pray you whither these Casuists drive Other Non-conformists have absolved the People from all Laws about Church matters And here now is one started up to teach them how to free themselves if they please from all Civil Laws and Statutes of the Realm None shall bind but such as they think good That is every man is made a King and Governour himself The danger of which determination I shall a little lay before you First it is certainly no easie thing to judge what is best for the Peoples good But Kings themselves find it necessary to have their Council to deliberate and advise them to that which will promote it which they declare to their People by their Laws And if they did not the Publick Welfare would be but little regarded though we supposed every man better able to anderstand it than he is For secondly when men do know what is conducing to it they will not presently do it if their present private Interest incline them otherways From which two grounds Plato I remember derives the necessity of Laws There are few private persons that know what is most profitable for Common Life and of those that know fewer can or will do it unless the will of a Superiour Power be signified to them and oblige them to it It is not hard indeed to know what will please themselves and may make for their own private utility But what will make for the General Good that is difficult for them to comprehend and more difficult to bring them to do it because they are not inclined to prefer the good of all before that of their own Private Persons No Mortal Nature k Plato L. 9. de Legibus p. 875 880. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. hath a violent Propension to covet and draw all to its particular self always flying after a brutish manner that which it feels grievous and pursuing that which is pleasant and delightful For which reason Law is needful to bound direct and govern him since of himself he will not mind the Publick Good If indeed men were of such a nature saith he that they understood the Common Good and had such a portion of Divinity in them that they would alway follow it they would stand in need of no Law For that would be better than any Law or Order whatsoever But since it is rare to find such men we must make the World as good as we can by making them subject to a better and more disinteressed reason than their own which is the Publick Order and Law l 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 And whosoever he be that makes every man judge of what is for the Peoples Weal that man takes away the principal Power of the Magistrate For he supposes the People able to judge of that and if they be there is no need of any Law and consequently of no Law-giver But thirdly they are so far from being able to judge what is for the Publick good that the wisest and best Princes with their Councils find it very difficult and in many Cases are a long time considering about it before they come to a resolution And that though they have the help of those who have been long versed in affairs of this nature and it is their business on which they attend they have nothing else to mind unless they please and information comes to them from all parts which every private man cannot have but as he hath something else to do so he can know but a few of those things which are to be considered in the case Good and evil gain and loss advantage and disadvantage as that excellent Bishop m Replic to Bish of Chalcedon p. 235 236 I have so often cited may teach him ought not to be weighed or esteemed from the consideration of one or two Circumstances or Emergents All Charges Damages and Reprises must first be cast up and deducted before one can give a right estimate of benefit or loss If a Merchant reckon only the Price which his Commodity cost him beyond the Sea without accounting Customes Freight and other Charges he will impoverish himself when he thinks he hath sold it to good profit If the benefit also be only Temporal and the loss Spiritual which few think of as to gain Gold and lose Faith which is more pretious than Gold that perisheth it is no benefit whatever a man imagines but loss and damage The English Church and the English Kingdom are one and the same Society of men differing not Really but Rationally one from another in respect of some distinct Relations And that which is truly good for the Kingdom of England cannot be ill for the Church of England nor that which is truly good for the English Church be ill for the English Kingdom But yet alass how hard is it to comprehend what is good for both and how few can attain it When so many men are to be considered in different relations and there are so many things and circumstances that must be considered to make them happy in both those relations and when their good and happiness depend not upon what is done for them in one but in both nor in a respect to a few Circumstances but to all any of which if they be wanting it is not good but evil I need not mention the Rule for this which is commonly known but ask now what shall be done when there are so many things to be considered which will cost so much time and pains to weigh before we can know what will make for the Publick Good Shall a Private man whom we now suppose to have the liberty which this Casuist gives judge without considering or attending to all those things which the Supreme Magistrate had a regard to in making his Law This is very hard that a Publick Decree standing on such good grounds should be thrown down by one that knows them not And how ill will the Publick Good be provided for at this rate by those that know little what belongs to it Or shall we suppose every Private man to be of quicker dispatch than their Governours able to run over all things that are to be considered with more speed than they can do That 's very unlikely if you reflect upon all that hath been said and that they have not those advantages of knowing neither what is to be considered as Publick persons have Or in conclusion must the Prince be content to wait till his Subjects have found means to know all that he doth and till they have considered it and till they be satisfied that his Law is for the Publick Good before he expect any obedience from them What then shall become of the Publick Good all that time which they take to think of the business And who knows how long it will be before they are informed and have considered all things And what if they be so scrupulous as never to be satisfied because for any thing they know there
the circumstances in a business which very much alter the case and lastly there being such a proneness in men to invent down-right falshoods and to publish them for their own advantage I have now given you an instance of it and I can give you more The three Covenanting Ministers I find in their answer to the Queries of the Divines of Aberdeen had the boldness to declare in Print and positively aver that his Majesties Commissioner rested satisfied with their Covenant according to their explication of it by which report they hoped to draw the people to a liking of it But this was such a calumny that the Commissioner thought it necessary to clear himself of it by a Manifest and Declaration i See his late Majesties Large Declaration 1638. p. 111 112. to the contrary Which brought them to a confession that indeed they never heard him say he was satisfied but had only some probable reasons whereby they were induced to believe that he was And indeed men easily believe what they have a mind unto They believed or at least gave it out even in the Pulpit saith his Majesty k Ib page 405 406. that we intended to bring in Popery into all our Kingdoms or at least a toleration of it It was preached that the Service-Book was framed at Rome and brought over by a Country man of theirs They told the people that all England was of their opinion And some desired them publickly to give thanks to God for the overthrow which the Hollanders had newly given the Spanish Fleet before Dunkirk assuring them that it was no less to be celebrated than the deliverance in 88. all that Fleet being prepared at the Kings charge for their ruine and subversion A most horrible thing that in the House of God and in that place of his House which they called the Chair of Truth men should deliver such things as either they did not know to be true or did know to be false But you will say we must be distinguished from the Scottish Presbyterians they and we are not all of a mind For they for instance believed Ruling Elders to be Jure Divino but I knew few in England saith this Writer if any that held that Office so save only in a large sense i. e. lawful and not contrary to Gods Word l See p. 141. Goodly he knew few or none therefore there were none here in England that held Lay-Elders to be of Divine right This is his reasoning for he satisfies a question by these words and a rare one it is built altogether upon his own Ignorance For we know not a few but many who were of this opinion And if he had not been negligent where he was concern'd and busie where he needed not have medled he might have more easily known the mind of the English than of the Scottish Presbyterians He being one of that Party should have here known one would think better than I that the London Ministers and Elders met in a Provincial Assembly Novem. 2. 1646. put forth a Vindication of the Presbyterial Government In the very Title Page of which they set this down among the Contents of the Book that the Ruling Elder is by Divine Right and that it is the will of Jesus Christ that ALL SORTS of persons should give an account of their Faith to the Ministers and Elders before admission to the Supper of the Lord. Which is more I hope than not being repugnant to Gods Word In like manner the Lancashire Ministers of the first Classis at Manchester declared after this m An. 1657. in the Book called Excommunicatio Excomm p. 46. that they could not consent to part with the Ruling Elder unless they should betray the truth of Christ Rom. 12. 1 Cor. 12. 1 Tim. 5. These are the places they alledge to prove the Divine Authority of this new Order of Ecclesiastical Officers By which you may see that I said they are Changelings with more reason than this Apologist had to excuse them from it For I wrote from what I knew and He from what he knew not But there is another thing which he apologizes for after the same manner in the very language of his predecessor Philagathus whom he was ashamed to own The horrid Murder of his late Majesty saith this Writer was never undertaken that I know of to be justified by any Minister in Print but by J. G. that great Goliah and Champion of the Arminians p. 74. It is very likely that he is ignorant of this as well as of other matters but he must excuse us if we know more of these men and such as were none of J. G.'s Disciples There was one L.S. for instance whom I have read who maintains that desperate Fact in a Book called Natures Dowry or The Peoples Native Liberty Asserted It was not Printed till the Year 1652. but written as he tells us in the Epistle three year before just upon the Kings Murder on occasion of a Question propounded to him by a Member of Parliament and Committee of State In the first Chapter he determines Should any one it is easie to know whom he means by a reserved and merciless obstinacy be shut up and barricado'd against the Law Counsel and Prayers I see not but a people may warrantably go about to break such a one seeing he will not be bended by reason But look farther and you will find this to be the Title of the tenth Chapter That Kings agreeable to the Law of God may in some cases be forcibly resisted by their Subjects and likewise deposed In some cases indeed he resolves it may be the prudence of the people to pardon their Prince not observing his stipulation but their promise is out of date and cannot bind them to further subjection Nay he saith A people whose Ancestors have for themselves and their posterity either gratis or upon inconvenient Articles promised subjection and obeysance to any one and his Heirs may lawfully renounce the ingagement and cast off the Yoke And at the end of that Chapter cites the Vote of Parliament at the beginning of the Wars to justifie his Doctrine That if the King raised Forces against the Parliament he forfeited his Trust But proceed further to the next Chapter and you will find he comes home to the business and determines That Kings may render themselves obnoxious to the penalty of death according to the Law of God in some cases to be inflicted by publick Authority in others by private men This is the Title of the Chapter And immediately he betakes himself to that very Scripture upon which Mr. J. Goodwin grounded his whole discourse For the Chapter begins thus That Law Gen. 9 6. Who so sheds man's Blood by man shall his Blood be shed reaches all the Sons of Noah Princes themselves though they be taller than their Brethren by the head and shoulders And he explains it thus Whether he shed it by himself or
those who despised them Augustus Vespasian Titus had prosperous Successes fortunate Reigns but the poor Christians the great enemies of their Gods were dragged continually by the Hang-man to be butchered suffered the most exquisite torments and for three hundred years together were most miserably harased and barbarously used And thus Parsons I remember disputes against all the Protestants from the unhappie success of those Princes which have in any sort opposed themselves to the See of Rome as you may read at large in his Apologetical Epistle e An. 1601 sect 7. none of which I shall now stand to transcribe This is sufficient to shew what may be expected from this New Undertaker who will appear I doubt not as lame in his other reasonings as he doth in this and prove as unfit to determine Cases of Conscience as to make Observations upon Providence For first he doth not fairly and candidly represent that which I said but accuses me of such Resolutions in matters of Conscience as never came into my thoughts I am beholden to him I confess for some good words and for his favourable opinion of me but I could have been well content to have wanted them on condition he would not have said that I am so unkind and so unconscionably untender as to account that no man who transgresses an Act of Parliament can be a good Christian f In the later end of the first page nor askt Whether indeed I think that every transgression of a Realm is no less then a deadly sin There was no occasion for this Question or for that Censure unless he be of the opinion that all sins are equal so that what a man saith concerning the open breach and contempt of one Law is to be applied to all transgressions whatsoever of any Law I never said that no man can be a good Christian that transgresses an Act of Parliament nor that every transgression of a Statute is a deadly sin These are inventions of his own upon occasion onely of a single instance which I gave of Defiance to a Law wherein some men live mark my words g Friendly Debate p. 3. Edit 1. From whence he draws an universal proposition that he might the better conclude me to be a man of no great depth h P. 3 of his Case that looks not to the bottom of a business which lies before him That may very well be true for it is no easie matter But I will try a little how far I can see into this Case concerning the transgression of humane Laws which as I take it depends upon this single point Whether humane Laws binde the Conscience that is whether we sin if we be not obedient to them In the resolving of which he that findes no diâ—ficulty may well suspect that he doth not fully understand it For if on the one side we say that Conscience is not concerned I beseech you what is Nothing but our common discretion to keep our selves out of the reach of the Princes Sword whose anger and power we may dread but whose commands we need not care a straw for And if on the other side we say that Conscience is concerned and obliged by their Laws then there may follow great perplexities when any thing is commanded that proves a common and an intolerable grievance More difficulties I need not mention of this nature there being no dispute about commands to do sinful things but immediately apply my discourse to the Question And for all that which was last said since there is no greater mischief then disobedience to Laws and nothing can so certainly secure obedience as a sense of duty we must determine that a man is bound to make a conscience of observing the Laws of his Governours which are not contrary to the Laws of God So the holy Scripture it self teaches us to speak when it requires us and makes it necessary to be subject for conscience sake and not onely for wrath Rom. 13.5 that is out of a sense that we cannot be innocent and preserve a good conscience before God unless we be observant of their Laws where we are not pre-ingaged by a higher Authority then theirs The very same is included in those words which require our submission to every ordinance of man for the Lords sake 1 Pet. 2.13 which if we do not yield it is manifest the disobedience is a violation of a General precept of God exacting our obedience to them Insomuch that to set a mans self in opposition to their Laws is by interpretation to oppose the Almighty according to that of the Apostle Whosoever resisteth the Power resisteth the ordinance of God Yes saith this Casuist but will you pronounce thus without any distinction Doth a man commit a deadly sin every time that he transgresses an Act of Parliament I answer That 's without the limits of the Question We are not speaking of the degrees of sin which are of more or less guilt according as the Law is of greater or lesser concernment and as a mans transgression of it is with modestie or with a high hand nor are we considering when and in what cases a Law may cease to oblige and quite alters its nature but whether while it doth oblige and is in force it lays a tye on the Conscience or no and whether all Laws do so or no. And to this we say Yes Laws while they are obligatory do binde the Conscience because the Scripture saith so and we say so indefinitely because that 's the Scripture-language also But stay a little this Gentleman cannot believe that The Scripture saith the Magistrate is Gods minister to us for good Rom. 13.4 Very true and the Apostle makes that an argument why we should be obedient to him because it is much for our profit and benefit But this Casuist turns the words quite another way and makes them an outlet to disobedience by taking that to include an Exception to the General precept of subjection which is in truth Nothing but a Reason to inforce it To countenance which interpretation he tears a little patch out of Bishop Taylor 's Rule of Conscience and would draw him into confederacie with him who accommodates indeed those words of the Apostle to the illustration of a particular case but never intended any such use of them as this man makes as is apparent from the entire Body of his discourse and shall be touched afterward Now let us hear this mans Exception If the Magistrate saith he command that which is for the peoples Good and welfare they are bound in conscience to obey him otherwise they are not bound in conscience but for wrath sake that is because they dare not do as they would and as they may Very well But who shall judge of that I mean whether a Law be for the Publike good or no His Answer is ready at his tongues end for he need not go deep for it The Magistrate must judge what is
plain consequence as this in our Casuist that this Land is given to English men and therefore as Birds defend their Nests so ought Englishmen to cherish and maintain themselves in their Land and to grieve and hurt Aliens for respect of their Common-wealth I will not trouble you with the rest of the Story q Which you may find in the Survey of Londâ—â— by J. Stow p. 152 c. nor with the Uses or Application which the People made of this goodly Sermon Only this you may know in general that they bestirred themselves lustily for respect of their Common-wealth That was the word then as now it is in this Casuist the Peoples Weal of which he teaches them to take a tender care And it will be no hard matter to improve their understanding of their own good and their affection to it so far as to make them digest this new truth mentioned by his late Majesty in his Large Declaration r Pa. 407. out of the Protestation 22. Sept. 1638 That what Subjects do of their own heads is much better than what they do in obedience to Authority the one savouring of constraint but the other being voluntary and chearful obedience Why not Since at the same time they may be taught that all power is originally in them and came from them who intrusted particular persons with it Which is the surest proof they will easily believe that it is to be imployed for their good for they would not have intrusted it with any body to other purposes and consequently they must retain the power still to hinder those persons from doing otherwise and in order to that must judge whether they do so or no. This indeed is for the People to command the Magistrate not to obey him But it is that Authority which they may fairly assume to themselves from this mans dangerous Maxime For if People are to submit in all things that are for their good and no further then they appeal back to themselves And this appeal they may well think supposes power originally in themselves some of which they have reserved as supreme and above all Laws and why they should not take all back when they judge it is not imployed for their good who can tell For they are to obey no Laws but those which are for their good unless it be for fear of wrath and when they combine together they need not fear that but can make themselves dreadful and give what Laws they please to their Governours No saith this Casuist a man must not resist that is express and rather than resist he must suffer p. 4. But this is to steal a Goose and stick a Feather Why must he when he is already perswaded that he need not unless he be forced It is resolved just before that if the Magistrate command any thing for the Peoples hurt there lies no Obligation upon Conscience to be obedient and they are made judges of what is for their hurt If then he require them not to resist and they find this is to their hurt they are not bound in Conscience not to resist but only for wrath And that is not to be feared when the multitude is agreed not to suffer themselves to be injured But they must avoid contempt and scandal And so they will in their own opinion even when they are contemptuous and scandalous They are Judges of all their own actions for the publick good and they may resolve that which we call contempt and scandal to be for the honour of the Nation for the making their Prince glorious by rescuing him out of the hands of those evil Councellors who procure Laws for their own private interest and not the peoples good In short this Principle if it be pursued will prove the very same with that in the perverse meaning of it so much cryed up when all our mischiefs began The welfare of the people is the Supreme Law for the right understanding of which Maxime I refer you to the last Lecture of Dr. Sanderson about the Obligation of Conscience Who hath uprightly determined elsewhere t Pralect 9. N. 9. that we ought to obey a Law made by a just Authority not onely when it may be supposed to be made with an ill intention but when it is unprofitable for the Publick nay something noxious and hurtful provided the thing it commands may be done without sin The Reason is because every man ought to minde what belongs to his part and duty and not trouble himself about other mens and our duty is to obey not to command and ordain Besides I may add though the Magistrate ought not to ordain any thing but what is for the peoples good yet when he doth otherwise it will be more for their good to obey him then to refuse obedience They ought still to look upon him as Gods Minister for their good because they receive a great many benefits by Government and Order be it what it will though in that particular he do amiss and so to submit to his command For the mischief of not obeying is greater then the hurt that is done the people by obedience It is in effect to turn all things upside down to reduce the King to the condition of a private man by making every body a Judge of his Laws whether they shall be obeyed or no. The very truth is such Casuists as these have quite unhinged the people from their dependance on their Governours and subjection to them And I may say of them as the secular Priests did of the Jesuits in another matter t Dialogue between Secular Priests Lâ—y Gentlemen 1601. pag. 67. They have not onely much impeached the due estimation honour and reverent respect which the people carried toward their Superiours but they have exceedingly impaired by their tricks shifts and evasions the natural sincere condition of our people which is there most decayed where they have had conversation and dealing Many of modest and temperate constitution are become imperious brazen-fac'd and furious They that were lowly and humble are become peremptory rash in their judgement and disdainful The simple and sincere are grown cunning and double dealers full of equivocation in their words and dissembling in their behaviour Well perhaps you will say we are all had enough but when the Doctor now named Bishop Sanderson determines that we should be obedient though the thing required of us be something hurtful to the Publick doth he not imply that if it be extremely hurtful we are not obliged To this I will answer before I end when I have first told you that it doth not follow from what hath been said concerning an obligation upon Conscience to yeild obedience to Laws that every transgression of a Law is of so deep a dye as some is He asks my opinion you know about this in the beginning of his Case And therefore I think good briefly to direct him to a better medium then any that