Selected quad for the lemma: kingdom_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
kingdom_n	grant_v	king_n	time_n	1,980	5	3.5361	3	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A91298	The third part of The soveraigne povver of parliaments and kingdomes. Wherein the Parliaments present necessary defensive warre against the Kings offensive malignant, popish forces; and subjects taking up defensive armes against their soveraignes, and their armies in some cases, is copiously manifested, to be just, lawfull, both in point of law and conscience; and neither treason nor rebellion in either; by inpregnable reasons and authorities of all kindes. Together with a satisfactory answer to all objections, from law, Scripture, fathers, reason, hitherto alledged by Dr. Ferne, or any other late opposite pamphleters, whose grosse mistakes in true stating of the present controversie, in sundry points of divinity, antiquity, history, with their absurd irrationall logicke and theologie, are here more fully discovered, refuted, than hitherto they have been by any: besides other particulars of great concernment. / By William Prynne, utter-barrester, of Lincolnes Inne. It is this eighth day of May, 1643. ordered ... that this booke, ... be printed by Michael Sparke, senior. John White.; Soveraigne power of parliaments and kingdomes. Part 3	Prynne, William, 1600-1669.; England and Wales. Parliament. House of Commons.	1643 (1643)	Wing P4103; Thomason E248_3; ESTC R203191	213,081	158

Tamerlain Emperour of the Tartars denounced warre unto Bajazet King of the Turkes who then besieged Constantinople saying That he was comming to chastise his Tyrannie and to deliver the afflicted people and vanquishing him in battle routed his Army and taking the Tyrant prisoner he kept him in chains in an Iron Cage till he dyed Neither in this case is it materiall that such a vertuous Prince being a stranger proceede against a Tyrant by open force or fiercenesse or else by way of justice True it is that a valient and worthy Prince having the Tyrant in his power shall gaine more honour by bringing him unto his tryall to chastise him as a murtherer a manqueller and a robber rather than to use the Law of Armes against him Wherefore let us resolve on this that it is lawfull for any stranger Prince to kill a Tyrant that is to say a man of all men infamed and notorious for the oppression murder and slaughter of his subjects and people And in this sort our Queene Elizabeth ayded the Low-Countries against the Tyrannie and oppressions of the King of Spaine and the King of Sweden of late yeares the Princes of Germany against the Tyranny and usurpations of the Emperor upon their sollicitation If then it be thus lawfull for Subjects to call in forraigne Princes to releeve them against the Tyrannie and oppressions of their kings as the Barons in King Iohns time prayed in ayde from Philip and Lewis of France against his tyrannie and those Princes in such cases may justly kill depose or judicially condemne these oppressing Kings and put them to death I conceive these whole kingdomes and Parliaments may with farre better reason lesse danger and greater safety to themselvs their Kings and Realmes take up defensive Armes of their owne to repulse their violence For if they may lawfully helpe themselves and vindicate their Liberties from their Kings encroachments by the assistance and Armes of forraigne Princes who have no relation to them nor particular interest in the differences betweene their kings and them which can hardly be effected without subjecting themselves to a forraigne power the death or deposition of the oppressing King much more may they defend and releeve themselves against him by their owne domesticke Forces if they be able by generall consent of the Realme because they have a particular interest and ingagement to defend their owne persons estates liberties which forraigners want and by such domesticke Forces may prevent a forraigne subjection preserve the life of the oppressing Prince and succession of the Crowne in the hereditary line which forraigne Armies most commonly endanger And certainely it is all one in point of Reason State Law Conscience for Subjects to relieve themselves and make a defensive warre against their Soveraigne by forraigne Princes Armes as by their owne and if the first be just and lawfull as all men generally grant without contradiction and Bracton to l. 2. c. 16. I see no colour but the latter must bee just and lawfull too yea then the first rather because lesse dangerous lesse inconvenient to King and Kingdome From Reasons I shall next proceed to punctuall Authorities Not to mention our ancient Brittons taking up of armes by joint consent against their oppressing tyrannizing Kings A●chigallo Emerian and Vortigern whom they both expelled and deposed for their tyranny and mis-government nor our Saxons ray sing defensive Forces against King Sigebert Osfred Ethelred Beornard Coolwulfe and Edwyn who were forcibly expelled and deprived by their Subjects for their bloody cruelties and oppressions which actions the whole Kingdome then and those Historians who recorded them since reputed just and honourable and no Treason nor Rebellion in Law or Conscience being for the Kingdomes necessary preservation and the peoples just defence which Histories I have elsewhere more largely related Nor yet to insist long on the fore-mentioned Barons warre against king Iohn and Henry the 3 d. for regaining establishing preserving Magna Cha●ta and other Liberties of the Realme which our Kings had almost utterly deprived them off I shall onely give you some few briefe observations touching these warres to cleare them from those blacke aspersions of Rebellion Treason and the like which some late Historians especially Iohn Speed to flatter those Kings to whom they Dedicated their Histories have cast upon them contrary to the judgement of our ancienter Choniclers and Matthew Paris who generally repute them lawfull and honourable First then consider what opinion the Prelates Barons and Kingdome in generall had of these Warres at first Anno 1414. in a Parliament held at Pauls the 16. yeare of King Iohns raigne Steven Langton Archbishop of Canterbury produced a Charter of King Henry the First whereby he granted the Ancient Liberties of the Kingdome of England which had by his Predecessors beene oppressed with unjust exactions according to the Lawes of King Edward with those emendations which his Father by the counsell of his Barons did ratifie which Charter being read before the Barons they much rejoyced and swore in the presence of the Archbishop that for these Liberties they would if need required spend their blood which being openly done in Parliament they would never have taken such a publike solemne Oath had they deemed a Warre against the King for recovery or defence of these their Liberties unlawfull and no lesse then Treason and Rebellion in point of Law or Conscience After this the Barons assembling at Saint Edmond●bury conferred about the said Charter and swore upon the high Altar That if King Iohn refused to confirme and restore unto them those Liberties the Rights of the Kingdome they would make Warre upon him and withdraw themselves from his Allegiance untill he had ratified them all w●th his Charter under his great Seale And further agreed after Christmas to Petition him for the same and in the meane time to provide themselves of Horse and Furniture to be ready if the King should start from his Oath made at Winchester at the time of his absolution for confirmation of these Liberties and compell him to satisfie their demand After Christmas they repaire in a Military manner to the King lying in the new Temple urging their desires with great vehemencie the King seeing their resolution and inclination to warre made answer That for the matter they required he would take consideration till after Easter next In the meane time he tooke upon him the Crosse rather through feare then devotion supposing himselfe to bee more safe under that Protection And to shew his desperate malice and wilfulnesse who rather then not to have an absolute domination over his people to doe what he listed would be any thing himselfe under any other that would but support him in his violences he sent an Embassage the most base and impious that ever yet was sent by any free and Christian Prince unto Miramumalim the Moore intituled the great King of Affrica Morocco and Spaine wherein

tilting blame themselves alo●e and have no other just legall remedie but patience it being neither Treason Rebellion nor Murther in the defensive party and most desperate folly and frenzie in any Prince to engage himselfe in such a danger when beneede not doe it I reade of Charles the first of France that he fell sodainely destracted upon a message he rec●ived from an old poore man as he was marching in the head of his Army and thereupon thinking himselfe b●tray●d encountred his owne men and slew two or three of them ere they were ware of him wo●nding others Whereupon they closing with him dis●rmed and led him away fo●ceably keeping him close shut up like à Bedla● till he recovered his sens●s I thinke no man in his right wits will deeme this their action Treasonable or unlawfull neither did the king or any in that age thus repute it If then a King in an angry franticke passion for Ir. brevius furor est shall take up Armes against his loyall Subjects and assault their persons to murther them and spoyle their goods if they by common consent in Parliament especially shall forcibly resist disarme or restraine his person till his fury be appeased and his judgement rectified by better councells shall this be Treason Rebellion or Disloyaltie God forbid I thinke none but mad men can or will averte it It was a great doubt in Law till the statute of 33. H. 8. c. 20. setled it If a party that had committed any high Treasons when he was of perfect memory after accusation examination and confession thereof became madde or lunaticke whether he should b● tried and condemned for it during this distemper And some from that very act and 21. H. 7. 31. 36. Ass 27. 12. H. 3. For faiture 33 and Dower 183. Fitz. Nat. Br. 202. D. Stamford Pleas 16. b. and Cooke l. 4. f. 124. Beverlyes case which resolve ●hat a Lunaticke or Non Compos cannot be guilty of murthe● fel n●y ●●petite Treason because having no understanding and knowing not what he doth he can ●ave n● follonius intention conceive that a reall mad-man cannot be guilty of high Treason though Sir Edward Cooke in Bev●rlies case be of a contrary opinion if he should assault or kill his king And I suppose few will deeme Walter Terrils casuall killing of King William Rufus with the glance of his arrow from a tree shot at a Deere high Treason neither was it then reputed so or he prosecuted as a Traytor for it because he had no malicious intention as most thinke against the King or any thought to hurt him But I conceive it out of question if a king in a distracted furious passion without just cause shall invade his subjects persons in an open hostile manner to destroy them it neither is nor can be Treason ner Rebellion in them if in their owne necessary defence alone they shall either casually wound or slay him contrary to their loyall intentions and those Statutes and Law-book●s which judge it high Treason for any one maliciously and trayterously to imagine compasse or conspire the death of the King will not at all extend to such a case of meere just defence since a conspiracie or imagination to compasse or procure the Kings death can neither be justly imagined nor presumed in those who are but meerely defensive no more then in other common cases of one mans killing another in his owne inevitable defence without any precedent malice in which a Pardon by Law is granted of course however questionlesse it is no Treason nor murther at all to slay any of the kings souldiers and Cavaliers who are no kings in such a defensive warre Sixthly suppose the King should be captivated or violently led away by any forraign or domesticke enemies to him and the kingdome and carried along with them in the field to countenance their warres and invasions upon his loyallest Subjects by illegall warrants or Commissions fraudulently procured or extorted from him If the Parliament and Kingdome in such a case should raise an Army to rescue the King out of their hands and to that end encountring the enemies should casually wound the King whiles they out of loyalty sought onely to rescue him I would demaund of any Lawyer or Divine whether this Act should be deemed Treason Rebellion or Disloyalty in the Parliament or army Or which of the two Armies should in point of Law or Conscience be reputed Rebells or Traytors in this case those that come onely to rescue the King and so fight really for him indeed though against him in shew and wound him in the rescue Or those who in shew onely fought for him that they might still detaine him captive to their wills Doubtlesse there is no Lawyer nor Theologue but would presently resolve in such a case that the Parliaments Army which fought onely to rescue the King were the loyall Subjects and the Malignants army who held him captive with them the onely Rebels and traytors and that the casuall wounding of him proceeding not out of any malicious intention but love and loyalty to redeeme him from captivity were no trespasse nor offence at all being quite besides their thoughts and for a direct president It was the very case of King Henry the third who together with his sonne Prince Edward being taken Prisoner by the Earle of Leycester in the battle of Lewis and the Earle afterwards carrying him about in his Company in nature of a Prisoner to countenance his actions to the great discontent of the Prince the Earle of Glocester and other Nobles hereupon the Prince and they raising an Army encountred the Earle and his Porces in a battle at Evesha● where the King was personally present slew the Earle Routed his Army and rescued the king in this cruell battell the king himselfe being wounded unawares with a Iavelin by those who rescued him was almost slaine and lost much of his blood yet in a Parliament soone after sommoned at Winchester Anno 1266. the Earle and his Army were dis-inherited as Traytors and Rebels but those who rescued them though with danger to his person rewarded as his loyall subjects And is not this the present case A company of malignant ill Councellors Delinquents Prelates Papists have withdrawne his Majestie from his Parliament raised an Army of Papists Forraigners Delinquents and Male-contents to ruin the Parliament Kingdome Religion Lawes Liberties to countenance this their designe they detaine his Majestie with them and engage him all they can on their side the Parliament out of no disloyall intention but onely to rescue his Majesties person out of their hands to apprehend delinquents preserve the Kingdome from spoyle and defend their Priviledges Persons Liberties estates religion from unjust invasions have raised a defensive Army which encountred these Forces at Edgehill where they say the King was present slew the Lord Generall Earle of Lindsey with many others and as they never intended so they

he offered to render unto him his Kingdome and to hold the same by tribute from him as his Soveraigne Lord to forgoe the Christian Faith as vaine and to receive that of Mahomet imploying Thomas Hardington and Ralph Fitz-Nicholas Knights and Robert of London Clerke Commissioners in this negotiation whose manner of accesse to this great King with the delivery of their Message and King Johns Charter to that effect are at large recited in Mathew Paris who heard the whole relation from Robert one of the Commissioners Miramumalim having heard at large their Message and the Description of the King and Kingdome governed by an annointed and Crowned King knowne of old to be free and ingenuous ad nullius praeterquam Dei spectans dominationem with the nature and disposition of the people so much disdained the basenesse and impiety of the Offerer that fetching a deepe sigh from his heart he answered I have never read nor heard of any King possessing so prosperous a Kingdome subject and obedient to him who would thus willingly ruine his Principality as of free to make it tributary of his owne to make it anothers of happy to make it miserable and to submit himself to anothers pleasure as one conquered without a wound But I have heard and read of many who with effusion and losse of much blood which was laudable have procured liberty to themselves modo autem audio quod Dominus vester miser deses imbellis qui nullo nullior est de libero servus fieri desiderat qui omnium mortalium miserrimus est After which he said That the King was unworthy of his Confederacie and looking on the two Knights with a sterne countenance he commanded them to depart instantly out of his presence and to see his face no more whereupon they departing with shame hee charged Robert the Clerke to informe him truely what manner of person King Iohn was who replied That he was rather a Tyrant then a King rather a Subverter then a Governour a Subverter of his owne Subjects and a Fosterer of Strangers a Lyon to his owne Subjects a Lambe to Aliens and Rebels who by his sloathfulnesse had lost the Dutchy of Normandy and many other Lands and moreover thirsted to lose and destroy the Kingdome of England An unsatiable Extortioner of money an invader and destroyer of the possessions of his naturall people c. When Miramumalim heard this he not onely despised as at first but detested and accursed him and said Why doe the miserable English permit such a one to raigne and domineer over them Truely they are effeminate and flavish To which Robert answered the English are the most patient of all men untill they are offended and damnified beyond measure But now they are angry like a Lion or Elephant when he perceives himselfe hurt or bloody and though late they purpose and endeavour to shake the yoake of the Oppressor from their necks which lie under it Whereupon he reprehended the overmuch patience and fearefulnesse of the English and dismissed these Messengers who returning and relating his Answer to King Iohn he was exceeding sorrowfull and in much bitternesse of Spirit that he was thus contemned and disapointed of his purpose Yet persisting in his pre-conceived wicked designe to ruine his Kingdome and people and hating all the Nobility and Gentry of England with a viperous Venom he sets upon another course and knowing Pope Jnnocent to be the most ambitious proud and covetous of all men who by gifts and promises would be wrought upon to act any wickednesse Thereupon he hastily dispatcheth messengers to him with great summes of Money and a re-assurance of his tributary Subjection which shortly after he confirmed by a new Oath and Charter to procure him to Excommunicate the Archbishop of Canterbury and the Barons whom he had formerly favoured which things he greedily desired that he might wrecke has malice an them by Dis inheriting Imprisoning and Spoiling them being Excommunicated Which things when he had wickedly plotted he more wickedly executed afterwards In the meane time the Barons foreseeing that nothing was to be obtained but by strong hand assemble an Army at Stamford wherein were said to be two thousand Knights besides Esquires and marched from thence towards Oxford where the King expected their comming to answer their demands And being come to Brackley with their Army the King sends the Earle of Pembroke Mariscall and the Archbishop of Canterbury with others to demand of them what were those Lawes and Liberties they required to whom they shewed a Schedule of them which the Commissioners delivered to the King who having heard them read in great indignation asked Why the Barons did not likewise demand the Kingdome and swore he would never grant those Articles whereby himselfe should be made a Servant So harsh a thing is it to a power that is once gotten out into the wide libertie of his will to heare againe of any reducing within his Circle Vpon this answer the Barons resolve to seize the Kings Castles constitute Robert Fitz-walter their Generall entituling him Mariscall of the ARMY of GOD and of HOLY CHVRCH A Title they would never have given their Generall or Army had they deemed this Warre unlawfull in Law or Conscience After which they tooke divers of the Kings Castles and are admitted into London where their number daily increasing they make this Protestation Never to give over the prosecution of their desire till they had constrained the King whom they held perjured to grant them their Rights Which questionlesse they would not have done had they not beleeved this Warre to be just and lawfull King Iohn seeing himselfe in a manner generally forsaken of all his people and Nobles having scarce 7. Knights faithfull to him another strong argument that the people and Kingdome generally apprehended this taking up armes against the King to regaine to preserve their hereditary Rights and Liberties to be lawfull counterfeits the Seales of the Bishops and writes in their Names to all Nations That the English were all Apostates and whosoever would come to invade them hee by the Popes consent would conferre upon them all their Lands and Possossions But this device working no effect in regard they gave no credit to it and found it apparently false the King seeing himselfe deserted of all and that those of the Barons part were innumerable cum tota Angliae Nobilitas in unum collecta quasi sub numero non cadebat writes Mathew Paris another argument of the justice of this cause and warre in their beliefes and consciences at last condescended to grant and confirme their Liberties which he did at Running-Meade in such sort as I have formerly related And though the Pope afterwards for his owne private ends and interest bribed by King Iohn who resigned his Kingdome to him and became his Vassall without his peoples consent which resignation was judged voide excommunicated the Barons withall their assistance Qui Ioha●nem illustrum Regim

together to live and dye for justice and to their power to destroy the TRAITORS OF THE REALME Especially the two Spensers after which they raised an Army whereof they made Thomas Earle of Lancaster Generall and meeting at Sherborne they plunder and destroy the Spensers Castles Mannors Houses Friends Servants and marching to Saint Albanes with Ensignes displayed sent Messengers to the King then at London admonishing him not onely to rid his Court but Kingdome of the TRAITORS TO THE REALME the Spensers condemned by the Commons in many Articles to preserve the peace of the Realme and to grant them and all their followers Lette●s Pattents of indemnity for what they had formerly done Which the King at first denied but afterwards this Armie marching up to London where they were received by the City he yeelded to it and in the 15 th yeare of his Raigne by a speciall Act of Parliament the said Spensers were disinherited and banished the Realme formis-councelling the king oppressing the people by injustice a vising him to levie warre upon his Subjects making evill Iudges and other Officers to the hurt of the King and Kingdome ●ng●ossing the Kings eare and usurping his Royall authority as ENEMIES of the King and OF HIS PEOPLE and by another Act of Parliament it was then provided that no man should be questioned for any felonies or trespasses committed in the prosecution of Hugh ●e de pensers the father and sonne which Act runnes thus Whereas of late many great men of the Realme surmised to Sir Hugh le Despenser the sonne and Father many misdemeanors by them committed against the estate of our Lord the King and of his Crowne and to the disinheritance of the great men and destruction of the people and pursued those misdemeanors and attainder of them by force because they could not be attainted by processe of Law because that the said Sir Hughes had accroached to them the royall power in divers manner the said Grandees having mutually bound themselves by oath in writing without the advise of our Lord the King and after in pursuing the said Hugh and Hugh and their alies and adherents the said great men and others riding with banners displaied having in them the Armes of the king and their owne did take and occupie the Chattels Villages Mannors Lands Tenements Goods and likewise take and imprison some of the Kings leige people and others tooke some and slew others and did many other things in destroying the said Hugh and Hugh and their alies and others in England Wales and in the Marches whereof some things may be said Trespasses and others felonies and the said Hugh and Hugh in the Parliament of our Lord the King sommoned at Westminster three weekes after the Nativitie of Saint John Baptist the 15. yeare of his Raigne for the said misdemeanors were fore judged and banished the Realme by a vote of the Peeres of the Land and the foresaid great men in the said Parliament shewed to our Lord the King that the things done in the pursuite of the said Hugh and Hugh by reason of such causes of necessity cannot be legally redressed or punished without causing great trouble or perchance warre in the land which shall be worse and prayed our Lord that of all alliances trespasses and felonies they might be for ever acquitted for the preservation of peace the avoyding of warre and asswaging of angers and rancors and to make unitie in the land and that our Lord the King may more intirely have the hearts and Wills of the great men and of his people to maintaine and defend his Lands and to make warre upon and grieve his enemies It is accorded and agreed in the said Parliament by our Lord the King and by the Prelates Earles Barrons and Commons of the Realme there assembled by command of our Lord the King that none of what estate or condition soever he be for alliance at what time soever made by deed oath writing or in other manner nor for the taking occupying or detainer of Chattels towns Mannors Lands Tenements and good taken imprisoning or ransoming the Kings leige People or of other homicides robberies felonies or other things which may be noted as trespasses or fellonies committed against the peace of the king by the said great men their allies or adherents in the pursuite aforesaid since the first day of March last past till the thursday next after the feast of the assumption of our Ladie to wit the 19. day of August next ensuing be appealed nor challenged taken nor imprisoned nor grieved nor drawne into judgement by the King nor any other at the suite of any other which shall be in the Kings Court or in any place else but that all such trespasses and Felonies shall be discharged by this accord and assent saving alwaies to all men but to the said Hugh and Hugh action and reason to have and recover their Chattels Farmes mannors Lands tenements wards and marriages according to the Lawes and customes used in the Realme without punishment against the king or damages recovered against the party for the time aforesaid For which end they prescribed likewise a Charter of Pardon annexed to this Act according to the purport of it which every one that would might sue out which Charter you may read in old Magna Charta From which Act of Parliament I shall observe these three things First that this their taking up Armes to apprehend the Spens●rs as enemies to the King and kingdom and marching with banners displayd was not then reputed high Treason or Rebellion against the King though it were by way of offence not of defence and without any authority of Parliament for there is not one word of Treason or Rebellion in this Act or in the Charter of pardon pursuing it and if it had beene high Treason this Act and Charters on it extending onely to Fellonie and Trespasses not to Treasons and Rebellions would not have pardoned these transcendent Capitall crimes Secondly that the unlawfull outrages robberies and murders committed by the souldiers on the kings leige people and not on the two Spensers the sole delinquents were the occasion of this Act of oblivion and pardon not the Armed pursuing of them when they had gotten above the reach of Law Thirdly that though this were an offensive not defensive warre made without common assent of Parliament and many murthers robberies and misdemeanors committed in the prosecution of it upon the kings leige people who were no Delinquents yet being for the common good to suppresse and banish these ill Councellors enemies Traytors to King and Kingdome the King and Parliament thought it such a publicke service as merited a pardon of these misdemeanors in the carriage of it and acquitted all who were parties to it from all suites and punishments All which considered is a cleare demonstration that they would have resolved our present defensive warre by Authoritie of both Houses accompanied with no such outrages as these for

some to be Apostles some Prophets some Evangelists c. So that by their determination Ministers are more Gods Ordinance and more jure Divino then Kings yea but few years since they all professed themselves to be as much if not more Gods anointed then Kings and some of our Archest Prelates made publike challenges in the open Court That if they could not prove their Lordly Episcopacy to be Iure Divino they would presently burn their Rochets and lay down their Bishopricks though they never made good their promises to doubt whether the Pope and his supreme Authoritie be iure Divino by Christs own immediate institution deserves a fagot in the Roman Church Yet notwithstanding all this Divine Right and institution our Opposites will grant That if Popes Archbishops Bishops Priests Ministers preach false Hereticall doctrines oppresse wound slay rob plunder the people committed by God to their cares or attempt with force to subvert Religion Laws Liberties or commit any capitall offences they may not onely with safe conscience be resisted repulsed by their people but likewise apprehended arraigned deprived condemned executed by Lay Iudges as infinite examples in our Histories manifest and the example of Abiathar the High Priest 1 Kings 2. 26 27 And if so then why not Kings as well as they or other temporall Magistrates notwithstanding any of the obiected Texts Either therefore our Opposites must grant all Bishops Priests Ministers yea all other Magistrates whatsoever as irresistable uncensurable undeprivable uncondemnable for any crimes whatsoever as they say kings are which they dare not do or else make Kings as resistable censurable deprivable and lyable to all kindes of punishments by their whole Kingdoms consent in Parliament as far forth as they notwithstanding all the former Objections which quite subverts their cause Thirdly Kings and Kingdoms are not so Gods Ordinance as that they should be universall over all the world and no other Government admitted or so as any one Nation whatsoever should be eternally tyed to a Monarchiall Government without any power to alter it into an Aristocracy or other form upon any occasion or so as unalterably to continue the Soveraign power in one family alone as not to be able to transfer it to another when the whole State shall see just cause Hereditary Kingdoms being but Offices of publike trust for the peoples good and safety as well as elective most of them were elective at first and made hereditary onely either by violent usurpation or the peoples voluntary assents and institution and not by any immediate divine Authority and so alterable by their joynt assents as Zuinglius Buchanon Mariana observe and the Histories of most Kingdoms the experience of all ages evidence Which truths being generally confessed by all Polititians Historians Statists by many judicious Divines contradicted by no one text of Scripture that I have met with which our Opposites have objected hitherto they will finde all Monarchies upon the matter to be meer humane Institutions alterable still by that humane Power which did at first erect them and subordinate still thereto as the Creature to its Creator and to be Gods Ordinance onely in regard of speciall providence and the like as other inferiour Magistrates Rulers are who may be justly resisted altered removed censured notwithstanding the objected Text. From which whiles some men earnestly presse that every soul by Gods own Ordinance ought to be subject to some publike civill power which others safely deny fince the Patriarks the first families of most Nations and Countries were not so and all Nations all people before setled publike governments were erected which in many places are not very ancient since those whose Parents are dead and are not by them subjected to a Government are naturally free and none bound to part with their freedom to any other unlesse they see a necessitie a great advantage and that upon such terms and conditions as they deem meet they involve even Kings and Emperours themselves by Gods own Ordinance in a subiection to a superiour earthly civill power to wit to their Laws Parliaments Kingdoms which I have proved Paramount them collectively considered according to the common proverbe Omne sub Regno graviore Regnum est and that of Solomon concerning oppressing Kings and Judges He that is higher then the Highest considers and there be higher then they And so make kings not onely resistble by their whole Kingdoms the supreme Soveraign power but likewise subiect to their Realms superiour commands and uncapable to resist their lawfull power and Forces even in point of Conscience by vertue of this very Text. And so much for the fourth Question For the fifth and last What kinde of resistance of the Higher powers is here prohibited I answer briefly That resistance is here forbidden which is contrary to subiection or obedience as the words Let every soul be subject to the higher Powers coupled with the ensuing reason Whosoever therefore resisteth that is disobeyeth or is not subiect to the Power resisteth the Ordinance of God and they that resist shall receive to themselves damnation In the Greek there are two distinct words used 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Latine English French Dutch use them both as one without distinction The first word signifies properly disordered counter-ordered or ordered against as Paraeus Willet and others observe and it is thus used by the Apostle 2 Thess 3. 6 7 11 or disobedient 1 Tim. 1. 9. The later word signifieth properly to resist withstand or oppose in which sence it is used Matth. 5. 39. Luke 21. 1 5. Act. 6. 10. Rom. 9. 19. Gal. 2. 11. 2 Tim. 3. 1. Hebr. 12. 4. Iam. 4. 7. chap. 5. 6. 1 Pet. 5. 9. and applied indifferently both to a spirituall corporall and verball resistance of the Holy Ghost the Devill or men Since then the Apostle in this Text useth the Hebrew phrase Soul not Man Let every Soul be subject to the Higher Powers because as Haymo Tollet Willet Soto and most other Interpreters observe we ought willingly and cheerfully to submit to the higher Powers not only with our bodies but soules and spirits too I may hence cleerly inferre that the resistance of the higher Power hee prohibited as contrary to this subjection is not only that which is corporall and violent by force of armes as the Objectors glosse it but that likewise which is verball mentall spirituall in the soule it selfe without the body and no more then a meer passive resistance or not obeying For not to doe what the higher Powers enjoyn is in verity actually to resist to withstand them as not to doe the will not to yeeld obedience to the motions dictates of the Holy Ghost or devill is really to resist them even in Scripture phrase Yea corporall resistance or opposition by way of force is only an higher degree of resistance but not the onely or proper resistance here prohibited which

MAN not God as I have formerly proved them to be If so I then appeal to the consciences of our fiercest Antagonists whether they do beleeve in their consciences or date take their Oathes upon it That ever any people or Nation in the world or our Ancestors at first did appoint any Kings or Governours over them to subvert Religion Laws Liberties or intend to give them such an unlimited uncontroulable Soveraignty over them as not to provide for their own safety or not to take up Arms against them for the necessary defence of their Laws Liberties Religion Persons States under pain of high Treason or eternall damnation in case they should degenerate into Tyrants and undertake any such wicked destructive designe If not as none can without madnesse and impudence averre the contrary it being against all common sence and reason that any man or Nation should so absolutely irresistably inslave themselves and their Posterities to the very lusts and exorbitancies of Tyrants and such a thing as no man no Nation in their right sences were they at this day to erect a most absolute Monarchie would condescend to then clearly the Apostle here confirming onely the Ordinances of men and giving no Kings nor Rulers any other or greater power then men had formerly granted them for that had been to alter not approve their humane Ordinances I shall infallibly thence inferre That whole States and Subjects may with safe conscience resist the unjust violence of their Kings in the foresaid cases because they never gave them any authority irresistably to act them nor yet devested themselves much lesse their posterity whom they could not eternally inslave of the right the power of resisting them in such cases whom they might justly resist before whiles they were private men and as to which illegall proceedings they continue private persons still since they have no legall power given them by the people to authorize any such exorbitances Fourthly The subjection here enjoyned is not passive but active witnesse ver 15. For so is the will of God that by WELL DOING to wit by your actuall cheerfull submission to every Ordinance of man for the Lords sake c. you put to silence the ignorance of foolish men as free and not using your liberty c. If then this Text be meant of active not passive obedience then it can be intended onely of lawfull Kings of Magistrates in their just commands whom we must actually obey not of Tyrants and Oppressours in their unjust wicked proceedings whom we are bound in such cases actually to disobey as our Antagonists grant and I have largely evidenced elsewhere Wherefore it directly commands resistance not subjection in such cases since actuall disobedience to unjust commands is actuall resisting of them And that these Texts prescribing resistance tacitely should apparantly prohibit it under pain of Treason Rebellion Damnation is a Paradox to me Fifthly This Text doth no way prove that false conceit of most who hence conclude That all Kings are the Supream Powers and above their Parliaments and whole Kingdoms even by Divine institution There is no such thing nor shadow of it in the Text. For first This Text calls Kings not a Divine but Humane Ordinance If then Kings be the Supreamest Power and above their Parliaments Kingdoms it is not by any Divine Right but by Humane Ordination onely as the Text resolves Secondly This Text prescribes not any Divine Law to all or any particular States nor gives any other Divine or Civill Authority to Kings and Magistrates in any State then what they had before for if it should give Kings greater Authority and Prerogatives then their people at first allotted them it should alter and invade the settled Government of all States contrary to the Apostles scope which was to leave them as they were or should be settled by the peoples joynt consent It doth not say That all Kings in all Kingdoms are or ought to be Supreame or let them be so henceforth no such inference appears therein It speaks not what Kings ought to be in point of Power but onely takes them as they are according to that of Rom. 13. 2. The Powers that ARE c. to wit that are even now every where in being not which ought to be or shall be whence he saith Submit to the King as supreame that is where by the Ordinance of man the King is made supreame not where Kings are not the supreamest Power as they were not among the ancient Lacedemonians Indians Carthaginians Gothes Aragonians and in most other Kingdoms as I have elsewhere proved To argue therefore We must submit to Kings where the people have made them supreame Ergo All Kings every where are and ought to be supreame Jure divino as our Antagonists hence inferre is a grosse absurdity Thirdly This Text doth not say That the King is the supreame soveraigne Power as most mistake but supreame Governour as the next words or Governours c. expond it and the very Oath of Supremacie 1. Eliz. Cap. 1. which gives our Kings this Title Supreame Governour within these his Realms Now Kings may be properly called Supreame Magistrates or Governours in their Realms in respect of the actuall administration of government and justice all Magistrates deriving their Commissions immediately from them and doing justice for and under them and yet not be the Soveraign Power as the Romane Emperours the Kings of Sparta Arragon and others the German Emperours the Dukes of Venice in that State and the Prince of Orange in the Nether-lands were and are the Supreame Magistrates Governours but not the Supreame Severaigne Powers their whole States Senates Parliaments being the Supreamest Powers and above them which being Courts of State of Justice and a compound body of many members not alwayes constantly sitting may properly be stiled The Supreame Courts and Powers but not the Supreame Magistrate or Governour As the Pope holds himself the Supreame Head and Governour of the Militant Church and the Arch-Bishop of Canterbury stiles himself the Primate and Metropolitane of all England and so other Prelates in their Provinces yet they are not the Soveraigne Ecclesiasticall Power for the King at least Generall Councells or Nationall Synods which are not properly tearmed Governours but Power are Paramount them and may lawfully censure or depose them as I have elsewhere manifested To argue therefore that Kings are the highest Soveraign Power because they are the highest particular Governours and Magistrates in their Realms as our Antagonists do is a meer Fallacie and Inconsequent since I have proved our own and most other Kings not to be the highest Powers though they be the Supreamest Governours Fourthly This Text speaks not at all of the Romane Emperour neither is it meant of him as Doctour Fern● with others mistake who is never in Scripture stiled a King being a Title extreamly odious to the Romanes and for ever banished their State with

an Oath of execration by an ancient Law in memory whereof they instituted a speciall annuall Feast on the 23. of February called Regifugium the hatred of which Title continued such that Tully and Augustine write Regem Romae posthac nec Dii nec Homines esse patiantur And Caesar himself being saluted King by the multitude perceiving it was very distastfull to the States answered CAESAREM SE NON REGEM ESSE which Title of Caesar not King the Scripture ever useth to expresse the Emperour by witnesse Matth. 22. 17 21. Mark 12. 14 16 17. Luke 2. 1. chap. 20. 22 24 25. chap. 23. 2. John 19. 12 15. Acts 11. 28. chap. 17. 7. chap. 25. 8 10 11 12 21. chap. 26. 32. chap. 27. 24. chap. 28. 19. Phil. 4. 22. Which Texts do clearly manifest that no Title was ever used by the Apostles Evangelists Jewes to expresse the Emperour by but that of Caesar not this of King Therefore Peters Text speaking onely of the King not Caesar cannot be intended of the Romane Emperour as ignorant Doctors blindly fancie Fifthly This Epistle of Peter the Apostle of the Jews was written onely to the dispersed Jews thorowout Pontus Galatia Cappadocia Asia and Bythinia 1 Pet. 1. 1. over whom Herod at that time reigned as King by the Romane Senates and Emperours appointment who had then conquered the Jews and made them a tributarie Province as is evident by Matth. 27. 17 21. Mark 12. 14 16 17. Luke 20. 22 24 25. chap. 23. 2. Acts 17. 7. chap. 25. 8 10 11 12 21. chap. 27. 24. chap. 12. 1. to 24. compared together and by Josephus the Century writers Baronius Sigonius and others The King then here mentioned to be supreame was Herod or King Agrippa or some other immediate King of the Jews who was their supreame Governour not absolutely but under the Romane Senate and Emperours and made so by their appointment whence called in the Text an Ordinance of man not God Now this King of the Jews as is evident by Pauls Appeal to Caesar from Festus and King Agrippa as to the Soveraign Tribunall Acts 25. and 26. by Josephus Philo Judaeus de legatione ad Caium and the consent of all Historians was not the absolute Soveraigne Power but subordinate to the Romane Emperour and Senate who both created and bad power to controll remove and censure him for his misdemeanours yet Peter calls him here Supreame because the Highest Governour under them as we stile our Kings Supreame Governours under Christ Therefore having a Superiour Governour and Power over him to which he was accountable and subordinate Supreame in the Text cannot be meant of a King absolutely Supreame having no Power Superiour to him but God but onely relatively Supreame in respect of under-Governours there actually residing whose Supremacie being forcibly gained onely by conquest not free consent and the ancient native Kings of the Jews being inferiour to their whole Senates and Congregations and to do all by their advice as Josephus Antiq. Jud. lib. 4. cap. 8. 2. Sam. 18. 3 4. Jer. 38. 45. 1. Chron. 13. 1. to 6. attest will no way advantage our Opposites nor advance the Prerogative of Kings since it extends onely to the King of the Jews that then was who was not simply Supream but a Subject Prince subordinate to the Romane State and Empire and one appointed by a Conquerour not freely chosen and assented to by the people So as all the Argument which can hence be extracted for the absolute Soveraigntie and irresistibility of Kings over their whole Kingdomes and Parliaments is but this The King of the Jews was in Peters time the Supreame Magistrate over that Nation by the Romane Senates and Emperours appointment to whom yet he was subordinate and accountable the Romanes having conquered the Jewes by force and imposing this government upon them without their consents Therefore the Kings of England and all other Kings are absolute Soveraigne Monarches Superiour to their whole Parliaments and Kingdomes collectively considered and may not in point of conscience be forcibly resisted by them though they endeavour to subvert Religion Laws Liberties How little coherence there is in this Argument the silliest childe may at first discern From these Scriptures I descend to Reasons deduced from them against resistance which I shall contract into three Arguments The first is this Kings are the Fathers Heads Lords Shepherds of the Common-wealth Ergo They ought not to be resisted in any their exorbitant proceedings it being unlawfull unseemly for a Son to resist his Father the Members the Head the Vassals their Lord the Flock their Shepherd To this I answer First They are Fathers Shepherds Lords Heads onely in an improper allegoricall not genuine sence therefore nothing can thence be properly inferred They are and ought to be such in respect of their loving and carefull affection towards their Subjects not in regard of their Soveraigne Power over them Therefore when their Tyrannie makes them not such in regard of care and affection to their people their people cease to be such in regard of filiall naturall and sheep-like submission When these Shepberds turn Wolves these Fathers Step-fathers the Subjects as to this cease to be their Sheep their Children in point of Obedience and Submission Secondly If we consider the Common-weal and Kingdom collectively Kings are rather their Kingdoms children then Parents because created by them their publike servants ministers for whose benefit they are imployed and receive wages not their Soveraigne Lords their subordinate Heads to be directed and advised by them not Tyrannically to over-rule them at their pleasure Therefore Paramount and able in such cases to resist them Thirdly Parishioners may no doubt lawfully resist the false Doctrines and open assaults of their Ministers though they be their Spirituall Shepherds Citizens the violent oppressions of their Maiors though they be their Politique Heads Servants the unjust assaults of their Masters though their lawfull Lords who may not misuse their very Villaines by Law And if Parents will violently assault their naturall children Husbands their Wives Masters their Servants to murther them without cause they may by Law resist repulse them with open force Fourthly A Son who is a Judge may lawfully resist imprison condemne his naturall Father A Servant his Lord A Parishioner his Pastour a Citizen his Major a meer Gentleman the greatest Peer or Lord as experience proves because they do it in another capacity as Judges and Ministers of publike Justice to which all are subject The Parliament then in this sence as they are the representative Body of the Realm not private Subjects and their Armies by their authority may as they are the highest Soveraign Power and Judicature resist the King and his Forces though he be their Father Head Shepherd Lord as they are private men Fifthly This is but the common

defensive Arms by subjects in certains cases Sleidan Hist lib. 8. 18. 22. David Chrytraus Chron. Saxoniae l. 13. p. 376. Richardus Dinothus de Bello Civili Gallico Religionis caeusasuscepto p. 231. 232. 225. 227 c. A book intituled De Iure Belli Belgici Hagae 1599. purposely justifying the lawfulnesse of the Low-countries defensive war Emanuel Meteranus Historia Belgica Praefat. lib. 1 to 17. David Paraeus Com. in Rom. 13. Dub. 8. And. Quaest Theolog. 61. Edward Grimston his Generall History of the Netherlands l. 5. to 17. passim Hugo Grotius de Iure Belli Pacis lib. 1. cap. 4. with sundry other forraign Protestant writers both in Germany France Bohemia the Netherlands and elsewhere Iohu Knokes his Appellation p. 28. to 31. George Bucanon De Iure Regni apud Scotos with many Scottish Pamphlets justifying their late wars Ioh. Ponet once B. of Winchester his Book intituled Politick Govern p. 16. to 51. Alber. Gentilis de Iur. Belli l. 1. c. 25. l. 3. c. 9. 22. M. Goodmans Book in Q. Ma. dayes intituled How superior Magistrates ought to be obeyed c. 9. 13. 14. 16. D. A. Willet his Sixfold Commentary on Romanes 13. Quaestion 16. Controversie 3. p. 588 589 590 608 c. Peter Martyr Com In Rom. 13 p. 1026. with sundry late writers common in every mans hands iustifying the lawfulnesse of the present defensive War whose Names I spare And lest any should think that none but Puritanes have maintained this opinion K. Iames himself in his Answer to Card. Perron iustifieth the French Protestant taking up Defensive Arms in France And Bish Bilson a fierce Antipuritane not onely defends the Lawfulnesse of the Protestants defensive Arms against their Soveraign in Germany Flaunders Scotland France but likewise dogmatically determines in these words Neither will I rashly pronounce all that resist to be Rebels Cases may fall out even in Christian Kingdoms where the people may plead their right against the Prince AND NOT BE CHARGED WITH REBELLION As wherefor example If a Prince should go about to subject his People to a forreign Realm or change the form of the Common-wealth from Impery to Tyrannie or neglect the Laws established by Common consent of Prince and people to execute his own pleasure In these and other caeses which might be named IF THE NOBILITY AND COMMONS IOYN TOGETHER TO DEFEND THEIR ANCIENT AND ACCVSTOMED LIBERTY REGIMENT AND LAWS THEY MAY NOT WELL BE COVNTED REBELS I never denied but that the People might preserve the foundation freedom and forme of the Common-wealth which they fore prised when they first consented to have a King As I said then so I say now The Law of God giveth no man leave but I never said that Kingdoms and Common-wealths might not proportion their States as they thought best by their publike Laws which afterward the Princes themselves may not violate By supertour Powers ordained of God Rom. 13. we understand not onely Princes BVT ALL POLITIKE STATES AND REGIMENTS somewhere the People somewhere the Nobles having the same interest to the sword that Princes have to their Kingdoms and in Kingdoms where Princes bear rule by the sword we do not mean THE PRIVATE PRINCES WILL AGAINST HIS LAWS BVT HIS PRECEPT DERIVED FROM HIS LAWES AND AGREEING WITH HIS LAWES Which though it be wicked yet may it not be resisted of any subject when derived from and agreeing with the Laws with armed violence Marry when Princes offer their Subjects not Iustice but force and despise all Laws to practise their lusts not every nor any private man may take the sword to redresse the Prince but if the Laws of the Land appoint the Nobles as next to the King to assist him in doing right and withhold him from doing wrong THEN BE THEY LICENCED BY MANS LAW AND NOT PROHIBITED BY GODS to interpose themselves for safeguard of equity and innoceucy and by all lawfull AND NEEDFVLL MEANS TO PROCVRE THE PRINCE TO BE RE FORMED but in no case deprived where the Scepter is Hereditary So this learned Bishop determines in his authorized Book dedicated to Queen Elizabeth point-blank against our Novell Court-Doctors and Royallists But that which swayes most with me is not the opinions of private men byassed oft-times with private sinister ends which corrupt their judgements as I dare say most of our Opposites in this controversie have writ to flatter Princes to gain or retain promotions c. But the generall universall opinion and practice of all Kingdoms Nations in the world from time to time Never was there any State or Kingdom under heaven from the beginning of the world till now that held or resolved it to be unlawfull in point of Law or Coscience to resist with force of Arms the Tyranny of their Emperours Kings Princes especially when they openly made war or exercised violence against them to subvert their Religion Laws Liberties State Government If ever there were any Kingdom State People of this opinion or which forbore to take up Arms against their Tyrannous Princes in such cases even for conscience sake I desire our Antagonists to name them for though I have diligently searched inquired after such I could never yet finde or hear of them in the world but on the contrary I finde all Nations States Kingdoms whatsoever whether Pagan or Christian Protestant or Popish ancient or modern unanimously concurring both in iudgement and constant practice that forcible resistance in such cases is both iust lawfull necessary yea a duty to be undertaken by the generall consent of the whole Kingdom State Nation though with the effusion of much blood and hazard of many mens lives This was the constant practise of the Romans Grecians Gothes Moors Indians AEgyptians Vandals Spaniards French Britains Saxons Italians English Scots Bohemians Polonians Hungarians Danes Swedes Iews Flemmins and other Nations in former and late ages against their Tyrannicall oppressing Emperors Kings Princes together with the late defensive Wars of the protestants in Germany Bohemia France Swethland the Low-countries Scotland and elsewhere against their Princes approved by Queen Elizabeth king Iames and our present king Charles who assisted the French Bohemians Dutch and German Protestant Princes in those Wars with the unanimous consent of their Parliaments Clergy people abundantly evidence beyond all contradiction which I have more particularly manifested at large in my Appendix and therefore shall not enlarge my self further in it here onely I shall acquaint you with these five Particulars First that in the Germanes Defensive Wars for Religion in Luthers dayes the Duke of Saxonie the Lantzgrave of Hesse the Magistrates of Magdeburge together with other Protestant Princes States Lawyers Cities Counsellors and Ministers after serious consultation coneluded and resolved That the Laws of the Empire permitted resistance of the Emperour to the Princes and Subjects in some cases that defence of Religion and Liberties then invaded was one of these caeses that the times were

Barbarous Inhumanity for any person not to put to his uttermost strength speedily to close up the mortall wounds of his bleeding dying Native Country but to protract its cure to enlarge encrease its deadly Ulcers Stabs Sores and make a lasting trade of Warre out of a sordid sinfull desire of Gaine of Plunder to raise a private fortune by the Republicks ruines a sinne of which some perchance are guilty is an unparalleld most unnaturall prodigious Impiety It was thought a great dishonour heretofore for men of Honour and Estates not to serve and defend their Country gratis as our own Lawbooks Histories plentifully manifest and shall such Persons now turne sordid Mercenaries stirre neither hand nor foot without their Pay and be more diligent to get their wages than discharge their Service God forbid It is Recorded of the Children of Gad and Reuben after they had recovered their inheritance on this side Jordan that they went all up armed before the Lord over Jordan at their owne free cost untill they had driven out all the enemies in it before them subdued the Land and setled their brethren of the other Tribes peaceably in it And shall not Englishmen of Estates doe the like for their Brethren now in these times of need when money the sinewes of Warre is almost quite shrunke up by reason of former Disbursements and want of Trade We read That the very Heathen Kings of Canaan when they came and fought in Taanach by the waters of Megiddo against the Israelites THEY TOOKE NO GAINE OF MONEY for their paines Such was their Noble-generosity which Deborah registers in her Song for their eternall Glory And we heare of divers Lords and Gentlemen in the Kings Army which serve against their Country gratis yea furnish out sundry Horse and Foote of their proper cost of few or none such there who receive any Pay And shall these be more free generous active in serving fighting against God Religion Lawes Liberties Parliament and their Country than those of like Ranke and quality on the Parliaments party are in warring for them O let not such anignoble unchristian Report be ever once justly told in Gath or published in the streets of Askelon lest the daughters of the Philistines rejoyce lest the sonnes and daughters of the uncircumcised triumph I know there are some Heroicke Worthies in the Parliaments Armies of whom I may truely sing with Deborah My heart is toward the Governours of Israel that offered themselves willingly among the people and who like Zebulon and Nepthali have freely jeoparded their lives unto the death in the high places of the field Blessed be their Endeavours and their Names for ever Honourable I shall now onely wish that others would imitate their laudable examples that so our long-lingring warres may be speedily and happily determined in a blessed pure pious secure honourable lasting Peace They are Tormentors not Chirurgions Executioners not true Souldiers who desire endeavour not speedily to close up and heale their dearest Countries bleeding festring wounds for which I have prepared this Treatise as a Soveraigne Balme to incarne and cicatrize them not ulcerate or inflame them It was the Prophets Patheticke expostulation The harvest is past the Summer is ended and we are not healed Is there no balme in Gilead Is there no Physitian there why then is not the health of the Daughter of my people recovered It may be Englands and Irelands expostulation now The Lord put it into the hearts of our great Physitians the King Parliament and Grandees of both Armies that they may now at last with bleeding melting hearts and spirits speedily poure forth such effectuall healing Balmes into these two dying Kingdomes deadly wounds as may effectually cure and restore them to more perfect health and vigor than they ever formerly enjoyed that so they may lose nothing but their putrid blood their proud dead flesh their filthy sanies and corrupt humours by their unnaturall stabs already received Towards the advancement of which much desired cure if these my undigested rude Collections interrupted with sundry inevitable interloping Distractions which may justly excuse their many defects may adde any contribution or satisfie any seduced or scrupulous Consciences touching this present Warre I shall deeme my labours highly recompensed And so recommending them to Gods blessing and thy charitable acceptation I shall detaine thee with no further Prologue Farewell THE SOVERAIGNE POVVER OF PARLIAMENTS KINGDOMES PROVING I st That the Parliaments present necessary Defensive Warre is Iust and Lawfull both in point of Law and Conscience and no Treason nor Rebellion HAving in the two former Parts of this Discourse dissipated foure chiefe Complaints against the Parliaments proceedings I come now in order in point of time and sequell to the 5 th Grand Objection of the King Royalists and Papists against the Parliament To wit That they have traiterously taken up Armes and levied warre against the King himselfe in his Kingdome and would have taken away his life at Keinton battell which is no lesse than Rebellion and High Treason by the Statute of 25. E. 3. c. 2. with other obsolete Acts and by the Common Law Which Obiection though last in time is yet of greatest weight and difficulty now most cryed up and insisted on of all the rest in many of his Majesties late Proclamations Declarations and in Anti-Parliamentary Pamphlets To give a punctuall Answere to this capitall Complaint not out of any desire to foment but cease this most unnaturall bloody warre which threatens utter desolation to us if proceeded in or not determined with a just honourable secure lasting peace now lately rejected by his Majesties party I say First that it is apparent to all the world who are not willfully or maliciously blinded That this Majesty first began this warre not onely by his endeavors to bring up the Northerne Army to force the Parliament confessed by the flight letters examinations of those who were chiefe Actors in it but by raising sundry forces under colour of a guard before the Parliament levied any Secondly that the Parliament in raising their forces had no intention at all to offer the least violence to his Majesties person Crowne dignity nor to draw any English blood but onely to defend themselves and the Kingdome against his Majesties Malignant invasive plundring Forces to rescue his Majestie out of the hands the power of those ill Councellers and Malignants who withdrew him from his Parliament to bring him backe with honour peace safety to his great Councell their Generall and Army Marching with a Petition to this purpose and to bring those Delinquents to condigne punishment who most contemptuously deserted the Houses contrary to Order Law the Priviledges of Parliament their owne Protestation taken in both Houses sheltring themselves under the power of his Majesties presence and Forces from the justice of the Houses and apprehension of their Officers contrary to

force of Armes resist him and his unnaturall instruments there being no other meanes else of safety left them they should sinfully and wilfully betray their trust and be so farre from keeping a good Christian Conscience in not resisting by force that they should highly sinne against Conscience against their trust and duty against their naturall Country yea and their very Allegiance to the king himselfe by encouraging him in and consenting unto these proceedings which would make him not to be a king but Tyrant and destroy him as a king in the spoyle and ruine of his Kingdome thereby endangered to be consumed and tempt God himself as Pope Nicholas and Gratian resolve in these words If there be no necessity we ought at all times to abstaine from warres but if inevitable necessity urge us we ought not to abstaine from warres and warlike preparations for the defence of our selves of our Country and paternall Lawes no not in Lent least man should seeme to tempt God if when he hath meanes he provide not for his owne and others safety and prevents not the Detriments of holy religion Fourthly those injuries which Allies and other neighbour States or Princes may with good Conscience repulse with Armes from Subjects wrongfully oppressed invaded tyrannically by their Soveraignes or their wicked Instruments at or without the Subjects intreaty when they are unable to relieve themselves no doubt the Subjects themselves if able may with better reason and as good Conscience resist and repell because every man is nearer and more oblieged to defend and preserve himselfe and those of his owne Nation Religion blood then strangers are and may with lesse publick danger inconvenience and more speede effect it then Forraigners but Allies and Forraigne Neighbour States and Princes as Gratian o●t of the 5. Councell of Carthage Augustine Ambrose Hierom Anastatius Calistus and other Albericus Gentilis John Bodin a Huga Grotius and Generally all ●●nonists Casuists Scho●lemen accord may in many cases with good conscience by for● of Arms repulse from Subjects wrongfully oppressed invaded and tyrannically abused the injuries offered them by their Soveraignes and that either at and in some cases without the Subjects intreaty Which they prove by Moses his slaying the AEgyptian that oppressed the Hebrew Exod. 2. 11. to 15. by Joshua his ayding of the Gibeonites against the five Kings that made war against them Josh 10. by the example of Jehoshaphat 1 Kin. 22. 2 Kings 3. Of the chiefe Captaines securing Paul with a gard of Souldiers against the Iews who had vowed his death Acts 23. by Abrahams rescuing Lot Gen. 14. by sundry ancie●t and late Examples in story Therfore Subjects themselves no doubt if able may with good reason and conscience lawfully resist and repell their Princes invading Forces though accompanied assisted with his personall presence Fifthly It is yeelded by all Divines Lawyers Canonists Schoolemen as Gratian Ban●es Seto Lessius Vasquius Covaruvi●s Aquinas Sylvester Bartolus Baldus Navarre Albericus Gentilis Grotius and others that private men by the Law of God and nature may in defence of their lives chastities principall members and estates lawfully resist all those who forcibly assault them to deprive them thereof yea and slay them to unlesse they be publicke persons of eminencie by whose slaughter the Commonweale should sustaine much prejudice whose lives in such cases must not be willingly hazzarded though their violence be resisted which is cleerely prooved by Iudges 11. 8. 15. to 18. 1 Sam. 17. 41. to 53. Deut. 22. 26. 27. since therefore all these are apparently indangered by an invasive warre and Army more then by any private assaults and no ayde no assistance or protection against the losse of life chastitie estate and other violences injuries which accompany wars can be expected from the Lawes or Prince himself the fountaine of this injustice or legall punishments inflicted on the malefactors whose armed power being above the reach of common justice and injuries countenanced abetted authorised by the Soveraine who should avenge and punish them every subject in particular and the whole state in Parliament assembled in generall may and ought in point of conscience joyntly and severally to defend themselves their neighbours brethren but especially their native Countrey Kingdome whose generall safety is to be preferred before the lives of any particular persons how great or considerable soever which may be casually hazarded by their owne wilfulnesse though not purposely endangered or cut off in the defensive incounter by those who make resistance And if according to Cajetan and other Schoolemen Innocents which onely casually hinder ones flight from a mortall enemie may be lawfully with good conscience slaine by the party pursued in case where he cannot else possibly escape the losse of his owne life because every mans owne life is dearer to him then anothers which he here takes away onely to preserve his owne life without any malicious murtherous intent though others doubt of this case or if innocent persons set perforce in the front of unjust assailants as by the Cavalleires at Brainford and elsewhere to prevent defence and wrong others with more securitie and lesse resistance may casually be slain though not intentionally by the defensive party as I thinke they may for prevention of greater danger and the publicke safety then certainely those of publicke place and Note who wilfully and unnaturally set themselves to ruine their Country Liberty Religion Innocent brethren who onely act the defensive part and voluntarily intrude themselves into danger may questionlesse with safe conscience be resisted repulsed in which if they casually chance to lose their lives without any malice or ill intention in the defendants it being onely through their owne default such a casuall accident when it happens or the remote possibility of it in the combate before it begins cannot make the resistance either unjust or unlawfull in point of conscience for then such a possibility of danger to a publike person should make all resistance unlawfull deprive the Republicke wholly of this onely remedy against tyrannicall violence and expose the whole common-weale to ruine whose weale and safety is to be preferred before the life or safety of any one member of it whatsoever Having thus at large evinced the lawfulnesse of Subjects necessary forcible resistance defensive wars against the unjust offensive Forces of their Soveraignes I shall in the next place answere the principall arguments made against it some whereof for ought I finde are yet unanswered These Objections are of foure sorts out of the Old Testament the New from reason from the example of the primitive Christians backed with the words of some Fathers I shall propound and answere them in order The first out of the Old Testament is that of Numb 16. Korah Dathan and Abiram for their insurrection against that very divine Authority which God himselfe

high ruleth in the kingdome of men and giveth it to whomsoever he will and setteth up over it the basest of men with Hos 13. 11. 1 Sam. 10. 1. Jer. 27. 5 6 7. Isay 45. 1 2. and other Texts To answer this question distinctly and dissipate these grosse erroneous Paradoxes we must distinguish First betweene Government it selfe in generall and kingly or other kindes of government in speciall as our opposites distinguish betweene a Sabbath and the Sabbath the first they say is morall and of divine institution the later not Secondly betweene the Regall power of Kings the persons invested with this power the manner of obtaining and the administration of their power Thirdly of Gods manner of instituting and ordaining things which is twofold immediately by himselfe mediately by others And these institutions of both kinds are either universall extending to all places Nations or particular concerning some Countries and Nations onely and not others Perpetuall for ever or temporall onely for some set time Immutable not capable of the least alteration or mutable and that either at the pleasure of God onely or at the will of men when they shall see just cause either in part or in whole Fourthly in what severall senses things may be said to be of God First in respect of his owne immediate institution Secondly of his generall or speciall commands Thirdly of his generall or speciall disposing providence without any speciall institution or command Fourthly of his approbation of assent unto and blessing on the meere institutions of men Fiftly of his permission onely To apply these distinctions to the present occasion First it is cleare that power and government in generall are Gods owne institution who as he hath appointed in the great fabricke of the world a certaine constant forme of government and subordination of one creature to another so he hath for the good of mankinde appointed that there should be some forme of government or other among men in the world which in respect of families hee hath specially and universally decreed as that the wife should be subject to the husband the children to the parents the servants to their masters but in regard of Commonweales or Nations hee hath left it arbitrary and indefinite leaving every Nation and Country free liberty to elect such a publike politike forme of government as themselves should judge most expedient for their publike good and that mutable since all humane things are so as they should see just occasion not prescribing any sempiternall immutable forme of government to any particular Nations Regions much lesse to all the world Secondly government in generall being thus of God but the kindes of it thus left arbitrary to mens institution and free election the particular governments instituted by any Nation for the better regulating of their lives the preservation of humane society and advancement of Gods glory may be truely said in some sense to be of God though instituted invented by men Not because God himselfe did immediately ordain or prescribe them by speciall command to all or any one people or because God himself did immediately ordaine or prescribe them by speciall command to this all or any one people but because hee by his generall or speciall providence did direct this Nation to make choyse of such a government or gave them wisedome to invent and settle it as most commodious for their republike till they should see cause to alter it or because he blessed and approved it when invented and received by them Thirdly Kingly powers Kingdomes Kings the things now in question are and may be said to be of God and ordained of God in no other manner or sense then all other particular Governments or Magistrates are For this Text of the Romans speaking onely of the higher powers the powers that are and of Rulers as doth that place of Titus 3. 1. And the Text of Prov. 8. 15 16. so much relied on by the objectors extending as well to all subordinate Rulers as Kings witnesse the subsequent words By me Kings reigne and Princes decree justice by me Princes rule AND NOBLES yea ALL THE JUDGES OF THE EARTH that is all Magistrates whatsoever it cannot but be yeelded that all and every lawfull kinde of government all lawfull Rulers and Magistrates of what fort soever are of Gods ordination and his ordinance as farre forth as Monarchies are and what is truely affirmable of the one is of the other too These generalls thus premised as indubitable I say first of all That Monarchy or regall power is not of God nor yet Gods ordinance by way of immediate divine institution or speciall command from Gods owne free motion as our opposites affirme it For first God himself never immediately instituted a royall Monarchicall government in any Nation whatsoever no not among his owne people whose government was at first Paternall and Patriarchicall next Aristocraticall then Regall not by Gods immediate institution and voluntary designation but by the peoples earnest importunity contrary to the good liking of God and Samuel as is evident by 1 Sam. c. 8 and 9 and 10 and 11. Hos 8. 4. and the Appendix Secondly All Politicians and Historians grant that the originall crection of all Monarechies was either by the peoples free consent and ordination or by Tyranny and usurpation or be conqest none by divine institution or speciall command from God And it must needs be so because most kingdomes were primitively erected either among Pagan Nations and States who knew not God nor his Word or among Christian States since speciall commands and Revelations from heaven ceased which if our opposites deny I shall desire them to instance in any one Monarchy in the world instituted immediately by God himselfe or by speciall command from his owne free motion Till this be done all their asseverations will be accounted fabulous Thirdly if Regall power be Gods ordinance by way of divine immediate institution and command then this institution of Regall Monarchy with the severall Prerogatives and boundaries of it would appeare in some Text of Scripture and this government would be specially and perpetually prescribed either to all or some particular Nations by God himselfe But this institution with the generall Prerogatives and bounds of Regall Authority are no where extant in Scripture neither this forme of government therein prescribed but left arbitrary to all or any Nation in particular for ought any man can demonstrate Those Texts which concerne the Kings of the Israelites in point of soveraignty and Prerogative being judiciall onely and peculiar to that Nation nor morall or extending unto others Therefore it is not Gods ordinance by way of divine immediate institution or command Fourthly if it were of divine ordination in this sense then the Regall power and authority of all Kings and Monarchs in the world should bee equall yea the very same and there should be no different kinde of Kings as the divine authority of

Anglorum Cruce signatum ET VASALLVM ROMANAE ECCLESIAE an honourable Title indeed for a King pers quuntur molientes ei Regnum auferre which this Pope him selfe did but few yeares before giving his Crown and Kingdome it selfe to King Phillip of France which to save he sordidly resigned up to the Pope quod ad Romanam Ecclesiam dignoscitur pertinere Yet this Excommunication thus procured by bribery proceeding not out of Conscience to preserve the Kings due Rights but selfe-respects to support the Popes usurped interest and Title to the Realme and being a wicked plot of the King more wickedly executed by the Pope who as Matthew Paris writes was AD OMNIA SCELERA pro praemijs datis vel promissis cercus proclivis and the Londoners Barons with divers Prelates then contemning it as pronounced upon false suggestions and especially for this cause that the ordering of temporall affaires belonged not to the Pope Cum Petro Apostolo ejus Successoribus non nisi Ecclesiasticarum dispositio rerum a Domino sit collata potestas And using likewise these memorable Speeches in those blind daies against the Pope and his usurped Supremacy with liberty Vt quid ad nos se extendit Romanorum insatiata cupiditas Quid Episcopis Apostolicis Militiae nostrae Ecce successores Constantini non Petri non imitantur Petrum in meritis vel operibus nec assimulandi sunt in Potestate Prob pudor marcidi ribaldi qui de armis vel literalitate minime norunt jam toti mundo propter excom nunicationes suas volunt dominari ignobiles usurarij Simoniales O quantum dissimules Petro qui sibi Petri usurpant partem c. I conceive this Excommunication rather justifies then disproves the lawfulnesse of this their taking up of armes and the warre insuing it being but for their owne just defence when the King afterwards with fire sword and bloody barbarous Forraigne Forces wasted his Realme in a most inhumane tyrannicall maner Factus de Rege Tyrannus imo in bestialem prorumpens feritatem c. which necessitated the Barons for their own preservation and the Kingdoms devoted by this unnaturall Prince to Vassallage and utter desolation to elect Lewis of France for their King Who together with the Peeres and Estates of France assembled at Lions concerning this Election resolved it to be just and lawfull and the Barons Defensive Warres against and rejection of King Iohn for his Tyranny and oppressions to be just and honourable since they did but flee to these extraordinary remedies and seeke for justice abroad when they were denied it by him that should give it them in as ordinary way at home chosing a King in place of a Tyrant as Matthew Paris with the generall History of France written by Iohn de Serres and Englished by Edward Grimston more largely manifest Secondly the Lawfulnesse and justnesse of the Barons Warres in Defence of Magna Charta with other their Hereditary Rights and Liberties appeares most evidently by the resolution of all those Parliaments summoned by King Henry the 3 d. Edward the 1 0 2. 3. Richard the 2 d. and other our succeeding Kings which have many times even by force of Armes or Menaces and sometimes by faire termes caused these Kings by new Acts of Parliament to ratifie Magnae Charta the Charter of the Forest with other Fundamentall Liberties thus forcibly extorted from King Iohn at first and constrained them to confirme him with their Oathes and solemne publicke Excommunications to be published by the Bishops in their Dio●esse twice every yeare oft solemnly vowing and protesting both in and out of Parliament to defend these Lawes and Liberties with their estates armes lives blood which their ancasters had purchased with their blood as I have manifested in the two first parts of this Discourse All which they would no doubt have forborne had they deemed it high Treason or Rebellion in point of Law to take up armes against their Kings in defence or these Lawes and Privileges neither would our Kings and Parliaments in times of Peace have so frequently confirmed these Lawes and Immunities as just and necessary for the peoples welfare had they reputed their former purchases and confirmations by warre and armes no lesse then Treason or Rebellion And if it were neither Treason nor Rebellion in the judgements of our Ancestors and those Parliaments which procured and ratified Magna Charta to take up armes in defence thereof much lesse can it be Treason or Rebellion in the Parliament and Subjects now by Votes by Ordinances of both Houses with force of armes to preserve not only these their hereditarie Charters Lawes Priviledges but their very Lives Estates yea the Privileges and being of Parliaments themselves which are now invaded endangered What opinion the world had of the lawfulnesse of most of the Barons Warres in King Henry the 3 d. his Raigne against this troublesome persidious King in defence of their Lawes Liberties Estates appeares first by the Dialogue betweene Agnellus a Frier minorite one of King Henry his Counsell purposely sent to the Earle Marshall then in armes against the King and this Martiall Earle in the Abbey of Morgan Anno 1233. I will first relate the true state of that Warre and then their Dialogue concerning it King Henry by the ill counsell of Peter Bishop of Winchester removed all his English Officers Counsellors and Servants from his Court and put Poictovines and Forraigners in their places being ruled wholly by them withall he puts the English Garisons out of all his Castles and substitutes Forraigners in them which dayly arived both with Horse and armes in great multitudes and much oppressed the people calling them Traitors so that the power and wealth of the Realme was wholly under their Command The Earle Marshall seeing the Noble and Ignoble thus oppressed and the rights of the Kingdome like utterly to be lost provoked with a zeale of Iustice associating to himselfe other Noble men goes boldly to the King reproves him in the hearing of many For calling in those Poictovines by evill Counsell to the oppression of the Kingdome and of his naturall Subjects and likewise of Lawes and Liberties Humbly beseeching him hastily to correct these excesses which threatned the imminent subversion both of His Crowne and Kingdome which if he refused to doe he and the other Nobles of the Realme would withdraw themselves from his Counsell as long as he harboured those Strangers To which Peter of Winchester replyed That the King might lawfully call in what strangers be would for the Defence of his Kingdome and Crowne and likwise so many and such as might compell his proud and rebellious Subjects to due Obedience Whereupon the Earle Marshall and other Nobles departing discontented from the Court when they could get no other answer promised firmely one to another That for this cause which concerned them all they would manfully fight even to the separation of Soule