Sure for a King to cut off his subjects is to diminish and annihilate his authority and lavves both And for a King to vvage vvarre against the Body of a land to pleasure Fourteen of a fevv of the basest and most unvvorthy of all the subjects vvould seem to be the result of no grave and sage Council nor vvould it appeare to be much for the Kings honour to have his Soveraigne authority imbarqued vvith a fevv abjects so as if they did sinke to the bottome of the sea It could not swime The next thing and that is the 2 hypothesis he allegeth is That they represent him in their virulent he should say nervous writeings as Nerone ipso Neronior a great persecuter of Religion intending the total ruine and destrustion of the protestant profession and the total ruine and destruction of the whole people of the land Answ They represente him no othervvayes then his owne publicke owned and avowed deeds and declarations did represente him to all the world What was his secret intentions God knoweth but his deeds did declare that he minded no good to the poor Church and State of Scotland for to pleasure a few abjects that had drunken in much Popery and Arminianisme and stirred him up to urge upon our Church 2 Popish publick service book of canons and ordination Popish ceremonies and such Romish trash he sought by fire and sword to reduce us to ashes We shal not now trouble his Urne by speaking to what this Surveyer sayeth afterward This we knovv That he died but vvhether as a glorious Martyr for the true Religion of God vvhich yet may admit several senses so ambiguous is it though vve let it passe in the best and lavves and liberties of the people as he sayeth many doubt At length he closeth his digression thus If there was any thing that could not have a favourable interpretation in that unhappy book that gave therise to the troubles how timely was it retired and great satisfaction and security given for religion If through default of Ministers of State any thing had creeped in that could not abide the test of law how willingly was â—treformed yet all could not sist begun course of violence till through God's dreadful indignation against a sinfull
by their declarature This is hard if true for then a Parliament might sell them and their posterity for bondmen and bond women to the Turk for ever But we see no more reason for asserting an infallibility or absolutenesse of power in Parliaments then in Princes What furder But to say that all not only obedience but allegiance and fidelity due to any created power is indispensably restricted to this qualification in defence of Religion and liberty viz. of the Subjects is a most false assertion Answ He said not restricted to this qualification but thus qualified and thus restricted This must be either ignorance or worse in this pamphleter thus to wrong the author But vvhat vvas the authors meaning vve have shevved Let us heare The pamphleting Prelate It is knowne sayes he that a restriction excludes all other cases which are not in the restrictive proposition included c. Answ All this is founded upon his either wilfull or ignorant mistake for the author took not the restriction so as we have seen as to exclude all fidelity or obedience except in things tending immediatly and directly unto the good of Religion and Liberty of the Subject But so as that we might do nothing in prejudice of Religion and Liberty nor yeeld obedience to him in any thing tending to the hurt of either thus is our obedience to be restricted or qualified We deny not obedience even when the act of obedience cannot be properly directly said to be either in defence of Religion or the liberty of the subject So that we crosse not what the ministers said unto the doctors of Aberdeen for we take not that clause as exclusive that is that we shall never defend his person and authority but when he is actually actively defending Religion Libertyes but only as a restriction or qualification thus that we shall defend his person authority so far as may consist with Religion Libertyes And thus we agree also with the general assemblie 1639. for we say it is the Subjects duty to concurre with their friends and followers as they shall be required in every cause that concernes his Majesties honour yet so as that they do nothing to the prejudice of Religion or Libertyes But furder sayes he as to the poynt of allegiance or fidelity that is another matter then obedience Answ True when men will become very critical but the scope of the place showeth in what sense he took it not only as includeing an owneing of him as lawful and rightful King c. but as includeing also a promise of active concurrence in defending of him and his interest and so while this is urged in an absolute illimited unqualified or un restricted way he made it all one with obedience It is true a man may keep allegiance or fidelity to the King when he cannot obey his commands yet the clause of the Covenant respects allegiance as well as obedience in so far as we are not to defend his person and authority absolutely but in defence of the true Religion and Liberties of the Subjects Allegiance then is a comprehensive thing not only taking in an owneing of the King as rightful King and fidelity to his person crowne and dignity against conspiracyes and treasons but also an active concurring to promove his honour and dignity and to defend his person and authority And so all who say allegiance must be qualified according to this restriction do not meane every thing in allegiance but that which is expressed in the Covenants So that it is his ignorant inference to say That that which Naphtals sayeth is contrary to the confession of saith Cap. 23. § 4. which sayeth is difference in Religion doth not make voyd the Magistrates just and legal authority nor free the people from their due obedience to him unlesse he think the article of the Covenant interfereth with the confession of faith which he dar not assert but if he do assert it let us hear by his next what he will say to the Apologetical Relation Pag. 386. 387. 388. 389. 390. where that clause of the Covenant is vindicated He addeth It is the Lord's way for keeping humane societies from grosse disorders to allow to such as are in supreme power by lawful calling the honour due unto their place although in the maine things they pervert the Ends of government dishonouring him by a false Religion or seduceing others to their evil way Answ Do we say that honour is not due unto Magistrates of another Religion because we say that we must promise allegiance and obedience to them in the Lord and must not concure with them nor contribute our power unto them to the manifest detriment of Religion and Libertyes This is like the rest of this Man 's foolish inferences Or doth he think that we cannot give to Caesar the things vvhich are Caesar's unlesse vve give him also the things which are God's and are the Peoples Then he citeth Calv. Instit. Lib. 4. c 20. § 25. 27. But He speaketh nothing contrare to the businesse we are upon Doth he think that Calvin was of the judgment that People are bound to sweare absolute Subjection allegiance or fidelity and obedience to all wicked princes whatever right they may have to the place That subjects are bound to obey and to sweare allegiance in the Lord unto wicked Kings who denyeth do vve say that vvicked Kings because vvicked are eo ipso no Kings nor to be acknowledged as Kings What then doth this testimony make against thus But 2. will he stand to what Calvin sayeth Then he must condemne vvhat King and Parliament have done in taking the life of the Marquise of Argyle and say that they are guilty of innocent blood for by vvhat Calvin here sayeth vve were as much bound to acknovvledge Cromwel then vvhen he did Reigne as now to acknowledge the King for he speaks of all qui quoquo modo rerum potiuntur How will he then free himself from treason For sure in Calvine's judgment Argile did but his duty though he had done more and yet he was condemned as a Traitour can he reconcile this with Calvine's judgment So then our promiseing and swearing alleagiance fidelity and obedience to the King being with a reserve of our alleagiance fidelity and obedience unto the Supreame King of Kings and Lord of Lords and according to that due subordination and thus limited and restricted that we may do nothing against God or in prejudice of his interests no person can with any colour of law or conscience challenge or accuse any of Treason or Rebellion against the King when they preferre the interest of God unto Man's and labour to secure Religion and the interest of Christ unto which they are absolutely and indispensably obliged and from which obligation and alleagiance no authority of man can loose them nothwithstanding that in so doing they postpone the authority of man and their alleagiance thereunto and lay it by seing
for their defence and preservation Then much more may they lavvfully novv joyne and associate together for their defence and preservation without making any such rupture or new erections but endeavouring to keep the old Society firme and intire undissolved and unweakened So that though his glosse should be admitted he doth but bewray the ignorence of his capricious braine to take the Medium for the conclusion And the antecedent will be granted by politians and is expresly asserted by Althusius Polit Cap. 20. Num. 20. in case the Prince keep not his promise but violate his faith and Covenant 5. Suppose also that this which he alledgeth had been the authors positive assertion can he hence inferred with any colour of reason that it was or is the designe of the author and his party to dissipate and dissolve the old setled frame of this Kingdome and erect new Commonvvealthes vvith nevv distinct Soveraignes Seing every one knovveth that many things are lavvful vvhich are not expedient convenient nor necessary that it vvere the result of no mature deliberation but of madnesse and folly to intend and designe such a thing vvhich though lavvful in it self yet all things considered vvere very inexpendient and unnecessary yea not only not advantageous to their ends and purposes but quite destructive thereof Novv since the Surveyer hath dravvne in this controversy by the eares and set it in the front of his learned and elaborat pamphlet vve must suppose him one vvho is vvell versed in this topick and can give a good account of his politick notions touching this quaestion But alas if he had a real adversary to deal vvith as novv he doth but faigne one to himself it is easy fighting against a man of stravv or one of our ovvne making his ridiculous and yet audacious folly vvould easily be made to appear his adversary vvould laugh as indeed he vvould have cause at the shakeing of his spear He maketh this the thesis which he undertaketh to confirme That when politick bodyes are setled in voluntary associations or whatever way in the course of divine providence they have been reduced to live under the same lawes and authorities and have continued long in the union of a common interest under the protection of magistracy to break off from the body in seditious secessions cannot but be displeasing to God and they are no other then firebrands confounders of humane society fighters against God and his ordinance who instigate People to cut off themselves from the body of the Common wealth whereof they are members But would not his adversary tell him that he had granted as much in the words immediatly preceeding as would make him and his position both ridiculous For he hath granted That the Lord hath not by any precept particularly determined the bounds of every embodied Political society There being some greater and some lesser acting under their several heads and souveraigne Magistrates And seing neither God nor Nature hath determined the quantity and extent of each Republicki or embodyed Politick Society what more affinity hath it with sinful sedition to say that greater bodyes may be divided and subdivided into lesser Republicks then to say that moe lesser bodyes may associate together to make one greater especially seing Politicians tell us that the ends of government are more easily attained in a lesser Republick then in a greater and that a mid way commonwealth neither too largâ— nor too little is the best as being lesse subject to vices and greater calamities as was to be seen in the Roman Republick before it was enlarged in the dayes of Marius Sylla Pompey and Caesar and is to be seen this day in the Commonwealth of Venice and the like as Althusius shewes us Polit. Cap. 9. num 11. The time was when all the World was under one head and after they were multiplied they became distinct Republicks without any sinful or seditious secession The time was when all thess westerne parts were under one Emperour and was nothing but a seditious secession caused by firebrands the ground of their becoming many and distinct Republicks The time was when Scotland England and Irland were distinct Kingdomes and under distinct Soveraigne Magistrates and what repugnancy were it either to the Law of God or nature to say they might be so againe So were there once Seven Kings in England at once and moe then one King in Scotland at once and by no reason can he prove that it should always be as it is at present but by the same reason his adversaries could prove him guilty of treason for he behoved to say that because we were once all under one Emperour we ought to be so still and that the King must either hold his crowne of the Emperour or be an usurper and a seditious rebel for in the course of providence we were then reduced under the same Lawes and Authorities and continued in the union of a common interest for some good space of time Yea and observe many of these civil Lawes yet Thus we see whither this advocate will drive the matter and how little service he doth his Majesty for all his rich recompence But it may be his arguments are cogent and binding He hath many words Pag. 4 5. to prove that this is contrary to Religion The sum is this Never greater perversion of government then in the times of many of the Prophets and in the dayes of Christ and his holy Apostles and primitive Christians and yet this was never their doctrine or sense Answ Is this all that he can say to prove that this is contrary to Religion Sure his adversary will think that he hath little Religion who sayth so and that he hath farlesse loyalty to his Master the King of Great Britane for why Because contrare to the doctrine of Christ and the Apostles and the sense of all the primitive Christians he acknowledgeth the King of Britane to be a distinct King from the Roman Emperour and not to depend upon him They never taught that Britane and Irland should be ruled by a King distinct from him and that these Islands should be separate from the Roman Empire and so the King holds his Crowne by usurpation and by an irreligious secession from the Empire which neither Christ nor his Apostles ever taught and must not this man and not we acknovvledge Iudas of Galilee and Theudas to be his Masters For they taught especially the first as Iosephus and Ruffinus out of him shevv us that no tribute should be given to the Roman Emperour and he vvil do the same and say that it should be payed to king Charles the II. Next his adversary vvould tell him that if this were held and maintained as a poynt absolutely necessary to salvation then his argument vvould say something But seing it is only held as lavvful and according as providence determineth it to be convenient or inconvenient to be practicable it is sufficient if the doctrine of the
This is not to solve an argument from scripture 〈◊〉 to set the Scriptures by the eares together Answ Naphtaly did not â—â—ok upon that man as nor yet say that he was distracted and sure his answere being so apposite and pertinent as that it did confound the objecters so as they had not what to reply might have more then sufficiently convinced them of their errour seing thereby they might have perceived that when they little regairded the solid and unanswerable confutations which God suggested to such as they could not but suppose both wise and sober God would prompt one whom they accounted distracted to give such a rational solide and binding ansvvere as all their vvit learning could not frame a reply unto It seemeth if this Surveyer had been rideing on Balaam's asse he vvould have been more furious and mad after the revvard then vvas that vvicked vvretch and vvould have thought himself more brutish then the asse to hearken to vvhat the Lord did put in the mouth of the asse to say by way of rebuke Thinks he that no man of sound judgment vvill think a scripture sufficiently ansvvered by produceing another And that this is but to set the scripture by the eares Then it seemeth vvith him no man of a sound judgment must think that our Lord Jesus did sufficiently ansvvere that passage of Scripture vvhich Satan abused by adduceing another Mat. 4. But that Christ did nothing but set the scriptures by the eares is this far from blasphemy I vvonder vvhere vvas the devils vvit that he had not this reply to make unto Christ's ansvver vvhich this Surveyer here maketh It seemeth our Surveyer can easily out-vvit the devil himself and declare himself better vvorthy of the chaire But enough of this here seing it is obviated Chap XVII Obj. 15. The author of Naphtali did further give these ansvvers 1. That from the place it self all the Euangelists it is most evident that that command was given and these words spoken by our Lord only for to testify his voluntare submission unto the fathers will by laying down of his life for fulfilling the Scripture as is clear From Math. 26. ver 54. and Joh. 18 11. Otherwise the context being considered that notonly in Luke 22 36. cited He forewarning his disciples of hazard to come adviseth them to provide swords and weapons And Mat. 26. asserts his power to have called 12 Legions of angels to his assistance which clearly implyes the lawfulnesse thereof this Scripture objected doth more confirme then impugne the lawfulnesse of defensive armes What sayeth our Surveyer to this He sayes 1. That passage Luke 22 36. is perverted by him Why so Because Beza Diodat and Iansenius acknowledge that speach to be wholly allegorick And then addeth that in very dead it cannot sustaine that Christ should here enjoyn them to buy swords of outward mettal seing it was not Christ's minde that at that time they should use such swords no not in defence of his owne person would he have them sell their cloaths to buy swords and then not use them Answ Though we have obviated this reply in the place cited Chap. XVII and fully vindicated our argument from this passage Chap. XII Arg. 13. beginning Pag. 260. Yet we shall adde this that sure Christ's Disciples tooke him to be speaking of vveapons svvords of outward mettal when they said to him here are two and as sure it is that Christ's reply saying it is enough hinteth at no spiritual armour othervvise vve must say that his Disciples at this time vvere sufficiently fortified against all Spiritual vvars and combats and yet after experience proveth the contrary And no lesse sure is it that if Christ had here meaned Spiritual armour he vvould have been loath to have left his Disciples in such a mistake vvhich vvas of so great concernement for all time comeing novv especially vvhen he vvas shorthly to be taken from them And vvhere do vve finde him rectifying this mistake of the Disciples or saying That he meaned no such svvords his saying it is enough Importeth some other thing as is said Againe if this speech be wholly allegorick what way will they expone these words But now he that hath a purse let him take it and likewise his Scripe But as we see no ground for an allegroy here so we may not expone Scripture by allegories when we please all know how dangerous it is to do so without clear warrand And as for this Surveyer's reason added it is of no weight to force us to accept of such an interpretation for though it was not our Lords minde that they should use those swords further at that time yet he might have taught the lawfulnesse of self defence in other cases where there was no positive command to the contrary by thus saying unto them He that hath no sword let him sell his garment and buy one Since he had not made use of such forcible defence before to have showne them the lawfulnesse thereof as he did of flight which also at this time he would not make use of and that they might see how voluntaryly and of his owne accord he laid downe his life in obedience to the command which he had received of his Father who would not make use even of that meane which he had declared lawful by adviseing them to provide swords Againe the Surveyer replyeth The question is now anent the lawfulnesse of privat mens useing defensive arms against all Magistrats without any shadow of authority And to prove this he alledges that God by his absolute power might send 12. Legions of Angels to help Christ God hath authority above all authorities in the World and he may imploy Angels or Men as â—hse pleaseth and then they have a good warrand and authority But what makes this for any privat Mens useing the sword against the Magistrate without authority either from God or Men It is wonder us reasoning from Gods absolute power the efficacy of Christ's prayer to argue the lawfulnesse of privat Mens resistence of the lawful Magistrate without any warrand from God Answ This is to us no strange way of replying seing we have met with the like so often before No Man sayeth let be undertaketh to prove whether by this or any other argument that it is lawful for privat persons yea or for Kings and all in authority to resist whether lawful Magistrats or others without a warrand from God What a non-sensical contradictory conclusion should this be But this we say That it is not in every case unlawful nor wanteth it a warrand from God even for privat Subjects to defend themselves from the Tyranny of those in power by forcible resistence notwithstanding that Christ would not suffer his followers to make use thereof in his case which was singular And among other things his saying that he could obtaine by prayer of the Father 12 Legions of Angels for his succour doth confirme it For if he might
not make use of mens help neither might he seek the help of Angels So that we argue not from God's absolute power but from Christ's professing he might if he would obtaine the help of Angels we show that in itself abstract from a particular positive command to the contrary it was not unlawful for the Disciples to defend themselves and their Master nor for Christ to make use of their help as it was not in itself unlawful to make use of the help of Angels Which yet in that case he would not do 3 He replyeth Albeit one part of our Lords designe is to testify his willing submission to the pleasure of his Father yet that is not all for any occasion of this prohibition to Peter he giveth a general rule to all his Disciples being privat Men and to all private Men that they should not take the sword God not giving them Authoritie Answ If he meane by Authority publick Magistratical authority He but begs the question and if he meane a lawful warrand we grant all For though privat persons have not the Magistratical power of the sword yet we have sufficiently proved that they have a warrand in cases of necessity to make use of the sword of defence or resistence in their owne defence And Christ's Word speaks nothing against this And if he should say That Christ's sentence being general admits of no such exception I would gladely know how he will salve the lawfulnesse of publick persons taking the sword for Christ speaks in general to his Disciples He who taketh the sword shall perish by the sword and I suppose he will not exclude Kings Magistrats from the roll of Christ's Disciples If he say he meaneth all these unto whom God giveth no authority Magistratical How shall he prove this If he say he speaketh to his Disciples who were private Persons True but it is as true That he speaketh to his Disciples who were Ministers Ergo shall it concerne only Ministers And that he speaketh to his Disciples who were Christians Ergo it must also concerne all Christians Magistrats as well as others Thus we see his evasions are naught And the true meaning is that all such as make use of the sword without God's warrand which the Disciples now wanted having God's minde revealed to the contrary in that particular shall perish by the sword and with this restriction we admit of it and he cannot reject it And then it will make nothing against us as is said proved Naphtaly answereth 3. Is it possible that men should be so far demented by flattery as to think that it was unlawful for Iesus Christ the mighty God and Lord over all to have defended himself by the assistence of his Disciples against the horrid wickednesse and insurrection of the vilest of his creatures had it not been that it was necessary that the Scriptures concerning him should be accomplished The surveyer sayeth He is insolent in saying so Why so Because albeit it be true Christ as God could have destroyed by himfelf or his instruments all the vile creatures that rose up against him yet Christ as Man submitting himself in our nature to fulfil all righteousnesse submitted himself to Magistracy as the ordinance of God and whatever by God's Law was unlawful for a subject to do as rebellion against lawfull powers is the Son of God in the state of his humiliation submitted that the same should be unlawful to him as Man c. Answ It is true Christ as Man became Subject to the Law and to Magistracy as the ordinance of God But to say that therefore He might not defend himself against the vilest of his creatures who rose up to take his life though abstract from that particular case wherein he had a particular command of God to lay downe his life because that would have been rebellion is but to begg the question and we have said enough to prove the contrary Naphtaly had a 3. answer thus Where our Lord sayeth in the place objected all they that take the sword c. as he thereby only condemneth unjust and offensive war So the saying itself by its later part doth tacitely imply the lawfulnesse justice of both defensive vindicative arms the same being otherwise justly founded Unto this The Surveyer replyeth 1. That the first part is false for then sayes he That sentence should not be pertinently applyed to Peter's fact or fault for his useing of the sword was defensive and objectively just on his part to wit in defence of his master whom they did invade yet he is reproved as wanting lawful authority Answ Peter's wanting a vvarrand for any further use of the svvord made it is true his vvar unjust yea and offensive for all lawful war except where God giveth a particular command to destroy a nation or people as he commanded the Israelites to destroy the Canaanits and Saul to destroy the Amaelekites is in a manner meerly defensive as sundry politicians averre thinking no ordinare war lawful but what is defensive And so this war being contrare to the revealed will of God was unlawful and so condemned by this sentence But to gather hence that every defensive war of Subjects is hereby condemned is to put more in the conclusion then is in the premisses His 2 reply is That the later is most falsly concluded if he meane defensive and vindictive armes against the Magistrate for albeit defensive and vindictive armes be otherwayes justly founded the defect of a lawful authority makes them unjust and sinful And it is utterly against Christ's minde and scope of the text to allow defensive as well as vindictive armes against the Magisirate for Peter was defending himfelf and his Master and revenging the invasion made by Malchus the Magistrats servant upon Christ and yet he is reproved for both Answ To say that the defect of a lawful authority as he understandeth it maketh a defensive war in subjects against their Magistrats otherwise lawful is but to beg the question and is not proved by any reproof Peter gote because as we have often tolde him that was a particular case it being necessary that the Scriptures concerning Christ should be accomplished which is only added by our Lord as the ground of his discharging Peter to proceed Christ never tels him that it was against the lawful Magistrates and therefore might not lawfully be Yea that which made Peter's Defence in this case unlawful would not Permit I. C. to pray to his father for aid or deliverance now if he will conclude from Christ's discharge of Peter to make use of the sword that it is simply unlawful for persons not cloathed with publick Authority in any case to defend themselves from the unjust violence of Magistrates then let him conclude also from Christ's example that it is unlawful for them to pray for help from God when they are oppressed for Christ gives on reason for both We are willing to grant him
13 v. 10. Unto which he answered That as these places do enjoyn either patience when the clear call and dispensation of God do inevitably call unto suffering without which patience were no patience but rather stupidity of c. So thence to inferre that Men should give way to all violence and sacrilege to the subverting of Religion and righteousnesse is after the manner of Satan to cheat and abuse men by the holy Scriptures The Surveyer replyeth thus I meddle not with his impertinent reflections and scurrile jibes nor vvith his groundlesse inferences vvhich vve have so oft met vvith in the former part The scope is to shew the unlawfulnesse of private revenge for injuries done to us and the place will condemne plainely enough violent retaliating the Magistrate when we think he doth us wrong Answ The scope of the place is obvious and doth no more condemne private persons retaliating the Magistrate then Magistrats retaliating privat Subjects unlesse Magistrates be exempted from this precept and consequently be not to be reckoned among Christ's followers And as from this place it will not follow that one independent King may not make war against another and thereby defend his rights nor that one private person may not defend his rights and just possessions against an invader no more will if follow that Subjects may not defend themselves and their Rights Libertyes and Religion against the violent oppression and Tyranny of Magistrats Next sayes the Surveyer Pag. 269. That every Man in his calling ought to withstand violence and Sacrilege to the subverting of Religion and Righteousnesse is granted Yea privat Men may resist the unjust violence of private Persons and being under the conduct of the Magistrate may resist any that offereth violence in lesser concernments then these are But we still maintaine that this text forbids all revenge or violent retaliation upon the Magistrate though he abuse his power Answ The question is not what he will still maintaine that this text doth forbid but what he can evince that this text will prove against us How will he prove that this text doth more forbid private persons to resist the unjust violence of Magistrats then to resist the unjust violence of privat persons or to resist the unjust violence of any having Magistrats to conduct them Is there any exception in the text Doth not the text speak to all in reference to all To wit that they should resist none out of a Spirit of private revenge Againe though the text forbid all revenge or violent retaliation upon the Magistrate though he abuse his power will it therefore forbid privat Subjects to defend themselves by force in case of necessity from manifest and unjust violence and Tyranny No no more then because the text doth forbid even Magistrats to revenge or retaliate from a Spirit of revenge wicked Malefactors It doth therefore forbid them to execute justice upon them Naphtaly did add that this was grosly to exceed that signal rule mainly in these places intended to wit that we should be perfect even as our Father which is in Heaven is perfect Who though he filleth the Earth with his goodnesse yet doth he love righteousnesse and helpeth and delivereth the oppressed and commandeth the Zeal of his owne glory wherein he himself doth often eminently appeare by the hand of his people to take vengeance on his adversaries To this the Surveyer replyeth What strange argueing is this that because God Almighty executeth vengeance upon his adversaries therefore private persons should follow his perfection in doing the like albeit they have not his warrand or command Answ Naphtaly's Argument ran mainely upon helping and delivering the oppressed Neither doth he conclude what private persons may do without God's warrand or command This he supposed because he had evinced it Then Naphtaly closeth saying Let us therefore in the consideration of what is said Rev 13 v. 10. He that leadeth into captivity shall goe Into captivity He that killeth with the sword c. Both possesse our souls in patience under all the former sufferings and hope and rejoyce in the faith of the succeeding delivery there subjoyned Upon this sayeth the Surveyer he would found the consolation and patience of his party in all former sufferings and his hope and joy in the succeeding delivery Answ And why might he not That word sayes he Rev. 13. toucheth not nor threatens the Magistrate in the executeion of justice but rebels who use the sword without God's warrand against the Magistrate may read their reward in this text Answ We say not that it threatens the Magistrate executing justice But let such see to it who instead of executing justice pervert justice and execute the innocent people of God And after the manner of the Beast there spoken of maketh war with the Saints And so may all rebels against God who use the sword without his warrand But as for privat subjects defending themselves by the sword of innocent self defence against unjust violence and intolerable tyranny and oppression we have proved that they want not God's warrand and therefore they may look for another reward And as for his hope and confidence after expressed we let it passe as not worth the mentioning for when the hope of the Hypocrit perisheth his is like to give up the Ghost Having thus answered all which this surveyer hath said whether in his first part or now in his second against the truth which we have maintained we may saifly say that these valient worthies were basely and unworthyly murthered that there was no just cause to take their lives This man pag. 260. c. Will not have them justified and adduceth for the most part such reasons as make me doubt whether he can be the same man that drew up the first part of this Survey because they are the very same things we heard before in the first part and is it possible the man could have forgotten himself or think that we could so soon have forgotten what we heard in the first part and had answered And if he be a distinct person I wonder what the man meaned to give us the same thing over againe did he ever read these in the first part or had he forgotten that ever he saw them Or thought he that they would have the weight of gold coming from his Mouth while they had not the weight of stuble being uttered by his collegue He beginneth that discourse with palpable untruthes saying That they suffered not upon the account of owneing the covenant Whereas the maine Argument of their indictment was That all convocations and riseing in armes or subjects entering in leagues without or against the King's authority are treasonable Then he tels us That all which they can say for their riseing was that the Magistrate by moderat penaliyes according to law was pressing them to attendance upon the ordinance of God which is an indispensible duty This we heard before and is answered Chap. XVI
defence without the conduct of their representative cannot in every case be condemned particularly not in our case now The antecedent I say is abundantly proved in the books mentioned which this windy man thinks needlesse to run out upon but he might rather say he thinks impossible to answere and beyond his poor strength to graple vvith as he sayeth Page 20. vve must then take some notice of vvhat in that Page vvhich he thinks sufficient to oppose unto the many arguments produced by them he is pleased to present what sense sayes he the people of Scotland when they have come to liberty have of these armes their late representative have declared and it were to be wished that the memory of such wayes were buryed that the posterity might never look upon them as exemplary Their progenitors have so deeply drunk of the bitter fruites of the same the result of them having been so much sin shame and sorrow vastation confusion and destruction to Princes and People I answer 1. What that liberty is which the people of Scotland are now come to who can see it for the perfect slavery and bondage they are sold unto A freedome he talkes of when all our libertyes are sold and we given up as bond men and bond women unto the lust of a Man and are denyed the very liberty which is the privilege of all free subjects yea and that which is the birthright and native privilege of all men viz. to supplicate petition or to pray what liberty can he then meane unlesse the liberty which is licentiousnesse to forsake God and our Covenant to turne Apostats from his truth and our profession to sweare foresweare to drink debauch whore commit sodomy all sort of wickednesse without curb or controll Is this the liberty he understandeth Sure all true christians and such as feare the Lord account that develish slavery and bondage 2. We know what this late Representatives have done but whether therein they have acted the part of Representatives and given the true sense of the people of Scotland will it may be be considered when He and I both are rotten Sure they never had any expresse yea nor tacite commission from the people of Scotland to give up all their necks to the stroke the axe as treatours and rebels for doing nothing but standing to their owne defence against manifest tyrranny and oppression of both soul and body and to condemne them and their worthy progenitors who valiently stood for the truth and the libertyes of Church and State to the losse of their lives and fortunes and to proclame and declare themselves guilty before God and Men of all the blood that was shed in that warre though most lawful and laudable 3. We are persuaded let him with what he will the memory of these memorable wayes shall never be buried but shall stand as exemplary monuments to succeeding generations when God shall think it meet to animate them with the spirit of courage to free the land of tyranny and of domineering abjured prelats withal their taile and traine and wise men will think that his Representatives have not taken a course fit for burying the memory of these wayes but rather a way to revive afresh the memory of them and to commend them more to the thoughts and hearts of all who love and pray for the comeing of our Lord's Kingdome 4. What bitter frutes these are which he sayeth our progenitours have drunk so deeply of we know not They lived and died such of them as owned and stedfastly adhered to that cause and Covenant in honour and peace and their names shall be in perpetual remembrance when his and the names of the rest of this perjured Malignant apostate faction shall rot We needed not have feared that either sin shame sorrow vastation confusion or destruction should have come to Prices or People if we had prosecuted the ends of our Covenants with zeal and faithfulnesse according to our manifold vowes promises solemne oathes and ingagments But what ever of these have followed should be and will be rightly fathered on our defection and lose of zeal And what sin and shame and sorrow vastation confusion destruction shall now follow both to Princes and People if they repent not upon this unparallelable defection Apostasie whereof now they are avowedly guilty none who is not an utter stranger unto God his faithful word and dispensations but may without any extraordinary Spirit of Prophecy foretell Next he tells us That these disputes proceed upon a most untrue and malitious misrepresentation of matters of fact upon two false hypotheses Let us heare what are those As if sayes he the King had been the first invader of the Nation whereas it is known his authority was first invaded his lawes trodden upon kis proclamations openly despised his castles violently seised his armes he took were notinvasive against the Nation but defensive of his owne authority of his lawes and the persones of orderly walking subjects and for reduceing these who strayed from their duty Answ Quis tulerit Gracchos de seditione querentes Who would suffer such a manifest notorius lyar to say that others made misrepresentations of matters of fact But 1. Do not all who then lived and yet read the publick papers and other acts that passed then know that through the instigation of some false perfidious fugitive Prelates the King was stirred up to make warre on Scotland ere ever they thought of any such thing Was not warre concluded both by sea and land Was not free tradeing taken away Were not the Scottish Nobility at court made to abjure the National Covenant and the General Assembly at Glasgow was there not a declaration emitted Feb. 27. publickly read in all the Churches of England wherein the faithful subjects and Covenanters in Scotland were tearmed Rebels Were not Berwik and Carlile frontier cities strongly fortifyed and garrisoned Was not the Earle of Huntly made Governour of the North of Scotland and had some foure or five thousand men in armes for the King Was not Aberdeen fortifying it self to take in the King's navy of shipes when it should come Was not the Marquis of Douglas Lord Haris ready to rise with the Papists in the South of Scotland Was not the Deputy of Ireland prepareing men to land them in the West of Scotland Was not the Earle of Arundale made the Kings General and was not the King to have his rendezvouz at York in Aprile and all the English Nobility commanded to attend him there by a letter written Ian. 26. before the faithful People of Scotland had any army in readinesse What impudency is this then to say the King was not the first invader of the Nation And as for the second expedition Anno Dom. 1640. managed and carryed on by the Parliament it was abundantly verified by their publick papers that it was purely defensive And it is notour that before the leavy was made and appointed
done by the encouragement and assistance of the Spirit of God And if any should reject this instance as impertinent because they suppose Antiochus was not their lawful Supream Magistrate but only a Tyrant without title let them heare what Grotius de jure belli pacis lib. 1. c. 4. n. 7. sayeth to this Like unto this appeareth that deed of the Maccabees for whereas some think to defend these armes upon this gronnd that Antiochus was not King but an invader it seemeth foolish to me seing in all the history of the Maccabees and of such as took their part they never name Antiochus any thing else but their King and that not without ground for long before this the Iewes had acknowledged the authority of the Macedonians unto whose power and place Antiochus did succeed as to that that the law forbiddeth that any stranger should be set over them that is to be understood of a voluntary election and not of what the people might through necessity be forced to do And whereas others say that the Maccabees used only the right of the people cui 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 deberetur Neither is that solide for the jewes being at first overcome by Nebuchadnezar and subjected to him by the law of warre by the same law they did obey the Medes and Persians who succeeded unto the Caldeans and all this Impire came at length into the hands of the Macedonians hence it is that Tacitus reckoneth the jewes amongst basest of such as served these Assyrians Medes and Persians Nor did they require any thing by stipulation from Alexander and his successours but without any condition gave themselves up unto their power as formerly they had been under the command of Darius And if at any time the jewes were permitted to use their owne rites and lawes that was but a begged right which they had through the indulgence of the Kings but not through any imperial law So that there is nothing that can defend the Maccabees but most imminent and certane danger thus he 2. The constant practice of the Waldensian protestants in Piedmont doth shew that this late practice is not so strange uncouth as adversaryes would give it out to be for they never had a Representative to be a screen betwixt them and the tyranny of their princes and yet how oftintimes have they valiently with stood such as came to oppresse them in goods and lives though cloathed with commission from the princes In the yeer 1580. being persecuted by the Lord of Trinity and their popish Soveraignes they assembled solemnely together to consult how to prevent the imminent dangers and after prayer and calling upon God for his grace and spirit of counsel and direction they resolved to enter into a solemne mutual Covenant and to joyn in a League together for defence of Themselves and their Religion and so accordingly did assist one another in their defence which they did with good successe And that alwayes since whenever they were assaulted by the bloody Emissaries of the Duk of Savoy as any may see fully in their history So that whosoever will condemne the late defence must also condemne these poor oppressed protestants who have no other meane to keen them from utter extirpation but this innocent meane of felf defence and of repelling unjust violence with violence for Bonds Promises Covenants binde their Prince as such obligations use to binde some others viz. no longer then they see it for their advantage Neither have they any Representative Prince or Noble man among them to head their matters but meer necessity puts them to use the best expendient they can and forcibly to resist their oppressing Superiours when they send to spoile them of their goods lives and libertyes 3. Some particular cityes in Germany did defend themselves against the Emperour unjustly invadeing their libertyes and assaulting them as may be seen in the history of Germany particularly the Cities of Madenburgh and Breme 4 So in France the Cities of Montobane and Rochel and the Isle of Ree with stood the King when he was seeking to oppresse them And no man will condemne these for acts of rebellion and sedition unlesse they will also condemne our Kings who at least undertook and offered to help and assist them 5. It was this opposition and resistence of privat persons when tyrannized over by Superiours that hath brought the Cantons of Helvetia unto that state of freedome and liberty which they have enjoyed for many yeers and do enjoy this day being now a free Republick as Simlerus showeth in his history of that Republick 6. But that we may come home we finde some remarkeable instances of this nature which no man in reason who shall condemne this late defence shall be able to defend and to beginne with what may be most recent in our memories In the year 1648. There are two signal Instances The one was that violent resistence used against the Parliaments forces at Mauchlin moor Here was not only a resistence in defence of the truth and cause of God then sought to be borne downe and oppressed by a prevalent Malignant faction in Parliament without the concurrence of conduct of the Representatives of the land but directly against them Here was a defence used by way of resistence by meer privat persons without the company or concurrence of one Noble man And yet a resistence that never was condemned by any to this day expect ingrained Malignants but was approved and commended highly by the Parliament anno 1649. the best Parliaments Scotland did see for many yeers Againe thereafter in that same yeer 1648 The forces of the west Countrey arose in defence of the Cause and Covenant of God and that not only without the conduct of a Parliament but against their resolutions It is true there were some Nobles Parliament-men among them and countenancers of them but these acted not nor could act by vertue of any Parliamentary power but only as privat subjects having by reason of their greater interest in the land a greater obligation to lay out themselves and to improve their authority and influence in the countrey for the good thereof and for the cause of God They had it is true by their places and stations greater influence upon the Countrey and a greater backing and so being leading men were in a greater capacity to defend the oppressed truth but all this gave them no publick Magistratical power nor put them in the capacity of a real and formal Representative and yet all this was afterward approved ratified and confirmed by Parliament as good and necessary service to the countrey and to the cause of God A third notable instance is that Anno 1639. There was then no publicke civil judicatory carrying on that defence but Nobles and others each in their capacity and according to their power concurred for the promoveing of that necessary work of defence They did not acte under the notion of any such judicature nor
upon this account any tumult should arise no crime might be imputed unto them but unto such as refused their just Demands And when they wrote that letter May 22. 1559. Wherein they said That except the cruelty were stayed they would be compelled to take the sword of just defence against all that should pursue them for the matter of Religion and that the cruel unjust and most tyrannical murther intended against Towns and Multitudes was and is the only cause of their râ—vâ—le from their accustomed obedience And when they wrote that other unto the Nobility where in they said By your fainting and extracting of your support the Enemies are encouraged thinking that they shall finde no resistence in which poynt God willing they shall be deceived for if they were Ten thousand and we but One thousand they shall not Murther the least of our brethren From all which and from the whole story of these times it is undenyably apparent that they acted for the defence of the truth and of their oppressed brethren and for the carrying on of the work of reformation for some considerable time without the concurrence and conduct of a Parliamentary Representative From all which Instances of our predecessours I would have these thing observed 1. It is remarkeable That when God was to beginne any word of reformation in our Land whether from Popery or Prelacy the powers then in being were standing in a stated opposition thereunto This is notoure both in the dayes of Mr Knox in the yeer 1639. King or Queen and Counciles were stated against it and opposeing the same what they could 2. The only wise God who is wonderful in counsel and excellent in working thought fit not to beginne with the Spirits of the Powers in being to cause them first appeare for the work but thought it more to his honour and glory to make use of foolish things to confound the wise and of weak things to confound the things that are mighty and base things and things which are despised and things which are not to bring to nought things which are It seemed good in his eyes who doth all things after the counsel of his owne will to imploy the least of the flock in that businesse according to that word Ier. 49. 20. and 50. 45. and to raise up meane and contemptible instruments that the work might more conspicuously appeare to be his and the glory thereof redound to himself alone 3. As they would have been glade had it so seemed good in the Lords eyes if the standing Representatives would have not only concurred and countenanced that work but would have according to their places led on the vaune and shewed themselves powers appoynted for God and his glory by exerceing the power which God had put into their hands for God and his interest So the want of their encouragement and conduct did not in the least brangle their confidence of the lawfulnesse of their interprize of so discourage them as to give over their work as desperate and hoplesse 4. Nor did they ever assume to themselves any authoritative and Magistratical power to legitimate their actions as if they had thought that without that formality their resolutions and motions had been condemned as unlawful in the Court of God and Nature but walked upon the ground of that fundamental right granted to all both higher and lower to maintaine the Truth of God upon all hazards and to stand to the defence thereof and of themselves when unjustly persecuted because of their adherence thereunto according to their power and as God in his providence called them thereunto 5. Nor did their adversaries objecting that their actions were treasonable and seditious as being contrare to authority and established lawes scar them from their purposes in the least having the testimony of a good conscience with in them that they had not the least purpose or project to cast off lawful authority or to diminish it's just right and power and knowing that the Powers out of whatever principle and upon whatsoever motives relinquishing their duty and opposeing that truth and way which by their places and callings they were obliged before God to maintaine preserve and promove did not loose their obligation and exeem them form that duty which God and nature had laid upon them but rather did presse them to prosecute their businesse more vigurously as seeing the necessity much more urgent and the difficulty so much the greater And knowing that whatever lawes are made in a Christian Common wealth should be for the glory of God and the good of the souls of the subjects mainly and for their external welbeing only in subordination unto these great Ends and when the observation of the strick letter of the law did crosse the maine good which principally de jure they aimed at they were eo ipso in so far null and voyd before God because it alwayes holdeth good that it is better to obey God then Man and mens commands or lawes unto which obedience cannot be yeelded without contempt of and treason committed against the Highest of all who is King of Kings are as no commands before God and disobedience unto these is no disobedience unto the lawful authority but faithful allaigance unto the most Supream 6. These poor weak beginnings how base and contemptible so ever they appeared yet God was pleased when the time to favour Zion was come so to owne countenance and prospere that the same work at length came to be owned by Publick Representatives and Parliaments yea and the Kings themselves were brought to a publick owneing and approving of the same And who knoweth but if God had thought good to blesse this late act with successe it might have been followed with the like consequent But his time was not come 7. It is also observable That whatever disaster or disappoyntment they did meet with in prosecution of the Reformation and in the preservation and defence of themselves in the owneing of the truth of God though it put them to mourne for their iniquities before God and to acknowledge among other sinnes their too much relying upon the arme of flesh and not resting with a pure faith on his power and protection yet it never made them question their call or suspect the lawfulnesse of their work and businesse as to its substance and end for they knew well that the work was the Lord's and that their call was divine though for his owne holy ends that they might be more humbled and taught do depend with a single heart on his word and promise and to purge out such evills as provoked the eyes of God's jealousy he suffered them to fall 8. When the work came at length to be owned by Parliaments and Higher Powers what was formerly done by persons not in that capacity was not condemned either as unlawful or illegal nor did the valient actors stand in need of any indempnity as if they had been transgressours but all was
obey him in the Lord. Peter Martyr also sayeth that not only King and People covenanted with God but the King also with the People and the People with the King and thereafter that the King was bound to rule the People according to the Lawes equity Secundum Iura Leges and the People promised to obey him Zanches more fully tells us there was a Covenant betwixt the King and the People as uses to be betwixt the Prince and Common-wealths The Prince undertaketh to defend the Kingdome Lawes Equity and to be a keeper and defender of the Countrey and of Religion And upon the other hand People promise obedience and fidelity and such expenses as are necessary for keeping up the Majesty of the Prince c. Now what sayes our Surveyer to this He tells us Pag. 96. That it was also made upon an extraordinary occasion extraordinaryes cannot sound ordinary rules Answ How doth he prove that it was meerly upon the extraordinarynesse of the occasion that this Covenant was made he might as well say that the crowning of him giving him the testimony making him King and making a Covenant betwixt the Lord and the King were extraordinary and so could not found ordinary rules yea and that it was extraordinary for the People to sweare allegiance unto him But he hath two things remarkable to his purpose as 1. That he is crowned made King before the Covenant is made which crosseth the antimonarchists who assert the King cannot be made King until he make the Covenant with the People that he gets the crowne and royal authority covenant wise and conditionally Answ Antimonarchists properly so called are against all Monarchs limited or absolute or doth he account them all antimonarchists who say that the King is a limited Magistrate then we know what to think of the Monarchists and Royalists of him and his party 2. He knoweth himself that the series or order of the relation of a complex businesse is not alwayes just according to the series of the things done but be it so this maketh for us in the former instance of David's Covenanting with Israel Which is mentioned before their making of him King 3. But suppose the King had refused to enter into Covenant with the Lord or with the People for mention is made of both Covenants after his Coronation might they not for all their solemnities in crowning of him have refused to have ownned him as King 4. But to put the matter beyond all debate we finde compareing the two places together That beside the Covenant betwixt Iehojadah and the Rulers of Hundereds c. mentioned 2. King 11. 4 and 2 Chron. 23. 1. which was rather a Covenant betwixt themselves to depose Athalia and to set up joash to put down Idolatry and to set up the true worshipe of God as the English annotations the Dutch say then a Covenant of fidelity or allegiance to the King as he would have it we finde 2 Chron. 23. 3. a Covenant made betwixt the Congregation and the King and this was before he was crowned or made King which Covenant as the English annotators say was a mutual stipulation betwixt the King and Them That the King should maintaine the true worshipe of God the peace of the Kingdome and privilege of the subjects and that the People should maintaine the King and yeeld unto him his due The next thing he sayeth is That it is not told us what the tenor of this covenant is Diodaâ— seems to say that Iehojadah made them sweare allegiance and fidelity to the King but how shall it be cleared that it was conditional with a reserve of coactive punitive power over him Answ Of this coactive power over Kings we are not now speaking and he but playeth the fool to start such questions without ground 2. That it was a conditional Covenant the scope of the place cleareth for if they had not expected thaâ— their condition had been better under his reigne then under Athaliah be like they had never resolved to have ventured their lives and estates for him and if the Covenant had not been conditional they could have had no rational expectation of the bettering of their condition from the young King Againe if it was not a conditional Covenant The King could with no more certainty have expected their dutyful obedience then They his faithful government 3. It is true the matter and tenor of the Covenant is not expressed but the nature of the act doth abundantly cleare what it was and that it was such as the English annotators have expressed 4. If Diodat say it was nothing else but the Peoples swearing allegiance he speaketh without ground for it was a mutual Covenant a Covenant betwixt King and People But sayes he suppose all the Kings of Judah made such covenants with the People yet will any judicious man force the Particular customes of that Nation on all Nations that might be best for that Nation that was not simply best their customes without a law of God bearing a standing reason cannot be obligatory on others lest we judaize too much Answ 1. We are not now pressing their practice as our only warrand but by their practice we prove the lawfulnesse of the King 's being brought under conditions and obligations to the people which Politicians Lawyers and Divines use to do 2. He must show why such a practice was best to them not also to other nations 3. We Judaize not more in this then in crowning and making of Kings though I grant they do who use the ceremony of anoynting with oile 4. We have the Law of Nature which is the law of God bearing a standing reason of this as was shewed above 5. Yea that lavv of God mentioned Deut. 17. 15. c. Limiting the Prince shovveth that it was the Peoples duty unto whom that is spoken when they were to set a King over themselves to provide for these conditions so that as they might not de jure set a stranger over them neither might they set any over them who vvould not engage to keep the conditions vvhich they were to required of him v. 16. 17. 18. 19. and these Conditions of the King being held forth unto them sayes that they were impowered to stipulate such of the King whom they were to create and that poynts forth a Covenant to be made betwixt them and their King power also in them to restraine the King from transgessing these conditions as Iosephus tels Ant. Lib. 4. cap. 14. Si autem fuerit alias c. â— e. But if otherwise a desire of a King shall adhere unto you let him be of your stock let him make much of Justice and other vertues and let him know that there is most wisdome in the lawes and in God let him do nothing without the advice of the High priest Elders neither let him assume to himself many vvives nor seek after abundance of riches nor
vve fee that if he loose the old fundations he shakes the throne more then he is a vvarre of And as in many other things through this pamphlet so in this he doth his Master no good service notvvithstanding of the great fee he hath gote for his paines The summe of what followeth Pag. 92 93. is this That none before King James 6. did at their installing enter into Covenant with the People except what one sayeth of Gregory the great who swore to defend the libertyes of the Christian Religion c. which then was Popery and neither did King James himself do it but only Morton and Hume in his name promised somehing like it nay it is doubted if King Charles the first did sweare that oath of if he did he was the first and yet he was aught yeers our King before and it is to be beleeved on good ground that if he had thought his taking of that oath should have subjected him to the coactive and punitive power of the Subjects in every case wherein they or any party of them being meer private persons might think him deficient he would rather have endured any death but it shall be avowed that he did never shrink from the observation of that Godly oath neither hath his Majesty who now reigneth swerved from the observation of that oath hitherto and we are hopeful God's grace shall preserve him hereafter from any such thing Answ 1. We cannot expect that Buchanan studying much brevity would set downe all the formalityes that were used at the coronation of the Kings he only satisfying himself with a series of the succeeding Kings and with a relation of some of the most remarkable passages And therefore it is no good argument to conclude that no such thing was because he doth not make mention thereof 2. other historians name some other Kings beside that Gregory who tooke an oath at their coronation as Corbred the 21. King who swore se majorum consiliis acquieturum That he should be ruled by the counsel of a Parliament whom he accounted his Superiours So in Macbethus his dayes it vvas ordained by the Estates that the King should sweare to maintaine the community of the Realme 3. Whether they did actually sweare an oath at their coronation or not it is not much to the matter for a virtual and implicite Covenant will ground all which we desire and that there was this much cannot be denyed seing Kings who could not reigne was layd aside others who corrupted government were pursued sentenced punished imprisoned and killed in battle or otherwise made to promise amendment And seing we finde bonds laid upon Kings as that in the dayes of Finnanus the 10. King That Kings thereafter should do nothing of any great concernment without the authority of their publick Councel and should not rule the Kingdome according to the Counsel of his Domesticks That he should manage no publick businesse which belonged to the King without the advice and conduct of the Fathers and should neither make peace or war enter into Leagues or break Leagues by himself without the concurrence and command of the Fathers Heads of tribes This was a fundamental Law of the Kingdome and all who accepted of the crowne thereafter must have accepted it upon these tearmes though they had not been in plaine tearmes expressed So Durstus his Successour did sweare the same and therefore in Mogaldus the 23. King his dayes this is called the ancient custome for he ad consilia Seniorum omnia ex prisco more revocavit did all by a Parliament according to the ancient and received custome And because Conarus the 24. King neglected or refused to follow this received custome he was cast into prisone So that the not observing of these conditions made them obnoxius unto the coactive power of the People So was Romachus censured by the Parliament for the same crime So we read of many others censured for their misdemanurs as Constantine the 43. King Ferchardus the first the 52. King Ferchardus the 2. the 54. King Eugenius the 62. King Donaldus the 70. King all which instances many such like do abundantly cleare that the Kings of old were under bonds and obligations if not explicite yet tacite unto the People 4. Whatever can be said concerning the ancient Kings yet now it is past doubt that all our Kings are bound to sweare an oath at their coronation and so are under conditions and Covenant-tyes and obligations and this is enough for our present purpose 5. It was thought suffificient in point of formality legality that the Earle of Mortoun and Hume should sweare in name of the King at this coronation That he should observe the Lawes and according to his power should preserve the doctrine and rites of Religion which were then taught and publickly received and oppose himself to all which was repugnant thereunto And this was the very summe of that oath which was afterward concluded in Parliament to be received by all Kings at their coronation And the reason why they did not put King Iames to that oath thereafter was because he was but once crowned and the oath was to be sworne at the coronation and when King Iames was crowned It was done by others for him as is said 6. Though this man make a question whether King Charles did swear this oath or not at his coronation yet it is notoure that he did and though he beleevetâ— that if the King had thought that his taking of that oath should have been so far mistaken by his Subjects as that he should have been thought thereby to have submitted himself to their coactive and punitive power in every case wherein they or any part of them might think him deficient he would rather have endured any death then so to have cast himself away at the pleasure of malcontented partyes amongst the People taking advantage against him by that oath all which we may give him good leave to beleeve for we assert no such thing yet he must suffer us to beleeve also upon as good ground That if King Charles had absolutely or peremptoriely refused to have taken that oath or had said That he would rule as he listed and have no regaird to the established lawes and whould bring in what Religion he pleased though it were Machometanisme or Poperie or that he did not account himself obliged to the Subjects by any oath he could take The Nobles and others would have scrupled to have given him the Crowne and acknowledged him King And their after practices declared that they looked upon him as a King obliged by tearmes and conditions unto them which when he broke they maintained their right against him with their sword when no other meane could prevaile 7. Though it be true that King Charles the first was acknowledged King sometime before he was crowned yet that was with respect to the same conditions unto which he was by his taking the place virtually obliged
the law of the XII tables so it was in force whatever forme of government was exerced But syes he Prael 9. § 19. Hence it will not follow That People may when they perceive or cry out that they perceive their libertyes hurt in some things take armes without the Princes leave and violate all lawes and dutyes and so raise tumults and seditions Ans Neither do we say so nor resolve to draw any such conclusions therefrom but this is cleare that when the covenanted work of reformation is overturned laudable lawes establishing the same contrary to oath and solemne Engagement rescinded libertyes palpably violated People in humanely persecuted for adhereing to their Covenants c. and unjustly oppressed by the Kings emissaries people may then take armes in their own defence though the King should refuse to consent or should countenance the oppressours carry on that inslaving course Againe he sayes let any read and read over againe that sentence of Cicero and search every pairt of it where vvill he finde any vvarrand for Subjects to rise up against princes to injure them or dethrone them Ans We do not intend to search the sentence for that end it vvill suffice us if hence vve finde ground to conclude the lavvfulnesse of Peoples defending themselves against tyrannizeing Princes in cases of necessity and let him or any for him read and better read that vvhole period and narrovvly consider and examine every sentence and vvord in it and see if he can finde this condemned Ere I come to speak to the other particular I shall from this draw some few things useful for our purpose and 1. It is irrational and meer flattery to cry up and exalt the Soveraignes prerogative in prejudice and to the destruction of that for which both He and His Prerogatives are and were appoynted as subservient meanes the saifty of the People That being de jure his maine end and it being for this cause end that he is endued with such power and hath such privileges and prerogatives conferred upon him and allowed unto him He and his Prerogatives both should vaile unto this Supreame Law the saifty of the People so that when they come in competition The Peoples saifty of right is to have the preheminence 2. Since all other lawes municipal made and established in a free Realme must be subordinate unto this Principal and Cardinal law and have tendency to promove corroborate and establish it Then when any of these Lawes in their letter strick directly at the root of the saifty of the People and thoward and crosse that maine and highest law That law is Eaienus null and really no law So that it is but childish scrupulosity to start at the letter of a law when the Commonwealth is in hazard and it is but brutish ignorance to object the letter of a low against such as are endeavouring the saifty of the people which is the maine businesse and to preserve the Commonwealth from ruine and destruction against which no law is or can be of any force or value but null and of no effect for here it holdeth true that summum jus is summa injuria 3. Since Lawes themselves when in their letter they crosse this maine law must be accounted as no lowes really and de jure and may saifly be neglected and passed over when the Peoples saifty is in no small hazard by the strick adhereing to the letter thereof Then much more may punctilioes and law formalities be laid aside when the Commonwealth is in danger When there is a fire in a City all the formalities of order are not strickly to observed 4. Since The privileges and lawful prerogatives of the Soveraigne must vaile in cases of necessity unto this High and Supreame Law the saifty of the People Then no lesse must the privileges of a Parliament yield unto this for whatever privilege they enjoy it is in order to this end and the meanes must alwayes have a subserviency unto the end and when they tend to the destruction of the end they are then as no meanes unto that end nor to be made use of for that end 5. Though King and Parliament both should conspire together against the good of the Land yet di jure they have no power or authority to destroy that End and whatever they enact or doe tending to the ruine of this maine and principal good which they should have before their eyes as their end is ipso facto null 6. When acts and actings of King and Parliament tend directly and are made and done of purpose to destroy and overthrow the work of reformation in doctrine worshipe discipline and government which was owned and established by lawes with all formalities of law and was avowed by solemne vowes Covenants attestations protestations declarations and engagements of all ranks of People from the highest to the lowest and courses are laid doune to force and constraine People to renunce their Covenant with God to turne perjured apostates and when by acts and actings the fundamental tearmes conditions of our reformed constitution confirmed by unrepelable lawes by the King 's accepting of his Crowne and Scepter and all other Magistrates accepting their places upon these tearmes are overturned and when by an arbitrary and illegal tyranny no man hath security for his life his lands his libertyes nor his religion is not the saifty of the People in danger No man needs to say who shall be judge The Magistrates or the people For all who have eyes to see may judge whether the Sun be shineing or not and all who have common sense may judge in this case When these things are done and avowed they cannot be denyed and no man of reason or religion will deny the inference Hence then it is cleare that no man in reason can condemne the late act of defence which was the only meane left for preserving of that which all government and Governours should level at viz. The saifty of the People both in soull and body their Religion Lives Liberties Privileges Possessions Goods and what was deare to them as men and as Christians howbeit it vvanted the formality of the authority of Soveraine Parliament or Councel No man vvho vvill not deny this axiome can condemne them as Traitors seing they vvere noble Patriots and loyall to that Supreame lavv The saifty of the People As to the other particular concerning the absolute power of the Soveragne We say 1. That the Soveraigne is under obligations to his People and bound limited by conditions we have shewed above which conditions he is bound to observe see Hoen Disp Pol. 9. 2. That the Soveraigne is not exempted from the lawes of God none but profane gracelesse vvreatches vvill deny since he is a creature of God's and a subject to him and his servant Rom. 13. and therefore must not transgresse his lawes under the paine of high treason and laese Majesty It was but a base saying of an impudent whore Iulia
of their accounts should imbrace professe and practise the truth of God and the true Religion reformed in doctrine vvorshipe discipline and government Though King Parliament and Council should reject and condemne the same and countenance or command and authorize the practice of idolatry superstition or any false way in the vvorshipe of God or in the doctrine and discipline For no lavv of man can vvarrand iniquity no act or constitution of any Magistrat under Heaven can rescinde or invalidate the mandats of the King of Kings or exempt People from obedience due thereunto No true Christian whatever court flatterers atheists may do can deny this 7. Nor can it be denyed That in Kingdomes or Commonvvealths vvhere once the True Religion reformed in doctrine vvorshipe discipline and government hath been received publickly imbraced approved and countenanced by authority ratified by lavves statutes acts declarations proclamations oathes vovves and engagements Though the Magistrates Superiour and inferiour should turne Apostates from that Reformed and received Religion and by their lavves condemne the same and establish corruptions and enforce corrupt practices by penaltyes yet it vvere the duty of all Subjects vvho had any regaird to the matters of their ovvne salvation to adhere to the truth once received and established and vvorshipe and Serve God after the right manner and refuse to obey these iniquous lavves Will any deny such a truth as this except such as have sold soull consciences and all unto the lust of Men or think there is no Religion but vvhat King and Parliament vvill have and consequently if they should enjoyne the imbraceing of Mahomet's Religion or the vvorshiping of Sun Moon and Starrs or of Satan himself obedience must be yeelded 8. If in the forementioned case The Magistrates Superiour and inferiour should combine together and conspire against Christ and his interest and should not only by their acts and statutes banish him and his glorious interests out of the Kingdome but also by their cruel executions labour to force constraine and compel all their subjects or a part of them to the renunceing of the formerly received and avowed truthes and to the imbraceing of the introduced corruptions and so to run with themselves unto the same excesse of iniquity perjury and abhomination Then it is lawful for these Subjects so oppressed persecuted and abused for their constancy in adhereing to the truths once received contrare to all engagements vowes and Covenants to defend themselves against that unjust tyranny and rage and maintaine the reformed truth which is unjustly violently taken from them by force when there is no other probable meane left for them to essay nay when liberty to supplicate or petition is inhumanely and severely under the very paine of Treason discharged The reasons are 1. because we have shewed above that it is most lawful for Subjects to maintaine their lives persons and Estates against the unjust violence and tyrannical oppression of their enraged Magistrates And if that be lawful this must also be much more lawful for as the soul is much more precious then the body so matters that concerne the soul should be preferred to such things as concerne the body And therefore Religion which is necessary for the life of the soull should be with no lesse Zeale care and industry maintained and preserved pure and uncorrupted then what concerneth the lives of our bodyes 2. It is lawful for Subjects to maintaine their natural and civil libertyes by force when no other way can be used lest they and their posterity after them should be redacted unto a state of perfect slavery and bondage worse then that of the Israilites in Egypt And shall it be unlawfull to fight for the defence of Religion wherein is comprised all true and desireable liberty and to save posterity from tyranny and bondage in their souls and consciences much more dreadfull and terrible then the most insupportable and bitter bondage of the body imaginable Shall men be allowed to fight to preserve their owne bodyes and the bodyes of their posterity from the slavery of men and shall they not be allowed to fight that they may preserve their owne soulls and the souls of their posterity from the tyranny of Satan Who but such as either think they have no soulls more then beasts or know not the worth of their souls will deny this consequence 3. It is lawful for Subjects to defend their lives and libertyes in order to the defence of the true Religion and the interests of Jesus Christs when their losseing of these should certanely tend to the losse of Religion Ergo It cannot be unlawful to defend Religion which is the maine and principal thing 4. If it be lawful to maintaine the interests of a King against an usurper whether a stranger or an inferiour Magistrate who is under the King and is seeking to eject him and his interest contrare to his faith and trust Then much more must it be lawful to defend Christ Iesus and his interest when King and Parliament contrare to their sworne allaigance unto him have rebelled and are seeking to dethrone him by their wicked Lawes and Ordinances and to banish him and his interests out of the Kingdome by their tyrannical cruelty inhumane and mercilesse executions Will any deny this but ingrained Atheistical Malignants whose chief character hitherto hath been to preferre man's interest unto Christs Or such as have renounced all faith and loyalty unto the King of Kings and have set up a creature as their only God whom they minde to Worshipe and adore and for whom they minde to fight against all breathing and against the God of heaven also But their weapons shall fall out of their hands when They shall feel the lighting downe of his arme with the indignation of his anger and with the flame of a devouring fire and with scattering and tempests and hailstones and when he shall cause his glorious voyce to be heard If any should Object That because Christ's Kingdome is not of this World therefore his Servants should not fight for him It is easily answered That as hence it will follow that Religion cannot be forced by the sword upon any So it will not follow that Religion should not be defended for then Magistrates should not defend Religion nor Christians should not defend their Religion against the Turks Which is false And hence 5. If it be lawful for People to defend their Religion against an army of infidells Mahometans or Papists invadeing the Land of purpose to spoile us of our Religion and to force us to imbrace heathenisme Turcisme or Popery Then it must be lawfull to defend the same true Religion against King and Parliament when they seek to rob the People thereof and force corruptious upon them because King and Parliament have no more authority from God to oppresse the consciences of their Subjects to corrupt Religion and force corruptions upon them then the Turk or the Pope hath and
therefore no lesse lawfully may they be resisted 6. If privat persons may resist and withstand the Prince and Parliaments when they sell them and their land and heritages unto a forraigner to the Turk or such an adversary Then much more may they withstand them and defend their Religion when they are selling it by their apostatical acts and thereby selling them and their Souls unto Satan the God of this World 9. When Religion by the constitution of the Kingdome is become a fundamental law and a maine article and cardinal condition of the established Politie and upon which all the Magistrates Supreme and Inferiour are installed in their offices Then may that Religion be defended by private subjects when their Magistrates have conspired together to destroy the same to enforce the corruptions of their owne braine The reasons are 1. because it is lawful to defend the just and laudable constitution of the Realme in so far as Religion which is a principal fundation-stone of this constitution is subverted the constitution is wronged and the fundations thereof are shaken 2. In so far the Magistrates are no Magistrates And therefore they may be resisted Magistrates I say in so far as they overturne the constitution are not Magistrates for that is a maine pairt of their work to maintaine it For upon the constitution hang all the libertyes and all the good and necessary Ends which People have set before their eyes in the setting up of governement and His owne being as such the subversion of that subverts all and declareth the subverter to be an enemy to the Commonwealth and an overturner of the polity and this is inconsistent with being a Magistrate 3. In so far as they overturne or shake the fundations they cannot be seeking the good of the Community but their owne with the destruction of the Common good and this is the mark and true character of a Tyrant And when they seek not the good of the Community they cannot be looked upon as Magistrates doing their duty but as Tyrants seeking themselves with the destruction of the Commonwealth Therefore in so far they may be resisted 4. In so farr The compact the ground of the constitution is violated and as Magistrates in this case in so far fall from their right in so farr also are People liberated from their obligation so that if They become no Magistrates the Subjects become no Subjects for the relation is Mutual and so is the obligation as was shewed above Therefore in this case Subjects may lawfully resist and defend their Religion which is become the principal condition of their constitution and of the compact betwixt King and Subjects 10. Where Religion is universally received publickly owned and countenanced by persones in authority ratified approved and established by the lawes and authority of the land There every person is bound and obliged before God to maintaine and defend that Religion according to their power with the hazard of their lives and fortunes against all who under whatsoever colour and pretence seek to subvert and overturne the same and to hinder any corruption that King or Parliament at home or adversaries abroad would whether by subtilty or power and force bring in and lay hold on the first opportunity offered to endeavour the establishment of Truth and the overturning of these corrupt courses which tend to the perverting thereof And the reasons are because 1. When the True Religion is once embraced and publickly received That land or Commonwealth is really dedicated and devouted unto God and so in a happy condition which happy condition all loyal subjects and true Christians should maintaine and promove recover when nearby or altogether lost And therefore should do what they can to hinder any course that may tend to recal this dedication to deteriorate the happy condition of the Realme and to give up the land as an offering unto Satan 2. By this meanes they endeavour to avert the wrath and anger of God which must certanely be expected to goe out against the land if defection be not prevented and remedyed For if but a few should depairt wrath might come upon the whole much more if the Leaders turne patrones of this defection But of this more in the next chapter 11. Much more must this be allowed in a Land where Reformation of Religion in doctrine worshipe discipline and governement is not only universally owned publickly received and imbraced nor yet only approved authorized ratified and confirmed by publick authority and the lawes of the Land But also corroborated by solemne vows and Covenants made and sworne unto God by all ranks and conditions of People from the King to the meanest of the subjects in a most solemne manner and that several times re-iterated in which Covenants all sweare to Maintaine and defend this Riligion with their lives and fortunes and to labour by all meanes lawfull to recover the purity and liberty of the gospel and to continow in the profession and obedience of the foresaid Religion defend the same and resist all contrary errours and corruptions according to their vocation and to the uttermost of that power that God puts in their hands all the dayes of their life as also mutually to defend and assist one another in the same cause of maintaining the true Religion with their best Counsel bodyes meanes and whole power against all sorts of persons whatsoever And Sincerely really and constantly endeavour in their several places and callings the preservation of thereformed Religion in doctrine worshipe discipline and government The extirpation of Popery Prelacy Superstition Heresy Schisme Prophannesse and whatsoever shall be found to be contray to sound doctrine and the power of godlinesse And to assist and defend all those that enter into the same bond in the maintaining pursueing thereof And shall not suffer themselves directly or indirectly by whatsoever combination persuasion or terrour to make defection to the contrary party or to give themselves to a detestable indifferency or neutrality in this cause which so much concerneth the glory of God the good of the Kingdomes and the honour of the King but shall all the Dayes of their lives Zealously and constantly continue therein against all opposition and promote the same according to their power against all lets and impediments whatsoever Now I say in such a case as this when after all these engadgments and covenants a courte of defection is carryed on by a strong and violente hand by King and Parliaments and there is no meane left unto Private Persones when violented and constrained to a complyance by acts and tyrannical and arbitrary executions of either preventing their owne destruction in soull and body or preserving the reformation sworn unto or recovering the same when corrupted and of purging the land of that dreadful sin of perjury and defection They may lawfully take the sword of just and necessary defence for the maintainance of themselves and of their Religion This
sayes he ut in solidum in continenti ab unoquoque promissum peti possit tanquam a principalirëo l. poen de duob rëis stip 2 Chro. 33. 2 King 24. 4. Deut. 29. And his reason is because God would not commit to one the care of his Church and worshipe but to the whole People whom their servants King and Parliaments do represent which also he proveth from Ier. 17 20. and againe Num. 19. He tells us that one of the corrëi must answere for the other and partaketh of his guilt if he do not oppose and resist him as much as he can and so hinder him from breaking Which he proveth from 1 King 14 16. and Num. 23 24. He ansvvers Barclaius alledging the same thing vvhich this Surveyer alledgeth saying Concedo Barclaio in duobus rëis promittendi observari ut uno solvente quod promisit alter liberetur Ergo quando Rex vel Populus ob delictà sua arque foederis initi transgressiones poena â Deo est affectus alter liberabitur Verum haecregula uno corrëo solvente alterum liberari exceptionem patitur in casu quo non insolidum in totâ—m corrëus solvit sed pro parte uti hîc unus ex corrëis poenas persolvens Deo non in solidum solvere potest Deinde haec regula non procedit in delictis In his enim uterque corrëus delinquens criminis socii puniuntur in solidum neque unus poenas luendo alterum liberare potest 1 Sam. 12 ver 27. Et docent id late ICC. Denique praedicta regula non procedat in casu qnando uterque corrëus se in solidum obligavit ad idem factum uti in hoc foedere accidit 2 Chron. 15 ver 13 Vbi de poena subditorum Regis loquitur ut 1 Sam. 12 ver 7. 4. But now the question is what is the Peoples duty in a day of defection He sayes it is only to keep themselves pure from the abhominations and reforme themselves But we have shewed above that the scripture requireth more even some active endeavour to have the National Corruptions removed though not to usurpe the Magistrates place But sayes he The late Covenant it self doth bind private persons in their places and callings which certanely are private and to be managed by private means to endeavour reformation doth not bind any number of private persons to pull the sword out of the Magistrate's hand when they think he useth it otherwise then he should and then they would have him use it if the Covenant be passive of such commentaryes as this man puts upon it That whatever any private party accounts Reformation they may use the vindictive punishing sword against all of all degrees that stand in their way to advance the same we have little reason to be in love with it and just cause to cast it by till it be cleared of such corrupt glosses Answer I feare the Surveyer be so out of love with it and have so cast it by that were it never so cleared as it is cleare enough he hath no minde to take it up againe and he best knoweth what it vvas that moved him to cast it off But 2. as Naphtaly said vvel That clause annexed can not be so restrictive as this Surveyer would have it for certanely it cannot bind up privat men's hands from doing of these things which otherwise were commanded them to do Now whether this Covenant had been or not more would have been required of private persons in a time of great and universal or a national defection then at other times Every man is bound according to his place and station to preserve he Kings person and authority Now put the case that some party or faction should captivate him This man will grant that private persones without the conduct of inferiour Magistrates may joyn together if they be in a capacity to break thorow impediments through the interprize and labour his vindication and delivery and restauration Would he in this case condemne these men as acting without their sphere or as usurpers I suppose not Let him then apply this to our case and he will easily see the parallel So it is the duty of burgesses in their places and stations to promove the good of the society Now suppose a fire kindle and such as are appointed to oversee the quenching of fires either are absent or carelesse or half willing the Town should be burnt shall private persones hands be bound up from doing what they can in what order they may to save the Towne shall they be accounted transgressours or Usurpers of the Magistrat's place though they should materially occupy his roome for that exigent No certanely they should rather be accounted faithful citizens mindeful of their oath and promise So when an army is engaged with the Enemy if the Commanders should perfidiously betray their trust and leave their station or seek the destruction of the army in their station It would be accounted no usurpation in any private persons who could best fill these roomes and places for these exigents to do what they could for the saifty of the army Nor would this be thought contrare to their oath When a Master of a Shipe either through sotishnesse or vvickednesse vvould run the ship against the rock any private Seaman in that case of necessity may to save his ovvne life and the lives of all vvho are in the shipe do the best he can to prevent destruction without any sinful transgressing the bounds of his calling Whence we may understand that in cases of extreame necessity private persones may do more then in ordinary cases and yet not sinfully goe beyond their places and callings and though materially they for that exigent occupy the places of Superiours who sinfully unfaithfully and basely either neglect or betray their trust yet they cannot be accounted Usurpers nor is it rational to say that such as plead for the lawfulnesse of this do plead for the lawfulnesse of private persons pulling the sword out of the Magistrate's hands whensoever they think he useth it otherwise then he should or whensoever he useth it otherwise then they would have him use it and useing the vindictive punishing sword against all Magistrates and others that stand in their way By this also vve may see what injury he doth to Naphtaly when he draweth such consequences from vvhat he said Pag 151. and there did shevv by the simile adduced that such a thing vvas to be done only in extreame inevitable and urgent necessity And what the Surveyer hath said Pag. 116. and 117. needeth no other ansvvere This is not all he must harpe on this string againe Pag. 103. where he sayes That it is to ruine all order to teach that the advancing Religion not only actibus elicitis but actibus imperatis which belong to the Magistrate may be medled with by the people-extraordinary necessities are more easily pleaded then justified as
I have said to declare himself an enemy to that which so highly provoketh the wrath of God against the whole People For where Moses sayeth Let the city be burned c. he plainly doth signify that by the defection and idolatry of a few Gods wrath is kindled against the whole which is never quenched till such punishment be taken upon the offenders that whatsoever served them in their idolatry be brought to destruction because that it is execrable and cursed before God and therefore he will not that it be reserved to any use of his People I am not ignorant That this law was not put into execution as God commanded but what did thereof ensue and follow Histories declare viz. plague after plague till Israel and Iudah were led into captivity as the Books of the Kings do witnesse The consideration whereof maketh me more bold To affirme that it is the duty of every man who desireth to escape the plague and punishment of God to declare himself Enemy to idolatry not only in heart hateing the same but also in external gesture declareing that he lamenteth if he can do no more for such abhominations of these premises I suppose it be evident That the punishment of idolatry doth not appertaine to Kings only but also to the whole People yea to every member of the same according to his possibility For that is a thing most assured that no man can mourne lament and bewail for these things which he will not remove to the uttermost of his power And a little thereafterâ— And therefore I feare not to affirme that the Gentiles I meane every City Realme Province or Nation amongst the Gentiles imbraceing Christ Jesus and his true Religion be bound to the same league and Covenant that God made with his People Israel when he promised to root out the Nations before them in these words Exod. 34 12 13 14. to this same law and Covenant are the Gentiles no lesse bound then some time were the jewes vvhensoever God doth illuminate the eyes of any multitude Province People or City and puteth the sword in their ovvn hand to remove such enormities from amongst them as before they knevv to be abhominable Then I say are they no lesse bound to purge their Dominions Cities and Countreyes from idolatry then vvere the Israelites vvhat time they received the possession of the Land of Canaan And moreover I say if any goe about to erect and set up idolatry or to teach defection from God after that the verity hath been received and approved that then not only the Magistrates to vvhom the svvord is committed but also the People are bound by that oath vvhich they have made to God to revenge to the utmost of their povver the injury done against his Majesty So in his admonition to the Commonalty of Scotland Pag. 36. Neither would I that you should esteem the reformation and care of Religion lesse to appertaine to you because yee are not Kings Judges Nobles nor in authority Beloved brethren you are God's Creatures created and formed to his owne image and similitude for whose redemption was shed the most precious blood of the only beloved sone of God to whom he hath commanded his gospel and glade tidings to be preached and for whom he hath prepared the heavenly inheritance so that yee will not obstinately refuse and disdainfully contemne the meanes which he hath appoynted to obtaine the same for albeit God hath put and ordained distinction betwixt King and Subjects yet in the hope of the life to come he hath made all equal and therefore I say that it doth no lesse appertaine to you to be assured that your faith and Religion be grounded and established upon the true and undoubted word of God then to your Princes or Rulers for as your bodyes cannot escape corporal death if with your Princes you eate or drink deadly poison although it be by ignorance or negligence so shall ye not escape the everlasting if with them yee professe a corrupt Religion and this is the cause that so oft I repeate and so constantly I affirme that to you it doth no lesse appertaine then to your King or Princes to provide that Christ Iesus be truely preached among you seing without his true knowledge you cannot attaine to salvation More to this purpose may be read there CAP. X. Arguments taken from the hazard of becoming guilty of the sin of others and of partaking of their Judgments And from the duty of relieving the oppressed c. IT is not necessary for our purpose to dip much into that question concerning Gods imputing of the sin of one unto others and therefore we shal shortly hint at some few particulars from Scripture and after we have considered what this Surveyer sayeth we shall apply them to our purpose That God doth punish some and that most justly for the sinnes of others the Scripture doth abundantly verifie Not to insist on the instances of his punishing of whole families for the sinnes of the Head of the family as the family of Pharaoh Gen. 12 v. 17. of Abimelech Gen. 20 v. 17 18. of Corah and his companions Num. 16 v. 27 32 33. of Achan Ios 7 v. 24 25. of Ieroboam 1 King 14 v. 10 11. Cap. 15 29. of Ahab 1 King 21 v. 21 22 24. 2 King 9 v. 8. of Baasha 1 King 16 3 4. of Iehoram 2 Chron. 21 14. Nor on the instances of his punishing of Servants for the sinnes of their Masters or the Children and Posterity for the sinnes of their Parents as in the 2 Command where he threatneth to visite the iniquities of the Fathers upon the Children unto the 3 and 4 generation So also Levit. 26 ver 38 39. Deut. 28 v. 18 32 45 46. So the Children of such as were drowned in the flood Gen. 6 7. The posterity of Canaan Gen. 9 v. 24 25 26 27. The children of the Egyptians Exod. 11 v. 5 6. of the Israelites Num. 14 v. 33. Psal 106 v. 27. of Dathan and Abiram Num. 16. of the Canaanites Deut. 3 Cap. 20. of the Amalekites 1 Sam. 15. of Saul 1 Sam. 21. of Cehazie 2 King 5 ver 27. of the Babilonians Esai 14 ver 21 22. of Semaia Ier. 24. v. 32. Hence true penitents acknowledge are humbled for not only their owne sinnes but the sinnes of their Fathers Ezra 9. Dan. 9. Job sayes Cap. 21 v. 19. God layeth up his iniquity or the punishment of his iniquity as it is in the margine for his children But to passe these we finde moreover 1. That People have been punished for the sinnes of their Pastors or in hazard to be punished therefore When Nadab and Abihu had provoked the Lord with their strange fire Moses spoke unto Aaron and to his other two Sones and sayd Levit. 10 v. 6. Vncover not your heads neither rend your cloathes lest you die N. B. and left wrath come upon all the People So that their sin would
so for this offence all the land was punished because at least as it oft hapneth the people had not hindered it Then Pag. 52. he cometh to explaine his other assertion It is no lesse certane sayes he to us that if the Magistrate do not connive at the sinnes of Subjects nor neglect to curb and punish them the sins of the people shall no way be imputed to him he not being thereunto accessory in any way nor shall be punished for their sinnes which in his place and calling he is wrestling against Answ Yet we know that for the transgression of a land many are the princes thereof Prov. 8. v. 2. And that for a punishment to people God may even cut the dayes of a good prince and though we should grant that it were no proper punishment unto the good Prince yet materially and in it self it is a stroke But he addeth Also it is alike certane That private persons shall not have the sinnes of Magistrates or of the body of the people imputed unto them nor be punished for the same if so be they honestly endeavour to do all things against these sins which in their privat calling they are bound to do Answ Be this granted The main question will be if people can be said to have honestly endeavoured to do all things against these sinnes which in their privat callings they are bound to do if having power to withstand the committing of these evills or to remove them after they are committed yet they forbeare and suffer these things to be done and labour not to remove them He addeth If they keep themselves without any degree of acting these sins or any way of accession to them if they mourne and sigh for evils that are done if they be earnest in prayer that God may convert others from their evil way if they as they can have opportunity faithfully admonish and study to reclaime those who are out of the way and do such like Christian dutyes God will never enter in judgment vvith them for not doing violence to the authorityes that are above them Answ If the Surveyer would do no more then this he ought neither to be accounted a good Christian nor a loyal subject For if he saw the King about to cut his owne throat with a knife or about to do as Saul did fall upon his owne sword or runing doun a precipice to break his neck would any think he had had done his duty and exonered his conscience if he should not lead his hand unto that mischief nor thrust him doune the principice but should roare and cry God save the King and admonish and study with faire words to reclaime the King from that cruel deed would any think but he might have done more even if he had had strength enough have holden his hands and keeped him back from breaking his neck and yet never have been in any hazard or sinfully touching the Lord's anoynted or doing violence to the authority that God had set over him 2. And if Kings may be-resisted and with violence hindered from putting hands in themselves or from drinking a cup of poyson or doing some such deed which will or may prove destructive to their life and posterity without doing violence to the authority appoynted of God vvhy may they not also be hindered from doing that which will ruine their souls and prove destructive to their Kingdomes and bring on the curse and vengeance of God upon young and old without doing any sinful violence unto the authority And as in the former case a man could not but be guilty of the King's death who knew that it was a cup of poyson which he was to drink and did not having power to do it hinder him from drinking it So in this case they that have power to hinder the Magistrate from drinking poyson or doing what may be deadly to thousands of his innocent subjects and bring downe the curse of God upon him and his posterity and do it not cannot but be guilty of that sin before God and so cannot expect to be free of the punishment which God will inflict because of that sin as not having done even in their private callings what they were bound to do viz. not having used their power for the glory of God the good of the Soveraigne and his posterity nor for the good of the Commonwealth which they were bound to do He tells us moreover concerning that instance of Manasseh Ier. 15 v. 4. That the people were punished because they were shares of the guiltinesse not by not violent resisting which they were never exhorted to but by direct or indirect accession otherwayes Hos 5 ver 11. Ier. 5 v. 31. Ans 1. How could young children be accessory either by consent or any otherwayes to these courses of Manasseh 2. It were hard to say that even all who were come to the use of reason were guilty of accession unto these wickednesses who yet were carryed away captive such as Daniel Hananiah Mishael and Azaria and others 3. That there were many yea the far greatest part of the People who were guilty of hainous sinnes when the final stroke came cannot be denyed but that they were at that same hight of wickednesse which they were at in Manasseh's dayes is doubted 4. We shalll grant with Calvin on the place That Manasseh alone was not in that transgression but had many of the People consenting Yet as Manasseh himself was dead long ere the stroke came so were they and yet for that sin of theirs the posterity suffered Yea even notwitstanding that there interveened a National repentance and mourning for that National sin and National Reformation of these idolatrous courses in the dayes of Iosiah 5. Though it be true that the People after Iosiah's dayes returned to their vomite and had wickednesse enough of their owne for which God might have punished them yet it is very remarkable how that sin of Manasseh is particularly mentioned as if there had not been another to procure that stroke and certanely all who read the places cited before will easily observe that there is something more in them then an occasion taken to remember that dreadful time of Manasseh when the wickednesse began as the Surveyer sayeth in the following words 6. It was their sin I grant that they did consent and that sayeth that they should not have consented but have refused obedience unto the King idolatrous mandats and have hindered in their places an according to their power the setting up of these abhominations and should have adhered to the truth and worship of God as it was practised in the dayes of good Hezekiah his Father 7. He needs not say they were not exhorted to this violent resisting for it was but folly to speak of resistence to these who so willingly walked after the commandement and would not do so much as disobey 8. That place of Hoseah speaking of Ephraim's willingly walking after the commandment proves
murther or to consent thereunto to bear hatred or to let innocent blood be shed if we may withstand it c. Citeing in the Margine Ezech. 22 1 2 3 4. c. where the bloody City is to be judged because she relieved not the oppressed out of the hand of bloody Princes v. 6. And to what Ambrose sayeth de office Lib. 1. c. 36. saying qui non repellit a socio injuriam si potest tam est in vitio quam ille qui facit i. e. he who doth not repel an injury from his brother when he may isas guilty as he who doth the injury And this he cleareth by Moses his deed defending the Hebrew against the Egyptian CAP XI Of our qualified alledgiance to the King Our Arguments hence THe author of Naphtaly Pag. 177 said That all powers are subordinate to the Most high and appoynted and limited by his holy will and commandement for his owne glory and the Peoples good and our allegiance was and standeth perpetually and expresly thus qualified viz. in defence of Religion and Liberty according to our first and second Covenants all allegiance obedience to any created power whatsoever though in the construction of charity apparently indefinite yet in its owne nature is indispensably thus restricted By which words any who will duely consider the scope which that author doth drive at will see That his meaning was That as obedience and allaigeance is to be given to Magistrates only in the Lord So the same ought to be promised with this qualification or limitation so far as it is not contrary to Religion and Liberty of the Subject thus we all swore to defend his Majesties person and authority in the preservation and defence of the true Religion and Libertyes of the Kingdomes and it is plaine to all who will not shut their eyes that the foresaid author putteth no corrupt glosse upon that necessary clause and qualification for while he is dissuadeing from taking of that bond which was urged upon the People of Edinburgh he useth the words cited furder addeth To renew the same or take any the like oath of allegiance purely and simply purposely omitting the former and due restriction especially when the powers are in most manifest notorious rebellion against the Lord opposition to his cause and Covenant is in effect equivalent to an expresse rejecting and disowning of the same limitation and of the Soveraigne prerogative of the Great God and King over all which is thereby reserved as much as in plaine tearmes to affirme That whatever abused authority shall command or do either as to the overturning of the work of God subverting of Religion destroying of Rights and Libertyes or persecuting of all the faithful to the utmost extremity we shall not only stupidly endure it but activly concurre with and assist in all this tyranny What could have been spoken either more full or plaine both for explicating the genuine import of that restriction or qualification or the authors Orthodox sense thereof Yet behold how this wrangling pamphleter because he can get nothing to say against the truth asserted must wrest words and sense and all that he may have something to say against the straw-adversary of his owne setting up Therefore he tells us Pag. 6. Can this assertion subsist that neither alledgiance or fidelity nor obedience is to be given to any created power but in defence of Religion and Liberty As if Naphtaly had meaned That no alledgiance fidelity or obedience was due or to be given to the created powers but when and in so far as they did actually owne and contribute their utmost for the promoving or establishing of Religion and the Liberties of the People Whileas his meaning is clearly seen to have been this That as all powers are subordinate unto God the great King over all So all alledgiance fidelity or obedience is to be promised and given unto them with a reserve of the allegiance fidelity and obedience due to God the Highest of all and that man's interest is not to be preferred unto God's but alwayes acknowledged in subordination thereunto So that when earthly powers are stated Enemies to Christ and his interest no absolute allegiance fidelity or obedience is to be promised But alwayes with this restriction or limitation Neither are the Subjects bound to concurre or assist them while in such a stated course of opposition to the King of King's and while actively endeavouring to destroy his great interest in the world But what sayes our Surveyer furder That obedience is not to be given unto any creature on earth against Religion or the revealed will of God shall be easily granted we ahhore the very thought of so doing Ans Though he abhore the very thought of so doing yet many will say that he hath not abhorred to do it It is against God's expresse and revealed will to commit perjury and renunce a Covenant sworne with hands lifted up to the most high God and yet he knowes who is guilty of this maketh the will of a creature the Law of the Conscience when the appendix is a full belly Againe sayes he it shall not be said that obedience is to be given to powers against the liberty competent to us as subjects and consistent with Soveraignity yet so that the measure of that liberty must not be made by every man's private will but by the declarature of the Parliament representative of the Subjects which best knowes what thereunto belongs Answ This royal liberal man would seem to yeeld something in favours of the liberty of the People but with his annexed clause and restrictions he takes all back again For 1. sayes he it must be consistent with Soveraignity and how wide a mouth this Soveraignity hath in his and his complices estimation many know and we have seem in part even so wide as that is shall swallow up all the Peoples liberties like one of Pharaohs leane kine that eates up the fat and yet is never the fatter Then 2. it must be determined by the Representatives as if the Representatives were not ex officio bound and obliged to maintaine the Liberties of the People which belong to the People ere the Representatives have a being and as if it were in the power of the Representatives to sell and betray the Libertyes of the People or as if no more were competent to the Subjects de jure then what they will Hath a man no more right to his lands aud heritages then what his advocate who betrayeth his trust for a larger summe of money alloweth him or declareth We know Parliaments can basely betray their trust and sell away the Libertyes of a People contrare to their vow and oath to God and their obligation to the People whose trustees they should be and shall People have no more liberty competent to them then what a perfidious company conspired against the good of the Commonwealth to pleasure a sinful Creature determineth
it is of no force when it cometh in competition with the authority of God and is stated against that Religion which by divine authority they are bound to maintaine with hazard and losse of their lives goods and fortunes And therefore the late act of defence being according to their sworne alleagiance to God a necessary defence of Religion cannot be condemned of Treason or Rebellion though it wanted that formality of the authority of Subordinat powers As postponing the authority of inferiour Magistrates in act of obedience and duty of alleagiance unto the Superiour can be no proper disloyalty or rebellion so nor can the postponing of the authority of Superiour and inferiour Magistrates in poynt of obedience and performing alleagiance unto the most Supreame be really treasonable seditious or rebellious 2. If we be sworne to maintaine the King's person and authority in the defence of the liberties of the subject Then who ever preferre the Liberties of the Subject unto his person and authority are not Traitours or Rebels And so the late act of defence being for the liberties of the subject when they were basely betrayed sold and given away by a company conjured into a conspiracy against the same and were trode upon and violently plucked away cannot in conscience or in the law of God or according to any just law of man be accounted or condemned as an act of Treason or Rebellion CAP. XII Some moe Arguments Briefly proposed and Prosecuted WE have in the preceeding Chapters proponed and considered such arguments as gave us occasion to meet with what this Surveyer allaidged We shall here ere we come to consider his objections briefly summe up other arguments The worthy author of Lex Rex Quest 28. and 31. hath some which we shall here set downe partly because that book is not in every mans hand and partly because this windy man pretends to have answered much of that book though he hath not so much as offered to make a reply unto the six hundereth part thereof 1. Pag. 261. thus he argueth That power which is obliged to command and rule justly and religiously for the good of the subjects and is only set over the people on these conditions and not absolutely cannot tye the people to subjection without resistence when the power is abused to the destruction of lawes religion and the subjects But all power of the law is thus obliged Rom. 13 ver 4. Deut. 17 ver 18. 19. 23. 2 Chron. 19 ver 6. Psal 132. ver 11. 12. and 89. ver 30. 31. 2 Sam. 7 ver 12. Jer. 17 ver 24 25 And hath been may be abused by Kings to the destruction of Lawes Religion and Subjects The proposition is cleare for the powers that tye us to subjection only are of God 2. Because to resist them is to resist the ordinance of God 3 Because they are not a terrour to good works but to evil 4. Because they are God's ministers for our good But abused powers are not of God but of men are not ordinances of God they are a terrour to good works not to evil they are not God's ministers for our good 2. ibid That power which is contrary to law and is evil and tyrannical can tye none to subjection but is a meer tyrannical power and unlawful and if it tye not to subjection it may lawfully be resisted But the power of a King abused to the destruction of Lawes Religion and subjects is a power contrary to law evil and tyrannical and tyeth no man to subjection wickednesse by no imaginable reason can oblige any man Obligation to suffer of wicked men falleth under no commandement of God except in our Saviour A Passion as such is not formally commanded I meane a physical passion such as is to be killed God hath not said to me in any moral law be thou killed tortured beheaded but only be thou patient if God deliver thee to wicked mens hands to suffer these things 3. Ibid There is not a stricker obligation moral betwixt King and People then betwixt parents and Children Master and Servant Patron and Clyant Husband and Wife The Lord and the Vassal between the pilote of a shop and the passengers the Phisitian and the Sick the doctor and the Schollar But law granteth 1. minime 35. De Relig. sumpt funer If those betray their trust committed to them they may be resisted If the Father turne distracted and arise to kill his Sones his Sones may violently apprehend him bind his hands spoile him of his weapons for in that he is not a father Vasq lib. 1. illustr quaest Cap. 8. n. 18. Si dominus subditum enormiter atrociter oneraret princeps superior vasallum posset ex toto eximere a sua jurisdictione etiam tacente subdito nihil petente Quid papa in suis decis parliam grat decis 32. Si quis Baro. abutentes dominio privari possunt The Servant may resist the Master if he attempt unjustly to kill him So may the wife do to the Husband If the pilot should wilfully run the ship on a roke to destroy himself and his passengers they might violently thrust him from the helme Every Tyrants is a furious Man and is morally distracted as althus sayeth polit cap. 28. n. 30. seqq 4. Pag. 262. That which is given as a blessing and a favour and a scrine betwixt the Peoples Liberty and their bondage cannot be given of God as a bondage and slavery to the People But the Power of a King is given as a blessing favour of God to defend the poor needy to preserve both tables of the law and to keep the People in their libertyes from oppressing and treading on upon another But so it is that if such a power be given of God to a King by which actu primo he is invested of God to do acts of Tyranny and so to do them that to resist him in the most innocent way which is self defence must be resisting of God and rebellion against the King his deputy Then hath God given a royal power as incontrollable by mortal men by any violence as if God himself were immediatly and personally resisted when the King is resisted and so this power shall be a power to waste and destroy irresistably and so in it self a plague and curse for it cannot be ordained both according to the intention and genuine formal effect and intrinsecal operation of the power to preserve the tables of the Law Religion and Liberty Subject and lawes and also to destroy the same But it is taught by Royalists That this power is for Tyranny as wel as for peacable government because to resist this royal power put forth in acts either of Tyranny or just government is to resist the ordinance of God as Royalists say from Rom. 13 1 2 3. We know to resist God's Ordinance and Gods deputy formaliter as his deputy is to resist God himself 2 Sam. 8. ver
private persons in cases of necessity So will the law of Nations and the Civil law for it maketh no distinction betwixt self defence used by private persons alone and that which is used by private persons having their Representatives concurring And where the law distinguisheth not we should not distinguish As all law permits to repel violence with violence so doth it give this allowance to all persons whatsoever l. Liberam C. quando licet unicuique sine judic 18. To maintaine that in no case it were lawful for Private subjects to resist the unjust violence and to defend themselves from the tyranny of Princes would be a direct condemning of our owne Princes K. Iames and K. Charles who helped the private Subjects of other Princes against them and is it not unreasonable to plead for more absolute subjection then princes themselves will plead for Or to condemne that resistence which even they will approve of countenance and encourage to 16. If it were not lawful for private persons to defend themselves against the manifest tyranny of a Soveraigne without the concurrence or conduct of a Parliament or their Representative Then the condition of such as live under such a government where there are Ephori or where there is a Representative constituted should be worse then is the condition of these who want such Representatives But that were absurd Therefore c. The consequence of the Major is hence cleared Because all the arguments which have been adduced by any for proving the lawfulnesse of resistence in cases of necessity will evince that a people who have no formal Representative may resist the tyranny of their Prince But now if this were not allowed unto a People having Representatives their case should certanely be worse Because their hands should be bound up from that necessary defence which otherwise they might have used viz. when Representatives should betray their trust and comply with a tyrannous Prince against the people The Minor is most certane because Parliaments or Representatives have been instituted for the good advantage of the people And therefore should not prove hurtful and destructive otherwise they cease to be a benefite and a blessing A benefite should not prove onerous sayeth the law si filiusf ff ut legator nom caveaetur 20. If it be lawful for private persons to resist the Tyranny of Parliaments and other inferiour Magistrates Then it cannot be unlawful for them to resist the Tyranny of others without their concurrence and conduct But the former is true as all the arguments used by divines and politicians to prove resistence will evince and as several of our adversaries will very readily grant though they will stifly maintaine that no resistence is to be used against the Soveraigne Therefore c. The connexion is hence cleare That to whom the greater is lawful the lesse is also lawful Now it is a greater matter to resist a Parliament then to wave them and miskend them or to resist others vvithout their help as all may see and will easily grant There is not a more expresse command for Subjects to do nothing without the concurrence of a Parliament then not to resist them and oppose them Nor are people more obliged to the one then to the other 21. Privat persons without the concurrence of Parliaments may resist and oppose the Prince yea and binde his hands when in a fit of frenzie of a distempered braine and madnesse he would seek to cut his owne throat or with Saul would run upon his sword Therefore they may also resist oppose him when in madnesse and fury he would not only endanger his owne life in soul and body but vvould destroy the inheritance of the Lord and cut off his faithful and innocent subjects and destroy the land The connexion is cleare Because more respect is to be had unto the life of Thousands then to the life of one Man The antecedent is certane because otherwise they should be guilty before the Lord of his death if they vvould not hinder it when it was in the povver of their hands for he vvho hindereth not a mischief vvhen he may he vvilleth it and so is formally guilty before God 22. Privat persons vvithout the concurrence of inferiour Magistrates may resist the Soveraigne vvhen in a rage he runeth upon an innocent man passing by and with Saul vvhen an evil spirit from the Lord came upon him vvould cast his javelin or deadly instrument at the innocent Davids This no rational person vvill deny vvho knovveth vvhat a hazard it is to partake of other men's sinnes Love to the Prince should presse to this perserving of him from shedding innocent blood and vvho doth not this vvhen he may consenteth to that murther Therefore they may also no lesse yea much more resist him vvhen in his madnesse and distemper he is seeking to destroy millions of the people of God And againe much more may vve resist him vvhen he is seeking to destroy ourselves vve being much more bound to love and defend ourselves then to love and defend others 23. If it be lawful for private subjects without the Commande or allowance of Parliaments or their Representatives to resist a Tyrant or the Tyranny of a Prince with teares and prayers Then also in cases of necessity it shall be lawful for them to resist his violent Tyranny and tyrannical violence with violence But the former is true Therefore c. The minor is cleare For Royalists themselves will grant that praeces and lachrymae may be opposed to Tyranny Thus did the ancient Christians resist their tyrannical Emperours with earnest cryes and prayers to God especially Iulian the Apostate whom they ordinarily stiled Idolianus Pisaeus Adonaeus Tauricremus alter Hieroboam Achab Pharaoh c. And we are allowed to pray against the Enemies of Christs Kingdome against the Turk the Pope that great Antichrist and all the little Antichrists that make warre against the Lord and his interest Therefore we may also resist a Prince Tyrannically oppressing the People of God destroying the mountaine of the Lord makeing havock of his Church when we are in probable capacity for that work The reason is because the one is no more condemned in Scripture then the other 2. The one is no more a sinful resisting of the Ordinance of God then is the other 3. Adversaries themselves will grant that resistence by prayers and tears is more powerful and effectual then the other 4. This personal resistence is as consistent with that command let every soul be subject to higher powers as the other is with that 1 Tim. 2 ver 1 2. 1 exhort that supplications prayers and intercessions be made for Kings and for all in authority 5. If the Prince be good the one is as unlawful as the other and a sinful resistence of the ordinance of God no lesse then the other Therefore when he becometh a Tyger a Lyon a waster of the inheritance of the Lord an Apostate as
Com. Class 4. Cap. 20. Pag. 680. c. To which we answere 1. The question which he moveth Pag. 680. doth not concerne us For there he sayes that meer privat persones may not depose Kings or Princes or rise against them for this end Vt eos à dignitate seu gradu suo deturbent Now this is not our question which is concerning necessary self-defence in cases of extreame necessity 2. He grants it lawfull to inferiour Magistrates who set limites to the Prince if the Prince violat his compacts and break his Covenant to force him to stand to his conditions eum in ordinem cogere ac vi redigere ut conditiones pacta quae fuerat pollicitus compleat idque vel armis cum aliter fieri non possit Our Surveyer will not assent to this which Martyr sayeth notwithstanding he account him one of the most learned of our Protestants 3. It is true Pag. 682. he would have private persones enduring a Tyrant who commands contrary to equity and good lawes and suffer him patiently as we are to suffer patiently sicknesse But who seeth not that notwithstanding of this patient submission we may use resistence as we may use resistence by all lawful meanes to sicknesse and diseases 4. Though we should yeeld that such a Tyrant as he described should not be resisted viz. such an one as commandeth contra aequum bonum ac leges yet our case is different For not only are there such acts of iniquity commanded but also Subjects are compelled by meer force and cruelty to consent to and approve iniquous courses and our Magistrates are in a singular manner obliged to prosecute the Ends of a sworne Covenant which the Subjects desire to adhere unto and for adherence thereunto are persecuted in a most inhumane and cruel manner So that this is tyranny of a higher nature then what Peter Martyr speaketh of In the next place he citeth Rivet in Decal Pag. 233. and 235. But we answere 1. Rivet granteth it lawful unto all vim vi repellere to repel force with force a proveth it 2. In the place by him cited he is speaking of a private man's resisting the violence of another who if under pretext of exponeing the law of Nature should avenge himself privato appetitu vel contumaciâ or raise seditions against the Magistrates he should but abuse his power and liberty and this we grant But our case is of a Community to which Rivet speaketh nothing Yea 3. in the other place though he will not have a private person kill his Father or a Magistrate in his owne defence yet he granteth it lawful to resist so far as can be to hinder our owne destruction Id sayes he nos absolute sontimus de Parente Principe quibus licet quidem resistere quantum id fieri potest cum invadunt injuste eo fine ut impediamus perniciem nostram Whence it appeareth that Rivet is much for us for he acknowledgeth it lawful for a private single person to defend himself as much as is possible from the unjust assaults of Princes Much more then shall it be lawfull for a community to defend themselves against the King's Emissaries After Rivet he citeth D. Ames cons cas Lib. 5. cap. 20. But Doct. Ames speaketh nothing against us for he is summarily holding forth what is the duty of Superiours towards their inferiours and of inferiours towards their Superiours and among the dutyes of inferiours he reckoneth subjection and obedience but what calleth he this subjection Doth he meane thereby a stupide and absolute submission to all acts of Tyranny and opression No but such an acknowledgement of their power authority as hath with it a care to preserve the same unhurt Now this is consistent with resistence in cases of necessity A community may defend themselves from unjust violence of Magistratees and yet attempt nothing against their just power and authority but labour tenderly to preserve the same 2. It is true that he sayeth all violent insurrection is opposite hereunto and also contempt But that is violent insurrection against the power and authority and not against the person who is abuseing his povver to the ruine and destruction of the Commonvvealth for no body will deny but tyranny and the Tyrant as such may be despised and undervalued vvithout vvrong to the povver and authority if self So may that be resisted vvithout violation of the power 3. It is true he sayeth that subjection may be vvhere there is not obedience but wherein sayeth he doth this subjection consist In submissâ recusatione obedientiae quando illicitum esse constat quod a superiore mandatur in a submissive refuseing to give obedience And this is some other thing then a stupide submission to all acts of Tyranny 4. This same Ames Cap. 25. where he is speaking of Maagistrates and Subjects and shewing the duty of subjcets unto them puts subjection and obedience together § 16. Wherefore as hence it cannot follow because obedience is due unto them when they command things just and agreable to God's Law that therefore obedience is due unto them when they command things unjust and repugnant to the Law of God So nor will it follow that because subjection is due unto them when their power is not abused to the destruction of the Commonwealth therefore subjection is due unto them or non-resistence when they tyrannize over the consciences states and bodyes of their subjects and laboure to overturne all 5. It is true he sayeth Cap. 31. § 10. that the person invading may be such and there may be such other circumstances as that the person invaded may rather choose to die as to Kill But that speakes nothing to our case which is a resisting to the King 's bloody emissaries not by one private person but by a Community And since D. Ames in the same Chapt. § 4. 5. c. thinks it lawful for a private person to defend himself even by killing the aggressor when there is no other remedy he will abundantly justify our practice And likewise he alloweth this defence even in the behalf of others § 9. Rectè etiam extenditur ad defensionem non tantum nostâ—um sed aliorum innocentium Hoc enim postula lex ut proximum diligamus sicut nosipsos And therefore Amesius is much for us As for the two Papists Estius and Tollet whom he citeth they speak not against us who plead for the Liberty of self defence unto a Community against the Magistrate and not to every private single person neither plead we for a power of Killing Kings And if they were against us he could not have much reason to say that we joyned hands with Papists Thus are all his authorities from divines answered let us see what he sayeth further He tells us Pag. 25. 26. That when Lex Rex had in severral places such as Pag. 313. 314. 322. 463. vented that principle in reference to the civil governement That no man
one kinde of Tyranny which consisteth in violating changeing or removing of fundamental lawes specially such as concerne Religion such sayes he was Athalia Philip the King of Spaine who contrare to the fundamental Belgick lawes did erect an administration of justice by force of armes and such was Charles the IX of France that thought to overturne the Salicque law and whether our King be not in this guilty in overturning the fundamental lawes concerning our reformed Religion let the world judge Next sayes he when he keepeth not his faith and promise but despiseth his very oath made unto the people and who is more guilty of this then King Charles the 2 â— n. 9. He giveth us this mark when the supreme Magistrate marketh use of an absolute power and so breaketh all bands for the good of humane society and are not the bonds both of piety and justice novv violated n. 11. He tels us a Tyrant doth take away from one or moe member of the Commonwealth free exercise of the orthodox Religion and n. 12. that for corrupting of youth he erecteth stage-playes whore houses and other play-houses and suffers the colleges and other seminaries of learning to be corrupted and n. 15. that living in luxury whoredome greed and idlenesse he neglecteth or is unfit for his office How these sute our times we need not expresse Then n. 16. He sayes he is a Tyrant who doth not desend his Subjects from injuries when he may but suffereth them to be oppressed and what if he oppresse them himself n. 19. who sayes he by immoder at exactions and the like exhausts the subjects Jer. 22 ver 13. 14. Ezech. 34. 1 King 12 19. Psal 14 4. and n. 10 who hindereth the free suffrages of Members of Parliament so that they dare not speak what they would how much of this we finde to be true in needlesse here to expresse Then n. 23 24 c. he tels us he is a Tyrant who takes away from the people all power to resist his tyranny as armes strengthes and chief men whom therefore though innocent he hateth afficteth and persecuteth exhausts their gods and lively-hoods without right or reason all which he confirmeth by several Scriptures And how apposite these are to our present case all know who is not an utter stranger to our matters So that when we have so many things to alledge none can justly blame us for saying that vve are oppressed and borne dovvne vvith insupportable tyranny and now we goe on to consider what he sayes And as to the first he tells us Pag. 68. That their life and blood was not sought upon any tearmes there was no forceing them to idolatry nor false worshipe nor frighting them to any thing of that kinde upon paine of their lives only for contempt of the outward ordinances of God purely administred in an orthodox Church they were put to pay such moderate fines as the publick lawes had appoynted Without any actual invasion of them or their persones They were the first aggressors murthering the Kings Servants and seiseing on his chief officer They had never before that assayed supplicating which was not forbidden them to do if so be they would have done it without tumults and combinations but flew to the sword and marched on to mock authority with armed petitions as they mocked God by sinful prayers to prosper their evil course Answ 1. What intention there was to seek the life and blood of these People God koweth But sure all who knew their case saw that their life was only left them that they might feel their misery So were they oppressed and harassed that death would have been chosen rather then life Were they not beaten wounded and bound as beasts their goods and substance devoured before their eyes were not their lands and tenements laid waste and many redacted to beggary Besides other inhumane barbarityes which they were made to suffer 2. We see he would allow it lawful to resist if the King should force to idolatry and false worship and what will he do then with his arguments which will not allow that exception as they are urged by him He must necessarily grant that they are inconcludent that it holdeth here Argumentum nihâ—l probat quod nimium probat 3. How beit they were not forced to idolatry yet by the same law reason and equity or rather Tyranny and inquity they might have been forced to that as to what they were forced That is by the law of Tyranny and violent oppression They were pressed to owne and countenance perjured prophane wicked and debauched Curates thrust in upon them contrare to their Privileges as lawful and duely called Ministers and thereby to owne and approve of Prelacy which was abjured and cast out of the Church with detestation and so to concurre in their places and stations with and give their testimony unto a most wicked and unparallelable course of defection and Apostacy from God and his holy wayes and works and thereby to condemne the Reformation of Religion in doctrine Worshipe Discipline and Government which God had vvonderfully vvrought amongst us and vvhich all ranks of People vvere solemnely svvorne to maintaine and defend 4. He talketh of the outvvard ordinances of God purely administred vvhen all knovv how these profane vvretches made all vvho ever knevv vvhat the service of the true and living God vvas to abhore the offering of the Lord For they despised the Name of the Lord and offered polluted bread upon his altar and made the table of the Lord contemptible they offered the blinde the lame and the sick and torne and thus they vovved sacrificed unto the Lord a corrupt thing Yea their administration of ordinances vvas and is to this day rather like histrionick acts and scenes then the service of the true and living God And vvhat sober serious Christian yea vvhat soul that hath any beleeving apprehensions of the Majesty of God can be vvitnesse let be a concurring actor in and consenter unto such abhomination and idol-like Worshipe 5. He talkes of an orthodox Church vvherein perjury and such like abhominations are approved and countenanced maintained and avovved and vvherein the vvork of Reformation of Religion in Doctrine Worshipe Discipline and Government is condemned a Covenant abjureing Popery Prelacy Prophanesse Schisme and Heresy and whatsoever is contrary to sound doctrine and the power of godlinesse condemned and annulled and wherein Atheisme wickednesse ignorance licentiousnesse and all sort of prophanity yea and blasphemy aboundeth and wherein there is so much Popery and idolatry countenanced and connived at and such abhominations reigneing Our first confession of faith recorded in Parliament Cap. 18. giveth this as one note of a true Church viz. That in it Ecclesiasticall Discipline be uprightly ministred as God's Word prescribeth whereby vice is repressed vertue nourished But now there is a discipline repugnant to Gods Word administred whereby vice is nourished virtue suppressed 6. He sayes that
all which he hath to this purpose For as touching his application of this pag. 9. and 10. all alleging that there is no perversion of the Ends of government now it hath been spoken to already and his adversaries in this position if there be any such which I am ignorant of will think and make out that the ends of government are so far perverted that if there were no other thing lying in the way of a secession then vvhat he hath said they vvould think it of concernment to minde this outgate vvhich they had no thoughts of before And the King should then think himself little obliged to this man and his defences and wish that he had been sleeping when he wakened such a debate and himself had bestowed his gold another way For sure if such a thing were upon the heart of people now as I hope am confident it is not they will professe themselves obliged to this Surveyer for putting it into their head first and that all which he hath said against it would rather invite and encourage them to it then discourage them from it May not then this Man be ashamed to take his Majesties Money and do so bad service for it as he hath done But Some will possibly say what could any persons have said more Well though some should think me officious to take his Majesties part and defend his cause un-hired yea and undesired yet I will propose one thing which I am confident shall be more effectual for preserving the immemorially setled frame of this Nation and the union of all his Majesties Dominions to all generations without dissipation or dissolution or any hazard or feare thereof Then what this Pamphleting Prelate hath said Or will say though he should write volumes at this rate What is that you will say It is no great secret yet if heartily followed it shall prove infallibly effectual Let his Majesty Turne to the Lord with all his heart and repent of his fearful perjury and defection and minde his oath made unto the great God and performe his vowes and fulfil his Covenant which he swore with hands lifted up to the most high God and solemnely promised to owne and prosecute as he should answere to God in that day when the secrets of all hearts shall be disclosed and execute judgment on the Apostate Prelates by hanging them up before the Sun that the fierce anger of the Lord evidenced by moe as twice three Yeers famine of the word may be removed and on all others who have been authors and abettors of this norrible course of defection and unparallelable apostasy which makes these lands an hissing and a by-word to all nations and let him honestly and with an upright heart prosecute the ends of these holy Covenants and with that Godly King Asa 2. Chron. 15. Enter into a Covenant that whosoever will not seek the Lord God of Israel shall be put to death whether small or great whether Man or woman And let his successours follow his footsteps in this and he and they shall finde no imaginable bond so sure to tye his Kingdomes together perpetually as an indissoluble Society then these holy Covenants particularly that solemne league and Covenant In which all his subjects in Scotland England and Ireland did sweare in a most solemne manner to maintaine and promove reformation of Religion in Worshipe Doctrine Discipline and Government and endeavour to bring the Churches of God in the Three Kingdomes to the nearest conjunction and uniformity in Religion Confession of faith Forme of Church government Directory for worshipe and Catechiseing c. that they and their posterity after them may as brethren live in faith and love and the Lord may delight to dwell in the midst of them and that the Lord may be one and his name one in the three Kingdomes and to endeavour the discovery of all such as have been or shall be incendiaries Malignants or evil instruments by hindering the Reformation of Religion divideing the King from his People or one of the Kingdomes from another or make any faction or partyes among the People contrary to this League and Covenant that they may be brought to publick tryal and receive condigne punishment And that they should each one of them according to their place and interest endeavour that the Kingdomes may remaine conjoyned in firme peace and union to all posterity And that they shall not suffer themselves directly nor indirectly by whatsoever combination perswasion or terror to be divided withdrawne from this belssed union and conjunction Now what bonde more strong to unite and keep together his Majestie 's Dominions can the wit of Man imagine And shall not the owneing and prosecuting of this Covenant Appear to all rational persons the most infallible meane to effectuate this indissoluble union and lasting Conjunction that can be invented CAP. XIX How weakly and foolishly the Surveyer defendeth his Majestie 's Life is shewed THe surveyer finding how poorly he had defended the cause now mainly controverted viz. The unlawfulnesse of Peoples defending themselves and maintaining their Religion against manifest and intolerable oppression Cap. 2. That he might do something for his money would start another question wherein he thought he should do his Majsome acceptable piece of servicé and secure his life when all came to all Though he could not cudgil with his railing for he can move none with his reason the People into a stupide and irrational subjection so that let the King rage worse then ever Nero did they should not lift a hand to resist and withstand him He thinks he shall do the next best viz. he shall fortify his Majestie 's person and set such a guard of impregnable reasons about him that no man no company of men yea no judicatoure shall ever approach to touch his sacred person or to spoile him of his life a guard of reasons like lyon rampants be-like he thought them more invincible and saife then a legion of the most valient Champions that his Majestie 's kingdomes can aford But poor man he may dreame that such armes are impenetrable and proof because they are the best in his armory or that his dull head could hammer out But no man of reason will think so yea all who know that belongeth to this controversy and are not professed adversaries yea and the most ingenuous of them too will upon second thoughts be forced to say That never any put pen to paper in the King's quarrel who hath so foolishly and childishly managed that disput and how little he deserveth thanks let be a reward for his paines such as are sober will judge when they consider how little ground he had to move such a question now seeing the wronging of the King's Person or his just authority was not intended by those worthies who arose for the maintenance of Religion as such of them who were publickly put to death did openly upon the scaffold confesse and avow and