out of his Writings and present them to the Reader who will easily distinguish them from healthful Plants by the rankness of their smell Such are these which follow T. H. As for the following Posie of Flowers there wants no more to make them sweet than to wipe off the Venome blown upon some of them by his Lordships breath J. D. 1. To be delighted in the imagination only of being possessed of another man's Goods Servants or Wife without any intention to take them from him by force or fraud is no breach of the Law which saith Thou shalt not covet T. H. What man was there ever whose imagination of any thing he thought would please him was not some delight Or what sin is there where there is not so much as an intention to do injustice But his Lordship would not distinguish between delight and purpose nor between a Wish and a Will This was venome I believe that his Lordship himself even before he was Married took some delight in the thought of it and yet the Woman then was not his own All love is delight but all love is not sin Without this love of that which is not yet a mans own the World had not been Peopled J. D. 2. If a Man by the terror of present death be compelled to do a Fact against the Law he is totally excused because no Law can oblige a Man to abandon his own preservation nature compelleth him to the Fact The like Doctrine he hath elsewhere When the Actor doth any thing against the Law of Nature by the Command of the Author if he be obliged by former Covenants to obey him not he but the Author breaketh the Law of Nature T. H. The second Flower is both sweet and wholsom J. D. 3. It is a Doctrine repugnant to Civil Society that whatsoever a man does against his Conscience is sin T. H. 'T is plain that to do what a man thinks in his own Conscience to be sin is sin for it is a contempt of the Law it self and from thence ignorant men out of an erroneous Conscience disobey the Law which is pernicious to all Government J. D. 4. The Kingdom of God is not shut but to them that sin that is to them who have not performed due obedience to the Laws of God nor to them if they believe the necessary Articles of the Christian Faith 5. We must know that the true acknowledging of sin is Repentance it self 6. An opinion publickly appointed to be taught cannot be Heresie nor the Soveraign Princes that Authorised the same Hereticks T. H. The 4 th 5 th and 6 th smell well But to say that the Soveraign Prince in England is a Heretick or that an Act of Parliament is Heretical stinks abominably as 't was thought Primo Elizabethae J. D. 7. Temporal and Spiritual government are but two words to make men see double and mistake their lawful Soveraign c. There is no other Government in this Life neither of State nor Religion but Temporal 8. It is manifest that they who permit a contrary Doctrine to that which themselves believe and think necessary to Salvation do against their Consciences and Will as much as in them lyeth the eternal destruction of their Subjects T. H. The 7 th and 8 th are Roses and Jassamin But his leaving out the words to Salvation was venome J. D. 9. Subjects sin if they do not worship God according to the Laws of the Common-wealth T. H. The 9 th he hath poisoned and made it not mine he quotes my Book de Cive Cap. 15.19 Where I say Regnante Deo per solam rationem naturalem that is Before the Scripture was given they sinned that refused to worship God according to the Rites and Ceremonies of the Country which hath no ill scent but to undutiful Subjects J. D. 10. To believe in Jesus in Jesum is the same as to believe that Jesus is Christ. T. H. And so it is always in the Scripture J. D. 11. There can be no contradiction between the Laws of God and the Laws of a Christian Common-wealth Yet we see Christian Common-wealths daily contradict one another T. H. The 11 th is also good But his Lordship's instance That Christian Common-wealths contradict one another have nothing to do here Their Laws do indeed contradict one another but contradict not the Law of God For God Commands their Subjects to obey them in all things and his Lordship himself confesseth that their Laws though erroneous bind the Conscience But Christian Common-wealths would seldome contradict one another if they made no Doctrine Law but such as were necessary to Salvation J. D. 12. No man giveth but with intention of some good to himself Of all voluntary Acts the Object is to every man his own good Moses St. Paul and the Decij were not of his mind T. H. That which his Lordship adds to the 12 th namely that Moses St. Paul and the Decij were not of my mind is false For the two former did what they did for a good to themselves which was eternal Life and the Decij for a good Fame after death And his Lordship also if he had believed there is an eternal happiness to come or thought a good Fame after death to be any thing worth he would have directed all his actions towards them and have despised the Wealth and Titles of the present World J. D. 13. There is no natural knowledge of man's estate after death much less of reward which is then to be given to breach of Faith but only a belief grounded upon other mens saying that they know it supernaturally or that they know those that knew them that knew others that knew it supernaturally T. H. The 13 th is good and fresh J. D. 14. David's killing of Uriah was no injury to Uriah because the right to do what he pleased was given him by Uriah himself T. H. David himself makes this good in saying To thee only have I sinned J. D. 15. To whom it belongeth to determine controversies which may arise from the divers interpretations of Scripture he hath an imperial power over all men which acknowledge the Scripture to be the Word of God 16. What is Theft what is Murder what is Adultery and universally what is an injury is known by the Civil Law that is by the Commands of the Soveraign T. H. For the 15 th he should have disputed it with the Head of the Church And as to the 16 th I would have asked him by what other Law his Lordship would have it determined what is Theft or what is Injury than by the Laws made in Parliament or by the Laws which distinguish between Meum and Tuum His Lordships ignorance smells rankly 't is his own phrase in this and many other places which I have let pass of his own Interest The King tells us what is sin in that he tells us what is Law He hath authorised the Clergy to dehort the people
in defence of the Civil Power that must be punish'd by him whose Rights he defended like Vzza that was slain because he would needs unbidden put forth his Hand to keep the Ark from falling But what if a whole Nation should revolt from the Pope at once what effect could Excommunication have upon the Nation A. Why they should have no more Mass said at least by any of the Popes Priests Besides the Pope would have no more to do with them but cast them off and so they would be in the same Case as if a Nation should be cast off by their King and left to be governed by themselves or whom they would B. This would not be taken so much for a punishment to the People as to the King and therefore when a Pope Excommunicates a whole Nation methinks he rather Excommunicates himself than them But I pray you tell me what were the Rights that the Pope pretended to in the Kingdoms of other Princes A. First An Exemption of all Priests Friars and Monks in Criminal Causes from the Cognizance of Civil Judges Secondly Collation of Benefices on whom he pleased Native or Stranger and exaction of Tenths First Fruits and other Payments Thirdly Appeals to Rome in all Causes where the Church could pretend to be concern'd Fourthly To be the Supream Judge concerning Lawfulness of Marriage i. e. concerning the Hereditary Succession of Kings and to have the Cognisance of all Causes concerning Adultery and Fornication B. Good A Monopoly of Women A. Fifthly A Power of absolving Subjects of their Duties and of their Oaths of Fidelity to their lawful Sovereigns when the Pope should think fit for the extirpation of Heresie B. This Power of absolving Subjects of their Obedience as also that other of being Judge of Manners and Doctrine is as absolute a Sovereignty as is possible to be and consequently there must be two Kingdoms in one and the same Nation and no Man be able to know which of his Masters he must obey A. For my part I should rather obey that Master that had the Right of making Laws and of inflicting Punishments than him that pretendeth only to a Right of making Canons that is to say Rules and no Right of Co-action or otherwise punishing but by Excommunication B. But the Pope pretends also that his Canons are Laws and for punishing can there be greater than Excommunication supposing it true as the Pope saith it is that he that dies Excommunicate is damn'd Which supposition it seems you believe not else you would rather have chosen to obey the Pope that would cast you Body and Soul into Hell than the King that can only kill the Body A. You say true for it were very uncharitable in me to believe that all English men except a few Papists that have been born and called Hereticks ever since the Reformation of Religion in England should be damn'd B. But for those that die Excommunicate in the Church of England at this day do you not think them also damn'd A. Doubtless he that dies in sin without repentance is damn'd and he that is Excommunicate for disobedience to the Kings Laws either Spiritual or Temporal is Excommunicate for sin and therefore if he die Excommunicate and without desire of reconciliation he dies impenitent You see what follows but to die in disobedience to the Precepts and Doctrines of those Men that have no Authority or Jurisdiction over us is quite another Case and bringeth no such danger with it B. But what is this Heresie which the Church of Rome so cruelly persecutes as to depose Kings that do not when they are bidden turn all Hereticks out of their Dominions A. Heresie is a word which when it is used without passion signifies a private Opinion So the different Sects of the old Philosophers Academians Peripateticks Epicureans Stoicks c. were called Heresies but in the Christian Church there was in the signification of that word comprehended a sinful opposition to him that was chief Judge of Doctrines in order to the salvation of Mens Souls and consequently Heresie may be said to bear the same relation to the Power Spiritual that Rebellion doth to the Power Temporal and is suitably to be persecuted by him that will preserve a Power Spiritual and Dominion over Mens Consciences B. It would be very well because we are all of us permitted to read the Holy Scriptures and bound to make them the Rule of our Actions both publick and private that Heresie were by some Law defined and the particular Opinions set forth for which a man were to be condemned and punished as a Heretick for else not only Men of mean capacity but even the wisest and devoutest Christian may fall into Heresie without any will to oppose the Church for the Scriptures are hard and the Interpretations different of different men A. The meaning of the word Heresie is by Law declared in an Act of Parliament in the first year of Queen Elizabeth wherein it is ordain'd That the persons who had by the Queens Letters Patents the Authority Spiritual meaning the High Commission shall not have Authority to adjudge any Matter or Cause to be Heresie but only such as heretofore have been adjudged to be Heresie by the Authority of the Canonical Scriptures or by the first four General Councils or by any other General Council where the same was declared Heresie by the express and plain words of the said Canonical Scriptures or such as hereafter shall be adjudged Heresie by the High Court of Parliament of this Realm with the Assent of the Clergy in their Convocation B. It seems therefore if there arise any new error that hath not yet been declared Heresie and many such may arise it cannot be judged Heresie without a Parliament for how foul soever the error be it cannot have been declar'd Heresie neither in the Scriptures nor in the Councils because it was never before heard of and consequently there can be no error unless it fall within the compass of Blasphemy against God or Treason against the King for which a man can in Equity be punished Besides who can tell what is declared by the Scripture which every man is allowed to read and interpret to himself Nay more what Protestant either of the Laity or Clergy if every General Council can be a competent Judge of Heresie is not already condemned for divers Councils have declared a great many of our Doctrines to be Heresie and that as they pretend upon the Authority of the Scriptures A. What are those Points that the first four General Councils have declared Heresie B. The first General Council held at Nicaea declared all to be Heresie which was contrary to the Nicene Creed upon occasion of the Heresie of Arrius which was the denying the Divinity of Christ. The second General Council held at Constantinople declared Heresie the Doctrine of Macedonius which was that the Holy Ghost was created The third Council assembled at Ephesus condemned the
some Divine of good Reputation and Learning and of the late King's Party A. I think I can recommend unto you the best that is extant and such a one as except a few passages that I mislike is very well worth your reading The Title of it is The whole Duty of Man laid down in a plain and familiar way and yet I dare say that if the Presbyterian Ministers even those of them which were the most diligent Preachers of the late Sedition were to be tryed by it they would go near to be found Not Guilty He has divided the Duty of Man into three great Branches which are his Duty to God to Himself and to his Neighbour In his Duty to God he puts the acknowledgement of him in his Essence and his Attributes and in the believing of his Word His Attributes are Omnipotence Omniscience Infiniteness Justice Truth Mercy and all the rest that are found in Scripture Which of these did not those seditious Preachers acknowledge equally with the best of Christians The Word of God are the Books of Holy Scripture receiv'd for Canonical in England B. They receive the Word of God but 't is according to their own Interpretation A. According to whose Interpretation was it receiv'd by the Bishops and the rest of the Loyal Party but their own He puts for another Duty Obedience and Submission to Gods Will. Did any of them nay did any man living do any thing at any time against God's Will B. By God's Will I suppose he means there his revealed Will that is to say his Commandements which I am sure they did most horribly break both by their preaching and otherwise A. As for their Actions there is no doubt but all men are guilty enough if God deal severely with them to be damn'd And for their preaching they will say they thought it agreeable to Gods revealed Will in the Scriptures if they thought it so it was not disobedience but error and how can any man prove they thought otherwise B. Hypocrisie hath this great Prerogative above other sins that it cannot be accus'd A. Another Duty he sets down is to Honour him in his House that is the Church in his Possessions in his Day in his Word and Sacraments B. They perform this Duty as well I think as any other Ministers I mean the Loyal Party and the Presbyterians have always had an equal care to have God's House free from Profanation To have Tithes duly paid and Offerings accepted To have the Sabbath-day kept holy the Word preached and the Lords Supper and Baptism duly administred But is not keeping of the Feasts and of the Fasts one of those Duties that belong to the Honour of God If it be the Presbyterians fail in that A. Why so They kept some Holy-days and they had Fasts amongst themselves though not upon the same days that the Church ordains but when they thought fit as when it pleased God to give the King any notable Victory and they govern'd themselves in this Point by the Holy Scripture as they pretend to believe and who can prove they do not believe so B. Let us pass over all other Duties and come to that Duty which we owe to the King and consider whether the Doctrine taught by those Divines which adhered to the King be such in that Point as may justifie the Presbyterians that incited the People to Rebellion for that 's the thing you call in question Concerning our Duty to our Rulers he hath these words An Obedience we must pay either active or passive the active in the case of all lawful Commands that is whenever the Magistrate commands something which is not contrary to some Command of God we are then bound to act according to that Command of the Magistrate to do the things he requires but when he enjoyns any thing contrary to what God hath commanded we are not then to pay him this Active Obedience we may nay we must refuse thus to act yet here we must be very well assur'd that the thing is so contrary and not pretend Conscience for a Cloak of stubbornness we are in that Case to obey God rather than Men but even this is a season for the Passive Obedience we must patiently suffer what he inflicts on us for such refusal and not to secure our selves rise up against him B. What is there in this to give colour to the late Rebellion A. They will say they did it in obedience to God in as much as they did believe it was according to the Scripture out of which they will bring Examples perhaps of David and his adherents that resisted King Saul and of the Prophets afterward that vehemently from time to time preached against the Idolatrous Kings of Israel and Judah Saul was their lawful King and yet they paid him neither Active nor Passive Obedience for they did put themselves into a posture of defence against him though David himself spared his Person and so did the Presbyterians put into their Commissions to their General that they should spare the King's Person Besides you cannot doubt but that they who in the Pulpit did animate the People to take Arms in defence of the then Parliament alleadged Scripture that is the Word of God for it If it be lawful then for Subjects to resist the King when he commands any thing that is against the Scripture that is contrary to the Command of God and to be Judge of the meaning of the Scripture it is impossible that the Life of any King or the Peace of any Christian Kingdom can be long secure It is this Doctrine that divides a Kingdom within it self whatsoever the Men be Loyal or Rebels that write or preach it publickly And thus you see that if those seditious Ministers be tryed by this Doctrine they will come off well enough B. I see it and wonder at People that having never spoken with God Almighty nor knowing one more than another what he hath said when the Laws and the Preacher disagree should so keenly follow the Minister for the most part an Ignorant though a ready Tongu'd Scholar rather than the Laws that were made by the King with the consent of the Peers and the Commons of the Land A. Let us examine his words a little nearer First Concerning Passive Obedience When a Thief hath broken the Laws and according to the Law is therefore executed can any man understand that this suffering of his is an obedience to the Law Every Law is a Command to do or to forbear neither of these is fulfilled by suffering If any Suffering can be called Obedience it must be such as is voluntary for no involuntary Action can be counted a submission to the Law He that means that his suffering should be taken for obedience must not only not resist but also not fly nor hide himself to avoid his punishment and who is there amongst them that discourses of Passive Obedience when his Life is in extream danger
are sent by him Love God with all your Soul and your Neighbour as your self are words of the Scripture which are well enough understood but neither Children nor the greatest part of Men do understand why it is their Duty to do so They see not that the safety of the Common-wealth and consequently their own depends upon their doing it Every man by nature without discipline does in all his Actions look upon as far as he can see the benefit that shall redound to himself from his obedience He reads that Covetousness is the root of all evil but he thinks and sometimes finds it is the root of his Estate And so in other Cases the Scripture says one thing and they think another weighing the Commodities or Incommodities of this present life only which are in their sight never putting into the Scales the Good and Evil of the Life to come which they see not A. All this is no more than happens where the Scripture is seal'd up in Greek and Latin and the People taught the same things out of them by Preachers But they that are of a Condition and Age fit to examine the sense of what they read and that take a delight in searching out the Grounds of their Duty certainly cannot choose but by their reading of the Scriptures come to such a sense of their Duty as not only to obey the Laws themselves but also to induce others to do the same for commonly Men of Age and Quality are followed by their inferior Neighbours that look more upon the Example of those Men whom they reverence and whom they are unwilling to displease than upon Precepts and Laws B. These Men of the Condition and Age you speak of are in my opinion the unfittest of all others to be trusted with the reading of the Scriptures I know you mean such as have studied the Greek or Latin or both Tongues and that are withal such as love knowledge and consequently take delight in finding out the meaning of the most hard Texts or in thinking they have found it in case it be new and not found out by others These are therefore they that pretermitting the easie places which teach them their Duty fall to scanning only of the Mysteries of Religion such as are How it may be made out with wit that there be three that bear Rule in Heaven and those three but One How the Deity could be made Flesh How that Flesh could be really present in many places at once Where 's the Place and what the Torments of Hell and other Metaphysical Doctrines Whether the Will of Man be free or governed by the Will of God Whether Sanctity comes by Inspiration or Education By whom Christ now speaks to us Whether by the King or by the Clergy or by the Bible to every man that reads it and interprets it to himself or by a private Spirit to every private Man These and the like Points are the study of the Curious and the cause of all our late mischief and the cause that makes the plainer sort of Men whom the Scripture had taught belief in Christ Love towards God Obedience to the King and sobriety of behaviour forget it all and place their Religion in the disputable Doctrines of these your wise Men. A. I do not think these men fit to interpret the Scripture to the rest nor do I say that the rest ought to take their Interpretation for the Word of God Whatsoever is necessary for them to know is so easie as not to need Interpretation Whatsoever is more does them no good But in case any of those unnecessary Doctrines shall be authorized by the Laws of the King or other State I say it is the Duty of every Subject not to speak against them in as much as it is every man's Duty to obey Him or Them that have the Sovereign Power and the Wisdom of all such Powers to punish such as shall publish or teach their private Interpretations when they are contrary to the Law and likely to incline men to Sedition or Disputing against the Law B. They must punish then the most of those that have had their breeding in the Universities for such curious Questions in Divinity are first started in the Universities and so are all those Politick Questions concerning the Rights of Civil and Ecclesiastick Government and there they are furnished with Arguments for Liberty out of the Works of Aristotle Plato Cicero Seneca and out of the Histories of Rome and Greece for their Disputation against the necessary Power of their Sovereigns Therefore I despair of any lasting Peace amongst our selves till the Universities here shall bend and direct their Studies to the setling of it that is to the teaching of absolute Obedience to the Laws of the King and to his Publick Edicts under the Great Seal of England for I make no doubt but that solid Reason back'd with the Authority of so many Learned Men will more prevail for the keeping of us in peace within our selves than any Victory can do over the Rebels but I am afraid that 't is impossible to bring the Universities to such a compliance with the Actions of State as is necessary for the business A. Seeing the Universities have heretofore from time to time maintain'd the Authority of the Pope contrary to all Laws Divine Civil and Natural against the Right of our Kings why can they not as well when they have all manner of Laws and Equity on their side maintain the Rights of him that is both Sovereign of the Kingdom and Head of the Church B. Why then were they not in all Points for the King's Power presently after that King Henry the 8 th was in Parliament declared Head of the Church as much as they were before for the Authority of the Pope A. Because the Clergy in the Universities by whom all things there are governed and the Clergy without the Universities as well Bishops as inferior Clerks did think that the pulling down of the Pope was the setting up of them as to England in his place and made no question the greatest part of them but that their Spiritual Power did depend not upon the Authority of the King but of Christ himself derived to them by a successive Imposition of Hands from Bishop to Bishop notwithstanding they knew that this derivation passed through the Hands of Popes and Bishops whose Authority they had cast off For though they were content that the Divine Right which the Pope pretended to in England should be denied him yet they thought it not so fit to be taken from the Church of England whom they now supposed themselves to represent It seems they did not think it reasonable that a Woman or a Child or a Man that could not construe the Hebrew Greek or Latin Bible nor know perhaps the Declensions and Conjugations of Greek or Latin Nouns and Verbs should take upon him to govern so many learned Doctors in matters of Religion meaning matters
there no particular instance of action or words out of which they argued that endeavour of his to subvert the fundamental Laws of Parliament whereof they accused him A Yes they said he gave the King counsel to reduce the Parliament to their Duty by the Irish Army which not long before my Lord of Strafford himself had caused to be Levied there for the King's Service but it was never proved against him that he advised the King to use it against the Parliament B. What are those Laws that are called fundamental for I understand not how one Law can be more fundamental than another except only that Law of Nature that binds us all to obey him whosoever he be whom lawfully and for our own safety we have promised to obey nor any other fundamental Law to a King but Salus Populi the safety and well-being of his People A. This Parliament in the use of their words when they accused any man never regarded the signification of them but the weight they had to aggravate their accusation to the ignorant multitude which think all faults hainous that are express'd in hainous terms if they hate the Person accus'd as they did this man not only for being of the King's Party but also for deserting the Parliaments Party as an Apostate B. I pray you tell me also what they meant by Arbitrary Government which they seemed so much to hate Is there any Governour of a People in the World that is forced to govern them or forced to make this and that Law whether he will or no I think not or if any be he that forces him does certainly make Laws and govern arbitrarily A. That 's true and the true meaning of the Parliament was that not the King but they themselves should have the Arbitrary Government not only of England but of Ireland and as it appeared by the event of Scotland also B. How the King came by the Government of Scotland and Ireland by descent from his Ancestors every body can tell but if the King of England and his Heirs should chance which God forbid to fail I cannot imagine what Title the Parliament of England can acquire thereby to either of those Nations A. Yes they 'l say they had been conquer'd anciently by the English Subjects Money B. Like enough and suitable to the rest of their impudence A. Impudence in Democratical Assemblies does almost all that 's done 't is the Goddess of Rhetorick and carries proof with it for what ordinary man will not from so great boldness of affirmation conclude there is great probability in the thing affirmed Upon this Accusation he was brought to his Tryal in Westminster-Hall before the House of Lords and found guilty and presently after declared Traitor by a Bill of Attainder that is by Act of Parliament B. It is a strange thing that the Lords should be induced upon so light grounds to give a Sentence or give their Assent to a Bill so prejudicial to themselves and their Posterity A. 'T was not well done and yet as it seems not ignorantly for there is a Clause in the Bill that it should not be taken hereafter for an example that is for a prejudice in the like Case hereafter B. That 's worse than the Bill it self and is a plain Confession that their Sentence was unjust for what harm is there in the Examples of just Sentences Besides if hereafter the like Case should happen the Sentence is not at all made weaker by such a Provision A. Indeed I believe that the Lords most of them were not of themselves willing to condemn him of Treason they were awed to it by the clamor of Common People that came to Westminster crying out Justice Justice against the Earl of Strafford the which were caused to flock thither by some of the House of Commons that were well assur'd after the triumphant welcome of Prin Burton and Bastwick to put the People into tumult upon any occasion they desir'd They were awed unto it partly also by the House of Commons it self which if it desir'd to undo a Lord had no more to do but to vote him a Delinquent B. A Delinquent what 's that A Sinner is 't not Did they mean to undo all Sinners A. By Delinquent they meant only a Man to whom they would do all the hurt they could but the Lords did not yet I think suspect they meant to cashiere their whole House B. It 's a strange thing the whole House of Lords should not perceive that the ruin of the King's Power and the weakening of it was the ruin or weakening of themselves for they could not think it likely that the People ever meant to take the Sovereignty from the King to give it to them who were few in number and less in power than so many Commoners because less beloved by the People A. But it seems not so strange to me for the Lords for their personal abilities as they were no less so also they were no more skilful in the Publick Affairs than the Knights and Burgesses for there is no reason to think that if one that is to day a Knight of the Shire in the Lower House be to morrow made a Lord and a Member of the Higher House is therefore wiser than he was before They are all of both Houses prudent and able Men as any in the Land in the business of their private Estates which require nothing but diligence and natural Wit to govern them but for the Government of a Common-wealth neither wit nor prudence nor diligence is enough without infallible Rules and the true Science of Equity and Justice B. If this be true it is impossible any Common-wealth in the World whether Monarchy Aristocratie or Democratie should continue long without change or Sedition tending to change either of the Government or of the Governors A. 'T is true nor have any the greatest Common-wealths in the World been long free from Sedition The Greeks had for a while their petty Kings and then by Sedition came to be petty Common-wealths and then growing to be greater Common-wealths by Sedition again became Monarchies and all for want of Rules of Justice for the Common People to take notice of which if the People had known in the beginning of every of these Seditions the Ambitious Persons could never had the hope to disturb their Government after it had been once setled for Ambition can do little without hands and few hands it would have if the Common People were as diligently instructed in the true Principles of their Duty as they are terrified and amazed by Preachers with fruitless and dangerous Doctrines concerning the Nature of Man's Will and many other Philosophical Points that tend not at all to the salvation of the Soul in the World to come nor to their ease in this life but only to the direction towards the Clergy of that Duty which they ought to perform to the King B. For ought I see all the States of
was courting the Gentlemen there the Committee was instigating of the Yeomanry against him To which also the Ministers did very much contribute So that the King lost his opportunity at York B. Why did not the King seize the Committee into his Hands or drive them out of Town A. I know not but I believe he knew the Parliament had a greater Party than he not only in York-shire but also in York Towards the end of April the King upon Petition of the People of York-shire to have the Magazine of Hull to remain still there for the greater security of the Northern parts thought fit to take it into his own Hands He had a little before appointed Governour of that Town the Earl of New-Castle but the Towns-men having been already corrupted by the Parliament refused to receive him but refused not to receive Sir John Hotham appointed to be Governour by the Parliament The King therefore coming before the Town guarded only by his own Servants and a few Gentlemen of the Countrey thereabouts was denied entrance by Sir John Hotham that stood upon the Wall for which Act he presently caused Sir John Hotham to be proclaimed Traitor and sent a Message to the Parliament requiring Justice to be done upon the said Hotham and that the Town and Magazine might be delivered into his hands To which the Parliament made no answer but in stead thereof published another Declaration in which they omitted nothing of their former slanders against his Majesties Government but inserted certain Propositions declarative of their own pretended Right viz. 1. That whatsoever they declare to be Law ought not to be question'd by the King 2. That no Precedents can be limits to bound their proceedings 3. That a Parliament for the publick good may dispose of any thing wherein the King or Subject hath a Right and that they without the King are this Parliament and the Judge of this publick good and that the King's Consent is not necessary 4. That no Member of either House ought to be troubled for Treason Felony or any other Crime unless the Cause be first brought before the Parliament that they may judge of the Fact and give leave to proceed if they see cause 5. That the Sovereign Power resides in both Houses and that the King ought to have no Negative Voice 6 That the Levying of Forces against the personal Commands of the King though accompanied with his presence is not Levying War against the King but the Levying of War against his Politick Person viz. his Laws c. 7. That Treason cannot be committed against his Person otherwise than as he is entrusted with the Kingdom and discharges that Trust and that they have a power to judge whether he have discharged this Trust or not 8. That they may dispose of the King when they will B. This is plain dealing and without Hypocrisie Could the City of London swallow this A. Yes and more too if need be London you know has a great Belly but no Pallat nor Tast of Right and Wrong In the Parliament Roll of Hen. 4. amongst the Articles of the Oath the King at his Coronation took there is one runs thus Concedes just as Leges Consuetudines esse tenendas promittes per te eas esse protegendas ad honorem Dei corroborandas quas vulgus elegerit Which the Parliament urged for their Legislative Authority and therefore interpret quas vulgus elegerit which the People shall choose as if the King should swear to protect and corroborate Laws before they were made whether they be good or bad whereas the words signifie no more but that he shall protect and corroborate such Laws as they have chosen that is to say the Acts of Parliament then in being And in the Records of the Exchequer it is thus Will you grant to hold and keep the Laws and rightful Customs which the Commonalty of this your Kingdom have and will you defend and uphold them c. And this was the Answer his Majesty made to that Point B. And I think this Answer very full and clear but if the words were to be interpreted in the other sense yet I see no reason why the King should be bound to swear to them for Hen. 4. came to the Crown by the Votes of a Parliament not much inferior in wickedness to this Long Parliament that deposed and murdered their Lawful King saving that it was not the Parliament it self but the Usurper that murdered King Richard the second A. About a week after in the beginning of May the Parliament sent the King another Paper which they stiled the humble Petition and Advice of both Houses containing 19 Propositions which when you shall hear you shall be able to judge what power they meant to leave to the King more than to any one of his Subjects The first of them is this 1. That the Lords and others of his Majesties Privy-Council and all great Officers of State both at home and abroad be put from their Employments and from his Council save only such as should be approved of by both Houses of Parliament and none put into their places but by approbation of the said Houses And that all Privy-Councellors take an Oath for the due execution of their places in such form as shall be agreed upon by the said Houses 2. That the great Affairs of the Kingdom be debated resolved and transacted only in Parliament and such as shall presume to do any thing to the contrary be reserved to the censure of the Parliament and such other matters of State as are proper for his Majesties Privy-Council shall be debated and concluded by such as shall from time to time be chosen for that place by both Houses of Parliament and that no publick Act concerning the Affairs of the Kingdom which are proper for his Privy-Council be esteemed valid as proceeding from the Royal Authority unless it be done by the Advice and Consent of the Major part of the Councel attested under their Hands and that the Council be not more than 25 nor less than 15 and that when a Councellors place falls void in the Interval of Parliament it shall not be supplied without the Assent of the Major part of the Council and that such choice also shall be void if the next Parliament after confirm it not 3. That the Lord High Steward of England Lord High Constable Lord Chancellor or Lord Keeper of the Great Seal Lord Treasurer Lord Privy-Seal Earl Marshal Lord Admiral Warden of the Cinque Ports Chief Governour of Ireland Chancellor of the Exchequer Master of the Wards Secretaries of State two Chief Justices and Chief Baron be always chosen with the Approbation of both Houses of Parliament and in the Intervals of Parliament by the Major part of the Privy-Council 4. That the Government of the King's Children shall be committed to such as both Houses shall approve of and in the Intervals of Parliament such as the Privy-Council
translated into English by Thomas Hobbs Popish Cruelties shewed in a Narrative of Parey's Tryal and Condemnation in Folio 1 s. An Historical Narration of Heresie by Tho. Hobbs in Folio The Life of Tho. Hobbs in a Poem in English in Fol. Consideration on the Loyalty Religion Reputation and Manners of Mr. Hobbs in Octavo price bound 1 s. The Memoires and rare Adventures of Silvia Moliere all the six parts in Twelves price 4 s. Tho. Hobbs Angli Malmsbur Vita being an Account of Mr. Hobbs of the Books he wrote of the times when and the occasions thereof of the Books and Authors against him of his Conversation and Acquaintance c. in Octavo printed 1681. LAW The Jurisdiction of the Authority of Court Leets Court Barons Court Marshals c. by J. Kitchin in Octavo Praxis Curiae Admiralitatis Angliae Author Francis Clark in Twelves Sir Simon Deiggs Parsons-Councellor in Octavo third Edition 1681. Clerks Manual a Book of Presidents in Octavo Officina Brevium select forms of Writs and other process c. Of the Court of Common-Pleas at Westminster c. in Folio price 12 s. printed 1680 A Dialogue betwixt a Student and a Philosopher about the Common Laws of England in Octavo by Thomas Hobbs Poetry and Plays Melpomene or the Muses delight in Octavo The Confinement with Annot. in Octavo The White Devil in Quarto Catiline's Conspiracy in Quarto Rival Kings in Quarto Old Troop in Quarto Amorous Gallant in Quarto Mock Duellist in Quarto Wrangling Lovers in Quarto Tom Essence in Quarto French Conjurer in Quarto Wits led by the Nose in Quarto Counterfeit Bridegroom in Quarto Tunbridg-Wells in Quarto Man of New-Market in Quarto Constant Nymph in Quarto Miscellanies The Deaf and Dumb Man's Discourse in Octavo The compleat Measurer in Octavo The American Physitian in Octavo Lord Bacon's Apothegms in Twelves 6 d. bound Hobbs's and Lany about Liberty in Twelves Reflections of Philosophers in Octavo Hobbs Natural Philosophy in Octavo Feavers cured by Jesuites Powder in 12 o 1681. Oliver Cromwell's Sermon preached 1649. Filmer of Usury in Twelves Saunders's Physicks in Octavo The Court of Curiosity being the Interpretation of Dreams and a Fortune-Book in Octavo 1681. Hobbs his defence of his Leviathan in Octavo Hobbs his Physical Problems in Octavo The Addresses defended by Dr. J. H. The Remains of the three great Wits viz. Abraham Cowly Sir John Berkenhead and Samuel Butler the Author of Hudibrass aprinting in Quarto The fifteen Comforts of inconsiderate Marriage Twelves and price 1 s. FINIS AN ANSWER TO A BOOK Published by Dr. BRAMHALL late Bishop of Derry CALLED The Catching of the Leviathan Together With an Historical Narration Concerning HERESIE And the Punishment thereof By THOMAS HOBBES of Malmesbury LONDON Printed for W. Crooke at the Green Dragon without Temple-Barr 1682. TO THE READER AS in all things which I have written so also in this Piece I have endeavoured all I can to be perspicuous but yet your own attention is always necessary The late Lord Bishop of Derry published a Book called The Catching of Leviathan in which he hath put together divers Sentences pickt out of my Leviathan which stand there plainly and firmly proved and sets them down without their Proofs and without the order of their dependance one upon another and calls them Atheism Blasphemy Impiety Subversion of Religion and by other names of that kind My request unto you is That when he cites my words for Erroneous you will be pleased to turn to the place it self and see whether they be well proved and how to be understood Which labour his Lordship might have saved you if he would have vouchsafed as well to have weighed my Arguments before you as to have shewed you my Conclusions His Book containeth two Chapters the one concerning Religion the other concerning Politicks Because he does not so much as offer any refutation of any thing in my Leviathan concluded I needed not to have answered either of them Yet to the first I here answer because the words Atheism Impiety and the like are words of the greatest defamation possible And this I had done sooner if I had sooner known that such a Book was extant He wrote it ten years since and yet I never heard of it till about three Months since so little talk there was of his Lordship's Writings If you want leasure or care of the questions between us I pray you condemn me not upon report To judge and not examine is not just Farewell T. Hobbes CHAP. I. That the Hobbian Principles are destructive to Christianity and all Religion J. D. THe Image of God is not altogether defaced by the fall of Man but that there will remain some practical notions of God and Goodness which when the mind is free from vagrant desires and violent passions do shine as clearly in the heart as other speculative notions do in the head Hence it is That there was never any Nation so barbarous or savage throughout the whole world which had not their God They who did never wear cloaths upon their backs who did never know Magistrate but their Father yet have their God and their Religious Rites and Devotions to him Hence it is That the greatest Atheists in any sudden danger do unwittingly cast their eyes up to Heaven as craving aid from thence and in a thunder creep into some hole to hide themselves And they who are conscious to themselves of any secret Crimes though they be secure enough from the justice of men do yet feel the blind blows of a Guilty Conscience and fear Divine Vengeance This is acknowledged by T. H. himself in his lucid Intervals That we may know what worship of God natural reason doth assign let us begin with his attributes where it is manifest in the first place That existency is to be attributed to him To which he addeth Infiniteness Incomprehensibility Vnity Vbiquity Thus for Attributes next for Actions Concerning external Actions wherewith God is to be worshipped the most general precept of reason is that they be signs of honour under which are contained Prayers Thanksgivings Oblations and Sacrifices T. H. Hitherto his Lordship discharges me of Atheisme What need he to say that All Nations how barbarous soever yet have their Gods and Religious Rites and Atheists are frighted with thunder and feel the blind blows of Conscience It might have been as apt a Preface to any other of his Discourses as this I expect therefore in the next place to be told that I deny again my afore recited Doctrine J. D. Yet to let us see how inconsistent and irreconcileable he is with himself elsewhere reckoning up all the Laws of Nature at large even twenty in number he hath not one word that concerneth Religion or that hath the least relation in the world to God As if a man were like the Colt of a wild Asse in the wilderness without any owner or obligation Thus in describing the Laws of Nature this
great Clerk forgeteth the God of Nature and the main and principle Laws of Nature which contains a mans duty to his God and the principal end of his Creation T. H. After I had ended the discourse he mentions of the Laws of Nature I thought it fittest in the last place once for all to say they were the Laws of God then when they were delivered in the Word of God but before being not known by men for any thing but their own natural reason they were but Theorems tending to peace and those uncertain as being but conclusions of particular men and therefore not properly Laws Besides I had formerly in my Book De Cive cap. 4. proved them severally one by one out of the Scriptures which his Lordship had read and knew 'T was therefore an unjust charge of his to say I had not one word in them that concerns Religion or that hath the least relation in the world to God and this upon no other ground then that I added not to every article This Law is in the Scripture But why he should call me ironically a great Clerk I cannot tell I suppose he would make men believe I arrogated to my self all the learning of a great Clerk Bishop or other inferior Minister A Learned Bishop is that Bishop that can interpret all parts of Scripture truly and congruently to the harmony of the whole that has learnt the History and Laws of the Church down from the Apostles time to his own and knows what is the nature of a Law Civil Divine Natural and Positive and how to govern well the Parochial Ministers of his Diocess so that they may both by Doctrine and Example keep the people in the belief of all Articles of Faith necessary to Salvation and in obedience to the Laws of their Country This is a Learned Bishop A Learned Minister is he that hath learned the way by which men may be drawn from Avarice Pride Sensuality Prophaness Rebellious Principles and all other vices by eloquent and powerful disgracing them both from Scripture and from Reason and can terrify men from vice by discreet uttering of the punishments denounced against wicked men and by deducing rationally the dammage they receive by it in the end In one word he is a Learned Minister that can preach such Sermons as St. Chrisostome preached to the Antiochians when he was Presbyter in that City Could his Lordship find in my Book that I arrogated to my self the eloquence or wisdom of St. Chrisostom or the ability of governing the Church 'T is one thing to know what is to be done another thing to know how to do it But his Lordship was pleased to use any artifice to disgrace me in any kind whatsoever J. D. Perhaps he will say that he handleth the Laws of Nature there only so far as may serve to the constitution or settlement of a Common-wealth In good time let it be so He hath devised us a trim Common-wealth which is founded neither upon Religion towards God nor Justice towards Man but meerly upon self-interest and self-preservation Those raies of heavenly Light those natural seeds of Religion which God himself hath imprinted in the heart of man are more efficatious towards preservation of a Society whether we regard the nature of the thing or the blessing of God then all his Pacts and Surrenders and Translations of power He who unteacheth men their duty to God may make them Eye-servants so long as their interest doth oblige them to obey but is no fit Master to teach men conscience and fidelity T. H. He has not yet found the place where I contradict either the Existence or Infiniteness or Incomprehensibility or Unity or Ubiquity of God I am therefore yet absolved of Atheism But I am he says inconsistent and irreconcileable with my self that is I am though he says not so he thinks a forgetful blockhead I cannot help that But my forgetfulness appears not here Even his Lordship where he says Those raies of heavenly Light those seeds of Religion which God himself hath imprinted in the heart of man meaning natural reason are more efficacious to the preservation of Society than all the Pacts Surrenders and Translating of Power had forgotten to except the Old Pact of the Jews and the New Pact of Christians But pardoning that did he hope to make any wise man believe that when this Nation very lately was an Anarchy and dissolute multitude of men doing every one what his own reason or imprinted Light suggested did again out of that same Light call in the King and piece again and ask pardon for the faults which that their illumination had brought them into rather than out of fear of perpetual danger and hope of preservation J. D. Without Religion Societies are like but soapy bubbles quickly dissolved It was the judgment of as wise a man as T. H. himself though perhaps he will hardly be perswaded to it that Rome ought more of its grandeur to Religion than either to strength or stratagems We have not exceeded the Spaniards in number nor the Galls in strength nor the Carthaginians in craft nor the Grecians in art c. but we have overcome all Nations by our Piety and Religion T. H. Did not his Lordship forget himself here again in approving this sentence of Tully which makes the Idolatry of the Romans not only better than the Idolatry of other Nations but also better than the Religion of the Jews whose Law Christ himself says he came not to destroy but to fulfil And that the Romans overcame both them and other Nations by their Piety when it is manifest that the Romans overran the world by injustice and cruelty and that their Victories ought not to be ascribed to the Piety of the Romans but to the impiety as well of the Jews as of other Nations But what meant he by saying Tully was as wise a man as T. H. himself though perhaps he will hardly be perswaded to it Was that any part of the controversie No Then it was out of his way God promiseth to assist good men in their way but not out of their way 'T is therefore the less wonder that his Lordship was in this place deserted of the Light which God imprints in the hearts of rudest Savages J. D. Among his Laws he incerteth gratitude to men as the third precept of the Law of Nature but of the gratitude of mankind to their Creator there is a deep silence If men had sprung up from the earth in a night like Mushroms or Excresences without all sence of Honour Justice Conscience or Gratitude he could not have vilified the humane nature more then he doth T. H. My Lord discovers here an ignorance of such method as is necessary for lawful and strict reasoning and explication of the truth in controversie And not only that but also how little able he is to fix his mind upon what he reads in other mens Writings When I had defined
God He offers no proof against any of this but says only I make Atheism to be more reasonable than Superstition which is not true For I deny that there is any reason either in the Atheist or in the Superstitious And because the Atheist thinks he has reason where he has none I think him the more irrational of the two But all this while he argues not against any of this but enquires only what is become of my natural Worship of God and of his Existency Infiniteness Incomprehensibility Unity and Ubiquity As if whatsoever reason can suggest must be suggested all at once First all men by nature had an opinion of Gods Existency but of his other Attributes not so soon but by reasoning and by degrees And for the Attributes of the true God they were never suggested but by the Word of God written In that I say Atheism is a sin of ignorance he says I excuse it The Prophet David says The fool hath said in his heart There is no God Is it not then a sin of folly 'T is agreed between us that right reason dictates There is a God Does it not follow that denying of God is a sin proceeding from mis-reasoning If it be not a sin of ignorance it must be a sin of malice Can a man malice that which he thinks has no being But may not one think there is a God and yet maliciously deny him If he think there is a God he is no Atheist and so the question is changed into this whether any man that thinks there is a God dares deliberately deny it For my part I think not For upon what confidence dares any man deliberately I say oppose the Omnipotent David saith of himself My feet were ready to slip when I saw the prosperity of the wicked Therefore it is likely the feet of men less holy slip oftner But I think no man living is so daring being out of passion as to hold it as his opinion Those wicked men that for a long time proceeded so succesfully in the late horrid Rebellion may perhaps make some think they were constant and resolved Atheists but I think rather that they forgot God than believed there was none He that believes there is such an Atheist comes a little too near that opinion himself Nevertheless if words spoken in passion signifie a denial of a God no punishment praeordained by Law can be too great for such an insolence because there is no living in a Common-wealth with men to whose oaths we cannot reasonably give credit As to that I say An Atheist is punished by God not as a Subject by his King but as an Enemy and to my argument for it namely because he never acknowledged himself Gods Subject He opposeth That if nature dictate that there is a God and to be worshiped in such and such manner then Atheism is not a sin of meer ignorance as if either I or he did hold that Nature dictates the manner of Gods Worship or any article of our Creed or whether to worship with or without a Surplice Secondly he answers that a Rebel is still a Subject de Jure though not de Facto And 't is granted But though the King lose none of his right by the Traytors act yet the Traytor loseth the priviledg of being punisht by a praecedent Law and therefore may be punish'd at the Kings will as Ravillac was for murdering Henry the 4th of France An open Enemy and a perfidious Traytor are both enemies Had not his Lordship read in the Roman story how Perseus and other just enemies of that State were wont to be punished But what is this trifling question to my excusing of Atheism In the seventh Paragraph of my Book de Cive he found the words in Latin which he here citeth And to the same sense I have said in my Leviathan That the right of nature whereby God raigneth over men is to be derived not from his creating them as if he required obedience as of Gratitude but from his irresistable Power This he says is absurd and dishonourable Whereas first all power is honourable and greatest power is most honourable Is it not a more noble tenure for a King to hold his Kingdom and the right to punish those that transgress his Laws from his Power than from the gratitude or gift of the Transgressor There is nothing therefore here of dishonour to God Almighty But see the subtility of his disputing He saw he could not catch Leviathan in this place he looks for him in my Book de Cive which is Latine to try what he could fish out of that And says I make our obedience to God depend upon our weakness as if these words signified the Dependence and not the necessity of our submission or that incumbere and dependere were all one J. D. For T. H. his God is not the God of Christians nor of any rational men Our God is every where and seeing he hath no parts he must be wholly here and wholly there and wholly every where So Nature it self dictateth It cannot be said honourably of God that he is in a place for nothing is in a place but that which hath proper bounds of its greatness But T. H. his God is not wholly every where No man can conceive that any thing is all in this place and all in another place at the same time for none of these things ever have or can be incident to sense So far well if by conceiving he mean comprehending but then follows That these are absurd Speeches taken upon credit without any signification at all from deceived Philosophers and deceived or deceiving School-men Thus he denieth the Ubiquity of God A Circumscriptive a Definitive and a Repletive being in a place is some heathen language to him T. H. Though I believe the Omnipotence of God and that he can do what he will yet I dare not say how every thing is done because I cannot conceive nor comprehend either the Divine substance or the way of its operation And I think it Impiety to speak concerning God any thing of my own head or upon the Authority of Philosophers or School-men which I understand not without warrant in the Scripture And what I say of Omnipotence I say also of Ubiquity But his Lordship is more valiant in this place telling us that God is wholly here and wholly there and wholly every where because he has no parts I cannot comprehend nor conceive this For methinks it implies also that the whole World is also in the whole God and in every part of God nor can I conceive how any thing can be called Whole which has no parts nor can I find any thing of this in the Scripture If I could find it there I could believe it and if I could find it in the publick Doctrine of the Church I could easily abstain from contradicting it The School-men say also that the Soul of Man meaning his upper Soul which
had corrected this Error sooner if I had sooner found it For though I was told by Dr. Cosins now Bishop of Duresme that the place above-cited was not applicable enough to the Doctrine of the Trinity yet I could not in reviewing the same espy the defect till of late when being sollicited from beyond Sea to translate the Book into Latin and fearing some other man might do it not to my liking I examined this passage and others of the like sence more narrowly But how concludes his Lordship out of this that I put out of the Creed these words The Father eternal the Son eternal the Holy Ghost eternal Or these words Let us make man after our Image out of the Bible Which last words neither I nor Bellarmine put out of the Bible but we both put them out of the number of good Arguments to prove the Trinity for it is no unusual thing in the Hebrew as may be seen by Bellarmine's quotations to joyn a Noun of the plural Number with a Verb of the singular And we may say also of many other Texts of Scripture alledged to prove the Trinity that they are not so firm as that high Article requireth But mark his Lordship's Scholastick charity in the last words of this period Such bold presumption requireth another manner of confutation This Bishop and others of his opinion had been in their Element if they had been Bishops in Queen Maries time J. D. Concerning God the Son forgetting what he had said elsewhere where he calleth him God and Man and the Son of God incarnate he doubteth not to say that the word Hypostatical is canting As if the same Person could be both God and Man without a Personal that is an Hypostatical Union of the two Natures of God and Man T. H. If Christian Profession be as certainly it is in England a Law and if it be of the nature of a Law to be made known to all men that are to obey it in such manner as they may have no excuse for disobedience from their ignorance then without doubt all words unknown to the people and as to them insignificant are Canting The word Substance is understood by the Vulgar well enough when it is said of a Body but in other sence not at all except for their Riches But the word Hypostatical is understood only by those and but few of those that are learned in the Greek Tongue and is properly used as I have said before of the Union of the two Natures of Christ in one Person So likewise Consubstantial in the Nicene Creed is properly said of the Trinity But to an English man that understands neither Greek nor Latin and yet is as much concerned as his Lordship was the word Hypostatical is no less Canting than Eternal now J. D. He alloweth every man who is commanded by his lawful Soveraign to deny Christ with his tongue before men T. H. I allow it in some Cases and to some men which his Lordship knew well enough but would not mention I alledged for it in the place cited both Reason and Scripture though his Lordship thought it not expedient to take notice of either If it be true that I have said why does he blame it If false why offers he no Argument against it neither from Scripture nor from Reason Or why does he not show that the Text I cite is not applicable to the Question or not well interpreted by me First He barely cites it because he thought the words would sound harshly and make a Reader admire them for Impiety But I hope I shall so well instruct my Reader ere I leave this place that this his petty Art will have no effect Secondly The Cause why he omitted my Arguments was That he could not answer them Lastly The Cause why he urgeth neither Scripture nor Reason against it was That he saw none sufficient My Argument from Scripture was this Leviathan pag. 271. taken out of 2 Kings 5.17 where Naaman the Syrian saith to Elisha the Prophet Thy servant will henceforth offer neither burnt-offering nor sacrifice to other Gods but unto the Lord. In this thing the Lord pardon thy servant that when my Master goeth into the house of Rimmon to worship there and he leaneth on my hand and I bow my self in the house of Rimmon when I bow my self in the house of Rimmon the Lord pardon thy servant in this thing and he said unto him Go in peace What can be said to this Did not Elisha say it from God Or is not this Answer of the Prophet a permission When St. Paul and St. Peter commanded the Christians of their time to obey their Princes which then were Heathens and Enemies of Christ did they mean they should lose their Lives for disobedience Did they not rather mean they should preserve both their Lives and their Faith believing in Christ as they did by this denial of the tongue having no command to the contrary If in this Kingdom a Mahometan should be made by terror to deny Mahomet and go to Church with us would any man condemn this Mahometan A denyal with the mouth may perhaps be prejudicial to the power of the Church but to retain the Faith of Christ stedfastly in his Heart cannot be prejudicial to his Soul that hath undertaken no charge to Preach to Wolves whom they know will destroy them About the time of the Council of Nice there was a Canon made which is extant in the History of the Nicene Council concerning those that being Christians had been seduced not terrified to a denyal of Christ and again repenting desired to be readmitted into the Church in which Canon it was ordain'd that those men should be no otherwise readmitted than to be in the number of the Catechised and not to be admitted to the Communion till a great many years penitence Surely the Church then would have been more merciful to them that did the same upon terror of present death and torments Let us now see what his Lordship might though but colourably have alledged from Scripture against it There be three Places only that seem to favour his Lordship's opinion The first is where Peter denyed Christ and Weepeth The second is Acts 5.29 Then Peter and the other Apostles answered and said we ought to obey God rather than men The third is Luke 12.9 But he that denyeth me shall be denyed before the Angels of God T. H. For answer to these Texts I must repeat what I have written and his Lordship read in my Leviathan pag. 362. For an unlearned man that is in the power of an Idolatrous King or State if commanded on pain of Death to worship before an Idol doing it he detesteth the Idol in his Heart he doth well though if he had the fortitude to suffer Death rather than worship it he should do better But if a Pastor who as Christ's Messenger has undertaken to teach Christ's Doctrine to all Nations should do the same it
which is a Person indued with Authority universal to govern all Christian men on Earth no more than there is one Universal Soveraign Prince or State on Earth that hath right to govern all Mankind I deny also that the whole Clergy of a Christian Kingdom or State being assembled are the representative of that Church further than the Civil Laws permits or can lawfully assemble themselves unless by the command or by the leave of the Soveraign Civil Power I say further that the denyal of this point tendeth in England towards the taking away of the Kings Supremacy in causes Ecclesiastical But his Lordship has not here denyed any thing of mine because he has done no more but set down my words He says further that this Doctrine destroyes the Authority of all General Councils which I confess Nor hath any General Council at this day in this Kingdom the force of a Law nor ever had but by the Authority of the King J. D. Neither is he more Orthodox concerning the Holy Scriptures Hitherto that is for the Books of Moses the power of making the Scripture Canonical was in the Civil Soveraign The like he saith of the Old Testament made Canonical by Esdras And of the New Testament That it was not the Apostles which made their own Writings Canonical but every Convert made them so to himself Yet with this restriction That until the Soveraign Ruler had prescribed them they were but Counsel and Advice which whether good or bad he that was counselled might without injustice refuse to observe and being contrary to the Laws established could not without injustice observe He maketh the Primitive Christians to have been in a pretty condition Certainly the Gospel was contrary to the Laws then established But most plainly The word of the Interpreter of the Scripture is the word of God And the same is the Interpreter of the Scripture and the Soveraign Judge of all Doctrines that is the Soveraign Magistrate to whose Authority we must stand no less than to theirs who at first did commend the Scripture to us for the Canon of Faith Thus if Christian Soveraigns of different Communications do clash one with another in their interpretations or misinterpretation of Scripture as they do daily then the word of God is contradictory to it self or that is the word of God in one Common-wealth which is the word of the Devil in another Common-wealth And the same thing may be true and not true at the same time Which is the peculiar priviledge of T.H. to make Contradictories to be true together T. H. There is no doubt but by what Authority the Scripture or any other Writing is made a Law by the same Authority the Scriptures are to be interpreted or else they are made Law in vain But to obey is one thing to believe is another which distinction perhaps his Lordship never heard of To obey is to do or forbear as one is commanded and depends on the Will but to believe depends not on the Will but on the providence and guidance of our hearts that are in the hands of God Almighty Laws only required obedience Belief requires Teachers and Arguments drawn either from Reason or from some thing already believed Where there is no reason for our Belief there is no reason we should believe The reason why men believe is drawn from the Authority of those men whom we have no just cause to mistrust that is of such men to whom no profit accrues by their deceiving us and of such men as never used to lye or else from the Authority of such men whose Promises Threats and Affirmations we have seen confirmed by God with Miracles If it be not from the Kings Authority that the Scripture is Law what other Authority makes it Law Here some man being of his Lordships judgment will perhaps laugh and say 't is the Authority of God that makes them Law I grant that But my question is on what Authority they believe that God is the Author of them Here his Lordship would have been at a Nonplus and turning round would have said the Authority of the Scripture makes good that God is their Author If it be said we are to believe the Scripture upon the Authority of the Universal Church why are not the Books we call Apocrypha the Word of God as well as the rest If this Authority be in the Church of England then it is not any other than the Authority of the Head of the Church which is the King For without the Head the Church is mute the Authority therefore is in the King which is all that I contended for in this point As to the Laws of the Gentiles concerning Religion in the Primitive times of the Church I confess they were contrary to Christian Faith But none of their Laws nor Terrors nor a mans own Will are able to take away Faith though they can compel to an external obedience and though I may blame the Ethnick Princes for compelling men to speak what they thought not yet I absolve not all those that have had the Power in Christian Churches from the same fault For I believe since the time of the first four General Councels there have been more Christians burnt and killed in the Christian Church by Ecclesiastical Authority than by the Heathen Emperors Laws for Religion only without Sedition All that the Bishop does in this Argument is but a heaving at the Kings Supremacy Oh but says he if two Kings interpret a place of Scripture in contrary sences it will follow that both sences are true It does not follow For the interpretation though it be made by just Authority must not therefore always be true If the Doctrine in the one sence be necessary to Salvation then they that hold the other must dye in their sins and be Damned But if the Doctrine in neither sence be necessary to Salvation then all is well except perhaps that they will call one another Atheists and fight about it J. D. All the power vertue use and efficacy which he ascribeth to the Holy Sacraments is to be signs or commemorations As for any sealing or confirming or conferring of Grace he acknowledgeth nothing The same he saith particularly of Baptism Upon which grounds a Cardinals red Hat or a Serjeant at Arms his Mace may be called Sacraments as well as Baptism or the holy Eucharist if they be only signs and commemorations of a benefit If he except that Baptism and the Eucharist are of Divine institution But a Cardinals red Hat or a Serjeant at Arms his Mace are not He saith truly but nothing to his advantage or purpose seeing he deriveth all the Authority of the Word and Sacraments in respect of Subjects and all our obligation to them from the Authority of the Soveraign Magistrate without which these words repent and be Baptized in the name of Jesus are but Counsel no Command And so a Serjeant at Arms his Mace and Baptism proceed both from
the same Authority And this he saith upon this silly ground That nothing is a Command the performance whereof tendeth to our own benefit He might as well deny the Ten Commandments to be Commands because they have an advantagious promise annexed to them Do this and thou shalt live And Cursed is every one that continueth not in all the words of this Law to do them T. H. Of the Sacraments I said no more than that they are Signs or Commemorations He finds fault that I add not Seals Confirmations and that they confer grace First I would have asked him if a Seal be any thing else besides a Sign whereby to remember somewhat as that we have promised accepted acknowledged given undertaken somewhat Are not other Signs though without a Seal of force sufficient to convince me or oblige me A Writing obligatory or Release signed only with a mans name is as Obligatory as a Bond signed and sealed if it be sufficiently proved though peradventure it may require a longer Process to obtain a Sentence but his Lordship I think knew better than I do the force of Bonds and Bills yet I know this that in the Court of Heaven there is no such difference between saying signing and sealing as his Lordship seemeth here to pretend I am Baptized for a Commemoration that I have enrolled my self I take the Sacrament of the Lords Supper to Commemorate that Christ's Body was broken and his Blood shed for my redemption What is there more intimated concerning the nature of these Sacraments either in the Scripture or in the Book of Common-Prayer Have Bread and Wine and Water in their own Nature any other Quality than they had before the Consecration It is true that the Consecration gives these bodies a new Relation as being a giving and dedicating of them to God that is to say a making of them Holy not a changing of their Quality But as some silly young men returning from France affect a broken English to be thought perfect in the French language so his Lordship I think to seem a perfect understander of the unintelligible language of the Schoolmen pretends an ignorance of his Mother Tongue He talks here of Command and Counsel as if he were no English man nor knew any difference between their significations What English man when he commandeth says more than Do this yet he looks to be obeyed if obedience be due unto him But when he says Do this and thou shalt have such or such a Reward he encourages him or advises him or Bargains with him but Commands him not Oh the understanding of a Schoolman J. D. Sometimes he is for holy Orders and giveth to the Pastors of the Church the right of Ordination and Absolution and Infallibility too much for a particular Pastor or the Pastors of one particular Church It is manifest that the consecration of the chiefest Doctors in every Church and imposition of hands doth pertain to the Doctors of the same Church And it cannot be doubted of but the power of binding and loosing was given by Christ to the future Pastors after the same manner as to his present Apostles And our Saviour hath promised this infallibility in those things which are necessary to Salvation to his Apostles until the day of Judgment that is to say to the Apostles and Pastors to be Consecrated by the Apostles successively by the imposition of hands But at other times he casteth all this Meal down with his foot Christian Soveraigns are the supream Pastors and the only persons whom Christians now hear speak from God except such as God speaketh to in these dayes supernaturally What is now become of the promised infallibility And it is from the Civil Soveraign that all other Pastors derive their right of teaching preaching and all other functions pertaining to that Office and they are but his Ministers in the same manner as the Magistrates of Towns or Judges in Courts of Justice and Commanders of Armies What is now become of their Ordination Magistrates Judges and Generals need no precedent qualifications He maketh the Pastoral Authority of Soveraigns to be Jure divino of all other Pastors Jure civili He addeth neither is there any Judge of Heresie among Subjects but their own civil Soveraign Lastly the Church Excommunicateth no man but whom she Excommunicateth by the Authority of the Prince And the effect of Excommunication hath nothing in it neither of dammage in this World nor terror upon an Apostate if the Civil Power did persecute or not assist the Church And in the World to come leaves them in no worse estate than those who never believed The dammage rather redoundeth to the Church Neither is the Excommunication of a Christian Subject that obeyeth the Laws of his own Soveraign of any effect Where is now their power of binding and loosing T. H. Here his Lordship condemneth first my too much kindness to the Pastors of the Church as if I ascribed Infallibility to every particular Minister or at least to the Assembly of the Pastors of a particular Church But he mistakes me I never meant to flatter them so much I say only that the Ceremony of Consecration and Imposition of hands belongs to them and that also no otherwise than as given them by the Laws of the Common-wealth The Bishop Consecrates but the King both makes him Bishop and gives him his Authority The Head of the Church not only gives the power of Consecration Dedication and Benediction but may also exercise the Act himself if he please Solomon did it and the Book of Canons says That the King of England has all the Right that any good King of Israel had It might have added that any other King or soveraign Assembly had in their own Dominions I deny That any Pastor or any Assembly of Pastors in any particular Church or all the Churches on earth though united are Infallible Yet I say the Pastors of a Christian Church assembled are in all such points as are necessary to Salvation But about what points are necessary to Salvation he and I differ For I in the 43d chapter of my Leviathan have proved that this Article Jesus is the Christ is the unum necessarium the only Article necessary to Salvation to which his Lordship hath not offered any Objection And he it seems would have necessary to Salvation every Doctrine he himself thought so Doubtless in this Article Jesus is the Christ every Church is infallible for else it were no Church Then he says I overthrow this again by saying that Christian Soveraigns are the Supream Pastors that is Heads of their own Churches That they have their Authority Jure Divino That all other Pastors have it Jure Civili How came any Bishop to have Authority over me but by Letters Patents from the King I remember a Parliament wherein a Bishop who was both a good Preacher and a good Man was blamed for a Book he had a little before Published in maintenance
lawful for a man to value his own life or his limbs more than his God How much is he wiser than the three Children or Daniel himself who were thrown the first into a fiery Furnace the last into the Lions Denn because they refused to comply with the Idolatrous Decree of their Soveraign Prince T. H. Here also my words are truly cited But his Lordship understood not what the word Worship signifies and yet he knew what I meant by it To think highly of God as I had defined it is to honour him But to think is internal To Worship is to signifie that Honour which we inwardly give by signs external This understood as by his Lordship it was all he says to it is but a cavil J. D. A fourth Aphorism may be this That which is said in the Scripture it is better to obey God than man hath place in the Kingdom of God by Pact and not by Nature Why Nature it self doth teach us it is better to obey God than men Neither can he say that he intended this only of obedience in the use of indifferent actions and gestures in the service of God commanded by the Common-wealth for that is to obey both God and man But if divine Law and humane Law clash one with another without doubt it is evermore better to obey God than man T. H. Here again appears his unskilfulness in reasoning Who denyes but it is alwayes and in all causes better to obey God than Man But there is no Law neither divine nor humane that ought to be taken for a Law till we know what it is and if a divine Law till we know that God hath commanded it to be kept We agree that the Scriptures are the Word of God But they are a Law by Pact that is to us who have been Baptized into the Covenant To all others it is an invitation only to their own benefit 'T is true that even nature suggesteth to us that the Law of God is to be obeyed rather than the Law of man But nature does not suggest to us that the Scripture is the Law of God much less how every Text of it ought to be interpreted But who then shall suggest this Dr. Bramhall I deny it Who then The stream of Divines Why so Am I that have the Scripture it self before my eyes obliged to venture my eternal life upon their interpretation how learned soever they pretend to be when no counter-security that they can give me will save me harmless If not the stream of Divines who then The lawful Assembly of Pastors or of Bishops But there can be no lawful Assembly in England without the Authority of the King The Scripture therefore what it is and how to be interpreted is made known unto us here by no other way than the Authority of our Soveraign Lord both in Temporals and Spirituals The Kings Majesty And where he has set forth no Interpretation there I am allowed to follow my own as well as any other man Bishop or not Bishop For my own part all that know me know also it is my opinion That the best government in Religion is by Episcopacy but in the King 's Right not in their own But my Lord of Derry not contented with this would have the utmost resolution of our Faith to be into the Doctrine of the Schools I do not think that all the Bishops be of his mind If they were I would wish them to stand in fear of that dreadful Sentence All covet all lose I must not let pass these words of his Lordship If divine Law and humane Law clash one with another without doubt it is better evermore to obey God than man Where the King is a Christian believes the Scripture and hath the Legislative power both in Church and State and maketh no Laws concerning Christian Faith or divine Worship but by the Counsel of his Bishops whom he trusteth in that behalf if the Bishops counsel him aright what clashing can there be between the divine and humane Laws For if the Civil Law be against God's Law and the Bishops make it clearly appear to the King that it clasheth with divine Law no doubt he will mend it by himself or by the advice of his Parliament for else he is no professor of Christ's Doctrine and so the clashing is at an end But if they think that every opinion they hold though obscure and unnecessary to Salvation ought presently to be Law then there will be clashings innumerable not only of Laws but also of Swords as we have found it too true by late experience But his Lordship is still at this that there ought to be for the divine Laws that is to say for the interpretation of Scripture a Legislative power in the Church distinct from that of the King which under him they enjoy already This I deny Then for clashing between the Civil Laws of Infidels with the Law of God the Apostles teach that those their Civil Laws are to be obeyed but so as to keep their Faith in Christ entirely in their hearts which is an obedience easily performed But I do not believe that Augustus Caesar or Nero was bound to make the holy Scripture Law and yet unless they did so they could not attain to eternal life J. D. His fifth conclusion may be that the sharpest and most successful Sword in any War whatsoever doth give Soveraign Power and Authority to him that hath it to approve or reject all sorts of Theological Doctrines concerning the Kingdom of God not according to their truth or falshood but according to that influence which they have upon political affairs Hear him But because this Doctrine will appear to most men a novelty I do but propound it maintaining nothing in this or any other Paradox of Religion but attending the end of that dispute of the Sword concerning the Authority not yet amongst my Country-men decided by which all sorts of Doctrine are to be approved or rejected c. For the points of Doctrine concerning the Kingdom of God have so great influence upon the Kingdom of Man as not to be determined but by them that under God have the Soveraign Power Careat successibus opto Quisquis ab eventu facta notanda putat Let him evermore want success who thinketh actions are to be judged by their events This Doctrine may be plausible to those who desire to fish in troubled Waters But it is justly hated by those which are in Authority and all those who are lovers of peace and tranquillity The last part of this conclusion smelleth rankly of Jeroboam Now shall the Kingdom return to the house of David if this people go up to do Sacrifice in the house of the Lord at Jerusalem whereupon the King took counsel and made two Calves of Gold and said unto them It is too much for you to go up to Jerusalem behold thy Gods O Israel which brought thee out of the Land of Aegypt But by the
from sin and to exhort them by good motives both from Scripture and Reason to obey the Laws and supposeth them though under forty years old by the help they have in the University able in case the Law be not written to teach the people old and young what they ought to follow in doubtful cases of Conscience that is to say they are authorised to expound the Laws of Nature but not so as to make it a doubtful case whether the King's Laws be to be obeyed or not All they ought to do is from the King's Authority And therefore this my Doctrine is no Weed J. D. 17. He admitteth incestuous Copulations of the Heathens according to their Heathenish Laws to have been lawful Marriages Though the Scripture teach us expresly that for those abominations the Land of Canaan spued out her Inhabitants Levit. 18.28 T. H. The 17 th he hath corrupted with a false interpretation of the Text. For in that Chapter from the beginning to verse 20 are forbidden Marriages in certain degrees of kindred From verse 20 which begins with Moreover to the 28 th are forbidden Sacrificing of Children to Molech and Prophaning of God's name and Buggery with Man and Beast with this cause exprest For all these abominations have the men of the Land done which were before you and the Land is defiled That the Land spue not you out also As for Marriages within the degrees prohibited they are not referred to the abominations of the Heathen Besides for some time after Adam such Marriages were necessary J. D. 18. I say that no other Article of Faith besides this that Jesus is Christ is necessary to a Christian man for Salvation 19. Because Christ's Kingdom is not of this World therefore neither can his Ministers unless they be Kings require obedience in his name They have no right of Commanding no power to make Laws T. H. These two smell comfortably and of Scripture The contrary Doctrine smells of Ambition and encroachment of Jurisdiction or Rump of the Roman Tyranny J. D. 20. I pass by his errors about Oaths about Vows about the Resurrection about the Kingdom of Christ about the Power of the Keys Binding Loosing Excommunication c. his ignorant mistakes of meritum congrui and condigni active and passive obedience and many more for fear of being tedious to the Reader T. H. The tears of School Divinity of which number are meritum congrui meritum condigni and passive obedience are so obscure as no man living can tell what they mean so that they that use them may admit or deny their meaning as it shall serve their turns I said not that this was their meaning but that I thought it was so For no man living can tell what a School man means by his words Therefore I expounded them according to their true signification Merit ex condigno is when a thing is deserved by Pact as when I say the Labourer is worthy of his hire I mean meritum ex condigno But when a man of his own grace throweth Money among the people with an intention that what part soever of it any of them could catch he that catcheth merits it not by Pact nor by precedent Merit as a Labourer but because it was congruent to the purpose of him that cast it amongst them In all other meaning these words are but Jargon which his Lordship had learnt by rote Also passive obedience signifies nothing except it may be called passive obedience when a man refraineth himself from doing what the Law hath forbidden For in his Lordship's sense the Thief that is hang'd for stealing hath fulfilled the Law which I think is absurd J. D. His whole works are a heap of mishapen Errors and absurd Paradoxes vented with the confidence of a Jugler the brags of a Mountebank and the Authority of some Pythagoras or third Cato lately dropped down from Heaven Thus we have seen how the Hobbian Principles do destroy the Existence the Simplicity the Ubiquity the Eternity and Infiniteness of God the Doctrine of the blessed Trinity the Hypostatical Union the Kingly Sacerdotal and Prophetical Office of Christ the Being and Operation of the Holy Ghost Heaven Hell Angels Devils the Immortality of the Soul the Catholick and all National Churches the holy Scriptures holy Orders the holy Sacraments the whole frame of Religion and the Worship of God the Laws of Nature the reality of Goodness Justice Piety Honesty Conscience and all that is Sacred If his Disciples have such an implicite Faith that they can digest all these things they may feed with Ostriches T. H. He here concludes his first Chapter with bitter Reproaches to leave in his Reader as he thought a sting supposing perhaps that he will Read nothing but the beginning and end of his Book as is the custom of many men But to make him lose that petty piece of cunning I must desire of the Reader one of these two things Either that he would read with it the places of my Leviathan which he cites and see not only how he answers my arguments but also what the arguments are which he produceth against them or else that he would forbear to condemn me so much as in his thought for otherwise he is unjust The name of Bishop is of great Authority but these words are not the words of a Bishop but of a passionate School-man too fierce and unseemly in any man whatsoever Besides they are untrue Who that knows me will say I have the confidence of a Jugler or that I use to brag of any thing much less that I play the Mountebank What my works are he was no sit Judge But now he has provoked me I will say thus much of them that neither he if he had lived could nor I if I would can extinguish the light which is set up in the World by the greatest part of them and for these Doctrines which he impugneth I have few opposers but such whose Profit or whose Fame in Learning is concerned in them He accuses me first of destroying the Existence of God that is to say he would make the World believe I were an Atheist But upon what ground Because I say that God is a Spirit but Corporeal But to say that is allowed me by St. Paul that says There is a Spiritual Body and there is an Animal Body 1 Cor. 15. He that holds that there is a God and that God is really somewhat for Body is doubtlesly a real Substance is as far from being an Atheist as is possible to be But he that says God is an Incorporeal Substance no man can be sure whether he be an Atheist or not For no man living can tell whether there be any Substance at all that is not also Corporeal For neither the word Incorporeal nor Immaterial nor any word equivalent to it is to be found in Scripture or in Reason But on the contrary that the Godhead dwelleth bodily in Christ is found in Colos. 2.9
they sent up to some of their Friends at Court a certain Paper containing as they pretended the Articles of the said Pacification a false and scandalous Paper which was by the King's Command burnt as I have heard publickly and so both parts returned to the same condition they were in when the King went down with his Army B. And so there was a great deal of Money cast away to no purpose But you have not told me who was General of that Army A. I told you the King was there in Person He that commanded under him was the Earl of Arundel a Man that wanted not either Valour or Judgment But to proceed to Battle or to Treaty was not in his power but in the King 's B. He was a Man of a most Noble and Loyal Family and whose Ancestors had formerly given a great overthrow to the Scots in their own Country and in all likelihood he might have given them the like now if they had fought A. He might indeed but it had been but a kind of superstition to have made him General upon that account though many Generals heretofore have been chosen for the good luck of their Ancestors in like occasions In the long War between Athens and Sparta a General of the Athenians by Sea won many Victories against the Spartans for which cause after his death they chose his Son for General with ill success The Romans that conquered Carthage by the Valour and Conduct of Scipio when they were to make War again in Africk against Caesar chose another Scipio for General a Man valiant and wise enough but he perished in the Employment And to come home to our own Nation the Earl of Essex made a fortunate Expedition to Cadiz but his Son sent afterwards to the same place could do nothing 'T is but a foolish superstition to hope that God has entail'd success in War upon a Name or Family B. After the Pacification broken what succeeded next A. The King sent Duke Hamilton with Commission and Instructions into Scotland to call a Parliament there and to use all the means he could otherwise but all was to no purpose for the Scotch were now resolv'd to raise an Army and to enter into England to deliver as they pretended their Grievances to his Majesty in a Petition because the King they said being in the hands of evil Councellors they could not otherwise obtain their Right but the truth is they were animated to it by the Democratical and Presbyterian English with a promise of reward and hope of plunder Some have said that Duke Hamilton also did rather encourage them to than deter them from the Expedition as hoping by the disorder of the two Kingdoms to bring to pass that which he had formerly been accus'd to endeavour to make himself King of Scotland But I take this to have been a very uncharitable censure upon so little ground to judge so hardly of a Man that afterwards lost his life in seeking to procure the Liberty of the King his Master This resolution of the Scots to enter England being known the King wanting Money to raise an Army against them was now as his Enemies here wished constrained to call a Parliament to meet at Westminster the 13 th day of April 1640. B. Methinks a Parliament of England if upon any occasion should furnish the King with Money now in a War against the Scots out of an inveterate dissaffection to that Nation that had always anciently taken part with their Enemies the French and which always esteemed the Glory of England for an abatement of their own A. 'T is indeed commonly seen that neighbour Nations envy one anothers Honour and that the less potent bears the greater malice but that hinders them not from agreeing in those things which their common ambition leads them to And therefore the King found not the more but the less help from this Parliament and most of the Members thereof in their ordinary Discourses seemed to wonder why the King should make a War upon Scotland and in that Parliament sometimes called them Their Brethren the Scots But in stead of taking the Kings business which was the raising of Money into their Consideration they fell upon the redressing of Grievances and especially such ways of levying Money as in the late Intermission of Parliaments the King had been forced to use such as were Ship-Money for Knighthood and such other Vails as one may call them of the Regal Office which Lawyers had found justifiable by the Ancient Records of the Kingdom Besides they fell upon the Actions of divers Ministers of State though done by the King 's own Command and Warrant in so much that before they were to come to the business for which they were called the Money which was necessary for this War if they had given any as they never meant to do had come too late It is true there was mention of a Sum of Money to be given the King by way of bargain for the relinquishing of his Right to Ship-Money and some other of his Prerogatives but so seldom and without determining any Sum that it was in vain for the King to hope for any success and therefore upon the 5 th of May following he dissolved it B. Where then had the King Money to raise and pay his Army A. He was forced the second time to make use of the Nobility and Gentry who contributed some more some less according to the greatness of their Estates but amongst them all they made up a very sufficient Army B. It seems then that the same Men that crossed his business in the Parliament now out of Parliament advanced it all they could What was the reason of that A. The greatest part of the Lords in Parliament and of the Gentry throughout England were more affected to Monarchy than to a Popular Government but so as not to endure to hear of the King 's Absolute Power which made them in time of Parliament easily to condescend to abridge it and bring the Government to a mixt Monarchy as they call'd it wherein the absolute Sovereignty should be divided between the King the House of Lords and the House of Commons B. But how if they cannot agree A. I think they never thought of that but I am sure they never meant the Sovereignty should be wholly either in one or both Houses Besides they were loth to desert the King when he was invaded by Forreigners for the Scots were esteemed by them as a Forreign Nation B. It is strange to me that England and Scotland being but one Island and their Language almost the same and being governed by one King should be thought Forreigners to one another The Romans were Masters of many Nations and to oblige them the more to obey the Edicts and Laws sent unto them from the City of Rome they thought fit to make them all Romans and out of divers Nations as Spain Germany Italy and France to advance some that
they thought worthy even to be Senators of Rome and to give every one of the Common People the Priviledges of the City of Rome by which they were protected from the Contumelies of other Nations where they resided Why were not the Scotch and English in like manner united into one People A. King James at his first coming to the Crown of England did endeavour it but could not prevail But for all that I believe the Scotch have now as many Priviledges in England as any Nation had in Rome of those which were so as you say made Romans for they are all naturaliz'd and have right to buy Land in England to themselves and their Heirs B. It 's true of them that were born in Scotland after the time that King James was in possession of the Kingdom of England A. There be very few now that were born before But why have they a better Right that were born after than they that were born before B. Because they were born Subjects to the King of England and the rest not A. Were not the rest born Subjects to King James And was not he King of England B. Yes but not then A. I understand not the subtilty of that distinction But upon what Law is that distinction grounded Is there any Statute to that purpose B. I cannot tell I think not but it is grounded upon Equity A. I see little Equity in this that those Nations that are bound to equal obedience to the same King should not have equal priviledges And now seeing there be so very few born before King James's coming in what greater priviledge had those ingrafted Romans by their Naturalization in the State of Rome or in the State of England the English themselves more than the Scotch B. Those Romans when any of them were in Rome had their Voice in the making of Laws A. And the Scotch have their Parliaments wherein their assent is requir'd to the Laws there made which is as good Have not many of the Provinces of France their several Parliaments and several Constitutions and yet they are all equally natural Subjects to the King of France and therefore for my part I think they were mistaken both English and Scotch in calling one another Forreigners Howsoever that be the King had a very sufficient Army wherewith he marched towards Scotland and by that time he was come to York the Scotch Army was drawn up to the Frontiers and ready to march into England which also they presently did giving out all the way that their March should be without damage to the Countrey and that their Errand was only to deliver a Petition to the King for the redress of many pretended Injuries they had receiv'd from such of the Court whose Counsel the King most followed so they passed through Northumberland quietly till they came to a Ford in the River of Tine a little above New-Castle where they found some little opposition from a Party of the King's Army sent thither to stop them whom the Scotch easily master'd and as soon as they were over seiz'd upon New-Castle and coming farther on upon the City of Duresme and sent to the King to desire a Treaty which was granted and the Commissioners on both sides met at Rippon The Conclusion was that all should be referr'd to the Parliament which the King should call to meet at Westminster on the third of November following being in the same Year 1640. and thereupon the King returned to London B. So the Armies were disbanded A. No the Scotch Army was to be defrayed by the Counties of Northumberland and Duresme and the King was to pay his own till the disbanding of both should be agreed upon in Parliament B. So in effect both the Armies were maintain'd at the King's charge and the whole Controversie to be decided by a Parliament almost wholly Presbyterian and as partial to the Scotch as themselves could have wished A. And yet for all this they durst not presently make War upon the King there was so much yet left of reverence to him in the Hearts of the People as to have made them odious if they had declared what they intended they must have some colour or other to make it believ'd that the King made War first upon the Parliament and besides they had not yet sufficiently disgraced him in Sermons and Pamphlets nor removed from about him those they thought could best counsel him Therefore they resolv'd to proceed with him like skilful Hunters first to single him out by Men disposed in all parts to drive him into the open Field and then in case he should but seem to turn head to call that a making of War against the Parliament And first they call'd in question such as had either preached or written in defence of any of those Rights which belonging to the Crown they meant to usurp and take from the King to themselves Whereupon some few Preachers and Writers were imprisoned or forced to fly The King not protecting these they proceeded to call in question some of the King 's own Actions in his Ministers whereof they imprisoned some and some went beyond Sea And whereas certain persons having endeavoured by Books and Sermons to raise Sedition and committed other crimes of high nature had therefore been censured by the King's Council in the Star-Chamber and imprisoned the Parliament by their own Authority to try it seems how the King and the People would take it for their persons were inconsiderable ordered their setting at liberty which was accordingly done with great applause of the People that flocked about them in London in manner of a Triumph This being done without resistance the King 's Right to Ship-Money B. Ship-Money what 's that A. The Kings of England for the defence of the Sea had power to tax all the Counties of England whether they were Maritime or not for the building and furnishing of Ships which Tax the King had then lately found cause to impose and the Parliament exclaim'd against it as an oppression and one of their Members that had been taxed but 20 s. mark the oppression a Parliament-man of 500 l. a year Land taxed at 20 s. they were forced to bring it to a Tryal at Law he refusing payment and he was cast Again when all the Judges of Westminster were demanded their Opinions concerning the Legality of it of Twelve that there are it was judged legal by Ten for which though they were not punished yet they were afrighted by the Parliament B. What did the Parliament mean when they did exclaim against it as illegal Did they mean it was against Statute-Law or against the Judgments of Lawyers given heretofore which are commonly called Reports or did they mean it was against Equity which I take to be the same with the Law of Nature A. It is a hard matter or rather impossible to know what other Men mean especially if they be crafty but sure I am Equity was not their ground for
as being a thing contrary to nature or to pay them any reverence or to care what they say except some few that may be delighted with their jingling I wish with all my heart there were enough of such discreet and ancient men as might suffice for all the Parishes of England and that they would undertake it But this is but a wish I leave it to the Wisdom of the State to do what it pleaseth B. What did they next A. Whereas the King had sent Prisoners into places remote from London three Persons that had been condemn'd for publishing seditious Doctrine some in writing some in publick Sermons the Parliament whether with his Majesties consent or no I have forgotten caused them to be released and to return to London meaning I think to try how the People would be pleas'd therewith and by consequence how their endeavours to draw the Peoples affections from the King had already prospered When these three came through London it was a kind of Triumph the People flocking together to behold them and receiving them with such Acclamations and almost Adoration as if they had been let down from Heaven In so much as the Parliament was now sufficiently assur'd of a great and tumultuous Party whensoever they should have occasion to use it On confidence whereof they proceeded to their next Plot which was to deprive the King of such Ministers as by their Wisdom Courage and Authority they thought most able to prevent or oppose their farther Designs against the King And first the House of Commons resolv'd to impeach the Earl of Strafford Lord Lieutenant of Ireland of High Treason B. What was that Earl of Strafford before he had that place And how had he offended the Parliament or given them cause to think he would be their Enemy for I have heard that in former Parliaments he had been as Parliamentary as any other A. His name was Sir Thomas Wentworth a Gentleman both for Birth and Estate very considerable in his own Countrey which was York-shire but more considerable for his Judgment in the publick Affairs not only of that Countrey but generally of the Kingdom and was therefore often chosen for the Parliament either as Burgess for some Burrough or Knight of the Shire For his Principles of Politicks they were the same that were generally proceeded upon by all men else that were thought fit to be chosen for the Parliament which are commonly these To take for the Rule of Justice and Government the Judgments and Acts of former Parliaments which are commonly called Presidents To endeavour to keep the People from being subject to Extra-parliamentary Taxes of Money and from being with Parliamentary Taxes too much oppressed To preserve to the People their Liberty of body from the Arbitrary Power of the King out of Parliament To seek redress of Grievances B. What Grievances A. The Grievances commonly were such as these The King 's too much Liberality to some Favorite The too much power of some Minister or Officer of the Common-wealth The misdemeanour of Judges Civil or Spiritual but especially all unparliamentary raising of Money upon the Subjects And commonly of late till such Grievances be redressed they refuse or at least make great difficulty to furnish the King with Money necessary for the most urgent occasions of the Common-wealth B. How then can a King discharge his Duty as he ought to do or the Subject know which of his Masters he is to obey for here are manifestly two Powers which when they chance to differ cannot both be obeyed A. 'T is true but they have not often differed so much to the danger of the Common-wealth as they have done in this Parliament 1640. In all the Parliaments of the late King Charles before the Year 1640. my Lord of Strafford did appear in opposition to the King's demands as much as any man and was for that cause very much esteem'd and cried up by the People as a good Patriot and one that couragiously stood up in defence of their Liberties and for the same cause was so much the more hated when afterwards he endeavoured to maintain the Royal and just Authority of his Majesty B. How came he to change his mind so much as it seems he did A. After the dissolution of the Parliament holden in the Year 1627. and 1628. the King finding no Money to be gotten from Parliaments which he was not to buy with the Blood of such Servants and Ministers as he loved best abstained a long time from calling any more and had abstained longer if the Rebellion of the Scotch had not forced him to it During that Parliament the King made Sir Thomas Wentworth a Baron recommended to him for his great ability which was generally taken notice of by the disservice he had done the King in former Parliaments but which might be useful also for him in the times that came on and not long after he made him of the Council and after that again Lieutenant of Ireland which Place he discharged with great satisfaction and benefit to his Majesty and continued in that Office till by the Envy and Violence of the Lords and Commons of that unlucky Parliament of 1640. he dyed In which Year he was made General of the King's Forces against the Scots that then entred into England and the Year before Earl of Strafford The Pacification being made and the Forces on both sides disbanded and the Parliament at Westminster now sitting it was not long before the House of Commons accused him to the House of Lords for High-Treason B. There was no great probability of his being a Traitor to the King from whose favour he had received his Greatness and from whose Protection he was to expect his safety What was the Treason they laid to his charge A. Many Articles were drawn up against him but the sum of them was contained in these two First That he had traiterously endeavoured to subvert the fundamental Laws and Government of the Realm and in stead thereof to introduce an Arbitrary and Tyrannical Government against Law Secondly That he had laboured to subvert the Rights of Parliaments and the ancient course of Parliamentary Proceedings B. Was this done by him without the knowledge of the King A. No. B. Why then if it were Treason did not the King himself call him in question by his Attorney What had the House of Commons to do without his Command to accuse him to the House of Lords They might have complained to the King if he had not known it before I understand not this Law A. Nor I. B. Had this been by any former Statutes made Treason A. Not that I ever heard of nor do I understand how any thing can be Treason against the King that the King hearing and knowing does not think Treason But it was a piece of that Parliaments Artifice to put the word Traiterously to any Article exhibited against any Man whose Life they meant to take away B. Was