in the hands of the Consulâ— swore allegiance fealty to the comâ—monwealth and when he made thâ— Pretor to gouerne in his name according to the ceremony deliuering the naked sword sayd to him Vse this sword for me if I gouerne iustly iâ— otherwise vse it against me By whâ—ch resignation both of state and life into the Common-wealthes hands he more secured them both then any enforced Oath that he held the Crowne from God only could haue done Philanax You haue shewed the first proposition of Theodidact to be neyther a solid ground of soueraignty nor a doctrin apt to nourish in subiects minds affection to their Kings I desire you wold passe to the examination of the second that Kings haue no Superior that may call him to account or punâ—sh him but God alone Aristobulus Heere Theodidact goeth forward in building the soueraignty of Kings â—ither vpon manifest falshood or totâ—ering vncertaineties That the King â—ath no superior but God alone that â—ay punish him all learned men geâ—erally Papists Puritans Proâ—estants â—eny Philanax I do much wonder that you say Protestants â—each thâ—t the Kinge may â—e sentenced and punished by any man â—pon earth I thinke you meane Puriâ—ans not our Protestants that proâ—esse to follow the Religion established â—y Parlament Aristobulus I meane Protestants that are eneâ—ies of Puritans and conformable to â—he state and to increase your wondring I add that howsoeuer the word Supreme Gouernour and Head of the Church go currant in England yet in â—ense our Deuines giue our Kinge no greater authority in causes Ecclesiasticall then Papists do I desire not to be â—eleeued vnlesse I make what I haue â—ayd euident by the testimonies of them that haue lately written aboâ—â— this argument First concerning the verâ— title they say the King hath no any spirituall Ecclesiasticall power aâ— aâ—l his power sayth doctor Morton noâ— Bishop of Chester is but corporall and caâ— go no â—urther then the body He hath saytâ— M. Burhill no iurisdiction in the Church eyâ—ther â—or the inward oâ— outward Court his poweâ— is meere temporall and laicall nor in it selâ— spirituall though the matter and obiect thereâ—â— be spirituall such power and no greater saytâ— M. Richard Tomson then Iewes Infidelâ— and Turkes haue ouer the Christian Churcâ— within their dominions Secondly concerning Controuersies of fayth the Deane of Lichfielâ— doctor Tooker disclaymeth as an imâ—pudent slaunder that the Church oâ— England holdes the King to be their primaâ— or head or iudge of Controuersies about faitâ— and Religion To the Apostles Christ gaue poweâ— to gather Councells and to define solemnly thâ— Churches doubts The sentence of Councell sayth M. Richard Harris hath without thâ— King the force of an ecclesiasticall law the King addes thereunto corporall penalty M. Morton â—â—yth that Imperiall and Kingly authority in â—â—irituall causes reacheth no further then as it â—â—longeth to outward preseruation not to the â—ersonall administration of them neyther doth â—â—e King challenge nor subiects condescend vnto â—ore But most cleerly M. Barlow late â—ishop of Lincolnâ— The King sayth he in â—ontrouersies about fayth hath not iuâ—icium definitium sentence dâ—finitiue to â—â—scerne what is sound in â—â—â—inity but when the â—hurch hath determined matters of fayth he â—ath iudicium executiuum sentence exeâ—utiue to commaund the professing therof â—ithin his Kingdomes And is not this the very doctrine â—f Papists and that doctrine which â—â—rmerly our Arch-bishop Bancroâ—t reâ—ected with great scorne as disgraceâ—ull to Kings making them but Carâ—â—fices Ecclesiae the executioners of the Churches will and pleasure Thirdly concerning the offices of â—his power they teach the King hath no â—ower to vse any censure or to cast any out of â—he Church by sentence but his office is to punish â—hem with corporall chastisement on whom Bishops haue laid their censures The King doth â—ot make or vnmake Bishops they are made by the Bishops of the Kingdone as by them they aâ—â— desposed and vnmade The King hath right tâ— name and present persons to benefices as other lay men of lower conditioÌ„ haue but benefices eiâ—ther with cure or without cure great or little he neither doth nor euer did bestow much lesse the ecclesiasticall dignities as the Bishopricks Arch-Bishopricks of his Kingdome Fourthly concerning the Kings sudordination to Bishops Doctor Barlow highly commendeth the saying of Ambrose Bishops in matters concerning faith are to iudge of Emperors not Emperors of Bishops The Deane of Lichâ—eild saith that the King is and with Valentinian Emperor doth acknowledge himselfe the sonne and pâ—pill of the Church and the scholler of the Bishops What more do papists require Can he then iudg teach his Fathers Iudges and Maisters in those thinges wherein he is their sonne pupill and scholler Finally M. Burhill saith that the King supâ—eme gouernour of the Church may by his Bishops be cast out of the Church VVhat Ambrose did lawfully to Theodosius our Bishops may do lawfully to the King â—or the like offence And what did Ambrose to Theodosius He cast him by sentence out of the Church he stood ready to keepe him out by force and called him Tyâ—ant â—o his face he forced him to eâ—act a temporall law concerning the â—xecution of the sentence in matter of â—ife and death he commanded him out of the quire or the place of Priests sent him into the body of the Church to pray with laymen And may the Bishop of Canterbâ—â—y lay the same punishments on his Mâ—iesty yea saith the Bishop of Ely perchaunce the Pope may excoÌ„municate the Kinge depriue him of the common goods of the Church Doe you see to how many censures Protestants make the King subiect Truly I see not how any ReligioÌ„ doth or can make Kings more absolute and subiect to fewer Superiors then Papists doe The Puritan will haue them subiect to the Pastor of euery parishe that hath a Consistory as our Bishop Bancroâ—t sayth They banish one Pope and admit a thousand The Protestant makes them obnoxius to the censure of Bishops without any restraynt wheras the Romanists out of respect to the Maiesty of Kings reserue the power of censuring them â—o the supreame Pastor But to returne to Theodidact you seâ— he keepeth his custome to ground alâ—legiance due to Kings vpon doâ—ctrines eyther questionable or 〈◊〉 denyed of all sides his second propoâ—sition that the Kinge is free from alâ— punishment that maÌ„ may inflict beinâ— rather more vncertaine then hiâ— first that Kings hâ—â—e their power only froâ— God Philanax It seemeth by your discourse thaâ— Theodidact makes Kinges more absoluâ—â—â— then other Protestants doe teacheth against them that the King may noâ— be excommunicated or cast out of thâ— Church For he sayth that the Kinge iâ— free from all punishment that man can inflict excommunication without doubt is a great punishment Ministers withâ—out question are men Aristobulus It is hard to say what Theodidaâ—â—
And without doubt by this their familiar acquaintance with the word part of the horror against the action is lost Which may be the cause that where speach against the Pops authority for deposing of Kings hath been rifest most vulgar those Countries for practise against the life of their Kinges haue been most vnfortunate Whereas Spayne hath seene no such tragicall practise nor any attempt thereoâ— but hath enioyed a longe happy peace where the questions how to proceede with Tyrants are freely permitted to the schooles without any popular declamations agaynst Scholasticalâ— opinioÌ„s in this poynt Philanax I must confesse that I haue been my selfe much deceaued in my expectation about the sucâ—esse of Papists in this controuersy When I considered the circumstances of the contention the doctrine impugned not gratefull to Princes not so cleerly decided in their Church by some of their writers denied the person impugning by sword and penne a Monarch mighty learned beloued euen of Popish Potentates and this at a tyme of great aduantage vpon the gunpowder treason which was vrged as a sequell of this doctrine that euen the greatest fauorers therof seemed fearfull These circumstances made me think that Pâ—pery would receaue a great blow and that his Maiesty would draw the whole Church to be of his opinion What the successe hath been we see you haue shewed I could wish the Controuersy might not haue further progresse be now buried in silence that posterity may not say that Rome grew by his Maiesties opposition against it that this point of her authority was made renowned by victory ouer him what the Papists before did doubtfully defend the bloud of their Martyrs suffering vnder King Iames made certaine knowne illustrious And peace concluded about the silencing of this controuersy might be the beginning of an vniuersall agreement with that Sea seeing other doctrinall controuersies by discussion be brought to that yssue that as I haue heard some learned intelligent persons auerre a calme consultation void of priuate interest and animosity might soone end them Aristobulus This peace were much to be wished nor is it safe to mantaine strife with that Sea but vpon vnauoidable occasions And this is the fifth and last thinge which I wish you would seriously ponder and not wonder that this counsell should be suggested by mee that am no Paâ—â—st The knowne bad successe that Kings and Princes haue still had in their opposicions against the Romane Church may mooue sufficiently all faithfull Counsailors though not of the Popes Religion neuer if they may choose to engage their Soâ—craignes in such quarrelles Arioch the Ammonite Prince could tell Holosernes out of experience that his power and force would not be able to subdue the Iewes that in the end he would be repelled with disgrace yet he was not a Iew in ReligioÌ„ The like aduise Amonâ— Counsailors that were heathens gaueâ— him to desist in his quarrell against Mardochaus the Iew Thou canst not say they resist him he being of the stock of the Iewes but shalt fall beâ—ore him It was noted that when Octauâ—aâ— and Antony were youthes still in their games Octauian had the best wherupon a prudeÌ„t frend gaue Antony warning in ciuill controuersies neuer to encounter him Thou art said he more noble then he more eloquenâ— and better qualified yet I see cleerly his Genins is stronger theÌ„ thine if thou try the forâ—une of warre with him he will doubtles be Conquerour What the cause may be why it shold be so who knows but experieÌ„ce now a thousand and six hundred years oldâ— shewes that this is theâ— fate and felicity of that Sea to conquer with their patience and bring vndâ—â— subiection into nothing all the opponents against their doctrine or their authority The Roman Emperors for 300â— yeares together bloudily oppugned Christian Râ—ligâ—on but principally the Roman Sea in so much as thirty Bishops therof were martyred and the persecuting Emperors as S. Cyâ—rian saith were more greeued that a new high Priest was placed in that Sea then that a new Prince was chosen set vp against them What was the successe For those three Centuries of yeares scarce any Emperour that persecuted them can be named that deriued the Empire to a third heire or dyed not an vnfortunate death and in the end Constantine their Successor submitted the Empire to the obedience of the Roman Bishop wherin the Empeâ—ors that followed him contynued Afterward soâ—e Christian Emperors begaÌ„ to quarrell with the Church about the priuiledgeâ— and immunities of the Clergy specially Valentinian the third and the succeeding Emperors of the West Did they preuaile In their daies the westerne Empire began to decay The Franks tooke to theÌ„ France the Saxons Britanny and VVandalls Asrick the Visigothes Spaine the Gothes Italy â— which â—oone after were made Chriâ—â—â—ans and submitted their Kingdomes to the Pope and their Kings professed to receaue their Crownes authority from him Who knoweth not how pittifully the Easterne Emperors and the Patriarches of Constantinople vexed thâ— Pope for many ages which their quarrell they neuer would giue ouer till finally they fell into the miserable bondage slâ—uery of the Tuâ—ke wherin at this present without hope of remedy they grone What successe to omit many other experiences had the German Caesars that stroue with the Pope for the inuestiture of Bishops by staffe ringe Henry the 4. excommunicated and deposed by Gregory the 7. vpon that cause prospered for a while which this treatiser sets downe to encourage Princes to follow his example but he concealeth how in the end in punishment of his rebellion against his spirituall Father as Papists thinke he was deposed by his owne Sonne put in prison whence escaping he gathered forces was defeated brought to such want as he sued to be Sexton in a Churcâ—â— and serue Priests Masse who had most cruelly vexed the high Priest of Christians many yeares together Not admitted to that office he turned himself to begge of laymen in lamentable manner crying Haue mercy on me at least you my friendes for the hand of the Lord hath touched mee and so full of misery repentance and anguish of mind he pined away to death The newes whereof was receaued with generall ioy of all Christians And his Sonne though for a while he trode the steps of his Fathers disobedience yet finally he yielded vp his right in possession whereof the Roman Bishop is at thiâ— day Wherein not only the successe which Popes had against so potent Aduersaries as was Henry the 4. who fought more battaileâ— then euer did Iulius Caesar but their courage and confidence also was admirable Neither ought any discreete Protestant trust Theodidacts relatioÌ„ of HidelbraÌ„ds fainting in the quarrell taken out of Sigebert a partiall Monke seeing Papists bring 50. Historians that contradict him These whose fidelity can with no rea 〈…〉 called in question relate that he ended his life full of coÌ„stancy
vsing at his death these words Because I haue loued Iustice and hated wickednesse I now dy in banishment Vrbane that succeded Gregory both in office and in zeale against the Emperour being driueÌ„ out of Italy into France hauing so great need of the Kings assistance yet was he so voide of humane respects that at that very time he excommunicated Philip King of France for putting away his true wife and liuing in open incest The Kinge saith an vnpartiall Historian threatned that except Vrbane would restore him to the Church Crowne he wold depart with his whole Kingdome from his obedience the obedience of the Roman Sea yet this moued not that most holy Bishop to relent In fine Philip was faine to yeeld not being able to extort otherwise releasment from excommunication and so religion conscience preuailed ouer thâ— Scepter and the Diademe the inuincible Maiesty and Name of King So admirable for constancy were those Popes that vsed their authority to depose wicked Emperors so free from loue of the world that we may iusâ—ly thinke God fauoured their cause Hâ—â—soeuer their perpetuall good successe for so many ages against all aduersaries though the reason therof be hidden may giue iust cause in my opinion for Kings to be wary how they aduenture their Crownes vpon preuailing against them and how they deuise new oathes of Allegiance that wage warre against the authority of their Sea And this is the last thing which I desire to leaue to be seriously pondered by you that loue the King so I coÌ„clude praying the Lord hartily that as hitherto he hath defended Kingly authority in our great Britany froÌ„ open enemies so now he will defend the same from secret plots and trayterous Treatises which by shew of friendship seek the ouerthrow thereof Philanax I am glad Aristobulus that wee fell into this discourse in which you haue cleerly discryed Theodidacts fraudulent vndermining of Royall Authority The publishers of that booke besides their secret plotting agaynst 〈◊〉 â—oueraignty of Princes seeme likeâ—â—â—â— to haue had an eye to their owne â—uere in the diâ—ulging therof For there being a commaund that this Booke both in publicke and priuate schooles be read to Children of both sexes ech booke sold for six pence which is hardly worth two pence you must needs see a great summe of money that heÌ„ce is yearely made a summe I say so great as doth farre surpasse the custome of the Peter-pence which in old time euery house payed to the Pope Notwithstanding at this their enriching themselues by this deuise I do not so much grieue but I am hartily sory that so many odious vngrounded positions coÌ„cerninâ— Royall Authority that may raise vp horror rather theÌ„ loue of Kinges be instilled into the tender mindes of ChildreÌ„ which afterward when any occasion is giuen may soone turne into hatred But thereof yoâ— haue spoken inough Wherfore I likewise will end with your harty good wishes towardes his Maiesty and our most gracious Prince Charles beseching the Almighty to defend them both and to giue them the spirit of wised 〈◊〉 wherby they may discouer these â—â—â—â—sons hidden with a shew of friendshipp The Printer to the Reader THIS Treatise gentle Reader may seeme written by some English Protestant agaynst some Puritans enemies of Kingly Soueraignity which by them in former times openly impugned they now seeke to ouerthrow by grouÌ„ding the same vpon odious and â—aungerous PositioÌ„s touching the immunity of Tyrants The Authour disputeth the questioÌ„ of this weighty subiect in such moderate stile and manner bringing 〈…〉 ns both solide and not reg 〈…〉 ing with Catholike doctrine that he may be thought to be in opinion Catholike though for modesties sake to the end that this truth might be more pleasingly accepted of Protestants in this worke he discourseth as if he were Protestant And for this reason some Catholike arguments he doth pretermit others he doth not vrge to the vttermost partly for breuityes sake but cheefly because his inteÌ„t is no more then to shew that the new Protestants principles from which they deduce Râ—yall Authority be at the least doubtfull and vncertayne And this he doth cleerly demonstrate and thence concludes that it is against the rules euen of humane policy to forsake the most sure grounds of Soueraigne Power in Kinges whereon Christian Kingdomes relying haue hitherto stood firme and florished vnd 〈…〉 Catholike discipline iust l 〈…〉 and to build the sacred authority of Princes whereon their peoples safety dependes vpon the new vngrounded Doctrines Paralogismes of Scriptures which seemes to haue byn the drift of the former Dialogue For this cause I thought it would not be amisse nor lost labour to put the same in print renewed before hand corrected The title God and the King I would not alter because iâ— two wordes it doth fully put downâ— the Catholike opinion concerning Princes Authority their subiects Allegiance For as this treaâ—ise doth iâ—sinuate three opinions in this poynt now are in EnglaÌ„d The first of PuritaÌ„s who wil haue God without King or else such a King that must depend on the peoples beck 〈◊〉 their ConsistoriaÌ„ Preachers 〈…〉 ose perfidious audacity his â—â—â—esty hath had sufficient experience The second is of Politicians who haue no more Christianity then Parlamentary decrees breath into them These will haue King without God or at least King and God that is God so longe and no longer then the King shall please whome they will haue still obeyed though he go openly about to extinguish the light of Christian Religion The third opinion is of Catholikâ—s whose â—ote is God and the Kingâ— in the first place they worship God in the second the King to whome they giue all Allegiance and subiection as farre as Religion and conscience will permit And this is to giue what is Caesars to Caesar and what is Gods to God Farewell FINIS Dial. God and the Kinge pag. 2. Dial. p. 33. 34. â—peach in the Star-chamber 16.6 Bancroft in the Dangerous poâ—itioÌ„s p. 33. Psal. 84. v. 16. 2. Thessal â— 2 v. 10. Hooker Ecclesiast pol. prefac p. 28. Hooker ibid. p. 29. Suruey of the holy â—iscipline p. 93. (a) Baâ—il Dor. p 40. 41. (b) Knox. histor of the Church of Scot. p. 265. Dang poâ—it p. 11. (c) Sleydan l. 28. l. 22. Oâ—ian Epist. cent 16. p. 566. (d) Cuspin of the Church of France p. 625 Ferres histor p. 588. (e) Osiand ibid. p. 94. (f) Chitrâ—eus in chron p. 71 (g) Fulk answere to the declam of P. â—rarines (h) Dang posit l â— c. â— 4â— seq (i) Suruey of the disc p. 101. (k) Dang poâ—it Suruey and others by D. Bancroft (l) Principes sunt omnium quos terra â—ustinet sâ—ultisâ—imi deterrimi nebulones ToÌ„ 2. Ger. â—en de mag saecul fol. 200. (m) Cal. in Dan. cap. 6. v. 22. (n) Knox to Engl. Scotl. fol. 78. (o) BuchaÌ„ de iâ—â—e Reg.
whicâ— the cheefest Pretendents in that reforâ—mation had notice at loast in confuâ—â— and in generall as the said Archbishoâ— affirmeth and did secreâ—ly conniuâ— thereunto fauouring no doubt in haâ—â— a popular state where Church-doctrine and discipline is receaued reiected by voices In which gouernment these fiery Ghospellers as hiâ— Maiesty calleth them beeing comâ—monly men of sharpe wits and ready tongues high minded and of working spirits might beare great sway euery one rule as King and Pope in his parish Since that time these men haue been in shew both for doctrine practise more moderate specially â—ince his Maiesties happy raigne and that some of them haue been aduaunced to dignities Now they are become the forwardest in shew â—or defence of Allegiance they speake most against the Papists that hold Kings to be deposable in some cases They extoll Royall authority aboue the skyes I can iâ— Charity beleeue that some of them meane as they professe yet wisedome giues leaue to feare recâ—nciled emenies Poison no where lurketh more securely then in hony Their present doctrine carrieth outwardly a shew of friendship to Kings but â—o will â—ooke into the ground shall finde it dangerous to them and more pernicious then the former of Caluin Goodman Beza Knox Buchanan and others â—heir predecessors and Maisters The â—umme of this their doctrine is conâ—eyned in the Treatise intituled God â—he King The Authour whereof had â—o reason to tearme himselfe Theodiâ—act that is Taught of God seing he speaâ—eth diuers thinges that the spirit of God could not suggest vnto him He â—ndertaketh the proofe of foure proâ—ositions The first is That Kings haue â—uthority immediately only from God the Church and people not being any thing in the â—uist thereof This is the fundamentall â—â—one whereon is built the second â—hat Kings haue no superior on earth to chaâ—â—ise and punish them The third is That â—either Tyranny nor Heresy nor Apostacy can release subiects of their ObedieÌ„ce The fourth That Kings may neither be deposed nor resisted but by teares and prayers though they should be so tyrannous prophane as to endeauour to oppresse the whole Church and Commonwealth at once and vtterly to extinguish the light of Christian Religion Philanax These speaches may be disgustfull to Subiects and sound vncouâ—hly in their â—ares but doctrine that doth so magnify Kings I see not how it may be thought pernicious to them Aristobulus Kinges are not to regard so much how great and glorious as how grounded be the titles that are bestowed on them seeing incredible praises giuen to men do oftentimes abate the credit of their deserued commendation Some Ghospellers as a iudicious Protestant complaines attributing to the holy Scripture more then it caÌ„ haue the incredibility of that hath caused euen those things which in deede it hath most aboundantly to be the lesse reuerently esteemed The same we may â—are will happen to the authority of Kinges And the danger of such flatâ—ering speculations as this Dialogist â—eachâ—th is so much the greater to the Soueraigne whilest they extoll him â—boue measure to the state of absolute Lord God vpoÌ„ earth as it is hatefull â—o the subiect to see himself abased to â—eruile abhorred â—â—ptiuity put to â— more miserable condition then the â—ondage of slaues For slaues to speak nothing of humane lawes that haue â—ppointed limits to their miseries â—aue some rightes and liberties by the â—aw of nature inuiolable which if â—hey be able they may defend by force â—gainst euen their owne Maisters that shall violently and vniustly inuade â—hemâ— Such liberty they haue to marry â—nd propagate humane kind to enioy â—ife so longe as they haue done noâ—hing worthy of death but principally â—o worship God their maker and suâ—reme Lord. But this new doctrine of Princely absolute Soueraignty set â—owne in the Treatise mentioned â—akes the Common-wealth so miseâ—able and the people such bondmen to their Prince that they may not defenâ—â— their nationall freedomes how iust necessary soeuer nor the liberties anâ— rightes that nature hath bequeaâ—â—eâ— euen vpon slaues But that if thâ— Prince wanton in cruelty should keeâ— men by force froÌ„ marrying so to bring the Common-wealth to vtter deâ—olation in one age â—r if not hauing patiâ—ence to attend that lingring consumpâ—tion of the state he should daily senâ— meÌ„ by multitudes like heards of sheep or oxen to the slaughter or if out oâ— a desire his subiects may perish eternally he should seek vtterly to extinguish the doctrine of saluation within his Realmes In these cases I say oâ— the like of extreamest necessity and most hostile inuasion according to thâ— doctrine of this Dialogist they may not lift vp so much as their finger against his attempts nor ioyne with any power vpon earth that would releeue them Philanax I see plainly that this doctrine is very odious in it self and you set it forth to the vttermost Aristobulus I say no more then his owne worâ—es import nor haue described tyraÌ„ny â—ore truly then he hath done in his Dialogue And I know so well there is â—o cause to feare the practise of this â—octrine by his gratious Maiesty that I would not haue said thus much but to â—hew how odiously â—nemies of Royalty may and will exagitate this Concluâ—ion when such discourses shal be for â—he aduantage of popularity Now â—hey write and cause Treatises to be â—ublished by authority which when â—ime shall serue they may vse to make â—is Maiesty hatefull By the like straâ—ageme the Puritans of Scotland ouerâ—hrew his Maiestiâ—s Mother When â—hey had barbarously slayne the Kinge â—er husband they importunely vrged â—eâ— alledging it was necessary for the maintenance of her state and life to marry with the Earle of Bothwell â—oncealing from her that he had been â—heef actor in the murther The marâ—iage was no sooner concluded but â—hey diuulged the hatefullnes therofâ— thence seeking to persuade the world she had been consenting to her husbands death And so what with defaâ—matory libells abroad what witâ— their turbulent declamations at homâ— they made her odious they tooke from her the Crownâ— they tossed her froÌ„ miâ—sery to misery till finally they broughâ— hâ—r to lay her head on the blocke to bâ— cut off by the comon Executioner â— hope his Maiesties happy raygne shalâ— neuer see commotion in this state yeâ— if any such tumult happen and human things are vncertain I do not feare to be found a false Prophet in saying thaâ— this doctrine wil be bitterly exclaimeâ— against and this Treatise I speake ofâ— produced to witnes what desperate allegiance Princes exact and vrged noâ— only against his Maiesty but as a causâ— sufficient to banish Kings out of thâ— Land The late Lord of Canterbury complaynes that in his dayes cantoninâ— of Kingdomes was in many mens mouthes thaâ— men did talke what a notable thing it is to liuâ— in Veniceâ— where euery gentleman liueth witâ— as great liberty as the Duke
ambition be ouerforward to proceed against Princeâ— So that in my opinion Papists take a most mature course and remoue the life of Kings from the temerity of vulgar affections one degree further then any other religion whatsoeuer And seeing mankind with vniuersall consent seeme to allow that some meanes may be vsed for the commonwealths safety against incorrigible and deplored tyrants I do not see that humane wisdome could haue inuented a proceeding more discreet and moderate then this of Papists who that a Prince may be deposed lawfully require First crymeâ— manifest that can no wayes be excused secondly crymes exorbitant tending to the euident ouerthrow of the whole Kingdome thirdly crymeâ— with malice incorrigible leauing no hope of amendment fourthly the publicke and vuiuersall agrement of magistrates and Nobles of the Common-wealth Fiftly that the case be proposed and the deposition approued by their supreme Pastor and his Counsell abroad Finally to preuent popular rashnes they further add that the comonwealth in the execution of the sentence must proceed per modum defensionis non per modum punitionis by way of their owne defence not by way of punishing their Prince And in this their defence they must obserue moderamen inculpatae tutelae that is they must do no more then is precisely necessary for their own defence Wherfore they may not hauing deposed their Prince arraigne him as Puritans teach that being needlesse for their owne safety The King deposed still retaynes a certaine remote right to the Crowne as it were a marke or politike character that discerneth him from meere subiects by reason whereof if he repent of his Apostacy and giue the Commonwealth good security that being againe restored to gouernment he wil rule moderately the Commonwealth may not by taking way his life depriue him of his possibility Philanax Your discourse giueth me great content to see that Papists in their doctrine prouide so carefully for the security of Princes That a King be deposed lawfully they require such a generall consent both domesticall and forraine that it seemes scarce possible that so many should conspire in passion or that any Prince by this doctrine loose his Kingdome that is either friended abroad or beloued at home For if the motion to depose the Prince arise from the Commonwealth the last decision thereof is referred to the Pope and his Counsell that are forrayners and not interessed in the Commonwealthes quarrell Yf the treaty of depoâ—ition begin from the Pope the execution must passe through the hands of the Peeres of the Realme spirituall temporall whose loue to their Prince will resist the Popes sentence if they find the motiue either openly vniust as grounded vpon temporall pretences or not cleerly and apparantly iust as is required in a point of so many consequences Nor do there want examples of Catholicke Kingdomes that haue stood for their Kings when they thought that Popes were moued with humane respects yea I haue noted in the histories I haue perused and much wondred thereat Protestants haue beene more forward and heady to follow the sentence of some Ministers or consistory against their Prince then haue Papists beene in obeying the Popes censures for the deposition of their King that hardly can you name any sentence of deposition that hath been executed and the Prince turned from his Crowne by his Catholike subiects Which difference seeing it cannot spring from any greater reuerence which ProtestaÌ„ts bâ—aâ—e to their spirituall gouernours for it is known they do not so much esteeme their Ministers as the Papists do their Priests it must proceed from this cause that Papists loyall loue to their Prince doth somewhat allay their prompt obedience to the Pope when betweene him and their Prince contentions happen But you haue so discouered the weaknes of Theodidacts arguments that I haue more cause to feare treason then expect reason in his discourses I should haue byn glad if the doctrine that makes Kings in all cases indeposable could haue byn proued by solid and inuincible arguments Aristobulus How solide and inuincible Theodidacts arguments are you may giue a ghesse by this one which he vrgeth very â—arnestly that Christians may not depose Tyrants though neuer so cruell enemies of their Religion because Christ commaundeth theÌ„ to loue their enemies and perâ—â—cutors And verily I could smile to see Theodidact seriously dilate vpon the precept to loue enemies VVe must sayth be loue them with our harts blesse and pray for them with our tongues and do good to them by our actions Yf these duties be to be performed twards priuate men that are our enemies how much more to publicke persons and Potentats of the earth Thus he and much more shewing great want of iudgment thus to trifle in so serious an argument For the precept to loue our enemies to bestow benefits on them vrgeth the Commonwealth to depose tyrants rather then to the coÌ„trary For what greater benefit can Christian charity bestow on tyrants that run headlong to euerlasting perdition then to remoue them from gouernment from the world occasions of synne Without doubt the precept of Charity would bind the Commonweaâ—th to â—tay the damnatioÌ„ of tyrants by deposing theÌ„ did Iustice permit them that are not Superiours to bestow benefits deeds of charity vpon others against their wil. The truth is that this were against Iustice though not against Charity to take by force the scepter from a Prince who abuseth the same only to his owne damnatioÌ„ without endaungering the Commonwealth But if he coÌ„mit synns that tend to the destruction of the state if saith the Chancellour of Paris the great Patron of royall imunity if the Prince doth manifestly obstinatly really vniustly persecute his subiects theÌ„ that Principle of the law of nature taks place violence may be repelled with violence Thus much Gerson and much more which I willingly pretermit nor would I haue said so much but only to shew that it were best not to handle these questioÌ„â— specially in vulgar Treatises and that you may see Theodidacts fraude who loadeth on Kings many new titles that are not so glorious as odious which doe not so much adorne as oppresse and weigh downe Kings by laying vpon them the heauy burthen of popular enuy Such is his fourth proposition which remaynes to be examined that there is no remedy besides teares and prayers that may be lawâ—ully vsed for the defence of the Church against the King though he shold be so tyrannous and prophane as to oppresse the whole Church and vtterly to extinguish the light of Christian Religion Philanax The very sound of this proposition offendeth a Christian â—are nor can I thinke it is gratefull to his Maiesty who would I dare say wish himselfe dead a thousand times rather then such a case shold really happeÌ„ that he shold extinguish the light of Religion so litle delight he takes that men should adore his Royall Dignity vested in these imaginary impieties Nor
GOD AND THE KING OR A DIALOGVE Wherein is treated of Allegiance due to our most Gracious Lord King Iames within his Dominions WHICH by remouing all Controuersies and causes of Dissentions and Suspitions bindeth Subiects by an inuiolable band of Loue Duty to their Soueraigne Translated out of Latin into English Printed at Cullen M. DC XX. To the Reader THE former Dialogue set forth vnder thiâ— same Title GOD AND THE KING the persons of the same being Theodidactus and Philalethes the first signifiyng One taught of God the other A louer of Truth did â—eed explication in diuers poynts aswell in regard of the verity of the discourse as also for the more safty both of Kings and their Kingdomes VVherfore it was thought good that in this present Dialogue two other persons should treate of the same subiect Aristobulus that is A good CouÌ„sellour and Philanax A Louer of Kinges of which the one wisheth all good vnto Kinges the other suggesteth what he iudgeth best for their State And so in few wordes gentle Reader thou hast the scope of both Dialogues Farewell GOD AND THE KING Philanax YOv are well met Aristobulus your countenance and gesture import that your thoughtes are much busied What may bâ— the occasion of these Meditations Aristobulus I haue lately perused a short Treatise intituled GOD AND THE KING the Author whereof vndertaketh to shew the groundes foundations of royall Soueraignty and of the Oath of Allegiance Philanax Why should the perusall of the Treatise cause such admiration in you I am sure you bâ—ing a Professour of the Ghospell are noâ— of their number that seeke to depresse Kingly power or thinke much that Kings should oblige their subiects to them by Oathes Aristobulus My professioâ— and my deedes declare sufficiently my dutifull affection to Kings my high esteeme of their authority my detestatioÌ„ of all treason hollownes and insincerity towardes them I approue the doctrine of this Dialoguâ— that vnder the pious and reuerend appellations of Father and Mother are comprized not only our naturall Parents but likewise all higher Powers and especially such as haue soueraigne authority as Kings Princes who more expresly then any Gouernours represent the person maiesty of one God ruling the whole world and are his substitutes lieutenants euery one within his owne Kingdome The subiect may not touch his soueraigne with any hurtfull touch nor stretch out his hand against his sacred person nor aâ—fright nor disgrace him by cutting the lapp â—f his garment not hurt him in word no not â—o much as in thought He must discharge his â—anifold duties towards him by payinge â—ribute for his regall supporte by fighting his â—attailes with Ioab aduenturing his life with Dauid to vanquish his enimies Reuealing with â—eligions Mardochaeus treasonable designeâ—ents against him by powring out praâ—ers â—nd supplications for his wellfare by esteeming and â—onouring him from the harte and out of conscience as the annointed oâ— the Lord Gods holy Ordinance and Minister and as a God vpon earth These doctrines I allow and these duties towardes Princes whosoeuer infringeth either by tumults or seditions against his state or by treacherous and violent attempts against his person deserue as violators of Gods will contemners of natures â—aw and enemies to the good of their Countrey to be punished persecuted â—o death by sword and fire Philanax Seeing then that the Treatise you â—peake of doth so fully declare the duty of Allegiance to the Kinge what â—roubleth you therein that your counâ—enance discouereth dislâ—ke Aristobulus To commend allegiance in generall termes simply and playnly conceaued is most alowable necessary in these times But bold or rather desperate Treatises such as this is that disclose the mysteries of Regall Prerogatiue which as his Maiesty well noteth ought not to be searched into that ground the authority of Kings so necessary for mankinde vpon doubtfull curiosâ—ties that moue questions about depositions both disgracefull to Maiesty and odious to the subiects such Treatises I say doe more harme then good and without doubt the first Authors of such conceipts be secret enemies to Kingly gouernment and by this stratageme would craftily vndermine what hitherto in vayne they haue assaulted openly Philanax I am persuaded the Treatise you mention was not written by any Papist nor that any of that generation â—ad their hand in it Who then may we think be these vnderminers of Monarchy you speak of Aristobulus I would to God it were hard to name them or that euery one could not point with his finger at that professioÌ„ which from her cradle hath euer been a mortall enemie 〈◊〉 Kings That the first planters of the Ghospell in this age rooted the same in rebellion and in hatred to Monarchy neitheir wee nor any of their best frends can deny Our late Arch-bishop excuseth them that their zeale was very greate the light of the Ghospell sayth he then first appearing vnto them so dazeled their eyes that they did not well consider what they did Without doubt so it was and so it will euer be where the pure light as they call it of this Ghospell shineth and zeale therof feruently burneth there can be no assured allegiance to the Prince This I confesse is no small blemisâ— to the Religion which I would conceale did not loue to his Maiesty force me to speak And the reason why it must needes be so is euident A true spirit zealous in ReligioÌ„ can neuer be quiet in the busines of sâ—luation and in questions and Controuersies of Faith â—â—ll he find some ground infallible whereon he may rest The Papist holdes that the Popes sentence specially in generall Councels is the infallible decider of Controuersies vpon which he repoâ—â—th his conscience And by submitting euery one his priuate iudgment to the sentence of a supreme Iudge they gayne peace and vâ—ity among themselues and their Iudge still when he defines being as they pretend assisted by Gods spirit they are secured from errour An easy and sweet way to end Controuersies had it pleased God to haue appointed it wherein verity and charity mâ—et Iustice doctrine I say iust with Gods word kisseth with peace and Christians might haue enioyed what S. Paul so highly commendeth charity of â—â—uth But our Authors constantly affirme that since the Apostles God grâ—unted no such priuiledge to any Pastor nor wold bestow so great blessing on his Church as to haue perpetually such a visible gouernour to decide her doubtes nimium vobis Romana propago visa potens superi propria haec si dona fuissent Wâ—erfore by the conseÌ„t of the Churches which we call reformed the spirit of God deciding Controuersies which Papists tied to the Pope and his Councells was giuen to euery man that should attend to the spirit speaking in Scriptures A course which pleased much the common people in the beginning persuading them that they had been blinded and wronged by the Pope taking from them
together with the vse of Scriptures their authority to iudge definitions of the Church by Scriptures The deuisers of this way seemed to haue great zeale of the truth but were not carefull to prouide for peace And so in practise this deuise begot a multitude of Sects and Religions one against another that many weary of all began to thinke it were better men should be vnited in error then thus mortally diuided in Truth A meane was deuised to decide Controuersies by nationall Synods that are confessed may erre but the Ciuil magistrate as our chief Deuines teach as being President in them is to compell his subiects by the sword to imbrace those doctrines that be determined be they true or fals For this course say they was appointed by God who thought it better in the eye of his vnderstanding that sometimes an erroneous definitiue sentence should preuaile then that strifes should haue respite to grow and not come speedily to some end Heere desire of peace concord may seeme to haue made these men lesse zealous of the Truth then behooued them So it opened a gappe specially in England to prophanes irreligiosity which is to be iust of the Kings Religion whatsoeuer it be or rather of none A salue for this sore hath been inueÌ„ted that subiects ought to obey their Princes Lawes and definitions when they haue only probabilities against them not when they haue necessary and demonstratiue reasons which discharge the conscience and giue liberty to resist This caueat and salue for Truth sets the wound of dissention againe a bleeding Sects in the world are now allmost infinite for number amongest which not one is found that pretendeth not cleere and euident demonstration and proofe from holy Scripture for their contrary and repugnant opinions And who shall iudg in this contradiction and confusion whose reasons are necessary and demonstratiue The arguments which we think demonstratiâ—e moue Papists nothing at all and arguments which we iudg of no force Puritans as Archbishop Bancroft writeth of them take to be so vrgent that if euery hayre of their head were a seuerall life they wold giue them all in the cause This controuersy therfore whose reasons are demonstratiue and whose are not is the greatest of all others nor is there any way to decide it in our churches besides the sword of the temporall Prince Princes therfore for conseruation of peace must keep the spirit in awe practising power infallible in deedes which they dare not challenge in wordes This is the cause of the secret emnity betweene power of Kings and feruour of our Ghospell The Prince can neuer be assured of our Gospellers by the Principles of their Religion that their zeale to the Truth will not trouble the peace of his Kingdome nor Ghospellers of the Prince that his loue of temporall peace will not compell them to trust to his deceaueable definitions Whence it is manifest that so longe as the one shal be zealons and feruent to follow and preach what by light of the spirit they conceaue to be in Scâ—ipture occasions cannot be wanting to the other that will force him to vse his power to curbe their liberty Which power so long as he shal vsurpe so long as he will be Prince and Protestant he must needes vsurpe let him neuer expect that Ghospellers can loue his gouernment though they may flatter in outward shew Those men had no doubt the pure spirit of our Ghospell who professed that except they might haue the reâ—ormation they desired they would neuer be subiect to mortall man Looke vpon the first erecting of our Religion in Germany France Flanders Sweâ—eland Denmarke and Scotland you shall find that the Ghospell went not so fast vp but Kings and their authority went as fast downe What Bullenger writeth of Anabaptistâ— was the true course of our Reformers They began with Bishops pulling them from their seates they ended with Kings casting them froÌ„ their Thrones Books haue been written of this argument by no Papists that shew their practises and doctrines to be in the highest degree iniurious to Kings Luthers inuectiues I omitt not to pollute your eares Caluin is more modest yet so bould with Kinges as to write that when they resist the Ghospell they are not to be obeyed but rather we ought to sâ—it it in their faces This is nothing to that which HottomaÌ„ Beza Goodman Knox Vrsinus Buchanan to forbeare the naming of others innumerable haue writteÌ„ wherby they make Maiesty subiect to the peoples pleasure no more sure of his state then wethercocks that must turnâ— with the wind Vt sumat vt ponat secures Arbitrio popularis aurae What thinke you of these their propositions following Yf Princes be tyrants against God and his Truth their subiects are freed from their oath oâ— Allegiance The people are greateâ— then the King of greater authority The people haue the same power oâ—uer the King that the King hath oueâ— any one person The people haue right to bestow the Crown at their pleasure As the patient may choose the phisitiaÌ„ he likeâ—â— best reiect him at his pleasure so the people in whose free choice at the beginning it was to be vnder kings or no may when they be weary of their bad gouernment cast him from his Office into prison into irons put him to death and set whome they please to gouerne in his place Kings haue their authority from the people and the people may take it away againe as men may reuoke their letters of Attorney Yf kings without feare transgresse Gods Lawes they ought no more to be taken as magistrats but be examined accused condemned and punished as priuate transgressors When magistrats do not their duties God giueth the sword into the peopleâ— hand from â—e which no person King Queene 〈◊〉 Emperor is exempt being Idolater 〈◊〉 must dye the death These and the â—â—ke positions haue been inuented by â—â—e zealous professors of our Religion â—he same or worse were renewed and â—ttered by the feruerous reformers that â—roue for discipline in Queene Eliz. â—ayes that as a worthy prelat writes All the Popiâ—â— traitors that hitherâ—o haue written and all the Geneâ—ian Scottish Reformers come not neere â—hem for malicious and spiteful taunts â—or rayling and bitter tearmes for disâ—aineful and contemptuous speaches â—gainst Prince Bishops Counsailors â—ll other that stand in their way Their â—ecret practises to set vp by som meane â—r other sweete or violent the said â—isciplin haue neuer been interrupted â—r remitted as he doth particularâ—y relate beginning at the yeere 1560. â—o the yeere 1591. when was practised â—hat most blasphemous and barbarous â—reason of their counterfait Iesus-Christ Hacket and his two Prophets â—f mercy and vengeance who would â—aue planted the discipline by depriuing the Queene and murthering thâ— nobles that stood against it of
that the light of Christianity may be vtterly extinguished rather then the Prince resisted Philanax Yow haue shewed that Theodidacts foure propositions are vngrounded odious and no sure foundations of sincere and dutifull allegiance But you promised also to speake of the Oath of Allegiance which Theodidact saith stands vpon these grounds and what your opinion is concerning of rigorous vrging thereof Aristobulus I cannot beleeue that the cheef inciters of his Maiesty to the violent exaction of this Oath do so much respect the common good as their priuate interest beiâ—g men that liue and triumph by the temporall miseries calamities of Papists When the desperate rage and temerity of some few of that profession had iustly exasperated his Maiesty these their enemies that lay in waite to do them a mischief suggested this deuise which I cannot be persuaded that his singular wisdom and iudgment would euer haue liked but in these circumstanâ—s of perturbationâ— I wil not rashly precipitate my censure in a matter of such consequence and wherein his excellent Maiesty is so much engaged only I will offer vnto your serious cogitation fiue considerations which often present themselues vnto me and make me much doubt how this rigorous course of vrging the Oath of Allegiance can stand with conscience or with true policy or with clemency or with his Maiesties honour or safety First how can we with safe conâ—cience vrge meÌ„ to swear what eueÌ„ according to the principles of our Religion is vncertayne Not only they that sweare what they knowe to be false commit periury but such also as sweare whaâ— they know not to be certaine because in swearing a thinge that may be false they go in danger to make God witnesse of falshood A truth so cleere that it was knowne to a prophane Poet who setts it downe in verse that might beseeme a Christian Ambiguae si forte citabere testis Incertae que rei Phalaris licet imperet vt sis Falsus admoto dictet periuria Tauro SummuÌ„crede nefas animaÌ„ preferre pudori The doctrines sworne in the Oath cannot be more certaine then the principles whence they are drawne as the walls cannot be more firme then the foundation wheron they stand Now if you call to mind the pillars of the Oath laid by Theodidact you shall find they are at least doubtfull propositions which not only Papists but our Doctors are diuided about Yea for the most part both sides agree that they are false Let Protestants then thinke how with safe coÌ„science they sweare and vâ—ge others to sweare the things which being grounded vpon principles vncertaine cannot be certaine Philanax I haue heard that VVidderington and some other Papists thinke the taking of the Oath lawfull because they iudg the opinion That the Pope may not depose Kings probable and tollerable amonge Catholikes these men allso sweare vpon a probability Aristobulus VVidderington his adhereÌ„ts seeme to be Theodidacts Cosen-germans with him secretly vndermine the Oath of Allegiance wherof they would be thought great frends For either they coÌ„mit periury in swering or els elude the drift of the Oath Yf they sweare the thing it selfe that the Pope wants that power they that haue but a probable persuâ—sion therof be forsworne seeing they sweare what they doe not know certainly to be true Yf they say that they sweare not the thing it selfe but only that they haue an acknowledgment beleef therof that this is true seing they feele a prâ—pable asseÌ„t to the points of the Oath this answere cleereth theÌ„ from peâ—iury but together takes froÌ„ the Oath force to bind them For if a man that only probably beleeues that the Pope caÌ„not depose Kingâ— may take the Oath without being forsworne then the Oath in the swearer requires only a probable persuasion of that point if only probable then changeable vpon better aduise for liberty to change is necessarily implied in a probable assent seeing no law can exact that our speculatiue persuasion be more certaine and immoueable theÌ„ reasoÌ„ argumeÌ„t is able to make it He that taks the Oath as a point of faith if he sweare truly caÌ„ neuer alter his iudgmeÌ„t therin without being forsworn because vnlawfulnes to change being inuolued in the assent of faith he that sweares beleef for the present sweares consequently he will neuer afterward chaÌ„g But he that swears I acknowledg beleue the Pope cannot depose the Kinge meaning no more then I probably beleeue though he sweare truly yeâ— he may within three dayes or sooner change his mind without periury for neyther did he sweare expresly that he would neuer change nor did the nature of the assent he professed implicitely bind him neuer to change And if this proposition the Pope hath no power to depose the King which is the foundation of all the other partes in the Oath be sworne as probable vpon better aduise changeable who seeth not that the whole frame of Allegiance that is built thereon is left to the arbitrement of the swearer and that by VViddringtons doctrine the drift of the Oath to make his Maiesty secure is ouerthrowne I add hereunto that if the Oath be satisfied with a probable persuasion that the Pope cannot depose the King then the Oath leaues liberty to the Papist that sweares to follow with safe conscience the contrary in practise seeing they may by comon consent of their Deuines follow what probable opinion they please yea they may without synne follow that opinion which they themselues thinke lesse probable Which is to be vnderstood when the Authors that allow the speculation of a doctrine doe not themselues condemne the practise therof as somtimes they do because the doubtfullnes of the speculation makes the practise cleerly against Charity or Religion or Iustice as in the instances that VViddrington brings in his last reply But no instance can he giue when both speculation and the practise is allowed as probable by graue authors that then Papists may not follow the same with a safe conscience And such is the doctrine that the Pope may depose Kings their schooles that allow the speculation condemne not the practise Yf then VVidrington taking the oath of Allegiance may without breach of his Oath thinke the contrary doctrine that the Pope may depose Kings probable he may with the Oathes good leaue by the principles of his Religion also follow that doctrine in practise so that swearers vpon probabilities bâ— cunninger but no better subiects then other Catholiks that refuse the Oath I conclude that either we tender the new Oath to no purpose or els we vrge men further then in conscience they can sweare Yf we require but a weak and probable assent what assurance doth his Maiesty gaine when the swearer may change his opinion at his pleasure or retayning his opinion foâ—low the contrary in practise Yf we require firme and immutable assent how can that assent be sure the principles meanes thereof being doubtfull â—ow caÌ„