the Conscience of all true Christians as if he had been then summus Pontifex or that the Primitive Church was not as well restrain'd de Jure by the Doctrine of Christ's Apostles as de facto from bearing Arms against such Princes as were then Ethnicks and transferring of their Kingdoms from them unto any others or that the Apostles at that time if they had found the Christians of sufficient force for number provision and furniture of Warlike Engines to have Deposed those Pagan Princes that were then both Enemies ☜ and Persecutors of all that believed in Christ would no doubt have moved and authorized them to have made War against such their Princes and absolved them from performing any longer that obedience which they as Men temporizing had in their Writings prescribed unto them or that when afterward Christians were grown able for number and strength to have opposed themselves by force against their Emperors being Wicked and Persecutors they might lawfully so have done for any thing that is in the New Testament to the contrary he doth greatly err If any Man shall affirm that it is not a most profane impiety Can. 10. l. 2. tending altogether to the discredit of the Scriptures for any Man to hold that St. Peter and St. Paul had so instructed the Christians in their times as that they knew if they had been able they might without offence to God have deposed Nero from his Empire or that the Christians in Tertullian's time when they profess'd that notwithstanding their numbers and forces were so great as they had been able to have distress'd very greatly the Estate of the Emperors being then Persecutors they might not so do because Christ their Master had taught them otherwise ought not to be a sufficient Warrant for all true Christians to detest those Men in these days and for ever hereafter who contrary to the Example of the said Christians in the Primitive Church and the Doctrins of Christ which were then taught them do endeavor to perswade them when they shall have sufficient Forces to rebel against such Kings and Emperors at the Pope's commandment and to thrust them from their Kingdoms and Empires ☞ or that this devilish Doctrine of animating Subjects to Rebellion when they are able against their Sovereigns either for their Cruelty Heresie or Apostacy was ever taught in the Church of Christ by any of the Ancient Fathers during the Reigns of Dioclesian or Julian the Apostate or Valens the Arrian or of any other the Wicked Emperors before them or that it is not a wicked perverting of the Apostles words to the Corinthians touching their choice of Arbitrators to end dissentions among themselves rather than draw their Brethren before Judges that were Infidels to infer thereof either that St. Paul intended thereby to impeach in any sort the Authority of the Civil Magistrates as if he had meant they should have chosen such Judges as by civil Authority might otherwise have bound them than by their own consents to have stood to their award or to authorize Christian Subjects when they are able to thrust their Sovereigns from their Royal Seats and to chuse themselves new Kings in their places he doth greatly err But it were requisite to transcribe almost that whole admirable Treatise should I give the Reader a view of all those passages that vindicate the Divine Right of Kings and assert the necessity of Subjects being obedient to them while I forbear in expectancy that the most venerable owner of that great Treasure will very speedily make the World happy in the publication of so elaborate a work SECT V. Some few years after this King James ordered to be Printed and had in every Church a little Treatise called Deus Rex which was publish'd both in Latin and English and as I am very credibly inform'd drawn up by Bishop Overal which was reprinted in English Anno 1663. by the especial command of King Charles II. and therein the Nation is taught their duty toward their Superiors thus In the Allegiance of a Subject to his Sovereign the evil he is to eschew is 1. Evil in action p. 15 16. edit 1663. for he is not to touch him with any evil touch not to stretch out his hand against his most sacred Person nor so much as to affright or disgrace him by cutting the lap of his Garment 2. Evil in words for he is not to curse his Ruler 3. Evil in cogitation for he is not to curse the King in his thought and all this is proved by many Texts of Scripture placed in the Margin Now if the Subjects of our Sovereign out of their Allegiance to His Majesty are to succor and defend him even with the hazard of their lives c. and the bond of this Allegiance is inviolable and cannot by any means be dissolv'd then c. Eccles 8.2 p. 17. is an evident Testimony that Kings are subject unto God ☜ and have no mortal Man their superior who may require of them an account of their doings and punish them by any Judicial Sentence which Doctrine is excellently confirm'd by the instance of David in the case of Uriah and the Prophet Nathan 's carriage towards him after which 't is said that God only gave unto Saul Kingly Power and not the People p. 19. p. 29 30. c. who are said to make him King i. e. approving him as made by God c. But was not Saul a Tyrant a bloody Oppressor did not the blood of so many Innocents cry to God for vengeance and by his special commandment whoso sheds man's blood by man shall his blood be shed deserve death Yet David by God's own appointment design'd to the Kingdom says the Lord keep me from doing that thing unto my Master the Lord 's Anointed c. the Bishop of Rome and by parity of reason any other Person p. 35. if I Judge aright cannot dispense with the Law of Nature which from the first beginning of the reasonable Creature is unchangeable nor with the Moral Law of God whose Precepts are indispensible but the duty of Subjects in obedience to their Sovereign is grounded upon the Law of Nature beginning with our first beginning for as we are Born Sons so are we Born Subjects p. 38. Obj. But is there no means to stay the fury of a Sovereign command if he should be so tyrannous and profane as to endeavour to oppress the whole Church at once and utterly to extinguish the Light of Christian Religion Princes in their rage may endeavour wholly to destroy God's Church Ans but in vain because Christ hath so built it on a Rock that the Gates of Hell shall not prevail against it and when they do labour to effect so heinous an impiety the only means we have to appease their fury is serious repentance for our sins which have brought this chastisement upon us and humble prayer unto God who guides
declared at the least four times in the year That the King's Majesties Power Authority and Preheminence within his Realms and Dominions is the highest Power under God Here the Injunction plainly distinguishes the claim of the Pope from other claims implying that our Church always believed that her Prince's Power was derived immediately from God and that they were superior to all their Subjects either singly or collectively and so were not accountable to them but only to God and among Bishop Ridley's Articles of Visitation An. 1550. one is Whether any do preach or defend that private persons may make Insurrection stir Sedition or compel Men to give them their Goods Anno 1564. being the seventh Year of Queen Elizabeth in the ‖ Sparr Collect. p. 123. Articles for Preaching it is injoyn'd That the Minister move all People to Obedience as well in observation of the Orders appointed in the Book of Common Service as in the Queen's Majesty's Injunctions as also of all other civil Duties due for Subjects to do and that all Preachers Preaching Matters tending to Dissention c. shall be complained At last the Injunctions were called Canons and the first Canon An. 1603. in the first Year of King James is the same in substance with the Injunction of Henry the Eighth Edward the Sixth and Queen Elizabeth and for this reason Can. 55. it is ordained That every Minister should before his Sermon acknowledge the King to be in all Causes and over all Persons supreme Head and Governor in more express terms than were formerly used But particularly I look upon the Canons of the Year 1640. to be a full Explanation of the belief of our Church in this point Now Can. 1. injoyns all former Laws Ordinances and Constitutions formerly made for the acknowledgment and profession of the most lawful and independent Authority of our dread Sovereign Lord the King 's most excellent Majesty to be carefully observed and then descends to give an Explanation of the Royal Power and Authority That the most sacred Order of Kings is of divine Right being the Ordinance of God himself founded in the prime Laws of Nature and clearly establish'd by express Texts both of the Old and New Testament and for any Person or Persons to set up maintain or allow in any their said Realms or Territories respectively under any pretence whatsoever any independent coactive Power either Papal or Popular whether directly or indirectly is to undermine their great Royal Office and cunningly to overthrow that most Sacred Offfice which God himself hath establish'd and so is treasonable against God as well as against the King. For Subjects to bear Arms against their Kings See the Doctrine of these Canons vindicated in Dr. Puller's Moderat of the Ch. of Engl. c. 12. §. 6. p. 34. offensive or defensive upon any Pretence whatsoever is at least to resist the Powers which are ordained of God and though they do not invade but only resist St. Paul tells them plainly They shall receive to themselves Damnation while in the next Paragraph they shew that this Doctrine does not intitle the King to every Man's Estate But against the Synod that made these Canons lies a great Objection tho I should have thought that the hard Censures of it might have been spar'd because no Synod of our Church and perhaps none of any other Protestant Church hath so expresly condemn'd Popery and Socinianism the great Enemies of true Reformed Christianity as this Synod hath done ‖ V. Art. 3.4 that it was not a Lawful Synod because it was continued and sat after the Parliament was Dissolved and was by another Parliament Condemn'd not to answer that that very Parliament that first Condemn'd this Synod ruin'd even the Monarchy it self nor that the Synods of old Provincial or General were not dependent on the meeting of the States at the same time I answer First that these Canons were made and confirm'd in full Convocation of both Provinces of Canterbury and York and the making of Canons being a work properly Ecclesiastical these Canons were made by the Representatives of the whole Clergy of this Kingdom 2. The Canons were confirm'd by the King which was all that was of old required in such Cases and tho the Convocation sat after the Dissolution of the Parliament yet 1. This is not without President even in the happy Days of Queen Elizabeth not to look back into Henry VIII or the primitive Times And 2. the Persons who condemn'd this Synod are well known to have done it to justifie their own Proceedings being resolved to ruine Episcopacy and with it the Monarchy and afterward by their own power they called an Assembly of Divines and What a Confession of Faith what Discipline Rites and Methods did they Establish a Directory among other things out of which they left the Lord's Prayer perhaps because it 't was a Form the Apostles Creed because themselves thought they could make a better and the Ten Commandments because the fifth plainly accused them of Rebellion against their Lawful Prince And it is worth the observing that Sr. Edward Deering's Speeches that were spoken with so much Virulence against this Synod and afterwards Printed were by the Order of the same House who first applauded them decreed to be Burnt by the hand of the Common Hang-man And if it be still objected that the Canons were Reprobated since the Restitution of Charles II. I say that I quote them not as a Law that obliges the Church but as the known Sense of the Church of England at that time CHAP. III. The Doctrine of the Homilies THough the name of Homily hath been look'd upon and censured by unthinking People as ridiculous yet those admirable Sermons made by our first Reformers as a body of practical Divinity and a Confutation of the Errors and Idolatries of the Church of Rome are as Bishop Ridley said of the first Tome of them * Apud Fox To. 3. p. 506. Holy and wholsome Homilies Recommendations of the principal Virtues which are commended in Scripture and against the most pernicious and capital Vices that so alas do reign in this Realm of England These we subscribe to as containing wholsome Doctrine †Dr. Stanley's Faith and Pract. c. 7. p. 192. and every Man hereby sees what Opinions the Clergy are of for they subscribe and assent to the Book of Articles and Homilies and to the Book of Common Prayer Many also have some regard to the Articles of An 1640. They take the Oaths of Allegiance and Supremacy and the Test c. and Johnson says That the Book of Homilies is the best Book in the World next the Bible And since a ‖ D. Welw Letter to M. March p. 10. late Author is so bold to say that Passive Obedience in the narrow sense we take it in was not so much as thought on at the time of the publishing the Homilies I must first ask him How he came to be so
was call'd in which both the Universities most amicably agreed resolving only to give an account of the Proceedings at Oxford in the Years 1â—22 1647 and 1683 the Decree of 1622 was made the 25th of June in full Convocation on this occasion †Antiqu. Oxon. l. 1. p. 326 327 c. Mr. Knight of Broadgate Hall now Pembroke College preaching at S. Peter's in the East on Palm-Sunday upon 1 Kings 19.9 What dost thou here Elijah started this Question Whether it were lawful for Subjects in the defence of themselves when persecuted for Religion to take Arms against their Prince which he held in the Affirmative for which Doctrine when he was convened by the Vice-Chancellor he pleaded the Authority of Paraeus in his Commentary on the xiii to the Romans and the Example of King James who assisted the Rochellers against their King and was for that reason sent to Prison the Vice-Chancellor making the Bishop of St. David's Laud who in May of the same Year had his Conference with Fisher the Jesuit acquainted with it from whom the King was inform'd who ordered Knight and his Sermon to be sent up the Author being committed a Prisoner to the Gate-house in Westminster where he lay two Years and at last by the intercession of one of his Fellow Prisoners with Bishop Williams was releas'd and having ask'd the King's Pardon went into Holland where in a short time he died When Knight was complain'd of the King sent to the Vice-Chancellor to injoin the Students of Divinity to lay the Foundation of their Studies next to the holy Scriptures in the Fathers and Councils and to abstain from the Writings of either Jesuits or Puritans and accordingly the Heads of Colleges the Professors c. met in Convocation the Bishops that were then about the Court having condemn'd the Doctrine and the Books that contain'd it as seditious and contrary to the holy Scriptures the Decrees of Councils and Dictates of the Fathers and to the Doctrine and Constitutions of the Church of England and censur'd among others this Proposition * Proposit 2. v. Antiqu. Oxon. p. 327. That Subjects not private Persons but inferior Magistrates may take Arms to defend themselves the Commonwealth the Church and true Religion against their Sovereign or the superior Magistrate upon these Conditions If 1. The Prince turn Tyrant 2. If he compel his Subjects to commit Idolatry or to blaspheme 3. When any great injury is done 4. If they cannot otherwise be safe in their Fortunes their Lives and Consciences upon condition also 5. That under the pretext of Religion or Justice they do not seek their own advantage and 6. That their Arms be managed with much moderation Moderamine inculpatae tutelae These are the Terms of the Proposition and the Censure of the University runs thus This Proposition is false and seditious and so craftily restrain'd under such Conditions annex'd as every seditious Person may make use of to vindicate himself And the third Proposition which is of the same kind is alike condemn'd so that it is no wonder that Gillespy in the Preface to his Sermon calls this Doctrine the new Oxford Divinity and I wish no worse had been ever broach'd or owned there Nor did the University rest here but withal decreed and declared That according to the Canon of the holy Scriptures Subjects ought by no means forcibly to resist their Prince and that it is not lawful to take Arms either offensive or defensive against the King upon the account of Religion or any other Pretence requiring all the Members of the Convocation to subscribe the Censures and enjoyning all that should be admitted to any Degrees to take an Oath to consent to the determinations of that Convocation while the Commentary of Paraeus was burn'd in the Church-yard of St. Mary's at Oxford at Paul's Cross in London as it was likewise burn'd at Cambridge that University joyning with her Sister of Oxford in the Condemnation of those seditious Doctrines For as a * Doublet Ep. ad Gerh. Voss learned Foreigner who at that time was upon the spot informs that Knight citing for his Opinion the Authority not only of Paraeus but also of Bucanus and Junius Brutus affirming further that it was the Opinion of all the Reformed Divines and illustrating it by this instance that If the King of France should while his Army laid Siege to any Town of the Protestants his Subjects happen to fall by the hand of any of the besieged he was justly slain nor was he that killed him guilty of any crime both the Universities condemn'd the Doctrine and though at Oxford only Paraeus's Book was burn'd yet at Cambridge they also burn'd Bucanus's Common places and Junius Brutus or Hubert Languet's Vindiciae and damn'd the Authors to perpetual Infamy my Author adding that the Cambridge Doctors were the more fierce of the two whether because they hated the Puritans or were the Majority of them at least Remonstrants the Censure of that University Doublet saw when he was at the Commencement it being put into his Hands by him who drew it up upon his promise not to transcribe it What hinder'd it's publication I know not while the same year Dr. David Owen publish'd his Anti-Paraeus seu Determinat de Jure Regio adv David Paraeum at Cambridge anno sc 1622. Octavo in which the Doctrine of Resistance is throughly confuted This Censure and the Execution done upon his Book much troubled the old Paraeus And his Son * Append. in Comment ad Rom 13.5 vit Paraei says that his Father meant what he wrote not of Kings endowed with an absolute power but of such as were admitted to their Crowns upon condition while the illustrious Hugo Grotius thought so well of it that he hath inserted it at large in his Works †Vot pro pace ad Art. 16. p. 661. with a high commendation affirming That the Reverend Memory of King James the first the wisest King of Great Britain and the honor which he owed to the University of Oxford which at that time foresaw the Calamities which England afterward suffered and a just fear lest the pernicious Doctrine might do more mischief ingaged him to reprint the Censure To which Determination Dr. Prideaux Dr. Abbot and the other eminent Men of that time gave their suffrage Anno 1647 June 1. The same famous Academy met in Convocation and declared their Judgment concerning the Solemn League and Covenant and a few of their Reasons why they could not take that Covenant I shall transcribe * Ad calc vit Sanderson p. 174. as they were drawn up by Bishop Sanderson 1. We cannot take the Oath without acknowledging in the Imposers a greater power than for ought appeareth to us hath been in former times challenged †P. 181. 3. We cannot take the Oath without manifest danger of Perjury ‖ P. 182. the Oath being contrary to the Oath of Supremacy by us taken
old saying Let us do evil that good may come thereof cries out that they speak Blasphemy and that such mens damnation is just as if he were pronouncing an Anathema Maranatha against such profane Men. But our modern Zelots how contrary are they to St. Paul They seem to have minded that one thing that they might exclude the King from his rightful Succession due to him by Inheritance and by the Laws of the Land c. Peter du Moulin * Vit. Molinaei Lond. 4◠p. 707. When he returned into France from England with much grief saw the Protestants ingaged in the Party of the Prince of Conde against the Queen Mother which War was indeed raised against the King himself and endeavoured both by his Sermons and his Letters to remove them from so unlawful a design †V. Du Moulin answ to Philan. Angl. p. 37. and the King's Party owes it to him that not one Protestant Town on this side the Loire joyned it self to the Prince of Condé And when he was forc'd to leave France and fix at Sedan the first Letter that he wrote was to the Commonwealth of Rochel as it was then called ' To persuade them to Peace to dissolve their Covnention and to throw themselves as they ought on the Kings Mercy advising them to obey the King and thereby to take away all pretence from their Enemies And if God saw fit that they should suffer extremity for every one that feared God would be sure to suffer for no other cause but for the Profession of the Gospel c. Nay du Moulin the Son says Ubi Supr p. 45. that the actions of the Men of Rochel were disallowed by the best and the most of their Church That they were exhorted to their Duty by their Divines And that this was the Sense of the National Synod of which du Moulin was the President but two months before he wrote his Letter This also is du Moulin's Doctrine * P. 795 c. Ed. Genev. 1635. in his Buckler of Faith That the Government of Kings is by Divine Right and founded upon the Ordinance of God and that God hath required Obedience to Magistrates as to those whom he hath established and that whosoever resisteth them resisteth God and that those who affirm that the Authority of Kings is of Human Institution put Kings upon maintaining their Interests by force c. That that Allegiance of Subjects is firm which is incorporated in Piety and is esteemed a part of Religion and of the service which we owe to God. And whatever the learned Hugo Grotius might have said in his Books de Jure Belli Grot. in Mat. xxvi 52. Pacis in his later Works wherein it may presumed he speaks his truest Sense he asserts this Doctrine which it appears he had well studied as if he had been a Member of the English Church whose Articles and Politie he so well understood and in whose Communion he resolved to have lived had not God in his Providence ordered it otherwise If it be once admitted says he that private Men when they are injured by the Magistrate may forceably resist him all places would be full of Tumults and no Laws or Judicatures would have any Authority since there is no Man who is not inclined to favour himself To this purpose * Vot pro pace ad art 16. pag. 66 〈◊〉 662. he censures the Practices and Writings of many of the French Church still excepting Camero confirming his Opinion by the Authority of King James and the Reasons of the University of Oxford that condemned Paraeus's Book †Animadver in animadv Riveti art 16. p. 644. For both Christ and his Apostles Peter and Paul have Preached the Doctrine that no force is to be opposed to the Supreme Power and that we ought to own and retain the Doctrine to be of Divine Right and Institution The Opinion of Monsieur Bochart the glory of the French Churche sis fully seen in his Epistle to Bishop Morley who among other reasons refused to Communicate with the Reformed Church in France because he thought they asserted the Doctrine of Resisting and Deposing Kings but Bochart expresly avers That the King is Gods Anointed and Lieutenant and so not in any case to be Resisted since he is accountable to none but God. That he who rises against his Prince is one of those Giants that fight against God. That David could not take away the Wife of Uriah Nor Ahab seize Naboth's Vineyard without being guilty of great sin but that when Samuel 1 Sam. viii 9. says of the King He shall take your sons and your daughters c. He means that when Kings commit such transgressions they are as uncontrolable as if the Actions had been lawful That in such cases a Nation ought to call upon God since there are no Human remedies against the force of a King for if a King may be resisted he cannot be a Sovereign for where Subjects may Resist they may Judge and consequently the Sovereignty is in them That when Julian Persecuted contrary to Law none of his Soldiers rose up against him though nothing was more easie would they have undertaken it since at his death it was plain that almost the whole Army was Christian David Blondel * De Formula Regnante Christo Sect. 2. §. 16. p. 172. p. 184. chastises Pope Gregory VII as for many other Usurpations upon Princes so for this among the rest for saying That a Prince hath his Power from the People contrary to what S. Paul says expresly of Nero that he was ordained of God affirming further that lawful Kings being guilty of ill management of their Power are accountable to and shall be punished by God who gave them that Power Pag. 187 but not to Men. That this Opinion that Kings were subject to any human Authority was brought into the Church near 1100 years after our Saviour came into the World when the Church could not be presumed to be in a better condition than it was when it flourished in the former Ages of Christianity And that no Man before Greg. VII ever owned the Power of any Man over Kings And this he proves from the Testimonies of Tertullian Pag. 188. Hosius of Corduba Basil Ambrose Hierom Arnobius junior Cassiodore and others who say That King David was above the coercive power of the Law nor could be called to account for his Faults And therefore says in his Confession to God Against thee only have I sinned If Subjects offend against the Laws of Justice the King corrects them but if the King offends who shall correct him None but he who is Justice it self all other persons are under the Restraint of Laws but Kings only are reserved to the Tribunal of God and therefore while according to the Apostle it is a terrible thing to fall into the Hands of the Living God it will be more terrible to Kings who have none on
it was too great for him to wield and too high also for him to aspire unto Such was the Humility of this excellent Man the Friend of God to the utter Condemnation and Confusion of all those whose whole study and endeavour evermore hath been and is at this day to undermine those which be in authority to invade and occupy other mens Kingdoms to wring the Scepter and Sword out of Princes hands This is a Vice never enough to be detested considering the manifold and great Mischiefs which have come thereby to Heaven to Earth to Angels to Men to all Kingdoms and Commonwealths to the whole World. This ambitious Man is a Thief is a Homicide if it lye in his power he is a Regicide he is the Parricide of his Countrey I will only put you in mind of one only Lesson which we are taught by this Verse which is this that it is much better for us sperare quà m aspirare to trust in Almighty God than to aspire for in aspiring there be many Inconveniences but the anchor-hold of Hope is firm and sure c. Bartholomew Clerk Fidelis servi subdito inside'i responsie Lond. 1573. anno 1573 writing against that virulent tho learned Rebel Saunders avers That the Majesty of Princes is by no means to be violated if they are good we are to thank God who hath bless'd his People with so divine a Benefit but if they are evil we are to submit our Necks to their Tyranny or to fly to another City we must at no time make resistance by Force and Arms by Tumult and Slaughter For this we ought to believe that evil Kings are appointed by God for the punishment of our Sins and are sent into the World as God's Scourges SECT III. Anno 1590. Dr. Babington printed his Questions and Answers upon the Commandments he being the Year after made B. of Landaffe and saccessively of Exon and Worcester and on the Fifth Commandment he says p. 2â—2 That by Parents are meant such as are so by Dignity and Office such as are Magistrates over the People Masters over their Servants p. 203. c. Magistrates are only to be obey'd in the Lord p. 208. contrary to Prety and Charity must neither they command nor we do Many Servants take their Masters Unkindness for an excuse of their Disobedience or Infidelity in their Services which indeed must not be so saith S. Peter but be they never so froward yet we must do all Duty if we be Servants and even joy heartily in that Cross that notwithstanding our faithful and painful Duty we suffer for we serve not them but God in them And whereas some may be apt to limit this Doctrine to Servants and to exempt Subjects who are by parity of reason obliged the same Bishop in his Notes on Exodus 18. says p. 27. â— ed. Lond. fol. 1637. The Duty of Subjects toward their Governours is 1. To think most reverently of their Places as an Authority appointed of God for our good and not as some Men do outwardly to obey them and inwardly to think them but necessary Evils For S. Peter's words teach more when he saith Honor the King and Solomon when he biddeth Fear God and the King for in the word Honor Peter includeth sinceram candidam existimationem a sincere and unfeigned reverence of them and Solomon joyning the King with God sheweth a holy and reverent regard of him to be due to him from men subject to him that also in S. Paul hath great efficacy in it not for fear but for Conscience sake as if he should say even what duty is done ☜ or left undone to him is done or left undone to God himself from whom their Authority and Power is whosoever therefore the person is the calling is of God. Agian after this inward reverend Conceit must follow outward Obedience to their Laws in paying Tribute c. Let every Soul be subject to the high Powers saith the Apostle because he that resisteth ☜ resisteth to his own damnation The Magistrate may sometime be weak but God will ever be strong to punish any Contempt of his Ordinance In no case therefore may we intrude our selves into their Offices and meddle with publick matters without a calling For this is not to obey them but to rule with them what is amiss to them must be signified and their help expected unless they appoint us and then we are not private Persons any more but publick for such business be they never so evil yet their place is of God by whom only Kings do rule Dan. 2.23.37 either to our good in his Mercy or to our punishment in his Justice Tyrants are suffer'd sometimes to rule for the punishment of the evil and the reward of the good saith S. Ambrose but how will you think l. 2. de Cain Abel c. â— for the reard of the good The same Ambrose notably saith for answer Never did the Gentiles more for the Church than when they commanded the Christians to be beaten proscribed and killed for than did Religion make that a Reward an Honor and a Crown which infidelity reputed a Punishment S. Austin saith There is no Power but of God and therefore our Saviour told Pilate He could have no Power at all over him except it were given him from the Father but God doth suffer the Hypocrite to rule for the Sin of the People and therefore that Sin must be taken away that the Plague of having a Tyrant Ruler may cease What manner of King was Nez buchadnezzar c. if a King shall do as it is said 1 Sam. 8.11 c. he is God's Instrument thus to chasten us and tho things do not shew what he ought to do yet they shew what Subjects ought to suffer without Disloyalty if they be done Read Jerem. 29.7 God forbid saith David that I should lay my hand on the Lord 's Anointed and yet Saul sought his Life Who shall lay his hand on the Lord 's Anointed and be guiltless c. The Wife is not freed from her Husband when he is ill nor the Child from his Father no more are Subjects from their Prince But in such cases God the only Helper is to be thought of and prayed unto who can give a Moses for a Pharoah an Othniel for a Cushan who can bring down the Pride of Tyrus by the Egyptians and then of the Egyptians by the Assyrians the Assyrians again by the Chaldeans by the Medes and Persions c. yet carrying a gracious Ear and Eye to Prayer proceeding from a penitent Heart 〈◊〉 Not. 〈◊〉 Gen. 14. page 43 44. c. Rebellion is a bad course to get Liberty where Subjection is due For Rebellion God never loved never prospered but ever plagued and the fearful destruction of Corah and his Company Absalom and his Company c. say as much Papists charge us that we are no good Friends to Princes and
divide these duties so as if they could not consist together and did not both Peter and Paul require so much when Kings were Enemies of the truth and of the Salvation of their Subjects Verily when Men make their excuse by God in this they tell a lye for the Almighty as Job says in another matter for that which is Caesar 's may be given to Caesar without the least breach of allegiance to Almighty God and it is most true that Chrysostome saith on the 13th to the Romans subjection to Princes overturneth not Religion a point belike that in those days stood in need stall and successively to be urged for the Greek Scholiast likewise in his Collect on the same place to the Romans hath it near word for word and he saith after that St. Paul taketh great care to urge it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 every where neither was this as Jerome supposeth by reason of the continuance of any old Heresie but because St. Paul saw that this sin would universally and successively assail and therefore as Men hinder the work of godliness in themselves they must keep tenderly in the reins of their consciences the reverence of their Prince Whosoever doth vilipend his Sovereign in his conscience is either an Atheist or a Hypocrite the causes of Sedition and Rebellion are 1. Pride there are that go under the name of resolute that give occasion to upbraid the Land as Ezekiel upbraided Jerusalem there are in thee that have despised father and mother Ez. 22 7. that speak scornfully both of Queen and Council 2. Lack of Wisdom in not discerning the policies of Princes 3. lack of compassion in not weighing their temptations and their necessities 4. lack of equity when the Subject blames his Prince for his own fault Lastly forgetfulness of their benefits which is unthankfulness in my Text the Lord threatens the depravers of Kings and Magistrates the foul of the Heaven shall carry the voice c. this notes the heinousness of the Sin for the Holy Ghost is not wont to bewray Men for trifles and is strong evidence that the maligning of Higher Powers is in the Catalogue of those sins which though they escape Man yet the vengeance of God doth pursue and as it were bring back again to the judgment seat it matters not what plausible shews there be to do such things for the event discovers that they are but shews Absalom seemed to have a just quarrel against Amnon for lying with his Sister especially his pernicious impunity consider'd by reason of David 's indulgence but Absalom 's matter was not Amnon 's incest but Amnon 's Seniority he was betwixt Him and the Crown for the Event declared what an hater of incest Absalom was by his behavior to his Father's Concubines and the Lord discovered by his Insurrection against his Father that it was ambition that made him to kill his Brother Dr. John Dove in his Sermon about divorcement at Pauls Cross 1601. says that some Men will prove Rebellion and High Treason out of the Scriptures that the People are above the King and cites in the Margin Vindiciae contra Tyrannos CHAP. V. The History of Passive Obedience during the Reign of King James SECT I. WHEN God of his great mercy had taken to himself our illustrious Queen Elizabeth in the beginning of the Year 1603. her undoubted Successor King James published the same Year a little but accurate Treatise intituled The true Laws of free Monarchies which is an exact Comment on 1 Sam. 8.11 c. where Samuel shews the Israelites what would be the manner of the King that should reign over them that if he made their free-born Children Bond-men vers 11 c. and seized their Estates by Injustice and Violence vers 14 c. they should be allowed no other remedy in that day of their Calamity but to cry unto the Lord vers 18. and to punish them for their Contempt of his immediate Conduct God threatens he will not hear them In this Book says the learned John Forbes Duplies to Henderson p. 20. he doth at length demonstrate That in a free Monarchy such as he proveth his Kingdom of Scotland to be the Subjects for no occasion or pretext whatsoever may take Arms without power from the King and much less against him whether he be a good King or an Oppressor c. and comprehendeth the sum of all his Discourse concerning this matter in these words following Shortly then to take up in two or three Sentences grounded upon all these Arguments out of the Law of God the Duty and Allegiance of the People to their lawful King Their Obedience I say ought to be to him as to God's Lieutenant on Earth obeying his Commands in all things except directly against God as the Commands of God's Minister acknowledging him a Judge set by God over them having power to judge them but to be judg'd only by God to whom only he must give account of his Judgment fearing him as their Judge loving him as their Father praying for him as their Protector for his continuance if he be good for his amendment if he be wicked following and obeying his lawful Commands eschewing and fleeing his Fury in his unlawful without resistance ☞ but by Sobs and Tears to God according to that sentence used in the Primitive Church in the time of the Persecution Preces lacrymae sunt arma Ecclesiae i. e. Prayers and Tears are the Arms of the Church And the Book it self speaks out The Wickedness of the King can never make them that are ordained to be judged by him to become his Judges And if it be not lawful to a private man to revenge his private Injury upon his private Adversary since God hath only given the Sword to the Magistrate how much less is it lawful to the People or any part of them who all are but private men to take upon them the use of the Sword whom to it belongeth not against the publick Magistrate whom to only it belongeth But should I transcribe every Passage out of that accurate little Treatise I should swell this Volume and tire the Reader whom I therefore refer for his further satisfaction to the Work it self in which and his other Works the King hath shewn himself as a learned man styles him A Pillar of the Church Oweni Antipar Pag. 117 118. a Support to a ruinous Commonwealth a brave Champion of Christ against Antichrist and the new Arians an invincible Defender of Kings against the Papal Tyranny the Impostures of the Cardinals and the Seditions of the Puritans the Restorer of the Episcopal Dignity and the Defender of it against Presbyterian Anarchy the Defender of the Catholick Faith and the truly peaceable King. R. Doleman i. e. Parsons having publish'd his Conference concerning the Succession to the Crown of England Ann. 1594. a Book from whence most of our modern Enemies of the true Rights of Princes have borrowed
gave that Prince no reason to repent of his favors to him vindicating on all occasions both the interests of the Church and the Person Power and Writings of the King nor were his Books and his Actions dissonant one to the other for he never sided with never encouraged the Commonwealth of Rochel as it was called and in his works Orthodoxly States the Catholick Doctrine of Government and confutes the objections of its adversaries thus in his Buckler of Faith c. Buckler of Faith. He lays down briefly but fully ‖ Lib. 2. Sect. ult p. 556 557. Lon. 1623 in Engl. first the Opinion of the Romanists and then the Doctrine of the Reformed Churches as to the right of Kings Thomas the chief Schoolman says he avers that the Power of Princes and Sovereign Lords is but a humane constitution and proceedeth not from God and with him agree Bellarmin and Arnoux their reasons are 1. That the first King that was in the World Nimrod made himself King by force 2. That the greatest part of Empires were erected by Conquest 3. That Kings are established by humane means whether they attain to the Crown by Hereditary Succession or by Election since there is no rule in the Word of God that bindeth to follow an Hereditary Succession more than an Election 4. That there is no express command set down to obey Henry or Lewis or to acknowledge this or that Man more than another to be King. 5. That for these reasons St. Peter calls the Obedience to Kings an Humane Order while we on the contrary maintain that Obedience due to Kings proceedeth from the Divine Law and is grounded upon the Ordinance of God and whom no Man may resist without resisting God. Rom. 13.1 2. and St. Peter in the same place which they object against us will have us yield Obedience to the King for the Lord's sake and altho Nebuchadnezzar was an ungodly King a scourge used by God to destroy Nations nevertheless God speaks thus unto him by his Prophet Dan. 2.37 Thou O King art a King of Kings c. as to their reasons 1. It is false that Nimrod was the first King in the World for the Fathers and Heads of Families were Kings Priests and Sovereign Princes of their Families Men living after the Flood Five or Six hundred Years long enough to see a multitude of their own Children over whom they were to exercise their paternal Power 2. As to the establishment of Government in Conquest I say that those whose Countries a strange Prince seeketh to invade do well to defend themselves and if in that defensive War the Usurper chance to be slain he is justly punished but if he get the upper hand if the Race of the Ancient Possessors of the same Country be clean extinguished if the States of the Country assembled together do agree upon a new form of Government and if all the Officers throughout the Country have taken their Oaths of Fidelity to the New King then we must believe that God hath established such a Prince in that Kingdom then I say that the People ought to yield to the will of God who for the sins of Kings and of their People transposeth Kingdoms and disposeth of the Issues of Battels at his will and pleasure as to the third it belongs not to the Question whether a King succeed by Inheritance or by Election but whether by the Ordinance of God we ought to obey him when he is established therein while our Adversaries will have the Power of Popes to proceed from the Ordinance of God tho they enter into the Papacy by Election and too often by indirect means c. 4. Tho there be no command to obey Henry or Lewis it sufficeth there is a commandment to obey the King and to keep our Oaths of Fidelity made to the King and by consequence to be faithful to that King to whom we swear Obedience and Loyalty nay by this argument no King of this age were to be obeyed because we do not find his name expresly set down in Holy Writ nay no Man were bound to fear God or to believe in Jesus Christ because the Scripture doth not particularly ordain that Thomas Anthony or William should fear God or believe in Jesus Christ it sufficeth that the Word of God containeth general rules which bind particular Persons without naming them 5. St. Peter calls the Obedience that Men owe to Kings an humane Order either because Kings command divers things which by their own nature are not derived from the Divine Law as suppose to forbid to go by night without a Candle or because they attain to that Power by humane means which hinders not but that their Power is grounded upon the Word of God after they are once established for the Question is not touching the means whereby a Prince attains his Kingdom i. e. whether by Hereditary Succession or Election but what Obedience is due to him after he hath attained thereunto whosoever buildeth the Authority of Kings upon Man's Institution and not upon the Ordinance of God cuts off three parts of their Authority and bereaveth them of that which assureth their Lives and their Crowns more than the guards of their Bodies or puissant Armies which put terror into Subjects instead of framing them to Obedience then the Fidelity of Subjects will be firm and sure when it shall be incorporated into piety and esteemed to be a part of Religion and of the service which we owe unto God. The same excellent Person in his rejoinder to de Balzac after he had asserted that the Jesuits teach the Murder of Princes ‖ Letter 2d ed. Lon 1636. Eng p. 73 94 95. and that their Schools have produced many King-killers he proceeds to vindicate the French Church from de Balzac's imputation who professes himself incens'd against the Authors of the troubles in France tho he acquits du Moulin's Person as one who made the subjection due to Sovereignty a part of the Religion which he taught affirming that Obedience to our Sovereigns is a thing just and necessary that to find out an occasion of Rebellion either in a Man 's own Religion or in that of his King is to make insurrections to defend Religion by courses condemn'd by the same Religion such as these being perplext in their own particular Affairs hope to find ease in troubled waters and to save themselves amidst a confusion never yet did the cause of God advance it self that way Moses had power to inflict grievous punishments on Aegypt and her King notwithstanding he would never deliver the Children of Israel out of Aegypt without the permission of the King. SECT XVI And tho this famous Man Peter du Moulin had one Son Lewis who applauded the Regicides translated Milton and bespatter'd the best Church in Christendom yet God blest him with another of his own Name and Principles who in his Letter as he calls it of a French Protestant to a Scotchman of
first brought from another Country and is no way natural to our own tho the Infection hath been taken by too many who had an ill Temper prepared for it Cons Dr. Jackson's Works Tom. 3. l. 12. ch 8. p. 978. their Loyalty and Peaceableness may be the Fruits of their Education or their good temper but not of their Faith or as Dr. Sherlock says they may be loyal as Englishmen but they cannot be so as Papists Would we therefore judge of the Doctrine of our Church we must consult her Articles Canons publick Homilies publick Offices of Devotion General Orders of her Bishops Censures of her Universities and Writings of her greatest Men who have vindicated her Doctrine and explained her Belief and this Method I shall use to discover what hath been owned by the Church of England as to the Doctrine of Non-resistance or Passive Obedience CHAP. I. The Doctrine of the Thirty nine Articles THE Articles of our Church have been always looked upon as the stated Doctrine of our whole Church to which all her Priests are obliged to make their Subscriptions they are allowed a place in the Body of the Confessions of the Protestant Churches and are highly commended by Foreigners as well as by our own Writers for * Bishop Ridley's Farewel Letter apud Fox tom 3. p. 506. this Church hath in matters of Controversie Articles so penned and framed after the Holy Scriptures and grounded upon the true understanding of God's Word that in short time if they had been universally received says Bishop Ridley the Martyr they should have been able to have set in Christ's Church much concord and unity in Christ's true Religion and to have expelled many false Errors and Heresies wherewith this Church alas was almost overgone Nor is this that excellent Prelate's peculiar Opinion but of the whole Church which ordains †Can. 3. an 1604. That whosoever shall affirm that the Church of England by Law establish'd under the King's Majesty is not a true and Apostolical Church teaching and maintaining the Doctrine of the Apostles let him be excommunicated ipso facto And Can. 5. Whosoever shall affirm that any of the thirty nine Articles agreed in the Synod 1562 are in any part superstitious or erroneous let him be excommunicate ipso facto Anno 1552. In the Convocation held at London Articles of Religion were agreed upon of which the Thirty sixth runs thus The Civil Magistrate is ordained and allowed of God and therefore is to be obeyed not only for wrath but also for Conscience sake And expresly asserts That the Bishop of Rome hath no Jurisdiction in this Realm of England In the Articles of our Church under Queen Elisabeth anno 1562. it runs thus and so continues to this day The Queens Majesty hath the chief Power in this Realm of England and other her Dominions unto whom the chief Government of all Estates of this Realm whether they be Ecclesiastical or Civil in all Cases doth appertain and is not nor ought to be subject to any Foreign Jurisdiction And it is remarkable ‖ Rogers's Praef. to the 39th Artic. that these Articles of 1562. were published in the same year in which the Massacre at Vassey in France was committed by the Duke of Guise and when all the Protestants in the Country were sentenced to Death by the Parliament of Paris It is true this Doctrine is not limited to the particular Case of Subjects taking up Arms but it seems to me by two necessary Consequences to be deduc'd from it 1. Because if the Pope who pretended by a Divine Right had no power over Kings much less have the People any power who pretend to an inferior Right that of Compact 2. Because the Article makes no distinction but excludes all other Power as well as that of the Pope And in truth the Plea is the same on either side the Pope says as long as the Prince governs according to the Laws of God and the Church of which he is the Interpreter so long the Censures of the Church do not reach him and say the People as long as the Prince governs according to the Laws of the Land and of the meaning of those Laws themselves are the Interpreters so long are they bound to be obedient but as soon as the King doth any thing that may contradict the Pope then he is deservedly say the Romanists excommunicate deposed and murdered and when he usurps upon the Peoples Liberties then he ought to be deposed by the Peoples the Arguments on either side are the same and for the most part the Authorities for as * Moderat of the Church of England ann 17. §. 19. p. 481. Dr. Puller well observes both Papists and Dissenters deny the Supremacy of the King one attributes it to the Pope originally the other to the People and the same Arguments that the Pope useth for his Supremacy over Kings the Disciplinarians use for establishing their Sovereignty CHAP. II. The Doctrine of the Injunctions and Canons IN the Infancy of the Reformation under Henry the Eighth for there I begin the Restoration of Religion to her Purity in this Kingdom as Dr. Burnet does †Burnet hist Reform l. 3. p. 226. tom 1. And Fox tom 2. p. 387. Anno 1536. Injunctions were issued out the first of which is That every Man that hath Cure of Souls shall for the Establishment and Confirmation of the King's Authority and Jurisdiction sincerely declare manifest and open for the space of one quarter of a year next ensuing once every Sunday and after that at the least wise twice every Quarter in their Sermons and other Collations that the Bishop of Rome 's usurp'd Power and Jurisdiction having no Establishment or Ground in the Law of God was of most just Causes taken away and abolish'd and that the King's Power is in his Dominions the highest Power and Potentate under God to whom all men within the same Dominions by God's Commandment owe most Loyalty and Obedience afore and above all other Potentates in Earth Now if a King be above all other Powers then he cannot be accountable to any other Power and so ought not to be resisted Anno * Burnet's Collect. of Records p. 181. 1538. came out the Lord Cromwel's Injunctions as they were called wherein the same Duty is injoyned in the same Words This also is the first of the Injunctions of Edw. the Sixth †Sparr Collect. p. 1 2. An. 1547. the Preface to which Injunctions acknowledges that part of them were formerly set out by Henry the Eighth and the rest added by King Edward the Sixth This also was the first of the Injunctions of Queen Elizabeth with a very little variation and accordingly in the Articles of Enquiry of Archbishop Cranmer in the Diocess of Canterbury under Edward the Sixth the first is Whether all Persons c. have preach'd against the usurp'd Power of the Bishop of Rome Secondly Whether they have preach'd and
is thus express'd From Civil Wars c. ☜ but not one Word of this could he ever find in the Roman Missals that have come to his hands it being the peculiar Glory of the Church of England that her Prayers and Practices have always been eminently loyal and Enemies to Treason and Rebellion And he says farther * Ib. p. 226 227. That Rebellion is a sin so contrary to Christianity that though the Primitive Christians had all the Provocations imaginable and Force sufficient they never offer'd to rebel So that they who do rebel have divested themselves of the Christian Principles and almost of their Humanity too In the Prayer for the Parliament We may say of our Princes as Pliny said of the good Emperor Trajan they have freely yielded to rule by those Laws to which nothing but their own goodness could oblige them and doubtless the People of England ought to take it as an Act of Grace that their Kings have consented to govern them on this manner In the Prayer after the Commandments the King is said to be God's Minister and we beg God that all his Subjects duly considering that he hath God's Authority may faithfully serve honor and humbly obey him according to God's blessed Word and Ordinance And this is admirably commented †Id. part 3. §. 4. p. 20. We are to consider that Kings bear God's Name and act by his Power and such as rebel do fight against God oppose his Word and resist his Ordinance c. In the occasional Office for Nov. 5. we pray God That the King may cut off all such workers of Iniquity as turn Religion into Rebellion and Faith into Faction And in the Office for May 29. when we thank God for the Restoration of the Royal Family we beseech God to accept of our unfeigned Oblation of our selves vowing all holy Obedience in Thought Word and Work unto the Divine Majesty and promising in him and for him all dutiful Allegiance to his anointed Servant and to his Heirs for ever And it is also observable the Proclamations relating to those solemn times are appointed to be read which are as full to this purpose as any thing can be and by our Canons when the Minister bids Prayer before his Sermon to continue the belief of this Truth he is bound to exhort the People when they pray to acknowledge the King to be in all Causes and over all Persons next and immediately under God supreme c. CHAP. V. The Orders of our Bishops BY the Orders of our Bishops I mean not so much the particular Injunctions or Enquiries of our Prelates within their own particular Dioceses though of such instances there is no want as I have shewn Chap. 2. from the Articles of Inquiry of Archbishop Cranmer and the Articles of Visitation of Bishop Ridley and could prove from many other such Instances but the general Orders which have been sent from the Metropolitan to the whole Church such Injunctions when obey'd ought to be look'd on as the sense of the whole Church unless we shall impeach either the Makers or the Complyers of dishonest Practices especially when the Adversaries of the Church have given occasion to such Injunctions thus when Knight of whom I shall treat in the next Chapter was censured at Oxford the same Year some Cautions concerning Preachers and Preaching were by the Archbishops of Canterbury and York with the King's Consent as the Law required sent to the several Bishops of their Provinces to be put in execution in their several Dioceses The Directions are dated Aug. 4. 1622. of which the first requires That no Preacher c. shall fall into any set course or common place otherwise than by opening the Coherence and division of his Text which shall not be comprehended and warranted in essence substance effect or natural inference within some one of the Articles of Religion set forth Ann. 1562. or in some one of the Homilies set forth by Authority c. The fourth is That no Preacher of what Title or Denomination soever shall presume from henceforth in any Auditory within this Kingdom to declare limit or bound out by way of positive Doctrine in any Lecture or Sermon the Power Prerogative Jurisdiction Authority or duty of Sovereign Princes or therein meddle with Matters of State and Reference between Princes and People than as they are instructed in the Homily of Obedience and in the rest of the Homilies and Articles of Religion set forth by Publick Authority These Injunctions were again renew'd and reinforc'd in the days of King Charles the Second and in the next Reign and in the Articles of the present Archbishop of Canterbury * July 16. 1638. Art. 7. the Clergy are expresly enjoyn'd That in their Sermons they should four times in the Year at least teach the People That the Kings Power being in his Dominions highest under God all Priests should upon all occasions persuade the People to Loyalty and Obedience to his Majesty in all things lawful and to patient Submission in the rest promoting as far as in them lies the publick Peace and Quiet of the World. And agreeably to this Doctrine were the Oaths of Allegiance and Supremacy especially the later framed which though particularly made against the Papists yet as Bishop Sanderson well observes where the Reason of making and imposing an Oath is particular Praelect 7. de juram but the words of the Oath are general there the Oath obliges according to the sense of the words in their utmost latitude as says he for Example in the Oath of Supremacy to the making of which the Usurpation of the Pope gave occasion the words being all general do exclude all Persons from exercising that Supreme Power in this Kingdom And every Clergy-man especially ought to reflect how often he hath solemnly profess'd and averr'd That it is not lawful upon any pretence whatsoever to take Arms against the King or any commissioned by him c. and to remember that that Declaration was injoyned in opposition to the Doctrines of the year 1641 the Men of which age asserted That the Power of Kings was given them by the People and might be resumed by the Donors that the King was co-ordinate with the States and that his Politick differ'd from his personal Capacity Now the occasion of the making a Law and the preamble of it are look'd on as the best Interpreters of the words of a Law. CHAP. VI. The Censures of our Universities NOR are the Censures of our most famous Universities in this case to be neglected or look'd on slightly it is well known what a Repute the Judgment of the single College of the Sorbone hath at Paris and how much the Authority of the Foreign Universities together with our own sway'd with King Henry the Eighth and persuaded the Christian World to credit the Justice of his Divorce Now I shall not mention the Censure of the Mille manus Petition as it
already Answ You have vowed Allegiance to the King to obey him ruling by Law according to the Law of Heaven you have not vowed to obey his private Will for that is to obey the Lusts of Men breaking and making void the Laws of God the Rights and Privileges of a free People Obj. But the King hath promis'd to maintain the true Religion Answ p. 20. So did the Lady Mary to the Men of Suffolk c. To all which venomous Doctrine I will apply this Antidote Sir Edw. Coke in Calvin's Case says This damnable Opinion That Allegiance was due to the King upon the account of his politick Capacity more than his natural Person was invented by the two Spencers to cover their Treason and from thence they deduc'd these execrable Consequents 1. That if the King did not demean himself by reason in the Right of his Crown his Lieges were bound to remove him 2. That when the King could not be reformed by Suit of Law it ought to be done by the Sword. 3. That his Lieges be bound to govern in aid of him and in defect of him All which Positions were condemn'd in two succeeding Parliaments SECT XVII The Year after this the learned Dr. Gerhard Longbaine set out his Review of the Covenant Chap. 9. p. 56. and therein tells us That to labor the Advancement of Religion by way of force contrary to establish'd Laws and the Prince's Will hath no warrant by way of Command or Approbation from God's Word must be taken for granted till those who are otherwise minded can shew the contrary and will be needless to persuade if we shew in the second place that it is against the express Testimony of Scripture Our Saviour professeth My Kingdom is not of this World and adds for then would my Servants fight which words as they evince that it is lawful for Subjects to fight at the Command of their temporal King for the maintenance of his worldly Estate so they do insinuate that Christ's Kingdom being spiritual must not be advanced by temporal Arms. We have always deprecated the Aspersion which our Adversaries would cast upon us P. 60. professing we do not punish any Hereticks with Death but Seminaries for Sedition and Rebellion Here I must observe that the Lords and Commons in Parliament 1 Eliz. confess they had no means to free the Kingdom from the usurped Power and Authority of the Pope but with the assent of the Queen's Majesty so far were they from thinking it lawful to raise Arms for the Extirpation of Popery when it was establish'd by the Law of the Land. And lest this distinction might seem to invalidate his Objection he adds It is utterly destructive to all civil Government P. 61. for if any be allowed to take up Arms for Propagation or defence of their true Religion against the civil Laws and Will of their Prince whosoever hath a mind to rebel may do it upon the same pretence and ought not to be question'd by any humane Authority for tho they do but pretend Religion yet it is impossible for any Judge to convince them of such Pretences nor can any thing be urged in defence of the true Religion which may not be made use of by a false SECT XVIII Anno 1646. Richard Overton the famous Leveller deck'd with many fantastick Titles printed a Pamphlet intituled An Arrow against all Tyrants and Tyranny wherein the Original Rise Extent and End of Magisterial Power the Natural and National Rights Freedoms and Properties of Mankind are discover'd and undeniably maintain'd and the late Encroachments of the Lords over the Commons legally condemn'd Out of which that the Principles of such Men may be made known I shall transcribe a few passages To every individual in Nature is given an individual Property by Nature not to be invaded or usurp'd by any for every one as he is himself so he hath a self-propriety else he could not be himself No Man hath Power over my Rights and Liberties and I over no Man's If I presume any farther I am an Encroacher and an Invader upon another Man 's Right to which I have no Right for by natural Birth all Men are equal and alike born to like Property Liberty and Freedom No Man naturally would be fooled of his Liberty by his Neighbor's Craft or enslaved by his Neighbor's Might for it is Nature's Instinct to preserve it self from all things hurtful and obnoxious And from this fountain or root all just humane Powers take their Original not immediately from God as Kings usually plead their Prerogative but mediately by the hand of Nature as from the Represented to the Representers no more may be communicated than is conducive to a better Being more Safety and Freedom he that gives more sins against his own Flesh and he that takes more is a Thief and a Robber to his kind every Man being by nature a King Priest and Prophet in his own natural Circuit and Compass whereof no second may partake but by Deputation Commission and free Consent from him whose natural Right and freedom it is As by Nature no Man can abuse beat torment or afflict himself so by Nature no Man can give that Power to another So that such so deputed are to the general no otherwise than as a Schoolman to a particular his Mastership is by deputation and that ad beneplacitum and may be removed at the Parents pleasure upon neglect or abuse thereof and it may be conferr'd on another And speaking to the Parliament he continues If you think you have power over us to save or destroy us at your pleasure the edge of your own Arguments against the King in this kind may be turn'd upon your selves for if for the safety of the people he might in equity be opposed by you in his Tyrannies Oppressions and Cruelties even so may you by the same rule of right Reason be opposed by the people in general in the like cases of destruction and ruin by you upon them for the safety of the people is the Sovereign Law to which all must be subject and for which all powers humane are ordain'd by them And at last applies all to the pulling down of the House of Lords as Usurpers The Pamphlet is said to be printed at the backside of the Cyclopian Mountains by Martin Claw-clergy Printer to the Reverend Assembly of Divines and are to be sold at the sign of the Subject's Liberty right opposite to persecuting Court. SECT XIX As a Preservative against the infection of such dangerous Principles Bishop Sanderson gives us his Advice * Pref. to Arch-Bi Vsher's Book of the Power of Kings c. Some say it is not for Divines to meddle in these matters nor do they come within the compass of their Sphere that they ought to be left to the cognizance and determination of Statesmen and Lawyers who are to be presumed most able to judg the one by the constitution in whom the
but that one cursed Position alone wherein notwithstanding their disagreements otherwise they both consent That lawful Sovereigns may be by their Subjects resisted and Arms taken up against them for the Cause of Religion it were enough to make good the Charge against them both which is such a notorious piece of ungodliness as no Man that either feareth God or the King as he ought to do can speak of or think of without detestation pag. 134. Ad Aulam It were good if we did remember that they are to give up that account to God onely and not to us pag. 177. SECT XX. Doctor Bernard * Ser. on Rom. 13.2 in the Clavi Trabalea p. 21. affirms that some Expositors conceived one cause of the Apostle's Exhortation to be the Rumour then falsly rais'd upon them as if they had been seditious c. And that the Kingdom of Christ tended to the absolving of Subjects from their obedience to any other And then shews †p. 28 29. That it is a Popish Assertion that a people can never so far transfer their right over to a King but they retain the habit of it still within themselves averring * p. 30. That whoever have or shall resist do tread under their feet the holy Scriptures †p. 35. That as Kings receive their Power from God so are we to leave them only to God if they shall abuse it not but that they may and ought to be prudently and humbly reminded of their duties but yet without lifting up our Hands against them in the least resistance of them God wanteth not means whereby he can when he pleases remove or amend them ‖ Pag. 40. The Arms of the Primitive Christians were nothing but Prayers to God Petitions to the Emperor or Flight when persecuted c. To this purpose does Mr. Symmons in his Vindication of King Charles aver That * Sect. 8. p. 84. Rebels as for God they believe him as little as they do the King for they dare not trust him for protection they have more confidence in the Militia a great deal and stand more upon it beside if they did believe God they would also fear him Faith and Fear go together they would regard his Word more and not be so opposite in all their ways or endeavour to make it of none effect by their sinful Ordinances and Traditions besides Faith in God discovers it self by their doing the Works of God and they are not Hatred Strife Sedition Rebellion Murther Lying Slandering and speaking evil of Dignities Sect. 14. p. 146. c. Tell us O ye pretenders to Piety where is that Subjection to the King for conscience sake which S. Paul calls for and that Obedience for the Lords sake which S. Peter requires Pag. 257. c. Consider and call to mind whether those Teachers ☞ who have been most active and busie in drawing you into this way have not hereby contradicted their own former Doctrines As it was said of Stephen Gardiner that no Man in the Days of Henry the Eighth had spoken better for the King's Authority than he had done in his Book De verâ obedientid and yet no Man more violent in Queen Mary's Time in persecuting those that held fast to the same Truth and Doctrine may not the like be affirm'd of many of your Preachers that no Men taught the Duty of Obedience better or inveighed more against Rebellion Pag. 258 259. and sheedin of Blood than they heretofore have done but now none more violent Observe that Note out of Mr. Fox how Henry the Fourth that deposed Richard the Second was the first of all English Kings that began the burning of God's Saints for their standing against the Papists Pag. 260 261 262. As the Doctrine of Infallibility is the Root of all Error among the Papists so it is now among them that are the Worshipers of a Parliament for when it was believed that the Pope could not err then he might oppose Princes excommunicate Kings absolve Subjects from their Obedience c. so now this being swallowed that the Parliament cannot err they may raise Rebellion too absolve People from their Loyalty persecute the King c. Consider whether in any thing these Men have perform'd what at first they promised whether Religion be better settled the Church better reformed and united or the Commonwealth more flourishing c. SECT XXI Thus that good Man asserted the Rights of Princes and the Duty of Subjects in those evil Days * Bishop of Lond. 2d Letter ab the neglect of the Lord's Supper when under an usurped Power Sin was the Law and Transgression the Commandment When three once happy Nations wore the heavy Yoke of Slavery and Men felt to their cost what the power of the People could do till God of his infinite Mercy restored our Judges as at the first and our Counsellors as at the beginning under whom Truth appeared in its true Colours and the Mask of Hypocrisie would no longer hide the Deformities of the Traitor and here I will not mention the Acts of Parliament made just after the Restoration that condemn the Power of the People that assert their Authority Superiority and Unaccountableness of Princes and the Unlawfulness of taking Arms against them upon any pretence whatsoever and confine my self to the Writings of the eminent Divines of the Age and I will begin with the Bishop of Down and Conner Dr. Taylor †Ductor dubitant B. 3. c. 3. Rule 1. who proves That the supreme Power in every Republick is universal absolute and unlimited ‖ Rule 3. n. 1. That it is not lawful for Subjects to rebel or take up Arms against the Supreme Power of the Nation upon any pretext whatsoever He that lifts up his Hand against the Supreme Power or Authority that God hath appointed over him is impious against God and fights against him Rom. 13. The Apostle doth not say he that doth not obey is disobedient to God for that is not true in some Cases it is lawful not to obey but in all Cases it is necessary not to resist * Id. n. 2. I do not know any Proposition in the World clearer ☞ and more certain in Christianity than this Rule And in the fifteenth Number he answers at large that wild Question as he calls it If a King went about to destroy his People is resistance then lawful And concludes all †N. 15 17. We have nothing dearer to us than our Lives and our Religion but in both these Cases we find whole Armies of Christians dying quietly and suffering Persecution without murmur if the Prince doth not do his Duty that is no Warrant for me not to do mine To this pious Prelate now in Heaven I will join a pious Brother of his as yet on Earth †Bishop Kenn's Expos Ch. Cat. V. Comman Who thus addresses to God in the behalf of his Sovereign Thou
secured by a patient submitting to persecuting Princes it being manifest from thence that Christianity was so far from being destroyed by the Blood of its many Martyrs that on the contrary it thrived and propagated it self by it Pag. 260. From that second Plea pass we to a third which is taken from those Oaths which Kings do commonly make before they are solemnly crowned of governing the People by the Laws the Government as some think seeming thereby to arise from a Compact between them and their Subjects upon the breach whereof on the King's part it may be lawful for the Subject to depart from their Allegiance and resist him in the Execution of his Power For Answer to which not to tell you what intolerable Mischiefs would ensue from such a Tenet as often as any seditious Man should go about to persuade the People they were not so well governed as they ought I will alledge in behalf of our own Princes farther than which we shall not need to look that which will cut the Throat of this Objection to wit That our Kings are to as full purpose such before their Coronation as after witness not only their performing all the Acts of a King but that known Maxim in our Laws that the King of England never dies From whence as it will follow that as the Kings of this Nation owe not their being such to any compact between them and their People that upon any supposed breach thereof it might be lawful for the Subject to resist them so also that the Oaths taken by them at their Coronation are not to procure them that Power which otherwise they could not have but for the encouraging the People to yield the more ready Obedience to them which they may very well do when they who are to govern plight their Faith and Reputation to govern them according to their own Laws Mr. Scrivener Book I. Part I. Of the Original Government p. 93. The Arguments to affirm that the grosser Body of the People did first of all agree upon Government and constitute their Ruler are 1. Ridiculous 2. Sacrilegious and impious 3. Impossible 4. Pestilential and pernicious to all Government 'T is a true Saying It is more to make a King than to be a King. Still I hold-this which I have not found shaken by the many Attempts of innovating Wits That there is a real Paternal Power in lawful Princes For 't is not Choice but Power that makes a King and in this case no power at all is given or can be given nor in truth ought to be taken away as the manner is from Princes entring through the Populacy into the Throne for God only is the proper and immediate Author of Right and Power which he hath inserted into Parents over their Children and hath proportionably prescribed to Kings and Princes without ever advising with the People or expecting their Consent or Confirmation This the Scripture it self calls Jus Imperii or lâ—ss significantly with us The manner of the King 1 Sam. viii 9. Not from the People but from God. Pag. 94. The most therefore that the People do when they act most in creating Kings is under God to apply the Person to the Place or Office of Governing Pag. 95. Grant that all Men were once but no body could ever tell when and in a certain place but no body could ever tell where equally free or at least all of years of Discretion which is most uncertain it would be known first how Men dare to be so presumptuous as to make such a breach of the Law of Nature as this must be viz. To part with their Birth right and to imbezzle that which God had given them concomitantly with their own Lives And this is further confirmed from the impossibility as well as impiety of making any such Translation of Power from its natural Subject the People because it cannot ever fairly or justly be brought about seeing that the People cannot unanimously much less ever did concur to the Election of any one Government or Governor They cannot all give in their Votes to such an end always some were dissenting and if they did not enter their Protest against the proceeding of their Fellows it must be because they were deterred curbed and oppressed by a more prevalent Faction obliging them and constraining them most unjustly to comply with their Opinions and Decrees for there appears no sound reason why a more numerous and powerful Faction may not as well take away my Estate because they are stronger than I as take away my Birth-right which Liberty is here asserted to be So that the very first step to Liberty must be founded in Injustice in taking away that from me which I might no less in natural reason spoil them of and in Servitude too in bringing me whom they acknowledge naturally free into unwilling Subjection Neither is the difficulty solved in saying That Reason and Nature also require that for order sake and regulating humane Society the minor part must yield to the major for upon this Supposition indeed that Power is so absurdly and inconveniently posited there doth presently appear such a necessity but my Argument is taken from the absurdity of any such necessity of Natures creating that the Supposition is very false and if it were true yet were not that Maxim true which is here brought to controul and correct the same for Nature doth not teach us much less necessitate us in any case to follow the most numerous but rather Reason and Experience and the Judgment of diligent and wise Discussers of this Point inform us That the Multitude are more inconsiderate undiscerning and injudicious than the fewer in number many times the World being generally thicker set with Fools than wise Men and Fools being commonly more apt to be led by Fools than with deeper and sounder Reasons of the Wise Pag. 96 97. The Right of Rule in the People is look'd upon as by Nature and Divine Ordinance belonging to them and therefore cannot de jure be transferred or if attempted must needs by the same Right be revocable Finding themselves most commonly destitute of that advantage they proceed to expound it more to their purpose tyrannical and boldly affirm That by the People is not meant necessarily the most but the best and soberest and godliest and such only that study really the Good of Religion and the Liberties of the People And are not these sine Doings Do not these popular Tenets hang well together and end well which in process of their own Reason and Practices confute the very first Principle of all viz. That People have an absolute supream Power to frame Governments when before they can bring matters to their intended conclusion they are forc'd to deny them Of the Obligations between the Governors and Governed p. 103. It cannot either consist with the Law of God or Nations to inflict Punishments on Princes Sovereign Not but that for instance Murder Adultery unjust
he suffered the most bitter and cruel kind of Death for our sakes and the points of Office of him that is his Vicar are to be in subjection not to command Princes but to acknowledge himself to be under their power and commandment not only when they command things indifferent and easily to be done but also when they command things not indifferent so they be not wicked in checks in scourgings and beatings unto death yea even unto the death of the Cross Indeed these are Christs footsteps Now if it be objected against what hath been said that the Author of the Treatise Gardiner was a virulent Papist I answer this strengthens the Authority for the Testimony of an Enemy to the Truth of Religion is worth an hundred other Witnesses and it is very remarkable that a Romish Bishop should assert the Divine Right and unaccountableness of Kings when his Church teacheth him to believe that the Pope hath power to depose Princes and many of their eminent Writers affirm that all power is originally in and derived from the people And if it be further objected that Gardiner retracted and disowned this Doctrine in the Reign of Queen Mary I grant it and I wish that he and Bonner had been the only men in the world who had altered their Opinions for the worse being prevailed upon by the love of the world which is the root of all evil But Truth is never the less venerable because some Professors of it have turned Apostates Gardiner 's and Bonner 's Reasons * Vide Cranmer's Translat in praef before his Book of unwritten Verities being so pithy and Arguments so strong as neither they themselves nor any other after them shall be able at any time rightly to assoil and answer And it must be observed that before they condemned these their Orthodox Tenets they wilfully broke the Oaths which they had taken in the Days of Henry the Eighth and the venerable Dean * Reproof of Dorman p. 1.6 Lond. 1565. Nowel thus urges the Argument Ask your forsworn Fathers with what face they did give to the King the Title of Supreme Head did swear it to him and so long time continued so calling him If they did not so think as they said and had sworn but dissembled deeply ask of them with what face they played so false dissembling Hypocrites with their Sovereign Lord Ask of them what manner of Subjects they were all that while feigning in face in word in writing yea and taking a Solemn Oath to be with their Prince therein and being in heart and deed on his sworn Enemy his side But if they thought indeed as they pretended in words then ask of them with what face they did change their Copy ☞ and forswear the same and themselves withal so easily afterward yea and compelled all others to be forsworn with them for company Then you shall find who they were that changed their Copy and turned with the Wind as the Weather-cock that so falsly swear reswear trieswear and forswear themselves and not content therewith did by all most terrible Torments and dreadful Deaths compel others to Perjury with them And whoso considers Bonner's juggling Fox Martyrs To. 2. p. 1192 1193. Edit 1610. anno 1547. with King Edward the Sixth's Commissioners about the Injunctions at one time protesting against them at another recanting that his Protestation swearing Obedience to the King receiving his Injunctions giving his assent and consent to the State of Religion then established to the abolishing Images abrogation of the Mass setting up of Bibles in Churches giving the Sacrament in both kinds and such like And then two years afterward anno 1549. on the Death of the Lord High Admiral and the many tumultuous Insurrections of the King's Subjects neglecting to be present or to officiate in his Cathedral at Divine Service and permitting others to frequent the Mass may see his temper throughly and be convinced that his Authority is of no worth while his Reasonings are unanswerable it being unjust that his personal Faults should make void the weight of his Arguments especially when he spake not his own sense but the sense of the whole Church of England which will undeniably appear by the continuation of his story For when Bonner was for his prevarication suspected and complained of and convened before the King's Council among other Injunctions then given him one was that he should personally preach within three weeks after at Paul's Cross And among the special points and Articles that were to be treated of by him in his Sermon this was the first 1. That all such as rebel against their Prince get unto them damnation and those that resist the higher Powers resist the Ordinance of God and he that dieth therefore in Rebellion by the word of God is utterly damned and so loseth both body and soul and therefore those Rebels in Devonshire and Cornwal in Norfolk or elsewhere who take upon them to assemble a Power and Force against their King and Prince against the Laws and Statutes of the Realm and go about to subvert the State and Order of the Commonwealth not only to deserve therefore death as Traitors and Rebels but do accumulate to themselves eternal damnation even to be in the burning Fire of Hell with Lucifer the Father and first Author of Pride Disobedience and Rebellion what pretence soever they have as Corah Dathan and Abirom for Rebellion against Moses were swallowed down alive into Hell altho they pretended to sacrifice unto God. And 4. That our Authority of Royal Power is as of truth it is of no less authority and force in this our young Age than is or was of any of our Predecessors tho the same were much elder as may appear by example of Josias c. How Bonner discharged his Obedience to these Injunctions is not my present Province the Martyrology will inform the Reader but what is already related undeniably proves what was the Doctrine of the Church of England in those Days Anno 1541. was Dr. Robert Barnes martyred Vide his Life prefixed to his Works and at the stake he professed That he never to his knowledge taught any erroneous Doctrine but only those things which the Scripture led him unto and that in his Sermons he never maintain'd any Error nor gave occasion of any Insurrection but with all diligence did study evermore to set forth the Glory of God the Obedience to our Sovereign Lord the King and the true and sincere Religion of Christ desiring the People to bear witness that he detested and abhorred all evil Opinions and Doctrines against the Word of God. And his Writings are agreeable to his dying Protestation In his Supplication to King Henry the Eighth when condemned to die treating of the Cruelties of the Popish Clergy among other things he says If they cannot make a Man a Heretick P. 183. to colour and maintain their Oppression they add Treason against your Grace tho
Saul with his Spear to the ground David forbad him saying Kill him not for who shall lay his hands on the Lord's anointed and not be guilty c. * Pag. 111. Why did not David slay Saul seeing he was so wicked not in persecuting David only but in disobeying God's Commandments and in that he had slain Eighty five of the Priests wrongfully Verily for it was not lawful for if he had done it he must have sinned against God for God hath made the King in every Realm Judg over all and over him is there no Judg He that judgeth the King judgeth God and he that layeth hands on the King layeth hands on God and he that resisteth the King resisteth God and damneth God's Laws and Ordinance If the Subjects sin they must be brought to the King's Judgment if the King sin he must be reserved to the Judgment Wrath and Vengeance of God And as it is to resist the King so is it to resist his Officer which is set or sent to execute the King's Commandment When * Luk. 13. they shewed Christ of the Galileans whose Blood Pilate mingled with their own Sacrifice he answered Suppose ye that those Galileans were greater Sinners c. this was told Christ no doubt of such an intent as they asked him Matt. 22. Whether it were lawful to give Tribute to Cesar For they thought it was no sin to resist a Heathen Prince as few of us would think if we were under the Turk that it were Sin to rise against him and to rid our selves from under his Dominion so sore have our Bishops robb'd us of the true Doctrine of Christ But Christ condemn'd their Deeds and also the secret Thoughts of all others that consented thereto saying Except ye repent ye shall all likewise perish as who should say I know that you are within your Hearts such they were outward in their Deeds and under the same Damnation except therefore ye repent betimes ye shall break out at the last into like Deeds and likewise perish as it came afterwards to pass Hereby seest thou that the King is in this World without Law and may at his lust do right or wrong and shall give Accounts but to God only The same Martyr in his Preface to the Practice of Popish Prelates set forth An. Dom. 1530. Unto all Subjects be it said if they profess the Law of God Pag. 342. and Faith of the Lord Jesus and will be Christ's Disciples then let them remember that there was never any Man so great a Subject as Christ was There was never Creature that suffer'd so great Unright so patiently and so meekly as he Therefore whatsoever they have been in times past let them now think that it is their parts to be subject in the lowest kind of Subjection and to suffer all things patiently If the High Powers be cruel unto you with natural Cruelty then with softness and patience ye shall either win them or mitigate their fierceness If they joyn them unto the Pope and persecute you for your Faith then call to mind that ye be chosen to suffer here with Christ that you may joy with him in the Life to come If they command that God forbiddeth or forbid that God commandeth then answer as the Apostles did That God must be obey'd more than man. Act. 5. If they compel you to suffer unright then Christ shall help you to bear and his Spirit shall comfort you But only see ☞ that neither they put you from God's Word nor ye resist them with bodily Violence but abide patiently c. And as for Wickedness whence it springeth and who is the cause of all Insurrection and of the fall of Princes and of the shortning of their days upon the Earth thou shalt see in the Glass following CHAP. II. The Doctrine of Passive Obedience in the Reign of King Edward the Sixth SECT I. IN the beginning of this pious Prince's Reign the Homily of Obedience was publish'd and in his Second Year Ann. 1548. the King Ch. Hist Cent. 16. lib. 7. pag. 38 8 / 9. says Fuller by his Proclamation did for a while prohibit all sort of Preaching that the Clergy might apply themselves to Prayer and the Layity to Prayer and hearing the Homilies So venerable an esteem had the wise and good Men of that Age of the now so much despised Homilies and I am enclinable to believe one great reason why they have since faln into Contempt is because they so earnestly press Subjection to Authority and forbid Sedition and Resistance Ann. 1550. Because of the scarcity of Preachers it was ordain'd Heyl. Hist of the Reform An. 1550. pag. 94. That of the King 's Six Chaplains two should be always about the Court the other four travelling abroad the first Year two in Wales and two in Lincolnshire the second Year two in the Marches of Scotland and two in Yorkshire the third Year two in Devonshire and two in Hamshire the fourth Year two in Norfolk and two in Essex c. and so till they had gone through the whole Kingdom so rare was Preaching in those days To supply the want of which the same Year a Postil or Collection of most godly Doctrin upon every Gospel through the Year was printed cum privilegio and in the Sermon on the Gospel for the Twenty third Sunday after Trinity the People are thus instructed in their Duty Here is to be noted the Difference that Christ maketh between the Kingdom of God and this World for he doth not only approve and allow this high Power and politick Life but also confirmeth it for the Kingdom of God or of Christ is spiritual and contrariwise the Kingdom of the Emperor is worldly it is visible in which the Emperor himself governeth and beareth rule mightily with his Lords and Princes Luc. 22. as the Scripture witnesseth in another place The Kings of the World have dominion over the People and they that bear rule over them are called Gracious Lords Nevertheless that Kingdom is of God and established by God's Ordinance in such wise that he that resisteth this Ordinance Rom. 13. resisteth God himself Thinkest thou that Princes and great Lords in the Scripture are called God's in vain and without a cause Psal 81. For if they be Gods and are made by God Partakers of his Magnificence then must they needs be in God's stead whose room they bear therefore seeing they rule in God's stead it is both meet and convenient to give them that we are bound to give them but what are those things S. Paul setteth them forth Rom. 13. and saith Give unto every Man his Duty Tribute to whom Tribute belongeth c. Here thou hearest what thou art bound to give to high Powers But peradventure thou wilt say Shall I give Obedience unto a Tyrant ☞ or to an ungracious Prince or Lord Yea truly thou art bound both to give and obey him for what
Greg. Tolesano de rep c. 7. §. 1â— And for 300 years after Christ though the Christians suffered innumerable and most cruel torments 20000 being slain at one time yet they never plotted against the Laws the Magistrate the Emperer or his â—â—enrity in the least degree but by this argument they personaded Men to turn to Christianity as to the best Religion because it tâ—â—k Men off from ambition and a desire of change and taught Men to obey Magistrates and accordingly as Nicephorus relates the Christian that but pulled down the Edict of Dioclesian at Nicomedia was lookt upon by his fellow Christians to be justly executed for the Fact it therefore behoves Princes to consider c. 2. Sect. 16. p 83. in what a slippery place their Sacred Majesty stands if this Principle of Deposing Princes unheard of in the Church of Christ for 1000 years be true and this he confirms by the authority of the Fathers c. 6. Sect. 14. p 255. especially St. Ambrose who is famous for this saying against the Goths My tears are my weapons such are the defence of a Bishop ☞ any otherwise I dare not resist Many other passages might be transcribed were not what is already cited more than enough since the Author's practice was so solemn and unquestionable a confirmation of his Opinion and his other Books especially his discovery of Romish Rebellious Positions with his full satisfaction against Parsons c. a proof that he never lived to repent of so truly Primitive and Apostolical Doctrine SECT VI. Mr. Greenham in his short form of Catechising Lond. 1599. 4 to p. 412 413.414 Qu. What do you understand by Father and Mother in the fifth Commandment Answ Not only my natural Parents but those whom God hath set over me for my good as Magistrates c. Qu. What be the duties of Servants toward their Masters Answ Servants ought in fear and trembling to submit themselves to the instructions commandments and correction of their Masters Qu. What if Parents or Masters do not their duty to their Children and Servants Answ Yet they must obey them for Conscience sake to God's Ordinance Qu. What if they command unjust things Answ Then they must obey God rather than Men and submit themselves to their corrections Archbishop Abbot An. 1600. publish'd his Lectures on Jonas Lon. 1600. lect 20. p. 432. and I shall only cite one Quotation out of him Athanaric King of the Goths seeing the triumph of the Emperor Justinian at Constantinople brake forth into these words The Emperor without doubt is a God upon Earth and whosoever shall stir his hand against him shall be guilty of his own blood In the same year on March 1st being the first Sunday in Lent Dr. William Barlow afterwards Bishop of Rochester Prâ—at Lon. 1601. and then of Lincoln Preach'd at Paul's Cross a little time after the Execution of the Earl of Essex on Matth. 22.21 and therein he well instructs us it pleaseth God to be called a King in Heaven Ps 20. and the King is called a God on Earth Ps 82. Therefore he which denieth his duty to the visible God his Prince and Sovereign cannot perform his duty to the God Invisible certainly a mind inclined to Rebellion was never well possest of Religion they therefore who with Sheba 2 Sam. 20.1 will make a secession from their Prince or with Jeroboam and the ten tribes will turn from him because he hath turn'd his Father's scourges into Scorpions 1 Reg. 12. They who think that they may either kill their Liege or sall from him or depose and thrust them out of their Seat or expose them to danger or fear are guilty not only of Rebellion but of Irreligion the Jesuit Parsons al. Doleman dedicates his Book to the Earl of Essex a Principal if not the only poyson of the Earl's heart wherein he would prove that it is lawful for the Subject to rise against his Sovereign c. my exhortation to you is beloved that you will believe Jesus rather than a Jesuit who willeth his Disciples and all Christians to possess their Souls in patience Luc. 10. albeit they be persecuted even to death by their Princes and St. Paul who adjudgeth him to damnation who resisteth the ordinance of God. Rom. 13. If you desire some stories of Scripture Saul an Apostate rejected by God not dejected by Samuel Jeroboam plagued not dispossess'd Ahab reproved by Elias not deprived Nebuchadonosor punished from Heaven not deposed by his Subjects the Law of God is streight in this case it bridles the mouth that it speak not evil of the King. Exod. 21. It binds the heart not to imagine evil against him Eccl. 10. the sum of this part is that of the Prophet Daniel 2.21 that the Inthroning and Deposing of Princes is God's only Prerogative Royal and the conclusion shall be an argument that if obedience be due unto Caesar a Tyrant and a Foreigner much more are we to perform it to our Prince c. SECT VII Thus also says Francis Marbury in his Sermon on Eccl. 10.20 〈◊〉 1602. at the Spittle on Tuesday in Easter Week Printed by authority the Principal question of this Chapter is that Subjects that are Godly wise ought to repress in themselves all insurrection of mind against the supposed scandals of civil administrations and against the doings of Princes and that a disloyal thought ought not to be lent thereunto it being insinuated by an evil subject that it is impossible to stand contented in a Government that perverts and inverts the use of preferments and abasements aiming perhaps at something done by Solomon in his uxoriousness at the instigation of his Idolatrous Wives and that the state of the Country is depraved by the riotousness and dissoluteness of the Governors but God gives us no dispensation for any cause to disreverence the Prince ☞ except that we be able to shew that we do it at God's Commandment the Men of God when they have by mistaking exceeded towards a Ruler though a wicked one have used diligence to excuse themselves and to avoid the scandal so St. Paul Act. 23 5. and David was cut in his heart because he had cut off the lap that was in Saul 's Garment ☞ so that if to refuse God be ungodliness then it must needs be so to admit a contemptuous thought of a Prince in whom God offereth himself unto us and it is sure that they are ungodly Men 1 Sam. 10.27 which offend in this kind that the Holy Ghost calleth them Sons of Belial i. e. unyoked Persons which refuse to be under the yoke of due obedience as for the allegation made by Hereticks of Conscience to God when no disobedience to God is required it is in great Hypocrisie that God is alledged for are they not put together in the Scripture fear God and the King and depart from the seditious or as the Text hath it from the various from those that
both their Arguments and Authorities Sir John Hayward Ann. 1603. sets out his Answer to the first part of that Conference which was reprinted Ann. 1683. for the satisfaction of the zealous Promoters of the Bill of Exclusion The Book was written as himself in his Dedicatory Epistle tells the King in Defence of the Authority of Princes and of Succession according to proximity of Blood and to maintain that the People have no lawful Power to remove the one or repel the other The Jesuits main Argument is Hayâ— pâ—â— 1. Ed 〈◊〉 and p 3â—â— that Succession to Government by nearness of Blood is not by Law of Nature or Divine but by the humane and positive Laws of any Commonwealth and consequently that it may upon just Causes be alter'd by the same changing the fashion of Government and limiting the same with what Conditions they please But the learned Civilian confutes the Opinion with much Reason Pag. 6. and many very pertinent Authorities he grants That it is inconvenient to be governed by a King who is defective in Body or Mind but it is a greater inconvenience by making a Breach in this high point of State to open an Entrance for all Disorders wherein Ambition and Insolency may range at large When S. Peter terms Kings a Human Creature c. 2. p. 39 40 c. 1 Pet. 2. he means not as you interpret a thing created by man. Is a brutish Creature to be taken for a thing created by a Beast If so then all Creatures should be called Divine because they were created by God to whom it was proper to create And S. Paul says Rom. 13. That all Authority is the Ordinance and Institution of God. It is evident that in the first heroical Ages the People were not governed by any positive Laws but their Kings did both judg and command by their Word by their Will by their absolute Power without any restraint or direction but only of the law of Nature and when it grew troublesom and tedious for all the People to receive their Right from one man Laws were invented as Cicero saith and when any People were subdued by Arms Laws were laid like Logs upon their Necks to keep them in more sure Subjection Parliaments in all places have been erected by Kings so that neither Laws nor Parliaments were assigned by the People for assistance and direction to their Kings We must judge Facts by Law and not Law by Facts or Example which Alciat and Deciane do term a Golden Law because there is no Action either so impious or absurd which may not be parallel'd by Examples Pag. 46. I never heard of Christian Prince who challeng'd infinite Authority without limitation of any Law either Natural or Divine but where you term it an absurd Paradox that the People should not have power to chasten their Prince and upon just Considerations to remove him I am content to joyn with you upon the Issue Pag. 47. Had you no Text of Scripture no Father of the Church no Law no Reason to alledg Do not the Apostles 1 Pet. 2.10 13. Jude 8. Rom. 13. Tit. 3.1 1 Tim. 2.1 oblige us to pray for and obey Kings But perhaps you will say that the Apostles did not mean this of wicked Princes the Apostle speaks generally of all S. Peter 1.2.18 makes express mention of evil Lords And what Princes have ever been more either irreligious or tyrannical than Caligula Tiberius Nero the Infamy of their Ages under whose Empire the Apostles did both live Pag. 50 51. and write I will give you an Example of another time Nebuchadnezzar King of Assyria wasted all Palestina took Jerusalem slew the King burnt the Temple took away the holy Vessels and Treasure the residue he permitted to the Cruelty and Spoil of his unmerciful Soldiers who defiled all places with Rape Ruine and Blood. After the glut of this Butchery the People which remained he led Captive into Chaldea and there commanded ☜ that whosoever refused to worship his Golden Image should be cast into a firy Furnace What Cruelty what Impiety is comparable to this And yet the Prophets Jeremy c. 29.7 and Baruch c. 1.11 did write to those captive Jews to pray for the Prosperity and Life of him and Baltasar his Son that their days might be upon Earth as the days of Heaven And Ezekiel c. 17. both blames and threatens Zedekiah for his Disloyalty in revolting from Nebuchadnezzar whose Homager and Tributary he was What Answer will you make to this Example Princes are the immediate Ministers of God and therefore he calls Nebuchadnezzar his Servant and the Prophet Esay calls Cyrus a prophane and heathen King the Lords Anointed In regard hereof David calls them Gods And if they do abuse their Power ☜ they are not to be judged by their Subjects as being both inferior and naked of Authority because all Jurisdiction within their Realm is derived from them which their presence only doth silence and suspend But God reserveth them to the sorest Tryal horribly and suddenly saith the Wise man will the Lord appear unto them and a hard Judgment shall they have Pag. 52. If he commandeth those things that are lawful we must manifest our Obedience by ready performing If he enjoyn us those Actions that are evil we must shew our Subjection by patient enduring It is God only who setteth Kings in their State it is he only who may remove them 2 Chron. 1. Prov. 28.2 2 Chron. 28.6 And therefore we endure with patience unseasonable Weather unfruitful Years and other like Punishments of God so must we tolerate the imperfection of Princes and quietly expect either Reformation or else a Change This was the Doctrine of the Ancient Christians Pag. 53. even against their most mortal Persecutors In a word the current of the Ancient Fathers is in this Point concurrent insomuch as among them all there is not one found not any one one is a small Number and yet I say confidently again there is not any one who hath let fall so soose a Speech as may be strained to a contrary sense How then are you of late become both so active and resolute to cut in sunder the Reins of Obedience the very Sinews of Government and Order Pag. 54. Neither was the Devil ever able until in late declining times to possess the Hearts of Christians with these cursed Opinions which do evermore beget a world of Murthers Rapes Ruins and Desolations For tell me What if the Prince whom you perswade the People you have power to depose be able to make and maintain his Party What if other Princes whom it doth concern as well in Honor to see the Law of Nations observ'd as also in policy to break those Proceedings which may form Presidents against themselves do adjoyn to the side What if whilst the Prince and the People are as was the Frog and the Mouse in the heat of their Encounter some
You dispose not only their Affairs but their Crowns at your pleasure you hunt them not to covert but to death You train up your Followers in the high mystery of Treason To these ends you wrest Scriptures you corrupt Histories you counterfeit Reasons you corrupt all Truth And all you say is directed to a holy and religious end Away then with your Devotion and so we shall be rid of your dangerous Deceit This was his Opinion in the Days of King James nor was it newly taken up to comply with that Prince for Ep. Dod. ante Answ to Doleman as Sir John Heyward himself informs us he wrote his Account of the Deposition of King Richard the Second and the Usurpation of King Henry the Fourth to shew that the People have no lawful power to resist their Prince nor to hinder the Succession according to Proximity of Blood. SECT II. On S. James's day being July 25 of the same year was this Learned Prince crowned Pr. London 1604 the Sermon on that Solemnity being Preached by Dr. Bilson Bishop of Winchester on Rom. xiâ—â— 1. The powers that are are ordained of God. In which we are told That the likeness which Princes have with the Kingdom of God and of Christ consists in the Society of the Names and Signs which they have common with Christ in the Sufficiency of the Spirit wherewith God endueth them in the Sanctity of their Persons which may not be violated in the Sovereignty of their Power which must not be resisted ☜ By the anointing of Kings God hath taught us that their persons once dedicated to his Service are not only protected by his stretched-out Arm but are and ought to be sacred and secured from the violence and injury of all mens hands mouths and hearts Touch not mine anointed P. 105. saith God by his Prophet which is chiefly verified of Princes whom God anointeth to be the chiefest of his People Neither is violence only prohibited towards them but all offence in speech or thought Yea the very Robes which they wear are sanctified The Sovereignty of their Power will soon appear as well by the persons subjected as by the things committed to their Charge Let every soul be subject c. He that brings an Exception useth but a Delusion says Bernard for who can loose what God hath bound neither is this an Exhortation to Obedience but a plain Injunction You must needs be subject c. You must imports a necessity for conscience declares a Duty to God the danger of resisting being as great as the Commandment of obeying is streight Whosoever resists resists the ordinance of God and they that resist shall receive to themselves judgment ☜ Dare any man promise himself success and protection in Conspiracy and Treason when the Spirit of God so plainly threatens ruin and condemnation to all that resist whosoever they be To maintain Peace and Tranquillity God hath allowed Kings power over the Goods Lands Bodies and Lives of their Subjects and what private men may not touch without theft and murder that Princes may lawfully dispose as God's Ministers taking vengeance on them that do evil ☞ He that resisteth and dishonoreth them resisteth and dishonoreth the Ordinance of God to his own confusion in this life where Princes are permitted to revenge the wrongs done to them and in the next where God everlastingly punisheth the contempt of his Ordinance What kind of Honor is due to Princes is shortly delivered in that Commandment Honor thy Father Rom xiii 1. The Apostle in this place nameth three things due to Princely Dignity Subjection Honor and Tribute teaching us that Princes must be obeyed with Conscience Reverence and Recompense It is therefore sin to despise or refuse their Laws commanding that which is good and likewise to resist or reproach their Power punishing that which is evil even in our selves Howbeit when Princes cease to command for God or bend their Swords against God whose Ministers they are we must reverence their Power ☞ but refuse their Wills. It is no resistance to obey the greater before the lesser neither hath any man cause to be offended when God is preferred Yet must we not reject their Yoke with violence but rather endure their Swords with patience that God may be Judge between Prince and People with whom is no unrighteousness nor respect of persons The man of sin hath not more grosly betrayed his pride and rage in any thing than in abasing the Honor and abusing the Power and impugning the Right of Princes by deposing them from their Seats and translating their Kingdoms to others by absolving their Subjects from all Allegiance ond giving them leave to rebel by setting his Feet in Emperor's Necks and spurning off their Crowns with his Shooe c. In all which he hath shewed himself like himself to yoke whom God hath freed and to free whom God hath yoked to deject whom God hath exalted and to erect whom God hath humbled to challenge what God hath reserved and to cross what God hath commanded And whatever Citations may be made out of this Learned Prelate's Book Of the true Difference c. Printed at Oxford 1585 in Quarto and the next year at London in Octavo to prove the contrary Yenet the Quoters and some of them I fear wilfully mistaking what he says of such Republicks and States in which upon the Invasion of Sabjects Privileges they are allowed by fundamental written known Compact as in Germany by the Bulla Aurea to resist as if it were applicable to free Monarchies and particularly to England contrary to his own express Assertion * P. 518 519 c. where be proves it at large That the Subjects in England have not that lawful Warrant to draw their Sword without consent of their Prince as the Germans have without consent of the Emperor He also teaches us our Duty agreeable to the holy Scriptures and primitive Antiquity in many places of that Book †P. 339 c. What Question can this be between the Prince and the People whether the Magistrate shall be deposed since God hath expresly commanded the People to be subject to the Sword and not to resist Against which Precept no earthly Court may deliberate ☜ much less determine to break his Law or license the People to frust are his Heavenly Will. It is one thing to disbuâ— then the Conscience from obeying the Evil which a Prince commandeth which a Priest may do and another thing to take the Prince's Sword out of his hand for abusing his Authority which the Priest may not do Manasses was carried Captive out of his Realm in the midst of his furious Idolatry and yet in his absence and misery no man stirred against him but his Kingdom was reserved for him until he was released out of Prison and sent back from Babylon It was therefore not for fear of Death but for regard of Duty that the zealous Priests
follow the murder of Kings is lawful and honorable Consider with your self P. 254. what a gap you open to popular Licentiousness when you praise those Men who magnifie the parricides of Princes The same Author in his Epphata to F. T. being a Vindication in English of the same Prelate vindicates the same Doctrin Cambr. 1617. in his Epistle Dedicatory he says That tho Kings die like men i. e. Quatenus homines non quatenus Reges yet we are to remember that they fall like one of the Principes i. e. one of the Angels says the Cardinal himself among others on that Psalm who we know are not judged till God judges them though no doubt but that aggravates their Judgment so much the sooner It were worth the considering what correspondence such Grounds have with the ancient Doctrine which the Cardinal and his Followers would seem so close to follow Of Chrysostome ☜ that a Sovereign King is accountable to none not only to his Subjects but not so much as to his Successor as David said that he is to be judged by God only The same Chrysostom noting that whereas the Psalmist passes over other miracles of the Wilderness in deep silence he insists only on the Death of Og and Sehon two mighty Monarchs because Kings lives are so wholly in God's Hands and the Disposition of them is alway miraculous reserved and appropriated to God himself Of S. Basil that a King is subject to no Judge Of Ambrose that nullis tenetur Legibus not only the King of Israel but not the King of Egypt Of the Pope in Theodoret who told Theodosius that it was not lawful to implead a King not only in his person but not personating another not fictione juris as the Lawyers say ‖ Ch. 1. p. 58 59. Now Obedience is become among the Ceremonies and the honoring of our Parents i. e. in truth of our Princes Patres Patriae by ancient stile ☜ and so Ezechias called the Priests his children 2 Chron. 29.11 is as subject to alteration as the Sabbath Day And because the Jewish Ceremonies may not only be omitted but may not be retain'd without heinous crime therefore it shall be Conscience to wax wanton against Princes to shake off their Yoke yea merit virtue and what not as if the Precept of honoring Parents which is the primum in promissione Ephes 6. were now secundum in omissione after that against Images P. 60 61 62. which is usually cancelled in the Popish Catechisms Against the Emperors under the Old Testament there was no rising up and as for the Emperors in the New Testament tho as they were Heathen they were neither by Christ nor his Apostles obey'd I hope Sir 't is enough that they were not resisted Kings when transported by Error they forsake their Duty Pag. 75. yet forfeit not their Supremacy We yield no Abdication of our King ☞ tho his Fault be Heresie remembring that Deus defendit oleum suum as Optatus says and Caesar non desinit esse Caesar even in Alto Gentilisino as our Saviour acknowledg'd of him Matt 22. So beinous is the Heresie of Deposing Magistrates for moral Misdemeanours A bad Head I should think which the Body will be the better for the cutting off No Iniquity can abolish Authority And if it be objected Pag. 94. P. 137. 139. that Kings must be hamper'd with a coercive Power or all must run to nothing and the Church be clean extinguishâ—d It is answered The Church gains by Patience in Persecution therefore she loses by Resistance and Opposition SECT VIII Among these domestick Champions of the King and the Truth it may not be amiss to reckon an eminent Foreigner if I may call Isaac Casaubon so who lived some Years in this Kingdom and dyed here one of the Glories of his Age before he came into England he just after the Quarrel between the Pope and the Republick of Venice An. 1607. printed a Discourse De Libertate Ecclesiastica or rather but a part of a Discourse for whereas he promises Eleven Chapters the first three are not entirely printed the rest being stopt at the Press by Order of the French King tho as imperfect as the Book is Goldastus hath thought it worth a place in his Collections and in it he shews that the true Church of God never usurp'd the Rights of Kings * Ad Lect. p. 6. Pag. 12.13 while the Popes spoil Kings of their Liberty and their Majesty too for under them it sometimes happens that Kings may be safe but they can never be secure for they so value this Liberty that to defend it they tumble all things upside down mingle Heaven and Earth things sacred and profane And whereas our holy Master's Precepts ought not to be contradicted since he hath joyned his Example to his Commands and recommended to us the Love of our Enemies Subjection to the Powers ordained of God ☞ and Obedience to them for Conscience sake they to build up and to confirm this Liberty unknown to the Primitive times do every where inkindle Wars become a Terror to Kings and Princes dispense with their Subjects Allegiance and arm them against their own Sovereigns and pretend that to violate all Laws divine and human is a holy undertaking and most acceptable unto God. As ifby an ill management of supreme Authority Pag. 17. the Authority were forfeited And if once Princes shall suffer the Foundations of their Government to be shaken in the minds of their Subjects their Government and Empire must of necessity reel and totter and fall into the dust God commands all orders of Men to render to Cesar the things that are Cesar 's Pag. 69. and let every soul be subject to the higher powers c. therefore Gregory Nazianzen says that the Civil Magistrate doth reign together with Christ nor does it make any difference that some Kings arrive to the Throne by hereditary Succession others by Election a third sort by Conquest for tho God in the establishment of a King as in the Ordination of a Priest uses the Ministry of men yet it is impious not to acknowledg that the Dominion and Power is received originally from God By God Kings reign as the holy Scriptures in almost infinite places do testifie P. 102 103. The Primitive Christians did so use the World as those that used it not as S. Paul advises for while their Zeal for Piety was flagrant while the Innocency of their Manners their mutual Love and Affection their unfeigned Humility ☜ their constant Meditation on the Joys of Heaven their Fidelity and Obedience to their Princes as far as their Conscience would give them leave lastly their incomparable Constancy in suffering all manner of Torments for the true Religion made them every day a Spectacle to the whole World they ravish'd their very Enemies to admire them and their Virtues these were the beginnings of Christianity this the
Puritan against Scripture Fathers Councils and other Orthodoxal Writers for the Coercion deposition and killing of Kings and the Title is a sufficient declaration what the Author's judgment was the Book it self being in many places both as to Argument and Style very agreeable to the Treatise called Deus Rex set forth by the King's Order he proves in the First Chapter that Kings are not punishable by man but reserv'd to the Judgment of God by the Testimony of the Holy Scriptures and in the subsequent Chapters he proves the same by the Testimony of the Fathers and other ancient Writers and he briefly gives his Opinion * P. 24. Chap. 4. but very fully Be the King for his Religion impious for his Government unjust for his Life licentious the Subject must endure him the Bishop must reprove him the Counsellor must advise him all must pray for him and no mortal man hath Authority to disturb or displace him The same Author Ann. 1622. printed at Cambridg his Anti-Paraeus in confutation of †Ambergae 1612. David Paraeus's Book De Jure Regum Brincipum contra Bellarminum Becanum c. who disallowing the Pope's Claim invested the Power over Princes in the People In the Preface of this Book the Dr. shews the consonancy and agreeableness of the Popish and Disciplinarian Principles and in the Book refutes from the dictates of nature Thes 1. p. 3 c. the laws of Nations Civil and Canon Scriptures Fathers and most eminent Reformed Divines that the Power and Jurisdiction of Kings is not founded in compact as if the Majesty of Princes were derived from the People and limited by them but that P. 16 17. as God is the Supreme Lord of all who judges all his Creatures and is judged of none so Kings and Princes who judge and punish others can be judg'd and punish'd by no one save God alone to whose only power they are subject this David understanding though guilty of Adultery and Murder implores the divine mercy against thee only have I sinned for I acknowledg no other Superior on Earth but thee who can call me to account give sentence against me or punish me for my sin the reason is the King is the head of the body politick but the members ought not to judge the head because they are subject nor to cut it off for then they cease to be members and this the Heathen Poet knew and averred that Kings have a power over their several Subjects but God only hath an Empire and Authority over Kings Nor will the publick safety and tranquillity be maintain'd without such an unaccountable power in Kings for the Monarch who is opposed by his rebellious Subjects although they are much too strong for him will call to his assistance all his neighbouring Kings and Confederates will list Foreign Forces to vindicate himself and the miseries of such a War will be a poor comfort to such an infatuated Nation P. 18. but suppose there were such a power in the People to call their Kings to account which we ought not to grant ☞ Nero perish'd but the case of Rome was not better'd by it for in the next year after his death it felt more calamities and was imbrued in more blood than in the whole nine years of Nero 's Tyranny Rome when she cast off her Kings did not abrogate p. 19. but change the Tyranny and Athens drove out one Tyrant and brought in thirty ☞ I do confidently assert that all Tyranny whether it uses violence against God or Man ought to be suffer'd ought not to be abrogated till he puts an end to it who alone girds and ungirds the loins of Kings p. 20. Solomon was guilty of Polygamy and Idolatry but lost not his Crown and Dignity Ahab slew Naboth Tyrannically Banished and put to death the Prophets persecuted the true Religion and established the Worship of Baal by his Authority but neither the inferior Magistrate nor the People presumed to resist his Tyranny it is true Jehu did so but it was not by any power that the Laws gave him but by an extraordinary Commission from Heaven and that which could not then be done without an Oracle from Heaven cannot now be done without the contempt of God's Majesty the contumely of Kingly Power and the ruin of the Commonwealth Christ who lived under the Empire of Tiberius the Authority of Herod and Government of Pilate p. 22. the Apostles who flourish'd under Caligula Claudius Nero and Domitian the Primitive Christians who lived under Persecutors for three hundred years Liberius Hosius Athanasius Nazianzen and many other Fathers who for a thousand years after the Birth of Christ watered the Church with their holy Lives and sound Doctrine were all ignorant of this Mystery that Princes may be resisted by their Subjects if they are blessed who suffer persecution for righteousness sake p. 25. then they undoubtedly shall not be blessed who refuse to suffer persecution for righteousness sake for in that they will not suffer but rise against their Persecutors they are convinc'd of sin and acquire to themselves damnation But are not Princes under the power of the Law Yes P. 41. under the directive not under the compulsive power of the Law. P. 43. but have not Princes given their Subjects many and must they be suffered to invade them it is very hard that Princes own voluntary concessions should be made use of to their detriment to encourage their Subjects to Rebellion and Parricide but whatever Princes do as the Laws are derived from them and they are the interpreters of them so though they voluntarily submit to their direction they cannot be compell'd so to do the concessions of a Prince to his Subjects P. 55. do not give them a right to call him to account Tyrants who are in possession of lawful power over us we are commanded to obey forbidden to resist ☜ for in the Holy Scripture we find no distinction between a good Prince and an evil Tyrant as to the honour reverence and obedience that is due to them it is not lawful therefore to draw the Sword against them because they that resist resist God and shall receive to themselves damnation but no law of God or Man hath set over us private Tyrants Usurpers or Domestick Thieves we are under no obligations to them we owe them no obedience nor are we any way either out of reverence to their power or necessity of submission but that we may repel force by force P. 65. one Apostle forbids all resistance another commands obedience to Superiors neither of them make any distinction between good and bad and they speak to all Inferiors indifferently to Lay and Clergy to Men of all Orders Degrees and Dignities that Man therefore distinguishes ill where the Law of God admits of no distinction in such a case God allows us flight P. 80. and patience and prayers and tears
Christ provided for his own safety by flight the Martyrs by patience offered their Souls to God and the prayers of the Church have always prevailed over its Tyrannical Persecutors SECT XII Anno 1613. Dr. John Downham's sum of Sacred Divinity was publish'd in * Commen on the 5th Command P. 177. which starting the usual objection what must be done if Princes command things unlawful such as with a good conscience we cannot yield unto he answers in such cases we are patiently to abide the punishment in which doing we no way violate the obedience due to them as the Apostle directs 1 Pet. 2.19 20. Anno 1614. Printed at Oxford 1614. P. 86. Lancelot Dawes sometime Fellow of Queens College Preach'd two Sermons at the Assizes held at Carlile the second of which had for its subject Psalm 82.6 7. I have said ye are Gods c. and in it we are informed that Princes have their Authority only from God for ‖ Ja. 1.17 if every good and perfect Gift be from above even from the Father of Lights much more this excellent and supereminent gift of governing God's People must proceed from the fountain the reason of all the sins that were committed in Israel is often in the Book of Judges ascribed unto this Judg. 17.6 18. c. P. 99. that they wanted a Magistrate there was at that time no King in Israel by me Kings reign c. it is not for a Magistrate to debase himself neither is it for others of what reputation soever to equalize themselves with the Judge whom God hath placed over them and this is not only meant of Godly and Religious Magistrates P. 100 101. 1 Sam. 8. but of Wicked and Ungodly Governors too such as are described by Samuel which take Mens Sons and Fields and Vineyards c. the reason is because the bad as well as the good are of God the one he gives in his love the other in his anger and be they good or bad we have no commandment from him but parendi patiendi of obeying them when their Precepts are not repugnant to God's Statutes and of suffering with patience whatsoever they shall lay upon us it was a worthy saying of the Mother of the two Garacs when they kept Sigismond in Prison Bentin â—er Hung. â—ec 3. l 2. that a Crowned King if he were worse than a beast could not be hurt without great injury done to God himself a lesson which she learn'd from David whose heart smote him when he had out the lap of Saul 's garment because he was the Anointed of the Lord altho he himself was before that time Anointed to be King over Israel and was without cause hunted by Saul like a Pelican in the wilderness and an Owl in the desert Then to draw thy sword and to seek perforce to depose such as God hath placed over thee either because they are not suitable to thy affections or not faithful in their places what is it but with the old Gyants to fight with God the weapons of a Christian in this case when such a case doth happen must be preces lacrymae prayers that either God would turn the heart of an evil Magistrate or set in his room a Man David like after his own heart and tears for his sins which as they are the cause of War Famine Pestilence and all other calamities so are they also of Wicked and Ungodly Magistrates P. 102. SECT XIII To what hath been cited out of Dr. Bois in the first part of this History may be added In Holy Bible we read Bois on Ps 47. P. 936. that David would not suffer his Enemy Saul tho a wicked King to be slain when he was in his hands for that he was the Lord's Anointed he had sanctitatem unctionis albeit he had not sanctitatem Vitae i. e. he had an holy calling tho not an holy carriage wherefore David said who can lay hands on the Lord 's Anointed and be guiltless and if Heathen Emperors in the Primitive times and ungodly Kings in all Ages ought to be thus obeved how much more a Christian and Virtuous Prince c. After the death of Robert Abbot Bishop of Salisbury were his Academick exercitations against Bellarmine Lon. 1619. and Suarez concerning the supreme power of Kings printed a work as it is called in the Epistle dedicatory agreeable to the Laws of Nature and Religion and very seasonable the Author of which having been the King's Professor of Divinity at Oxford * Prelec 1. Sect. 4. p. 4. vindicates the power of Kings and affirms * Prelec 1. Sect. 4. p. 4 that Pope Hildebrand Hellbrand Luther calls him that the first who assumed to himself the Power of Deposing Princes and absolving their Subjects from their Oath of Allegiance which Doctrine Sigebert a Writer of that Age calls Novelty and Heresie Sect. 5. p. 6 7. and when he treats of Rom. 13.1 be subject to the higher powers c. he says by Powers are meant Kings and Monarchs as the Word is used Luc. 22. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 they that exercise authority c. in which words Kings by a certain circumscription are defined because power belongs only and properly to them thus Origen Ambrose and Aquinas understood the words and Kings are not only called powers but also 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in St. Peter 1. ep 2. supereminent powers because in their Kingdoms they have power over all Persons being constituted the supreme and over all and to whom it is given to exercise that power over all for Kingly Majesty is absolutely eminent and above all being so constituted by a supreme right for as * in Rom. 13. St. Ambrose says it hath the Image of God that all others might be under one to whom because he is God's Vicegerent every Soul ought to be subject as unto God. This Sentence of St. ☞ Ambrose lays the unquestionable foundation of Kingly Power for it expresses that in the Power of a Monarch the Image of the Divine Majesty appears and that Kings exercise a Power over Men delegated unto them in God's stead and therefore must be superior to all Men because nothing can be higher than God whose Deputies Kings are P. 12. this also is the Doctrine of Optatus St. John Chrysostom Agapetus and other Fathers and so destructive have the Romanists thought it to their pretensions ☞ that the Spanish Index Expurgatorius hath ordered this sentence to be blotted out of Antonius his Melissae tho the sentence be in two other Fathers viz. Agapetus and Maximus A King hath no superior on Earth Prelec 2. Sect. 4. p. 19. and tho Kings may be made by Men yet their Power is from God by whose Providence and Conduct they are advanc'd to those dignities by Men and whom God either in Mercy Job 34. Prelect 3. Sect. 1. p. 25. or in anger decrees to rule even that God who
makes a Hypocrite to reign for the sins of a people Now the Supremacy of Kings and the subjection of every Soul to them are so joined that the King cannot be said to be supreme unless every Soul be subject to him nor will the duty of subjection agree to every Soul unless the King be invested with this Supremacy Sect. 3. p. 21. for all Men universim omnes sigillatim singuli whether singly or contained in a body are bound in conscience by this Apostolical Precept to pay the duties of subjection and observance to Kings and whereas Bellarmin as others urged the deposition of Athaliah Sect. 5. p. 33. to prove the lawfulness of Dethroning Princes he answers that Athaliah had no right to the Crown that she had the Kingdom by violence that the true King lay hid that by her Parricide and Treason she had made herself guilty of death by the Law and ought to have suffered Prelect 4. Sect. 3. p. 44. p. 47. and that word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Power which St. Paul uses never signifies force and violence but a just Power which must be lawful because it is from Heaven that Christ was subject by the law to the Power of Pilate and the Apostles to the Heathen Princes Prel 5. Sect. 1.2 p. 70 71. and that in the Primitive Church there were no Traytors who either openly or privately contrived or attempted any thing against the Life or Crown of the Emperor when they wanted neither numbers nor force but they durst not turn Rebels or Traytors ☜ lest by breaking the command of Christ they should lose Heaven and Bellarmin belies them when he says they wanted not a right nor good will to depose Kings but only forces sufficient P. 73. it was of old their Doctrine that the Church ought not to rebel against Princes and this the Gospel taught them let them therefore shew from the Gospel that it is lawful for else let a Man pretend to Inspiration if he speaks from himself and not from the Gospel believe him not says St. Chrysostom Prelect 8. Sect. ult p. 96. and having shewn from David's saying against thee only have I sinned that Kings are accountable only to God he closes his Lecture with these words a King is under the coercion of no Laws because there is no power among Men on Earth that can punish him so that when Kings transgress we must expect the judgments of God upon them SECT XIV In the same year Dr. Lewis Bayly Bishop of Bangor set forth the Practice of Piety ‖ P. 479. edit 1675. in the end of which he shews that the Doctrine which St. Paul taught the Ancient Church of Rome is diametrically opposite in 26 fundamental points of true Religion to that which the new Church of Rome teacheth and maintaineth and the 24th is this that every Soul must of conscience be subject and pay tribute to the Higher Powers i.e. the Magistrates which bear the Sword. Rom. 13.1 2 c. and therefore the Pope and all Prelates and by parity of reason all other Subjects must be subject to their Emperors Kings and Magistrates unless they will bring damnation upon their Souls as Traytors that resist God and his Ordinance and therefore let the Jesuits P. 480. c. take heed and fear lest it be not Faith but Faction not Truth but Treason not Religion but Rebellion which is the cause of their deaths ☜ because they cannot be suffered to persuade Subjects to break their Oaths and to withdraw their Allegiance from their Sovereign to raise Rebellion to move Invasion to stab and poyson Queens to kill and murder Kings c. Some years before this Dr. Richard Crackenthorp Preach'd at Pauls Cross viz. Mar. 24. 1608. and in his Epistle Dedicatory he affirms pr. Lond. 1609. that his desire therein was to testifie his unfeigned love first to God's truth and then to the Peace of our Jerusalem and in the Sermon he commends King James's Book of Free Monarchies but especially his Learned Apology for the Oath of Allegiance and proves that as Solomon had his Kingdom neither from the Priest nor the People but immediatly from God so the Scriptures call Kings the Ministers or Lieutenants of God Rom. 13. and that all the Ancient Fathers did believe that the Imperial Authority of Kings was immediatly and only derived of God immediatly depending of God and of God alone this was the judgment and just defence of all the Christians and of the Church at that time and to prove this to be agreeable to the Law he cites a Statute made 16. Ric. 2. c. 5. of purpose to keep sacred and inviolable the Sovereignty and regality of this Kingdom ☞ it was therein declared that the Crown of England hath been so free at all times not then only but which is specially to be remembred at all times that it hath been in subjection to no Realm but immediatly subject to God and to none other in all things touching the regality of the same in defence of which Statute they in the Parliament then Assembled promised to live and dye as it is there noted by all which it is evident that this Doctrine which is now at Rome counted most ridiculous it in it self most sacred as being grounded on the Scriptures of God and as most sacred hath been embrac'd by all the Christians in the Primitive Church taught and maintained with a general consent by the Ancient and Godly Fathers in their several Ages and Successions constantly defended by whole Kingdoms and Empires and that under pain of High Treason to the Gainsayers thereof even in those latter times also when superstition had dimin'd but not quite extinguish'd and put out the Truth that cannot possibly be true loyalty or sincere obedience which ever attending to an higher command includes in it as in a Trojan Horse that condition of rebus sic stantibus durante beneplacito or the like out of which if strength and opportunity might serve they might let out whole Armies and Troops of Armed Men suddenly to surprize both Church and Kingdom and much more to that purpose To Dr. Crackenthorp it is requisite to join his Friend Dr. P. 334 ed. Lon. 1675 Daniel Featly who in his Handmaid to devotion on the Feast of the Fifth of November gives all good Christians this useful admonition All that fear God ought to abhor and detest all Traiterous and Bloody conspiracies against the Prince and State because God strictly forbids dreadfully threatens miraculously discovers and severely punishes all Treasons and Conspiracies as we see in Corah Absalom Adonijah Zimri the Servants of Ammon Sullam Haman the servants of the Nobleman in the Parable Judas for God forbids conspiracies Touch not mine Anointed c. SECT XV. The Famous Peter du Moulin the Father the Cicero of the French Churches was by King James made a Prebendary of the Church of Canterbury and
the Rebel's Catechism wherein he shews that Lucifer was the first Author of Rebellion that the Rebellion even of the heart makes a Man guilty of Damnation in the sight of God much more that of the tongue or the hand that one branch of the Rebellion of the hand is the composing and dispersing of false and scandalous Books and Pamphlets tending to the dishonour of the King the other the taking up Arms against such Persons P. 6 7. cons p. 9 10 11 c. to whose Authority they are subject and it is worth our observation that not only the bearing Arms against the King is declared to be Rebellion by the Law of England but that it was declared to be Rebellion by the chief Judges of this Kingdom at the Arraignment of the Earl of Essex for any Man to seek to make himself so strong that the King should not be able to resist him although he broke not out into open act even defensive Arms are absolutely unlawful in the Subject against his Sovereign in regard that no defensive War can be undertaken but it carrieth with it a resistance in it to those Higher Powers to which every Soul is to be subject we find it thus resolved in Plutarch P. 12. that it was contrary both to positive Laws and the Law of Nature for any Subject to lift up his hand against the Person of his Sovereign with much more to the same purpose The same Author near about the same time See his Ecclesia Vindicata p 645 c Prâ—at Lon. 1681. wrote a Treatise intitled the stumbling-block of disobedience removed to shew that Kings ought not to be controuled by their Subjects either singly or in a body the whole of which learned Treatise as well as his other Vindications of the Doctrins and Rights of our Church will sufficiently repay the Reader 's expence of pains and leisure And in his Sermon on May 29. 1681. it is to be observed that such as draw their Swords upon God's Anointed use commonly to throw away the scabberds also and find no way of doing better but by doing worse no middle way for them to walk in but either to bear up like Princes or to dye like Traytors SECT VI. Of the same belief was Sir John Spelman in his Case of our affairs in Law c. that the Sovereignty is in the King's Person inseparably Pr. Oxf. 1643. p. 15 17 19. and the allegiance of the Subject by Law thereto inseparably annex'd fortifyed and enforc'd by Religion under the severe menace of damnation what streight then of humane Affairs can be so violent as to make Christian Subjects contrary to sworn Faith to Law and to Religion not only to disobey their Sovereign but resist and Invade the Sovereign Rights c. Anno 1641. Sir Tho. Ashton and many others Noblemen and Gentlemen of Cheshire tendred a Remonstrance to the Parliament against Presbyterian Government and in it they affirm that the donation of Sovereign Power is solely from God and so will he have the revocation too he doth not subject them to the question of inferiors but puts a Guard upon their Sacred Persons which to violate though in our own defence is a breach of his command even when persecuted as David was by Saul which precepts are renewed in the Gospel we see our selves bound by Oath to acknowledge and support that Regal Government our Statutes have establish'd our Laws approved History represents most happy to whom all Primitive times yielded full obedience to whose Throne Christ himself yields Tribute whose Persons God will have Sacred whose actions unquestionable whose Succession he himself determines and whose Kingdoms he disposes Tacitus tho a Heathen advises us to bear with the riots and covetousness of Kings as with barrenness and other infirmities of nature for while there are Men there will be vices but they cannot continue long and will be recompenc'd when better come In the 19th year of this King came forth a little book called an Appeal to thy Conscience as thou wilt answer it at the great and dreadful day of Jesus Christ p 2 3 c. the Author of which says that Subjects may not take up Arms against their lawful Sovereign because he is wicked and unjust no tho he be an Idolater and Oppressor 1. Because it were an high presumption in us to limit that command which God doth not limit now our obedience to Superiors is always commanded without limitation 2. We may not think evil of the King much less may we take up Arms against him 3. St. Paul saith recompence to no man evil for evil Rom. 12.19 If to no Man then certainly not to thy King 〈◊〉 That which peculiarly belongs to the Lord thou oughtest not without his Authority to meddle with but vengeance is his 5. Rom. 13. Every Soul none excluded must be subject there is no Power but of God if so then the Power of a wicked Prince is from God and the penalty of resisting is everlasting damnation both of Soul and Body in Hell-fire for ever 6. In Eccl. 8.1 2. the Covenant made by the People to obey their King is called the Oath of God and who dares break this Oath of God 7. God commands Touch not mine Anointed therefore thou mayest not smite him therefore thou mayest not bear Arms against God's Anointed 8. For Subjects to take up Arms against their own King tho an Idolater and an Oppressor is contrary to the practice of God's People in all Ages the Jews and the Prophets Christ and his Apostles and the Primitive Christians 9. God's heavy judgments on those who have taken up Arms against their Prince tho an Idolater and Oppressor ought to be a warning to us how we do the like this is contrary to the Doctrin of the Church of England in her Homilies then he answers the usual objections for resistance resolves several doubts and removes other little scruples and in the close of all passionately advises all Men to return to the Lord and to do their duty P. 51. for 't is strange says he that God's Church can be no way preserved the Subjects liberty no ways maintain'd but by sin who ever heard unless from a Papist that the way to Heaven was through Hell shall we do evil that good may come Rom. 3.8 It would be a very needless labor to cite all the passages to this purpose that occur in the Books written between the year 1644. and the time of the King's Murther and therefore I shall refer the Reader to the Regal Apology Printed 1648. the Kingdoms brief answer to the Declaration of the Commons Pr. 1648. the Plea for the King and Kingdom 1648. with many other Treatises of the same kind only I shall mention Bishop Rainhowe who took the degree of Doctor of Divinity An. 1646. Vid. Bish Rainbow's life p. 41. when his chief Question on which he made his Thesis was Ecclesia Anglicana tenet
Subjects leave to withdraw their obedience from their Sovereign when he hath most need of their assistance so that assoon as any Town City or Province of any Prince's Dominions is invaded by a Foreign Enemy or possess'd by a rebellious Subject that the Prince cannot for the present suppress the Power of the one or the other the People may lawfully resort to those who are over them and for their protection perform all the Offices and Duties of good Subjects to them whereas the duty of Subjects is and all good Subjects believe they owe another kind of Duty and Obedience to their Sovereign than to withdraw their subjection because he is opprest and will prefer poverty and death it self before they will renounce obedience to their natural Prince or do any thing that may advance the service of his Enemies P. 92. surely this woful desertion and defection which hath always been held criminal by all Law that hath been current in any part of the World hath received so much countenance and justification by Mr. Hobbs's Book ☞ that CROMWELL found the submission to those Principles produc'd a submission to him and the imaginary relation between protection and allegiance so positively proclaim'd by him prevailed for many years to extinguish all visible fidelity to the King whilst he persuaded many to take the Engagement as a thing lawful and to become Subjects to the Usurper P. 135 136. as to their legitimate Sovereign Kings themselves can never be punish'd for their casual or wilful errors and mistakes let the consequences of them be what they will but if they who maliciously lead or advise or obey them in unjust resolutions and commands were to have the same indemnity there must be a dissolution of all Kingdoms and Governments but as Kings must be left to God whose Vicegerents they are to judge of their breach of trust so they who offend against the Law must be left to the punishment P. 163. the Law hath provided for them if all Sovereigns be subject to the Laws of Nature because such Laws are divine and cannot by any Man or Commonwealth be abrogated they then are obliged to observe and perform those Laws which themselves have made and promis'd to observe for violation of faith is against the Law of Nature ☞ Nor doth this obligation set any Judge over the Sovereign nor doth any Civil Law pretend that there is any power to punish him it is enough that in justice he ought to do it and that there is a Sovereign in Heaven above him tho not on earth To this great Minister of State I should join Sir Robert Filmer but that it is needless the Enemies of the unaccountableness of Kings having branded him with the mark of a State Heretick for his Orthodox Opinions which among all good Men make his Memory reverend and his works Eminent to which I advise the Reader to make his recourse particularly his short but excellent Treatise of the Power of Kings c. See also Sir William Dugdale's Preface to his view of our late troubles c. The Late Bishop of Chichester Dr. Lake having Aug. 27. 1689. received the Sacrament on his Death-bed did in the presence of Dr. Hicks Dean of Worcester Dr. Green and some others make this protestation being as himself worded it ingaged in the most sacred and solemn act of conversing with God See the Paper and the vindication of it not knowing to the contrary but that he might appear with those very words in his mouth at the dreadful Tribunal That I was Baptized into the Religion of the Church of England and sucked it in with my Milk I have constantly adhered to it through the whole course of my life and now if so be the will of God shall dye in it and had resolved through Gods Grace assisting me to have dyed so tho at a Stake And whereas that Religion of the Church of England taught me the Doctrine of Non-Resistance and Passive Obedience which I have accordingly inculcated upon others and which I took to be the distinguishing Character of the Church of England ☜ I adhere no less firmly and stedfastly to that and in Consequence of it have incurred a Suspension from the exercise of my Office and exspected a Deprivation I find in so doing much inward satisfaction and if the Oath had been tendred at the peril of my life I could only have obeyed by suffering c. Manu propriâ Subscripsit Jo. Cicestrensis To this great Man I should add his bosome Friend Dr. Allestrey who speaks fully and consonant to sound Doctrine on this Head but I must refer the Reader to his Sermon Novemb. 5. 1665. on Luc. 9.55 Vol. 1. p. 127. and Vol. 2. p. 60. and p. 253 276. Thus the acute Dr. Sherlock Some Men pretend great Oppression Serm. on Ps 18.50 p. 2. and Male-Administration of Government though their licentious noises and clamors sufficiently confute it for Men who are most opprest dare say the least of it The Liberties and Properties of the Subject is an admirable pretence to deprive the Prince of his Liberties and Properties Others make Religion the pretence for their Rebellion Religion the greatest and the dearest Interest of all but methinks it is a dangerous way for Men to Rebel to save their Souls when God hath threatned damnation against those who Rebel No Men fight for Religion who have any Religion is a quiet peaceable governable thing it teaches Men to suffer patiently but not to Rebel It is evident it is not Religion such Men are zealous for but a liberty in Religion i. e. that every one may have his liberty to be of any Religion or of none which serves the Atheist's turn as well as the Sectaries but is not much for the honor or interest of true Religion So that whatever the pretences are it is an ambitious p. 3. v. p 6 7. discontented revengeful spirit an uneasie restless fickle and unchangeable humor which disturbs Politick Government and undermines the Thrones of Princes In the time of the Fanatick Plot p. 7 8. p. 11. but to Talk or Write or Preach about Obedience to Government or patient Suffering for a good Cause was to betray the Protestant Interest God may sometimes suffer Treason and Rebellion to be prosperous p. 11. but it can never prosper but when God pleases and it is impossible Rebels should ever know that and therefore it is impossible they should have any reasonable security of Success There is nothing more expresly contrary to the revealed Will of God than Treasonable Plots and Conspiracies against Sovereign Princes Christian Religion indeed is the greatest security of Government both in its Precepts and Examples It requires us to obey our Superiors in all lawful things and quietly to submit and suffer when we cannot Obey And the blessed Jesus who was the Author of our Religion and our great Pattern and Example did himself practise
Doctrin of the Church and would fain defend it as the uniform belief of the Reformed much more to the same purpose may be found in the same Book which I recommend to the Reader 's perusal the Learned Author of which wrote after his Father's Copy and therefore I have joyned them together tho according to the exact rules of Chronology I should have given the junior du Moulin a place in the next Reign CHAP. VI. The History of Passive Obedience during the Reign of King Charles the Martyr SECT I. WEre we to judge of the righteousness of any Cause and of its being acceptable to God by the prosperity of its outward circumstances and to intitle Heaven to the owning of all the designs which providence promotes as some Divines both then and since have argued more consonant to the Doctrin of the Alcoran than the Holy Gospel then the most Excellent Prince Charles I. was a vile Malefactor and fell justly a sacrifice to the rage of his rebel Subjects but the true Sons of the Church were of a more Orthodox belief and chose rather to suffer with their Master the Lord 's Anointed than to enjoy the ease and preferments which then were the rewards of perfidiousness and disloyalty as the first part of this History hath amply proved And though Dr. Sybthorp's Sermon called Apostolical Obedience was severely censured nor is it fit to defend every Proposition in it yet the then Bishop of London Dr. George Mountain approved it publickly in Print as a Sermon learnedly and discreetly Preached Testim ante concion and agreeable to the Ancient Doctrin of the Primitive Church both for faith and good manners and to the Doctrin established in the Church of England and therefore under his hand gave authority for the Printing of it Ma. 8. 1627. Mr. Hayes Could any thing privilege Loyalty toward Kings Serm. at St. Mary's Oxon. on Esth 1.15 1624. p. 3 21. Eminence and Alliance might be fair pretences but neither of these could yield Queen Vasthi advantage but what shall any dare to limit Sovereignty and prescribe Majesty it's duty shall he that enjoys the subjection of others by the Law be subject himself to the Law no in no other sense than that of Aquinas not that the Law should lead him by compulsion but lead him by directive persuasion if he conform his actions to the prescript of the Laws it is of his own accord if he do not is he lyable to account Yes but it is only to God against thee only have I sinned says King David Ps 51. those modest times had not the face to capitulate with their Sovereigns the pride of Faction had not yet hatch'd this rebellious Doctrin ☜ that if Kings obey not Laws Subjects have leave to disobey their Kings no let it glory in no Ancienter Author than New Rome and in no better success than confusion and seeing it owes it self to Jesuited Patrons let it be banish'd this Land together with their Persons Mr. Adams When Saul was in David 's hands In 2d ep of Peter pr. 1633. p. 755. his Men alledge God's promise and the advantage concurring and what was David 's charm to allay the fury of those raging Spirits he is the Lord 's Anointed Saul did not lend David so impenetrable an Armour when he ran to encounter Goliah as David lent him in the plea of his Unction not one of the discontented Out-laws durst put forth a hand of violence against him the image and impress of that Divine Ordinance strikes such an awe into the hearts of Men that it makes even Traytors cowards so that instead of smiting they tremble like those whose Office it is to suffer not to do fear God honour the King there was never Man that feared God but he also honored the Prince But let us hear P. 759 c what the Synod of Hell can plead for disobedience how if the Prince be bad an Enemy to truth and goodness a Ravisher a Persecutor raising powers for the extirpation of the Gospel here if ever a Subject may renounce all Allegiance for here is power against power Man against God and the Subject of both left to follow either Answ in this streight some for fear of the King Shipwrack their faith and these are Traytors to God others by a defensive sword in their hand Rebels to the King ☞ there is no question but God must be obeyed even against the King when the King commands things against God. what then shall we resist him with violence no God never Warrants that practice no not against a Prince that denies him there is an active Obedience and a passive I may not execute his impious commands I must suffer his unjust punishments the vices of Men cannot frustrate the institution of God peruse Mat. 5.44 and Rom 12.17 this will tye the Hands of Christian Subjects Samuel offer'd not to depose Saul though the express Sentence of God had cast him off and he was Excommunicated by a higher power than ever came from Rome Saul lived and dyed a King this he illustrates by the examples of the Jews and Primitive Christians and adds what resistance did those Primitive Christians make to those barbarous outrages but praying for the Emperor's life when under the Emperor's command they were bleeding to death neither did they suffer because they were not able to resist but it was their Doctrin c. Christians never prove losers but when they unjustly sight for their own preservation provide we the buckler of patience not a sword when the decree was gone out by Ahasuerus this was their refuge preces lacrymae the Apostles could work miracles yet they resisted not the ordinate powers this charge St. Paul gives the Romans even while Nero was their Emperor a Monster whom divers held to be Antichrist that Religion then cannot be right that pulls down Princes seeing neither Moses in the Old Testament nor Christ in the New nor Levite nor Prophet Apostle nor Disciple either counsell'd or practised against Government which should decide the point that hath cost the Lives of so many Christians and still threatens more Tragedies P. 763. there was never Prince to whom some Belialist took not some exceptions it were ill with Princes if their state depended on the good liking of their Subjects Subjects unfaithful at the heart may be without the suspicion of their Prince but they beheld Rebels in the Court of Heaven we be bound to be subject not only for wrath but for conscience sake In all the time of David 's prosperity there was no news of Shimei he looks like a fair Subject but he that smiles on David in his Throne P. 821. curs'd him in his Flight there is no security in that Subjects Allegiance that hath not God in his Conscience he that poysons the People with the male opinion of their Prince is the most dangerous Traytor to rip up the faults of Kings is bold
Impiety but to charge them with faults they have not is shameless Blasphemy SECT III. To this purpose also the Author of a discourse concerning Supreme Power and common right calculated for the year 1641. but publish'd an 1680. is very full and pertinent I must recommend the Book to the Reader while I cite only one passage out of it Kings have a right of security against all Violence P. 33. they are above all humane judicature and only under God as the People are under them for which God styles himself Lord of Lords and King of Kings Sam. Otes Chaplain to Sir Francis Walsingham Lond. 1633. fol. P. 206 207 c. and other Persons of Honor in his Seventeenth Sermon on S. Jude's Epistle v. 8. Our Lord Jesus performed all Obedience to Rulers even then when they were Heathen and knew not God his precept was Give to Cesar the things that are Cesars his practice he paid tribute and Paul 1 Tim. 2.1 willeth the Ephesians to pray for them even then when like Manasses they poured out blood like water and made Towns and Cities swim with blood as he did Jerusalem when like the Chaldees ☜ they gave the dead bodies of God's Servants unto the Fowls of the air and the Flesh of his Saints unto the Beasts of the field When like Antiochus they burnt all Libraries and consumed the days of the Christians like smoak and their Bones were burnt like an hearth when they were like Pelicans in the Wilderness and like Owls in the Desarts when they did eat ashes like bread and mingled their Drink with weeping and to shew the constant practice of this not to go back like the shadow of Ezekiah 's Dyal to the time of the Law the Jews are commanded to pray for Nebuchadnezzar tho as a Man he deserved not the Name of a Man but a Beast yet as a King he is called the Servant of the Most High God. Mr. Rob. Bolton Batchelor in Divinity and Preacher of God's Word at Broughton in Northamptonshire in his Epistle Dedicatory to the Honorable Sir Rob. Carre Gentleman of the King's Bed-Chamber A gracious Man about a Royal Person is a goodly sight and full well worth even a King's Ransom For never any except himself truly fear the great God of Heaven can possibly be cordially and conscionably serviceable to any of our earthly Gods A Principle so clear and unquestionable that no Man of Understanding and Master of his own Wits except himself be notoriously obnoxious can have the face to deny it Please they may be politickly plausible flatter extremely and represent themselves to ordinary observation as the only Men for Loyalty and Love but if we could search and see their hearts we should find them then most laborious to serve themselves and advance their own Ends when they seem most zealous for their Sovereign's Service Achitophel in the sunshine of Peace and Calmness of the Kingdoms did accommodate himself to the present both in Consultations of State and religious Conformity but no sooner had this hollow-hearted Man espy'd a dangerous Tempest rais'd by Absalom's unnatural Treachery but he turn'd Traytor to his natural Lord When he observ'd the Wind to blow another way he follow'd the blast and set his Sails according to the Weather which made David after complain but it was thou O Man even my Companion my Guide and Familiar We took sweet Counsel together c. Wherefore let great Men without Grace profess and pretend what they will and protest the Impossibility of any such thing as Hazael did in another Case yet ordinarily in such tumultuous times and of universal confusion for the securing of their temporal happiness which without timely turning on God's side is all the Heaven they are like to have in this World or the World to come I say upon a point of great Advantage and Advancement with safety they would fly from the declining State and down-fall of their old Master tho formerly the mightiest Monarch upon earth as from the Ruins of a falling House And it can be no otherwise for they have no internal Principle or supernatural Power to illighten and enable them to set their shoulders against the Torrent of the times and be overflown with it But now he that truly fears God would rather lose his high Place nay his Posterity as much Hearts-blood if he had it as would animate a whole Kingdom than leave his lawful Sovereign Lord in such a Case upon any terms tho he might have even the Imperial Crown set upon his own Head. For Conscience that poor neglected thing nay in these last and looser times even laughed at by Men of the World yet a stronger tye of Subjects hearts unto their Sovereigns than Man or Devil is able to dissolve ever holds up his Loyal Heart erect and unshaken when all Shebnas Hamans and Achitophels would hide their heads and shrink in the wetting Which Conscience of his if upon such occasion he should unhappily wound he knows full well it would follow him with guilty Cries for his so base temporizing and traytorous flinking all the days of his life Mr. To. 2. Ser. 8. p. 637. Faringdon If we make no better use of our Liberty than to fling it over our shoulders and wear it as a Cloak of Maliciousness the spirit is ready to pull it off and tell us our duty that for all our liberty we are to serve one another that Christianity destroys not relations of Son to Father of Servant to Master of Wife to Husband of Inferior to Superior but establisheth them rather and his Practice was according to his Doctrin for he was an Eminent Confessor to Loyalty in that great Rebellion as was also his dear Friend Mr. Chillingworth between whom there was a great Sympathy of Sentiments and Sufferings for both were harass'd for Preaching the same truth His first Ser. before the King on 2 Tim. 3.1 2 c. p. 6 7 c. especially the later but nothing could affright him from his duty which obliged him freely to reprove the vices of the Age he lived in the chief actors in this bloody Tragedy which is now upon the Stage who have robb'd our Sovereign Lord the King of his Forts of the Persons of many of his Subjects and as much as lies in them of the hearts of all of them is it credible that they know and remember and consider the example of David recorded for their instruction whose heart smote him when he cut off the hem of Saul 's garment they that make no scruple at all of fighting against his Sacred Majesty and shooting Muskets and Ordnance at him which sure have not the skill to choose a Subject from a King to the extreme hazard of his Sacred Person whom by all possible obligations they are bound to defend do they know think you the general rule without exception or limitation left by the Holy Ghost for our direction in all such cases