by Reassuming as I said before a taking of the whole power from him to themselves but onely for the particular Case in hazard and for the present necessity And now to begin with what he first mentions the Derivation of power I must tell him that he forges what he before complained of in others that they confounded the power it selfe with the person and the Qualification I am sure he doth so here if ever man did Hee before granted the Person and Qualification from men and then they approved of God and more then that no man pleads to be derived nor more to be forfeited plead not for so much nor he Paâ—liament neither But only the Qualification for he particular Case of danger and till that danger may be sufficiâ—ntly secured Yet here now at first to oppose the Forfeiture but of this particular which is only in question now before us he denies the power to be from the People and appeales to what he hath cleared which is onely by his owne saying but not altogether as hath beene shewed that the Power it selfe is from God But for all that if no more can be said against the persons forfeiting his reigning Power and specially in the Qualifications of it even for ever it may undoubtedly be forfeited and so re-assumed all of it which is more then I say Secondly but he will prove that though the People have this Power absolutely which himselfe hath more then once granted of the Designation of the Person and Qualification yet could they not have right to take it away REPL. The King will have no cause to thank him for his undertaking as well because he doth it not with any great strength as also because hee hath hereby provoked men to dispute even this Case which no way needed since the Parliament never pretended to this Right in generall but rather disclaimed it First he saith Many things which are altogether in our disposing before we part with them are not afterward in our power to recall REPL. True but some things are and that both if conditions be not observed and even at our owne pleasure A King makes some Officers for terme of life others quamdin se bene gesserint others aâ—â— ante bene placite To the latter hee may send a Writ of Ease at his pleasure and every day it s in his power to recall their Authority To the second their offices are sure without power of recalling till they are legally convicted of misbehaviour To the third as long as they live their Authority is firme and no power of recalling it wholly Yet even such may bee hindred from some Administrations by Accusations by and apparency of Crimes making it unfit for them to be trusted in the particular We imagine not the People to have power to recall that Regall Authority at their pleasure we argue not that they have power to recall it wholly upon any Case of Mal-administration All that we plead for is power to administer a part of it upon necessity which he will not administer for good but rather for evill And there are not many things that were altogether ours and in our disposing before we part with them but are still so farre ours as to use them againe in our necessity for that turne at least though there are some Secondly But he will prove this to be one of those that are not after in our power to recall especially saith he such in which there redounds to God an interest by the Donation as in things devoted though after they come to be abused REPL. 1. Grant this true in referrence to the Power of recalling them wholly which yet is not universally true as will appeare straight yet may there be power enough to administer so much as is of necessity A Wife is tyed to her Husband by the Covenant of God so called Prov. 2. by the Ordinance of God more ancient and no lesse strong then that of Politick Government She cannot recall wholly her Husbands Authority over her though shee was once altogether at her disposing to choose or another or none to be her head All the goods of the Family are his in Law and not here but by his leave and order Yet for her necessity she may by the Law of God and conscience administer so much of the goods as is fit and secure her Person from his violence by absence though that ordinarily be against the Law of Marriage and the end of it or any other meanes of nccessary defence But secondly it is not altogether true that there is no power or recalling any thing devoted to God Hezekiah took off the gold from the Doores of the Temple and the Pillars which he had overlaid and all the silver in the house of the Lord to pay the King of Assyria his demanded Ransome 2. Kings 18.14 15 16. If the Doctor will not owne this Act of Hezekiah I am sure he will that of David taking the hallowed Bread which was not for any by Gods Law to eate but onely the Priests This was devoted to God and not so much as abused and by him assigned to a speciall use yet from that diverted and lawfully without question And now I appeale to all Consciences Whether the necessity of saving a Kingdome from the subversion of Religion Lawes and Liberties be not greater then Davids necessitie was And if I will have mercy and not sacrifice did justifie Davids act will it not theirs who in a necessity use or administer the power of the Militia or Armes which ordinarily is only to be admieistred by the King Neither will Abimelech the Priests consenting to David alter the Case for it was devoted to God and but in necessity he might not have consented nor David accepted Necessity then recalled that particular Bread through devoted So necessity may recall this parcell of power in question Thus the Doctors ground failes him for our Case yet 3. see what he adds so although it were as they would have it that they give the power and God approves himselfe oft hath said and cannot deny but they give the Person his power and if they take it from his person yet they may leave it to his Heire but wee argue not for so much yet because the Lords hand and his oyle also is upon the Person elected to the Crowne and then he is the Lords Annointed and the Minister of God those hands of the People which were used in lifting him up to the Crowne may not againe be lift up against him either to take the Crowne from his head or the Sword out of his hand this true inform'd Conscience will not dare to doe REPL. 1. Is not Gods hand upon a Judge Is not hee the Minister of God Is not a King bound to God and to his People to appoint Judges who may lesse be spared in their Power then the Monarch himselfe for what is his Power when an Infant Is not the Kingdome then administred
purposes aforesaâ—d And this Parliament what ever oâ—her mighâ— bee is not deposeable dissoluble but by themselves The Sword cannot be Legally taken from them till they give it up It remaines then that they are bound in Conscience to GOD and to the People and King too that have entrusted them with this Power to use it to these ends to punish Delinquents and tempters though under Colour of surreptiously gotten Commands from the King to subvert Religion Lawes and Liberties and to prevent Tyranny and preserve themselves and Religion Lawes and Liberties They may not onely Lawfully doe this upon these Premises and suppositions but they are by all Obligations to GOD and Man necessitated to doe so and even to take away the wicked from before the King that so his Throne may bee establisht in Righteousnesse This is clearely theâ— the Parliaments not onely Power but duty Iâ— they mâ—stake in the present case of which anon yet the generall case stands good they may and ought to doe so to take Armes when such a case comes The Dr. hath somewhat more to say against the Peoples power applicable to our Kingdome Let us heare it also How shall Conscience be satisfied concerning the Peoples power derived from their Election when our Kings are such by Inheritance and claime not by Election and the Crowne hath been oft setled by Conquest REPLY Neither is Conquest any thing of it selfe to power or Lawfull Authority of which onely we argue but only as it obtaines consent by agreement which is all one in Sence and Effect with Election Only Election sounds more Freedome of will Conquest Imports a Force occasioning that will But it is evident in Reason that he that is free as all men are by Nature as was said before except their bond to Parents becomes not subject de jure till his Consent Agreement or Election makes him so and to no more then his Consent reaches explicitely or implicitely and so for many men they can no other way be subject to one to a Prince or Monarch but by their Agreement whether for feare of his Force or hopes of his vertue he is not their King or Lord till he be made so by their Consent I meane at first and Originally But what need I stand to provâ— this largely when our Dr. hath confest it in sence before in saying the designing the person and Qualification of the Power is from Men Mans invitation what is this put mans choyce Agreement Consent together And if there be 100. Conquests the Conqueror hath not the qualification of his power one whit enlarged by Right untill the People have consented and yielded up their former Rights and when they have then his Right is setled accordingly and to his sâ—ccessours if so consented to else not and to hâ—s â—eâ—res if consented to else not and to Heires male onely as in France or Femaâ—e also as in England according to the consent Or if the Conquerour to obtaine the Peoples 〈…〉 his posterity will offer to have leâ—t power then his Predecessour bed â—eâ— upon such consâ—â—t the qâ—alification of his power is lessened for ever after to hâ—m and his Conquest thâ—n first or last one or many are no more to right oâ— power then an occasion or Motive to consent consent Choise Agreement are all in all Secondly as for Inheritance it is nothing but a succession of consent Indeed posteritie are bound to the consent of their Parents for the Person Family qualification but to no more In all other Cases and respects they are as free as their Parents at first were A Prince then onely inherites what was given the first of the Nation or others since by consent of the people and by written Law or custome he must claime any power he will exercise or else he cannot plead any right title to it And his qualification of power admits of encrease or decrease as he and the People agree and consent His power is altogether derived by Election and consent first and last whence I will inferre no more but as before that therefore in case of necessity the people may use so much of it as may suffice to save themselves from Ruine and that may be inferred from it by what went before As for his Repetition of Rom. 13. and the Roman Emperours being Monarchs absolute I need say nothing to now I have said enough before After this he comes to the Covenant and Oath which the Prince takes to confirm what he promised which he denies to make the Kings Admitttance to the Kingdome altogether conditionall as is the meerely Elective Kingdomes of Polonia Swethland c. and that it is nothing to allow resistance unlesse in the Covenant could be shewed that in case he will not discharge the trust it shall be Lawfull for the States to resist REPLY The Oath is onely urged to shew that the Kings Conscience is bound more firmely then what he is sworne to and as a Testification of the Câ—venant The mattâ—r sworne to is the maine nor that urged for an absolute forfeiture but for the case of necessitie Secondly in more Elective Kingdomes the conditions of the Covenant are more largely perhaps and more solemnely explicite then in successive and the Power is morâ— Restrained then in some successive yet consent bâ—ing the foundation of succession as was said before a King that enters upon the succession doth by that verâ—ually before his Oath oâ— Coronation consent to the first Conditions or Covenant those that have been made consequently and in that sence his Admittance is altogether conditionall not that the people may refuse him at their will without new Conditions but that he may not refuse the former Covenant and Conditions by offering to take more power then those gave him or his Ancestors which is all one And if he doe the people are not bound to obey those Commands the Dr confesses before and I adde as before they may resist his illegal Violences 3. For now the case is all one as if the choyce or agreement Covenant oâ— consent were originally made but yesterday And then consider it We are a multitude of Free-men and whereas we might have agreed on an Aristocracy We agreed on a King on such and such Covenants or Conditions without mention that wee will resist if he break them But simply promise Obedience on those Conditions and he on those accepts the Crowne But next day breakes all and shewes hee is bent to subvert all Religion Lawes and Liberties How now in Reason for of Scripture we spake enough before can it be supposed that such a choyce or agreement hath turned us into such Slaves as we must onely suffer and not at all resist or rather is not all reason plaine that I have given away no more of my naturall freedome which is to resist all violence and wrong then I meant and exprest to give away I say then that unlesse a Nation have covenanted not to resist in such and
such cases they have power to resist because it is a naturall right each hath against all except Parents so farre is it from my being bound not to resist unlesse I have expressly covenanted that I may Though withall I doe not say that I may covenant at all to resist in no case as I shall have occasion to shew anon Fourthly in the meane time if the Doctor grant that in case the agreement be that if the Prince discharge not his trust the states may take Armes and resist as in effect he seemes to doe when he saith That were something for if he doe no such agreement Then is not all Resistance damnable nor Rom 13.2 Rightly interpreted by him For this and more the Brabancons had in their Agreement with their Duke even to choose another as the Doctor himselfe tells us afterward So ever now and then he must contradict his maine Proposition by the force of truth But he saith after that The slender Pleaâ— Election is thought to have a Covenant in it but usually the higher wee rise in all Empires the freer Kings were and still downward the People gained on them And by this he would imply that specially in successive Kingdomes as this what ever may be said of merely elective States there can be no forfeiture of power by breach of Covenant made in after Ages by succeeding Princes REPLY In the first times there was a great simplicity in all covenants in sale of Lands and letting of Lands and the like yet no man ever sold or gave away or lent more then hee meant though the force and fraud of ill men forced after Ages to more express Covenants In like sort Ex malis moribus bonâ— Leges as well between Prince and people as between common men the tyranny of Princes forced People to require them to sundry necessary expresse Lawes Yet these Lawes now for Phrase or expression will not in reason be thought more then was intended in the first simple Covenant how briefe soever it were for certainly free people and in their right wits never meant to enslave themselves to the wills and lusts of those they chose their Princes But to be subject to them for their generall good which when they found by experience to be violated or in danger to be so for want of expresse Lawes specifications of the Generall Law of Nature the generall good of the society they were forced by necessity to require them to make such Lawes for their generall safety and particularly also to prevent inferiour officers from tyranny under the name of the superiour and so to prevent all necessity of Armes within themselves And some good Princes for their peoples comfort have even been forward of themselves to make such Lawes which yet without our making they were bound for the most part to have done accordingly for the welfare of their Dominions The People then have gained nothing for the great part of Lawes for their Liberties but ability to claime them as undoubted more then before nor have Princes lost any thing almost but a power of impovershing ruining their Subjects so much as before they seemed to have for the satisfying of their owne Prodigalities and Lusts Still then it remaines that the People had a right to all fitting Liberties even after they submitted to a King unlesse they expressly gave them away as unto some Câ—nqâ—erours the conquered Party were sometimes forced to doe But yet N. B. even then the Conquerours followers who were part of his subjects at that time and by whoâ—e hands he conquered the rest whether more or fewer did consent and agree to the Peoples and so their owne Posterities having but such and such Liberties and yeelding to the new Conquerour and his Posterity such and such Power and Authority So still consent gave whatsoever a Prince could or can challenge I say then once more unlesse in the first foundation of a State Kingdome or Empire and this Kingdome particularly the People did make their King so absolute as to give away all power of resistance from themselves in any case which the Doctor I beleeve will never be able to prove of this or any other Civill State though they made no expresse conditions or Covenant much lesse any mention of reserving a power of resistance yet the Law of Nature allowed them still some Liberties what they were we shall have occasion to scan in the next Section and amongst them this for one to resist any violence against themselves in any thing that the Law of Nature did undoubtedly make them still Masters of and was not subjected to their Princes power But the Doctor concludes his reasoning against such power of resistance to be in our Parliament with that which indeed hath least shew of strength of any thing he hath said yet Thus he writes where the King as it is said never dies where he is King before Oath or Coronation where hee is not admitted upon any such Capitulation as gives any power to the People or the representative Body as is pretended to nay where the Body cannot meet but by the will of the Prince and is dissoluble at his pleasure that therein such a State such a Powâ—r should be pretended to and used against the Prince as at this day and that according to the Fundamentals of such a State can never appeare reasonable to any indifferent judgement much lesse satisfie Conscience in the resistance that is now made by such a pretended Power REPL. This is the most plausible Plea he hath or any can bring specially the latter part of it about the calling and dissolving the Parliament at the Kings will and pleasure But to this also as well as all the rest sufficient satisfaction I doubt not may be given before indifferent judgements and unpartiall Consciences in the manner following First as the King never dies so he never growes he never hath more authority unlesse by a new grant from the people then his first Predecessor had unlesse it can be proved that the people then gave away their liberty of defence from outragious violence which all are naturally invested with it is free for them now as well as it was the second day or houre after they chose or consented to their first King as was implyed before Secondly as he is King before Oath or Coronation So he gives away none of his Rights in his Oath nor doe the People when they crowne him But he there professes himselfe bound by his Kingly Office to rule so and so for the common good and they yeeld no more to him then they did to his first Predecessor as before Thirdly as he is not admitted upon any such capitulation in expresse terms as mention this power of resistance in the people or representative body in case of Tyranny So nor doe the people at his admittance expresse a yeelding to him such absolute power as they may not or will not in any case resist I say againe and
SCRIPTURE AND REASON PLEADED FOR DEFENSIVE ARMES OR The whole Controversie about SUBjECTS taking up ARMES WHEREIN Besides other Pamphlets an Answer is punctually directed to Dr. Fernes Booke entituled Resolving of Conscience c. The Scriptures alleadged are fully satisfied The rationall Discourses are weighed in the ballance of right reason Matters of fact concerning the present differences are examined Published by divers Reverend and Learned Divines IT is this fourteenth day of Aprill 1643. ordered by the Committee of the House of COMMONS in Parliament concerning Printing That this Booke entituled Scripture and Reason pleaded for Defensive Armes be Printed by Iohn Bellamy and Ralph Smith JOHN WHITE LONDON Printed for Iohn Bellamy and Ralph Smith at the Signe of the three Golden Lions neare the Royall-Exchange M.DC.XLIII To the READER T Is a bitter Controversie that our poore sinfull Nation is fallen upon wherein not onely Armes are ingaged against Arms but Bookes written against Bookes and Conscience pretended against Conscience In this perplexed condition What shall the people doe What shall they resolve They expect to receive Councell from Divines who though it be a mixt Argument are most likely to settle them And they have great reason to doe it for the truth is The world takes sufficient notice that the Cause as it now stands hath many Divines strongly ingaged unto it on either side and that their Resolutions have had a great Influence upon it and upon the people We know upon whom Doctor Ferne layes the burthen when he saith Many in the simplicity of their hearts have been wrought upon by such as misled them But we pleade in the words of the great Apostle That our rejoycing is this that in simplicity and godly sincerity not with fleshly wisdome but by the grace of God we have had our conversation to the world and more abundantly towards our Congregations To whom wee appeale and to our Sermons preached among them whether wee have taught any thing but humble and holy obedience to all just and lawfull authority sincere love and constant maintenance of the Truth What is it that We may be suspected of What Designes may we be thought to carry on What Interesses What ends What is it that Wee hold deare unto us but the Gospell of our Lord but the soules of our people Did we make a gaine of them Did Titus make a gaine of you Thinke you that wee excuse our selves Wee speake before God in Christ 'T is not a new thing to be challeng'd as Seditious as Tertullus accused Paul To be hurtfull unto Kings aâ—d Provinces as Rehum and others wrote against the Jewes To be setters forth of new Doctrines as the Epicureans blasphemed that chosen vessell But our witnesse is with God and in our consciences and before the people in our preaching and in our conversation That we are not the troublers of Israel That we pray for the Peace of our King and that we seeke the wellfare of our Nation and that we teach no new no other Doctrine then what the Scriptures confirme as this Treatise will fully shew Theâ— what our King himselfe hath allowed in his clearing our Brethren of Scotland by Proclamation when they had Covenanted and taken up Armes then what our State hath formerly favoured in yeelding ayde to Rochell Then what other Churches Scotland the French Protestants the united Provinces and great Divines have given suffâ—â—ge unto And as for the State of this Kingdome in the very Constitution of it The Case is yet clearer King James himselfe blamed a Bishop for a right-Court-Sermon that hee preached before Him and the House of Peeres That hee had not distinguish'd well betweene a King at large and the King of England And in a manner even all the points of the present difference might be answered against the King by the King Himselfe in His Majesties Answer to the nineteene Propositions pag. 17 18 19 20. Which wee desire the Readers seriously againe to peruse as out of which a politicall Catechisme might be drawne to instruct the people just so as wee have instructed them To conclude After the Kingdome hath duely considered the many provocations it hath had which will appeare by the Remonstrances Declarations and Votes of Parliament The Noâ—successe of other Remedies as namely frequent Petitions and Treaties and hath read this following Discourse with a minde not prejudiced We hope that this present Action of Parliament will stand justified and our Judgement and Consciences cleare Especially after this our Protestation That wee seeke nothing but the Truth and to the Truth if others can convince us we are resolved to yeeld SCRIPTVRE AND REASON PLEADED For Defensive Armes SECT I. The Question rightly stated THe Question which the Doctor hath propounded as necessary to be scanned is thus exprest Whether if any King will not discharge his Trust but is bent or seduced to subvert Religion Lawes and Liberties Subjects may take up Armes and Resist He maintaines the negative and his principall place of strength is Rom. 13.2 Whosoever resists shall receive to themselves damnation This he interprets of resisting the higher power mentioned ver 1. by which he understands the King or Supreame and the resisting a resisting by Armes But it seemes to me however he make a shew of distinct handling his matter that he either carelesly or sophistically confounds things which ought to have been more distinctly exprest by one that truly desired to have resolved consciences in so weighty a cause as forbearing to defend Religion Laws and Liberties when they are all in danger of subversion To which purpose I shall make bold to propound divers considerations towards a better clearing of the true state of the question and the strength of his proofes for it 1. It cannot be imagined that a King who is bent or seduced to subvert Religion Lawes and Liberties meanes to doe this by a meere personall strength For which no Sampson-like strength would suffice but by the assistance of others whether men in office and trusted with the civill Sword under him if he can draw them into his designe or by the souldiery ordinary or extraordinary and that not in one part of the Kingdome but in severall parts as fast as he can get instruments for his turn 2. Here then will come divers questions belonging to the case 1. Whether the resisting by Armes the illegall attempts of an under Officer of Justice suppose a Major or Sheriffe though armed with Commission under the Kings hand or seale be a resisting of the higher power and damnable 2. Whether the resisting a Captaine of the Souldiery comming to act any illegall commands with his bands of armed men though he also have a like Commission from the King be a resisting of the King and so forbidden Both these where the King is not present but in another part of the Kingdome 3. It will be further questioned in case he should grant resistance lawfull thus farr
againe it can never be rationally conceived the people have given away such a naturall liberty such a necessary power for their common safety Unlesse it can be proved that they have done so The proofe then before the Barre of indifferency of judgement and unpartiall conscience will lie on the Doctors part not ours Fourthly But he saith the representative Body cannot meet but by the will of the Prince and is dissoluble at his pleasure REPL. 2. It hath been so de facto multo but whether it bee altogether so de jure may justly be questioned upon these grounds First for their meeting when the Prince is an Infant or if a prisoner in enemies hands and so cannot give out a legall Warrant for their meeting or if distracted hath not the State power to meet in Parliament for their common safety and the Princes too They have met in the infancy or minority of Kings and made Lawes as in Edw. the 6. time and not by the meere power of the Protectour for the Nobility after put him out his head was cut off afterward by a Law made while he was Protectour It was then and could be nothing else but the inherent power of State to meet so in cases of necessity Yet I beleeve there is no written Law for this but the generall Maxim of Salus Populi suprema lex And this will extend to the case of Tyranny as fully as any of the former if not more Withall did not the Lords in Richard the 2 nds time call a Parliament without the King wherein they had their grievances redressed and this afterward was confirmed in the first of Hen. the 4 th Secondly then for their dissolving It hath indeed beene very much practised by our two last Kings But our Histories so farre as I remember quare whether Hen. 3. did not dissolve some Parliaments in discontent mention not any such thing as a Parliament dissolved in displeasure or against the desire of the Houses But as they meet very frequently oft-times every yeare somtimes oftner so that in the space of a hundred yeares there are counted above a 100. Parliaments So they sate till they had ended the Princes and their owne businesses which went much together and so it never came to a matter of examination or discontent the delay of calling them to meet or the too timely dissolution of Parliaments Parliaments were not wont to bee so odious or dreadfull to Princes as within these forty yeares they have been By whose default they have been so since let the encrochments upon Magna Charta and the Subjects liberties direct any to judge 2. But further for both these First the Parliament averres that there are Lawes that there should be a Parliament every yeare and so they have abated of their Right rather then gained upon the King by the Act of the Trienniall Parliament 2. And for the dissolution I have heard some wisemen affirme that by Law it cannot be dissolved while there are any Petitions of grievances or such matters of importance depending and unfinished Whereunto may be added most justly that in ordinary times Countrey Gentlemen and Noblemen and in a manner the whole body of the Parliament would be as sick of a long Parliament and continuall attendance as the King could wish and would petition rather then be tyed so by the legge for a dissolution or at least a Prorogation And it 's well enough knowne that even this Parliament after the Act of Continuation past were as weary of sitting as need to be desired till the Rebellion in Ireland seconded by the growing evills at home put new spirits into them and forced them to that diligence of attendance and unwearied labours so many as have taken the common good to heart as no Age or Story can parallel here or in any other Kingdome or Nation Thirdly beyond all this I appeale againe to the Kings Answer to the 19. Prepositions formerly mention'd and aske whether if the King have absolute power to forbeare calling them at his will and to dissolve them at his pleasure it be not a meere nothing that hee saith the House of Commons have power to impeach his owne Followers and Favorites who have broken the Lawes even by surreptitiously gotten commands from the King and that the Lords have power to judge and punish and are an excellent skreene between the King and the people to assist each against any incroachings of the other and by just Iudgements to preserve the Law which ought to be the rule of every one of the three and that the Power legally placed in both Houses is more then sufficient to prevent and restraine the power of Tyranny What serves all this for when his Favourites will keepe him from calling a Parliament perhaps all his dayes unlesse unlook'd for neceâ—sity force him to it We haoe â—eene our selves about 13. yeares without one and had there not beene conceived hopes that there would have beene Money given against the Scots it had not been then called as it was Againe what serves the calling them when the same Favourites being questioned shall counsell a dissolution We have knowne that too even three times in this Kings Reigne and no other dissolution but on these grounds And the last was within three weekes because they would not in all hast and contrary to all former Presidents and Priviledges give mony against the Scots and embroyle the two Kingdomes in a perpetuall Warre not having had one grievance redressed And in the case of a Prince bent or seduced to subvert Religion Lawes and Liberties which is the Doctors Case propounded It is undoubted he will if he can dissolve them as soone as they offer but to punish any of his Favourites and so to crosse the designe unlesse he dare not of which anon because therefore I believe the King in that Answer hath not ascribed more then right to the Parliament It will follow that in right specially in such case they ought not to be dissolved And that if by force they should be or should not have been called at all the People have right to meet together when and where they can in a Parliamentary manner or otherwise to such end as to defend themselves and one another from tyranny and the designed subversion of Religion Lawes and Liberties as hath beene often said Fourthly but for the present condition of our Kingdome and Parliament I must professe that as I admire the providence of God in the Act passed for the continuation of this Parliament so I doe for the forementioned expressions of the King in that answer Which laid together may to any understanding men wholly decide this first Question betweene the Doctor and us in point of Legality in our Kingdome if there were nothing else said or to be said that supposing such a designe to subvert Religion Lawes and Liberties This Parliament hath if no other had or could have being dissoluble at pleasure compleat power and Authority to
Estates and in any two of them or all the 3. together is given and is to be used ad Edificationem ad Salutem non ad destructionem for the common good and safety not ruine For in that it is Null and voyd in all reason and equity But the Doctor saith Must the King only trust and not be trusted Must he not alwayes have his security against the other which cannot be but by power of denying REâ—L 1. But he forgets that the Question by himselfe stated is when the Prince will not discharge his trust and more then soâ— is bent or seduced to subvert Religion Lawes and Liberties Then it is sencelesse to trust him till 〈◊〉 shewâ—s another a better mind and it is most ridiculous to allow him in this case a pâ—wer of denying safety for that is to allow him a power of subverting all 2. But when the â—u is as now it â—s made in Hypothesi whether the Prince or the two Houses do mean wâ—ll or ill and who doth or doth not discharge their trust and who doth or doth not intend the subversion of Religion Lawes and Liberties who can be Judge betweene them or who can amongst men decide the difference but the Body of the People Exercising their understanding and consciences to judge who is in the right by all that hath been said and done on both sides formerly and of late and so their power and strength too to defend the right side and resist the wrong-doers And these whether the Doctor or any under Heaven will or no must have and will have the Power of denying or granting meanes for their owne and others safety and securiâ—y The Doctors reproaches against the Parliament I passe Only where he sayes Conscience might demand for its satisfaction Why should 100. in the House of Commons see more then 300 or 20. in the House of Lords more then 60. that are of a different judgement and withdrawne REPL. Satisfaction may well be given First by saying it is evident the major part of the House of Commons when they were most full were all that way that 100. are now though that be a slander for but a while since there were 300. there The King a yeare agoe in â—anu last commanded all that were in the Countrey to come up which certainly most of them did Yet no Votes but this way they goe now onely things were not then at the â—eighth they now are 2. If yet the Major part were of another judgement they would certainly come and vote and end the businesse The House hath often called the absent and punisht some for it certainly they knew then there were not enough against them of their Members to over-vote them 3. They that are wilfully absent are offenders against the Law and the common good and so are not to be trusted or thought to have wisedome to see things right how many soever they may pretend to be For also 40 being the legall number for the House of Commons to vote any thing It is against all Rules of Politick Bodies that the absence of others there being thâ— Legall Number present should hinder or discredit any Vote or Act of the Legall Body One judge of Assize two Commissioners or Arbitrators and the like suffice for any Businesse and though still the greater number the more honour and comfort yet a legall number must and will ever suffice 5 As for the Lords who pretend their absence forced by reason of Tumults First this by an Almanack as the Doctor speaks elsewhere may be confuted the greatest part of those that came and after withdrew stayed a considerable time after the Tumults till the King was gotten to Yorke and begun to call them away And if his calling them away or their withdrawing themselves shall have power to make the votes or judgement of a part that are yet resident there as the Dâ— hath learned to call them Null or not to be regarded then have the King or such a number of Lords and Commons even out of the Parliament-House power to disanull a Law even the Law for the not dissolving of this Parliament without an Act for it which must passe all the 3. Estates both Houses and the King and in which each have their power of Denying And this alone what ever might be pretended against other Parliaments makes the legall Votes of the two Houses the full judgement and Authority of the whole representative Body of the Kingdome how few soever be present or how many so ever be absent and upon what pretence soever 2. But withall if I were Confessour or Chaplaine to any of those Lords that have withdrawne themselves and upon pretetence of the Tumult deny to returne I would make bold to aske them this Qu. in their eares for their consciences satisfactoin as well as mine owne which City and Countrey rung of them and which produced such and so many Petitions for the setling of the Militia and helping Ireland and outing the Bishops and Popish Lords out of the House of Peeres whether their refusing to concurre in the reliefe of Ireland and in securing the Kingdome even in petitioning the King for the settling of the Militia which yet the King after acknowledged necessary to be setled were not the true and only cause of those tumults that were And if so where was their judgement to see the means of safety or their conscience to provide for it And then whether their owne guilt did not more send or drive them away then any violence of the Tumults Which tumults yet I approve not nor ever did But if God so punished those that would not discharge the trust it is easier to answer that question why so many remaining should see more that is better then thrice so many if so many dissenting and withdrawne As for the Doctors preferring Monarchy before Aristocracy hee shall not have me for his Adversary who thank God I am borne and live and hope to dye under a Monarchy though not absolute as the Doctors Position would make him when he listed though the Doctor wisely disclaimes any such intention But for his reasons why a King should seâ—e better then the Major part of both the Houses because he sees even with their eyes though dissenting from them and hath other Councel besides and that he hath many reasons to perswade him to consent to their free and unanimous Votes All this is most unreasonable as the Question is now stated of a Prince bent to subvert Religion Laws and Liberties for we are still upon that generall supposition in this Section for whatever they see he will be sure as farre as he sees his owne strength to consent to nothing that shall hinder his designe And therefore to plead his power of denying or his wisdome in this case is to yeeld him all power to bee a Tyrant Which after all the Dr. will yet prove he hath so farre as he may not be resisted in it by the inconveniences
withdrew Pag. I need not repeat it And as for the cruse and speare he tooke them not away for feare of being hurt by them as now Ammunitions and other provisions but as the Dr. well sayes to shew Abners neglect and his own integrity and therfore when they had done him that service he restored them without demand But the Parl. cannot fly from place to place like David they must keep at Westminster or dissolve themselves and they have offered to restore that which they took to prevent their own and the Kingdomes being mischefed by it so that security might have been obtained for time to come witnesse the Petition sent by the E. of Holland and others to Beverley while Hull was besieged In a word there hath been nothing done in this kind of all that the Dr. reckons up which meer necessity hath not forced and most of those things must have beene done by David if he had kept Keilah against Saul as he desired and meant to have done 2 And whereas the Dr. further urges that the Kings loyall and peaceable Subjects are assaulted despoiled of their Armes goods estates their persons imprisoned because they would according to their allegiance assist him in this extremity or would not contrary to their conscience joyne with them against him Rep. This concerns two sorts of persons and for both though somwhat differently the satisfaction to this allegation depends upon the justice of the defence it selfe For 1. if the Parl. do justly take up Arms then without all doubt however the Dr. talks of an implicit faith they may seize upon the arms goods estates persons of those that actually under what pretence soever assist against them Though if their defence be not just then all this is confessedly a multiplication of injustice but if they may fight with the Army that opposes them they may disarm c. those that strengthen the army with monys c. 2. as for those that only wold not contrary to their conscience joyn with them against him I have 2. things to say 1. If any of these have in former times any way promoted illegall commands and practises it is much to be doubted they can bring but slender proof of their forbearing to joyn with the Parl. out of conscience There is nothing more easie then to pretend conscience in all controverted points But hee deserves not to be beleeved in his pretence that hath been but even now and much more if he be still a violatour of rules of conscience in other respects It is wel known how tender they have been of other mens consciences in needless Ceremonies in illegall Innovations in prophane violations of the Lords Sabbath and the 4th Com. who now cry conscience to save their mony or to weaken the Parl. 2. If any be really conscientious in the point yeâ— upon the necessity of a just defâ—nce the Parl. may as well secure their persons and specially their Armes and levy some monies upon them as in a common danger of a forrain enemy trenches may be digged on a mans Land or Forts built evâ—n against his will and in a fire breaking violently out the next house may be pâ—l'd downe to save a towne or many more houses Though it is also true that such ought to have recompence afterward when al the danger is over and so I doubt not but all truely consciencious shall have in due time When it shall appeare they only forbeare out of conscience and did no acts of malignancy withall nor spoke malignantly against the Parliament and their just proceedings The Modesty of some of many that have suffered a great deale worse within these few yeares then the Parliament makes their most Malignant Prisoner suffer may sufficiently shew what a Conscientious refusall signifies if it be no more but so And if the Parliam have nothing more to Answer for then rigour against such the Dr. will hardly prove they have transgressed the bounds of a lawfull defence His reproaches therfore in the close of this Sect. I let passe and come at last to his 7. last Sect. wherunto if as good a reply can be made as to the former I shall not much doubt the Sentence of Conscience of any one who is unengaged or unpartial in the whole Question between us SECT 7. WE are now come to the Tendrest Peece of all the Rest and how confidently so ever the Dr. charges the Parliament and all that cleave to them with Rendring the King odious c. and saith it concernes them so to doe yet it shall appeare by what I have to reply to him in this Section how little delight I have to make the King Odious and that the Parliament also hath and doth as much as lay in them to put off all Imputations from the King and charge them as the Law doth upon his Councellors Judges Followers and Favourites Here 1. let me remember him that whereas in other Kingdomes some Favourites when they have seen their Prince endangered have rather taken his actions upon themselves then cast theirs on him and been content to Sacrifice themselves rather for his safety then expose him to shield themselves It hath been the continuall practise of the plotters against our Religion and Liberties to Entitle the King to all their Illegallities and Oppressions There can scarce that Grievance be named if we except the Ship-money which was devolved upon the Judges and yet it is well knowne how they were tampered with in the Kings Name which they have not Fraudulently gotten the King to own as his Act and this is their constant practise to this day who then hath laboured to make the King Odious or whom did it concerne but they that so far as the people would finde fault with any thing they should be forced in a sort to finde fault with the King and this also helped to Charme all Tongues and tie down all hands till they provoked the Scots beyond all degrees of sufferance to come in with an Army and demand security in and by an English Parl. aswell as one in Scotland 2. Next whereas the Dr. upbraids the Parliament and People That it seemes they are men that would be loath to suffer for their Religion they are so ready to fly to Armes to secure themselves Repl. 1. It ill becomes a pretender to and Disputer for Conscience to speake this Language that hath lived to see how many sufferings though not resisting to blood striving against sinne many even of the Parliament but specially of the Ministery and people have yeelded to within 16. or 18. yeares and never thought of flying to Armes but rather of flying out of their Native Country as thousands have done Unlesse the Dr. will undertake to justifie all that was Imposed upon mens Consciences all this while And if he will do so he shall save many Consciences a labour to judge with what a Conscience hee Writes 2. Doth he thinke that they could be so simple as
enough that her illumination hath been so farre from the endeavours of those who might have bin heard by the King and the Queen both that Ministers have bin check't for praying for Her conversion 2. But no man hath said this alone is a sufficient Cause nor was the Chief cause at the first It is well known thaâ— at the first and for diverse yâ—eâ—s Shee carryed her self so as those that loved the true Religion pitied her rather then severely blamed her and hoped good of her if any meanes were used for Her good But when after some yeeres a Nuncio from the Pope was brought over and setled here those about her have been more active and yet more since the Qâ— Mother came first over things have ripened apace and how farre Her Religion hath beene a Cause of the dangers of Scotland England and Jreland by the countenance of the Popish Party generally and multitudes of Jesuites and Priests in Court City and Country any common understanding may judge that remember specially what even a Solomon did for Out-Landish Idolairous wives which Nehemiah set so home â— 13. 3. The little businesse of her journey into Holland and the great businesse that hath been acted by meanes of that is but an unhappy commâ—nt or explication of the iustnesse of feares and Jealousies from her Religion 4. As for the Doctrines and practises of these Times which the Doctor saith are not the way to make her fall in love with our Religion and draw her to it She hath little reason to be offended with them if she be pleased with the Doctrines and practises of her own Popish Religion Witnesse the Parisian Massacre the powder Treason and the present too lamentable rebellion of Ireland Let but that be compared with the worst can be imagined of our Doctrines and practises and then let her love which is fairest and meekest 3. Then he comes to the resort of Papists and his Majesties entertaining them and Davids example 1 Sam. 22.2 toward Ziba is alledged to justifie it Rep. 1. But the Dr. forgets that the time before the Parliament the Papists and popish party had undeniably made an inrode upon our Doctrine publike Worship Laws and Liberties and against them in speciall was the Militia desired to be setled by people and Parliament And after all this upon a difference about the Militia to imploy them against the Parliament sooner or later is an example beyond example and beyond the power of words to take off the exception Suppose a Woman suspected of incontinence And Popery is spirituall whoredome should take to her selfe the parties with whom she were suspected to be her servants the better to defend her honour were this a way to cleare her selfe Or a Captaine to take in Forces to defend himselfe having been challenged that they had a designe to ruine his Army or Castle 2. What charity can stretch it selfe to beleeve they intend to assist the King in maintaining the Protestant Religion and the Laws against themselves which yet his Protestations proclaime Surely some about him must needs give them other assurance or they would not be so mad as to fight for their own suppression and their Adversaries promotion 3. But if they be so good subjects as the Dâ—maintaines and helpe the King in such an extremity must they not be counted to deserve a great reward and what can that be but Ziba-like to divide the Land A Tolleration at least they must needs expect if not indent for or be promised 4. Or if they be strong enough to overthrow the Parliament will a division content them Will they not be able to command King and All hence-forward N. B. If Protestants charity can be so sottish by this Doctors delusions as to trust to their faire dealing with Religion and Laws when the Parliament is by their force ruined they deserve no other pitty then a bewitched or distracted Man who is not afraid of Fire nor Water but let Straw or Gun-powder lye neare the one and pulls up floud-gates to give the other passage 5. Davids followers 1 Sam. 22.2 were far from Popish qualities The Text describes them thus Every one that was in distresse and every one that was in debt and every one that was discontented bitter of soule Here is not a word of all this that signifies them to be wicked A faithfull Man may be in distresse severall wayes he may be in debt through Gods hand upon him not his mispending and not able to pay but willing if he were able and resolved when he should be able and may be bitter of soule through oppression c. So that though in likelihood among so many there were some vicious Yet here is nothing to affirme that they came as vicious but as afflicted 6. Had any of them been Idolaters as Papists are had they been of confederacy with the professed enemies of Gods true Religion and people and so known then David had been too blame to have entertained them and Saul would have been sure to have laid it to his charge Neither could he ever have purged himselfe so long as he had made them his Guard that he meant to be faithfull to God and Israel And specially if Saul had before excepted against such Men as treacherous This is the Case now The enmity of Papists by their very Religion against ours our Parliament and Protestant people is known to all the world that understands any thing The Parliament hath often and often declared their feare of them these two Yeares and in reference to the setling of the Militia that so their designe on the Kingdome might be defeated The King protests not to owne them nor their helpe Yet things all along since the first discontents are still acted as they could wish and did and doe applaud And now after all this to take them into the Armies and imploy them against the Parliament is as far from Davids fact in entertaining his Troopes as their designes against the Parliament are far from his against Saul 7. It is true indeed that professed Papists were not actually entertained at the first It had been too grosse for them to have appeared at the first specially in any number and would have raised all the Kingdome against them The Ice therefore must be broke by others first and by Court-converts Of whose Religion the Priest that had lately written on the subject on which Dr. Featly had animadverted hath given a faire warning sufficient to startle any man almost To which purpose let me adde a word of a Booke I have seen cal'd Jesuitica Negotiatio printed neare 20 Yeares since by Order of the States of Frizeland which containes Instructions surprized of the Jesuites toward the Conversion of the united Provinces Among which this was one That whosoever they could convert to the Romish Religion should be still allowed to professe the Protestant Religion and keep any Office or place he was possest of and give sentence against any Papist