〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 at least in some cases But the second Question What is ment by higher Powers will cleare in what cases either of these is required By the higher powers then is meant all civill legall Authority which in St. Peters phrase is of the King as Supreame or governour for these are higher then the people though lower then the King but it is to be observed that the word is in the abstract powers which notes the authority wherwith the person in authority is legally invested and not the person in the concrete least that might be understood of his personall commands without or beyond or even against his Authority Which conceit the Apostle doth greatly prevent by using the word Power which he doth also all the while he treats of this matter except only that once he names Rulers v. 3. 2. It is to be observed that the things about which the authority and so the subjection in this place is conversant are civill matters belonging to the second Table between man and man Not that I deny Magistrates to have Authority to command things belonging to the first Table and that subjection is due to them in such commands concerning Religion so that it be according to the will of God But I say that this is to be fetcht from other Texts rather then this My reason is because the Roman Magistrates of whom properly the Apostle speakes were so farre now from commanding things for Religion that they commanded things against Religion and the first Table and therfore certainly the active subjection at least here required is limited to civill matters 3. And now that so much as I have said is required active Obedience to legall civill Authority to all Magistrates in their legall commands in civill matters or at least passive yeelding to the penalty of the Laws in case of not obeying actively and neither further then to legall commands of legall Authority appeares by the Apostles reason in this 1. verse For there is no power but of God which he redoubles in a second phrase The powers that be are ordained of God or under God 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Every soule must be under their order which is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 because they all are ordered by God under him his deputies and vicegerents in their order and degree higher and highest This is true of all powers and therefore to all must subjection be performed And to none hath God ordered or ordained any Authority but legall Which as none will deny no not the Doctor himselfe of other Governours besides the supreme So can none with reason affirme that any hath more authority then the Laws whether speciall or generall written or unwritten have allotted them Which Lawes God ratifies being not against his and so the Authority according to them And this our Doctor also confesses in sence in mâ—re places then one of his Booke for active Obedience that no more is due but according to the Lawes of God and the establisht laws of the Land Only he argues for passive obedience beyond this every where 1. Because he argues against resistance even of Tyranny But in a word to refute this from the Apostles reason in the first verse If I be bound to be subject to tyranny or to suffer violence of a tyrant by vertue of the commandement here Then tyranny is the Ordinance of God or Magistrates have power ordained of God to use tyrannous violence for thus the Apostle argues for subjection from Gods ordaining the power But this is false Ergo so is that that I should be bound to suffer tyrannous violence And now if this be the true and whole meaning of the precept in the first verse It will not be hard to cleare the meaning of the prohibition and threatning in the second verse which runnes thus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Whosoever therefore resists or carries himselfe disorderly against the power or opposes the power resists or sets himselfe against the Ordinance or order appointed of God and they that resist or so set themselves against man and God both shall receive to themselves Damnation Now here we are to resolve two Questions 1. What resistance is 2. Who or what may not be resisted 1. Resistance is contrary to subjection as 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is to 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and this also the word Therfore notes For it shews that the sin of Resistance is a transgression of the duty of subjection It is then two-fold either in not obeying commands or in not suffering penalties He that is wilfully and obstinately disobedient to some commands is by the Apostles scope and by the consent of all interpretours that handle it fully a Resister 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 though he never offer to take up Armes but yeelds to suffer any penalty A man that refuses to answer at the Law he shall be outlawed he that refuses to yeeld possession shall have a Writ of Rebellion out against him he that refuses to put himselfe upon a legall tryall at his arraignement shall be pressed to death as a most obstinate resister of authority and so in many other cases Or secondly Resisting is in not suffering penalties resisting by force and even by Armes This is one kind of resisting and the worst kind against a lawfull power but what it is our second Question is to determine which againe breakes it selfe into two What is the power that may not be resisted and who In both the former verse may and must guide us as the word power repeated and the conjunction therefore and the mention of Gods Ordinance the third time assures us 1. Then what is the power that may not be resisted The legall authority of the Magistrate or the Magistrate legally commanding according to his authority For as the subjection reaches to this and no further So the sinfull resistance extends to this and is by it limited because Gods Ordinance hath confirmed all this and no more Only upon the change of the phrâ—se and not saying he that is not subject but he that resists the Spirit of God seemes to favour in some cases a simple not obeying and will not charge that with resisting Gods Ordinance Namely in such Laws as being of an inferiour nature may be generally good to be made and kept Yet to some persons in some cases so extremely inconvenient as the penalty according to man is much rather to be châ—sen then the practise of that Law in that case Now in such a case as our Divines generally use to say that obedience may be forborne to many civill Laws Extra casum scâ—ndali the Holy Ghost seemes to favour I say the not obeying and only charges guilt upon a not submitting to the penalty which is undeniable resisting But I say againe that by all the foregoing context and the reason from Gods Ordinance in the second verse The prohibition of blaming of resistance go's no further then of legall commands of legall authority The Doctor
to averre and very hard to prove that the Emperours were or any other Princes are absolute Monarks under whom there is a government by written Lawes as among the Romans were the 12. Tables and many other Lawes But I adde that no Prince can be an absolute Monarch to have power over mens lives at his pleasure or over the chastity of any at all He can have no power but according to the Ordinance of God Now it is certaine God never ordaines any such Arbitrary or iniurious power Therfore no Monarch hath any such de jure As for that any hath de facto as he speakes of the Emperours ruling absolutely or arbitrarily If they did so as they oft did for evill I have formerly shewed and he hath not refelled it that they might have been resisted 2. What he speakes of their becomeing Monarchs touches not our case at all For however he insinuates Who ever hath soberly written for defence and resistance against Tyrranny doth not plead any right in the people of this Land against the succession of this Crown But though the King and his rightfull succcessions ought still to hold the Crown This forbids not a necessary defence against their unjust violences when ever they shall use them 3. Yet withall I add that though so long as there was any in the Roman State who had not by Oath or the like exprest their consent to the usurpation of the Roman Emperours they were free to have thrust them out againe or rather bound to have done it and restore the Senate to their lost authority yet when any have with the generality yeelded to the change of an Aristocracy wherein no man hath personall right of succession into a Monarchy they and specially the posterity of those that have so yeelded are from thenceforth for ever bound to that government according to just and equall Lawes already in being or to be made hereafter even by the Monarke alone if they have trusted him with it alone But never can they lose their right no not by their owne consent of just defence of Chastities or of their lives untill they forfeit them by their misbehaviour against some just Lawes or other 4. As therefore the Doctor disclaimes the pleading for an arbitrary power such as Conquerours use in this crowne so if he can plead no better against resisting our Kings then he hath in the case of the Roman Emperours he will merit but small reward for his paines But for that viderit ipse 5. I come to his last objection That Christian Religion was then enacted against by Law but the Religion contended is establisht by Law Hee answers two things First Is the Religion establisht denyed to any that now fight for it c. REPL. This with the rest belongs to matter of fact in the third Proposition and seventh Proposition Thither I referre it that I may not say over needlesly the same things or say but a little here or that which hee will needs make necessary to say a great deale more then I desire Secondly the prohibition saith hee not only concernes Christians but all the people under those Emperors and not only Religion was persecuted but liberties also lost the people and Senate were enslaved by edicts and Lawes then inforced upon them and they according to the principles of these dayes might resist notwithstanding the Apostles prohibition and the Laws then forced upon them or else the State as they usually say had not means to provide for its safety Thus one fancy of theirs thwarts another because both are groundlesse REPL. 1. Wheâ—her the Christian Religion being condemned by law then did deny them resistance in its selfe I shall perhaps give him account in another place Meane time he cannot deny but the difference is very great betweene a Right to defend that which the Law defends and that which the Law punishes Secondly I have proved that the prohibition of resisting Tyranny by armes did not concerne the Heathen Romanes and therefore not the Christians neither Thirdly what ever liberties were lost and new Lawes enforced yet so long and so farre as the Emperours ruled by the Lawes the people and Senate were in no such slavery that they needed resist to save the State But when they used lawlesse violences according to their lusts neither the Lawes nor the Apostle prohibited a defensive resistance So that although Christians might not defend their Religion against Law yet he hath brought nothing to shew they may not defend it when the Law hath establisht it But of the meanes of safety in state he will speake more anon and so will I. And now I shall oppose his conclusion wiâ—h a little change of his words Hitherto of Scripture which how strong so ever it seems against resisting tyranny by Armes yet saith nothing at all to prohibit it rather the Reasons forbidding resistance of just power legally administred favour this resistance of Tyranny as hath bin shewed By which conscience will clearely see that according to the examples of David and Elisha and the rest that have been justified it hath cleare warrant for such resistance of Tyranny notwithstanding all the Dr. hath alleadged to the contrary Now let us see what Reason can enforce SECT III. I Have been so large in refuting his strength from Scripture that I need not spend a like proportion upon the rest and so shall I forbear such a Syllabicall REPLY as I have made to his former SECTION I shall here only touch Materiall Passages the rather becouse of other paines upon the following SECTIONS Our Dr. examines the Fundamentalls of this Government as hee saith though hee after urge that the Fundamentalls talked of are asserted common to all Governments which is true of that which this â—ECTION maintaines Power being Originally from the people at the first Upon this hee descants and meddles not with any particular fundamentalls of our State which indeed is a more proper businesse for Lawyers and Statists then Divines except the peoples right is now in the two Houses of Parliament the representative bodie of the People I will therefore keep only to what he saith and not meddle much with our State in Speciall For if the power of Râ—sistance belong to all States in time of need by the common Fundamentalls of all States it will be reason enough to prove it so in ours And whereas he saith that the Fundamentalls must have a correspondencie with the established Lawes I grant it in a right Sense that is that the Lawes must flow from those Principles which are transcendents to all particular Lawes but not if hee meane that they must be ever limited by particular Lawes In Nature the safetie of the Universe is the Fundamentall of the Harmony of the Elements and the power and inclination of each Creature towards its preservation Yâ—t this Fundamentall is not limited by the particular inclinations of Creatures which as himselfe told us above give way to the safetie of the
of Nature to defend my self from outragious Violence being altogether an Innocent I cannot see specially in a case concerning GODS immediate Honour as well as my safety 2. If Lawes cannot tie my hands in all Cases in the forenamed from resistance much lesse an Arbitrary Power but of that it will be convenient to discourse a little further and apply it also to Civill Matters as well as to Religion wherein we shall also see whether all Civill Lawes doe so tie us as none of them neither may be resisted and if any which and which not I say then an Absolute Arbitrary Power or absolute Monarchy as some call it is not at all the Ordinance of GOD and so no lawfull Power secured from resistance by Rom. 13.2 First GOD allowes no man to rule as hee list to make what Lawes he list to punish how and whom hee list But his Word speaks the Contrary every where Secondly GOD not allowing Men cannot give it to a Conquerour or any other They can give but what GOD allowes for they have no more their owne in that sence Now no man can give any thing but what is his owne Thirdly particularly no man is allowed by GOD or can be made by Man an absolute Monarch a meere Arbitrary Prince in point or Religâ—on I am farre from denying Authority about Circumstantialls in Religion But I meane he hath no Authority to bid what GOD forbids or to forbid what GOD bids or punish them that obey GOD rather than him GOD never gave this Power nor can men give it Fourthly no Monarch hath any Power from GOD or can have from men to violate the Chastity of any A Law of Platoes Community is null because against GODS expresse 7th Commandement and may and ought to be resisted yet now we are among civill matters Fiftly no Monarch hath any Power from GOD or can have from men to take away the life of his Subjects any one at his meere pleasure or without a Law broken whether Civill or Martiall and knowne to the Transgressour or which he ought to have knowne and might which Ionathan could not hee had no meanes to know of his Fathers Oath being then made and in his absence Lycurgus his Law to destroy all Children that were deformed or weakelings and Pharaohs Arbitrary Command to destroy all the Israelitish Males were both alike tyrannous and null and might have been resisted In all these cases there is I say no absolute Monarchy no meere arbitrary Power Lawfull none that is GODS Ordinance And whosoever challenges such Power is in that not GODS Deputy but an Vsurper whether King or Caesar Roman or Turkish Emperour or any other Sixtly but the only Cases wherein a Monarch may be absolute in Matter of Liberty of mens persons of Goods anâ— manner of Judaciall proceedings and making or taking away Officers and Honours and such like in those I grant that as GOD denies not but a Monarch may have absolute Authority onely he must use it to Good so men may give away their Liberty by Feare or otherwise and become much enslaved to their Princes Will in comparison of what others are And if any bee so which I beleeve not of the Roman State though much was done arbitrarily by the Emperours I yield they may not resist though they be sorely pincht They may thanke themselves who bound their owne if therefore our Parliament in after Ages or this by being forsaken by the People seduced by the Dr. should so enslave us we must beare it and not resist because it is our owne Act who choose them and put all such things into their hands but in other things we should not could not be bound as I said before The Doctor hath a third Reason We cannot expect absolute meanes of safety and security in a State but such as are reasonable REPL. If by absolute meanes of safety and security hee meane such as God cannot defeat we grant what he saith or such as God hath forbidden But if he take it of rationall means he saith nothing at all that allotts any means which are not absolutely sufficient according to humane proceedings to procure sâ—ch a safety as a State shall nâ—ed A State is a most considerable body and may challenge all possible meanes which God hath not denyed them and so even a private man may being altogether innocent except where a greater good then his Particular life calls him to venture it or yeeld it up But there is no greater good on earth in civill respects then the safety of a state Therefore all meanes not forbidden from Heaven are reasonable and to bee expected and used though not expressly provided for that is mentioned in the Fundamentalls of this Government which the Doctor would require Then he falls a commending the excellent temper of the three Estates King Lords Commons having each a power of denying REPL. They have so in making particular Lawes But the Quest now is of exercising the generall and maine fundamentall Law of all States to save the whole from ruine and subversion Here though all three agreeing and none denying makes the safety more secure and more comfortable and honourable Yet no reason but in a Co-ordinate Power as here it is plainly so see the Fuller Answer to the Doctors Booke any two or of three or even any one of them rather then all should faile and be dissolved should have Power to endeavour the common safety which the others neglect or intend to subvert or betray And I verily beleeve the Doctor himselfe or any other of his partie if hee forbeare not to say so much least it should be retorted on himselfe will confesse that the King and the Lords may save the Kingdome from ruine without or against the House of Commons and the King and the House of Commons without or against the Lords and which is yet more the King alone without or against both Lords and Commons For indeed this is the very thing now pretended by the King for his taking Armes to save the Protestant Religion and the Lawes and his owne Rights c. which he saith the Lords and Comâ—ons whom he termes the Major part of both Houses present intend and goe about to subvert And if they did so certainely all true Subjects and Paâ—riots ought not onely not to joyne with them in their Armes but to joyne with the King in his against them And if it could be possible that all the three Estates should agree to ruine Religion and the State even the Body of the People should by vertue of the power which each State hath for its necessary safety have Authority sufficient to defend themselves and resist all outragious Attempts of mischiefe as hath been proved before though then for want of many conveniences and perhaps of wisedome to manage it the defence and resistance must needs be much more hazardous and dfficult The power therefore of denying and so all other power in each of the 3.
that will follow if he have it not Heare his saying Such power of resistance would be no fit meanes of safety to a State but prove a remedy worse then the disease Reply If he can shew this de doth wonders What worse then subversion of Religion Lawes and Liberties For that is the disease Surely all these are of little worth with the Dr. if he will maintaine any thing in a State to be worse then these Sinne indeed in the practicers is worse then the suffering of the worst Tyranny But that is not properly in question in this Section but the Civill Inconveniences of resistance though I grant they may prove sinnes too as things may be managed but otherwise it is evident no Civill Inconvenience to remedy such a Tyranny as is in dispute can be so bad as the disease The Dr. once more urges Rom. 13. and by ver 3 4 5 6. would faine prove that the Apostle shewes the evill and inconvenience of resisting Tyranny Reply But I have shewed more then once that the Apostles Reasons are quite against him and he saith nothing to prove that hee abuses not the Apostle not vouchsafing I doubt not daring to quote the words as they lie lest every eye should see how hee perverts them much lesse offering to Analize them or shew the strength of the Reasons which I have done against him Onely he repeats what hee hath before told us in generall that although the powers were then altogether unjust c. Nothing answerable to the end for which governing power is ordained Yet doth the Apostle draw his Reasons against resisting them from that good Justice Order for which God hath set up the higher Powers Reply This is as good a Reason as to say God hath ordained Ministers Pastours to preach and administer his word and Sacrament and pray that his people may be saved Therefore though the Ministers Pastours be carelesse and neither afford the People any Word or Sacraments or prayers or false Teachers and pervert Word and Prayer and Sacraments Yet the People may not seeke their Soules safety from some other that will bee more faithfull even though not attempting to put those evill Ministers Pastours quite out of office but leaving them in their places still to see if GOD will give them better minds Only not trusting them so long as they shew themselves notoriously unfaithfull If to deny the people this bee reasonable because God ordained them ministers Pastours for their good though they that are such by Office doe nothing toward it then the Dr may pretend hee discourses with some reason Which yet will not satisfie the Apostles phrases as I have abundantly shewed before But he saith the Apostle would insinuate that the resisting of the Higher Powers even when they are Tyrannicall tends to the overthrow of the Order which is the life of a Common wealth not onely because there is still Order under Tyranny but chiefly because if it were good and lawfull to resist the power when abused it would open a way to the people to resist and overthrow Powers duly administred for the executing of wrath on them that doe evill Reply All this is altogether contrary for 1. The Apostles words will bear no such Insinuations as I have proved 2. If Religion Laws and Liberties be subverted what Order is left under such Tyranny Sure whether Civill order be or not no Religious order is which yet is more worth then the life of a Common-wealth God hath often overthrown Common-wealths for subverting this Religion But never in his Word preferred the ordinary Order of a Common-wealth or the Common-wealth it selfe before 〈◊〉 Religion so as to bid his servants suffer that to bee subverted even whâ—n 〈◊〉 by the laws of a Common-wealth rather then the order of the Common-wealth should be endangered by it 3. It is a Signe the Tyranny was deepely and desperately resolved if it cannot be resisted by a meer defence but that must tend to the overthrow of the life of the Common-wealth 4. The tyranny breaks the Order stabs at the life of the Common-wealth and yet the Dr. is so zealous an advocate for it however he deny it that he cryes whore first he cries out of the danger to Order 5. To tend to the overthrow of that Order which is the life of the Common-wealth may be a fallacious phrase Doth it tend so necessarily or in the intention of the Resisters Or rather contrary Or doth it so tend to overthrow it as the Tyranny to be resisted doth All remedies of violent and desperate diseases doe in some Sort tend to the overthrow of the Life of the Body Yet none saies the remedy is worse then the disease which that is knowne to bee mortall the other may prevent death 6. This opens no such gap to the people to resist and overthrow power duly administred as the Doctors doth open a gappe to Tyranny If a man a Prince feare not GOD and know his people principl'd not to resist him in any case what can hinder him from all Kind of Tyranny And I would it were not evident that the presumption of this had made way for what we feele I am sure the Jesuite Contzen whose principles have been followed step by step among us see Mr. Newcomens Sermon â—n Neh. 4. Preached last Nov. 5. to the Parliament encourages a Prince to attempt the subverting the Protestant Religion though establish't by Law because the Protestants will not Rebell for the cause nor ever did The Dr. seconds him well But now a people if voyd of conscience yet will find it hard and thinke it so if they have any wit for them to hope to overthrow powers duly adminstred It is not so easie a thing multitudes will stand as their duty and their comfort experienced commands them for such powers And the Order that is setled will much help to represse such unruly disorders And though there be examples in Storyes of people that have prevayled against Tyrants Yet I remember not one that ruling according to Laws was overthrown by the people namely in setled times for the souldiers mutynies against the Roman Emperours Pertinax and others will not reach this case Finally Wee are farre from saying that pretences suffice or even that every act of Tyranny allowes of a Nationall resistance But such as in the case by the Dr. stated shews or gives just grounds to believe a designe to subvert Religion Laws and Liberties or any of them But the Dr. will illustrate or prove his inconveniences 3. wayes 1. This power of resistance if admitted and pursued may proceed to a change of Government The principles that are gone upon and have carried it on so farre as we see at this day may also lead it on to the greatest of evills Repl. Is not the King much beholden to the Dr. that will needs urge the Parliament to those consequences they have professed to have no thought of and in their late Declaration
in maintaining that of May. 26. do professe to be unlawfull 2. If hee meane deposition of the King or which is more change of the Monarchy into Aristocracy or Democracy I deny that this may proceed necessarily or Rationally from a necessary defence unlesse the Dr. will undertake to prove that the state by no resistance or defence can bee safe without deposing their King or taking away Monarchs which hee neither will nor can as I durst undertake against him if that were now the Qu in hand which I hope shall never be Though sure there is no such temptation to it as to see Tyranny acted and all sober necessary defence cryed out upon as Rebellion all bloodshed in such defence murther and the end of it damnation And when Religion if ever it should bee is onely laid wast by the countenance of such doctrines improved as the Jesuite Advised then if a people should be greatly oppressed in their Civill liberty there might be some danger they would deny the Drs. grounds and all their allegiance and respect to Monarchy together And I dare be bold to say it Monarchy never received such a blow since States were as the Counsellors of Princes and Court-Chaplaines have provoked men to give it Because Kings must be absolute and People meer slaves formerly in doing and now in suffering 2 He saies This power of resistance when used and pursued is accompanied with the evills of a Civill Warr c. Reply 1. Whose fault is that Suppose the people that is a great many Papists would rebell unlesse the King and Parliament would subvert Religion and bring in popery and take away all the Lawes that displeased them must they doe this to avoid the evills of a Civill Warre and if not then neither must the Parliament or People sacrifice Religion Lawes and Libertie to the feare or danger of a Civill Warre No war so bad as the Parisian massacre or that of Ireland The King of France commanded the one the Irish people the Rebells acted the other In a Civill warre wee may save something and after recover all Under a Tyrannie not to be resisted we have nothing have lost Religion Laws and Liberties and have neither goods nor Lives Wives nor Children that we are sure of a day to an end He that rationally preferres such a Tyranny before a civill War surely hopes upon some speciall grounds that Tyranny will be none to him who pleads so well for it's indempnity but rather an advancement to him much good may it doe him 3 He saith the people may be discontented even with the Parliament and so it will come to â—ade and Tyler and overthrow all government Reply 1. I have satisfied this Objection for the maine of it already 1. That it is lawfull for the people to resist even the Tyranny of a Parliament when altogether outrageous as in our Questâ—on not else 2. That the principles of defence cannot be drawne to a necessary change of the Government Of which I adde 2. Reasons One that the defence will suffice without it if wisely managed to secure the safety of the State and Religion so morally For still men some or other must be trusted and those that discredit themselves a while may merit a trust againe afterward Enough for their honour and comfort and not too much for the Common-wealth and they need not be trusted as before till they do merit a trust againe And yet no opposition much lesse change of government 3. The next government suppose each shire as the Dr. talkes a Common-wealth and all governed by a Folkmoot is still liable in all reason to mischiefes as bad or worse then were in that goverment rejected And this they among the people that are not growne barbarous and bruitish by suffering Tyranny and losse of Religion and Liberties by the Drs principles may be made so sensible of that they will never offer to attempt such a madnesse 3. Make a people Religious as much as man can make them and let them enjoy the comfort of doing that which is good as St Paul speakes of Rulers praising such And then the Rulers need not feare the multitude of them though some will ever be wicked that they will Rebell and change the Government The People indeed by Absaloms flattery Rebelled against David a righteous and just Ruler But there was more then ordinary in that GOD threatened it to him for his adultery and murther They did not so to the great Reformers Asa Iehosaphat Hezekiah Iosiah specially yet questionlesse they 2. offended very many for the Princes and People as I noted before on a speciall occasion were very bad even in their times Some Papists as did rebell against King Edward the 6. and some against Queen Elizabeth But both soon and easily subdued GOD will not suffer a just Prince or State to be troden under foot David was humbred not overthrown and men will still be found to take theiâ— parts As then St. â—aul bids Christians doing that which is good not feare the powers he exhorts to submit to and not to resist that is legally ruling by Civill laws under God So I may say to Rulers Kings and Parliaments doing well Ruling according to GODS Ordinances they need not feare the power of Resisting Tyranny in the peoples hands which I say againe Though people have often used it and prevailed against Tyrannous Governors yet never did they prevaile against Just Rulers to Depose them or much lesse alter the Government Tyranny then helped forward now by the Doctors Principles will be onely that that in a despaire will drive People to Cantoning and Folkmoots if any thing will and not at all our Position of a sober necessary Defence The Reasons that the Dr. hath brought againh Resistance are so far from being the Apostles Insinuations that they are wholly unsufficient to discredit it with Reasonable and unpartiall Men to whom next under GOD we Appeale His conclusion Ergo repeating that because some must be trusted therfore Ergo the K is still I must tell him most unreasonable when his case supposes he will not discharge his trust but is bent to subvert Religion Laws and Liberties So perpeatually the Dr. doth or will forget the State of the Qu. The King ought ordinarily to be trusted and a just King a David is worth 10000. nay 100000. of us his Subjects but the will and Lust of such a Tyrant as the Qu. speakes of is not to be satisfied upon one Ionathan or Naboth the meanest of those thousands yet it must be if he must still be trusted when he is bent upon extreame Tyranny What the Dr alleadges further of the Oathes of Allegeance and Supremacy and the late Protestation prejudices not defensive Resistance no more then Scripture and Reason hath done The Oathes of Allegeance and Supremacy are onely to the Kings Legall power and Authority which no man disputes against The Protestation is to defend as far as lawfully I may according
both and then let Conscience exercise charity as it will answer to GOD to it selfe to all it's Fellow English men and Christians and even to the whole World Thus in generall now we must examine some particulars The Dr. names 4 grounds of feares and jealousie with which the people have been possessed All which he first rejects with a gentle comparing of the Parliamont who hath set them forth to the Devill the Arch-accuser This is his charity In stead of rataliating I will onely say the Lord forgive thee His first ground is Reports of Forraign Power to be brought in This he saith was given out before the setting up of the MILITIA to keepe the People amused the easier to draw them into such a posture of defence as was pretended and they are all discovered by time to have been vaine REPL. 1. why will he perpetually forget that the King himself granted the Militia necessary to be setled 2 It was not meerely Forraigne Forces to bee brought in but Papists and Delinquents rising at home that was insinuated a cause of the desire to have the Kingdom put in a posture of defence 3. Who knows not of the billeting of many thousands of Irish upon us even during the fitting of a former Parliament The Project of Germane Horse in the Dukes time is it quite forgotten The Earle of Staffords Councell not only to bring in his Irish Army consisting most of Papists wherewith to reduce this Kingdome was it not proved by the Oath of a Privy Counsellor present and confirmed by his own Notes taken at the time and did not the rest of the advise then given by that Politician that the King being now deserted by his Parliament might doe any act of power Quaere the words in his charge amount to Counselling the bringing in of any forces from any place And why must all intelligences after these prevented bee counted vaine 4. For is all suspition vaine because the thing suspected comes not to passe when mean are used to prevent it Is all preventing Physicke Vaine Is all feare of Pyrates in a Sea voyage vaine if none assault a well man'd and provided Ship Was not such a Navy being secured in safe hands as would under God have made great Forraign Forces repent their comming against the Kingdomee competent reason why those that did mean to come if they might have had no resistance on the Sea now thought it too hot a service 5. But besides the Navy they had no Landing place Hull being contrary to the Court-expectation and attempt as was Noted before secured by the Parliament and so might well be the more discouraged 6. Which is the more considerable because no sooner had they got a Port-Town namely Newcastle but though no Forraign Forces came who could not be so soon ready yet Forraign Ammunition came not a little and Forces of our Country-men who served in Forraign Countries and money too from Forraigne Princes or People And what more is comming if our unhappinesse continue till the Spring who can be secure But for this if it prove so the Dr. hath a defence ready All Christian Kings he saith cannot but thinke themselves concerned in the cause and it will be as just for the King to use them against subjects now in arms as it was unjust in the Barons to call in the French against their naturall King REPL. 1. The Dr. bestirres himself to make the King strong to maintain the Prelacy among other things as himself hath told us before in the former Section he said that they that assist him doe it according to their Allegiance So that he intends that all his Subjects are bound by their Allegiance to assist him and fight against the Parliament even though their Consciences judge them to intend the conservation of Religion Laws and liberties and his followers to intend their subversion And here hee calls all Christian Kings iâ— as themselves concerned in the Cause 2. When the Rochellers took Arms according to their Priviledges and Edicts of the Kingdome to defend themselves And our Protestant or Popish Councellors got 8. Ships to be sent to assist the King of France against them and in the Low-Country they did the like too what will the Dr. say were all the Christian Princes concerned to assist against the Rochellers If hee doe the very souldiers and marriners that went into Ships shall rise up in judgment against him who when they knew what they went for utterly refused to fight against their Religion and so the greatest part of them were set a Shore againe and the rest went on their voyage and did the mischief to help beat the Rochell Fleet and give the King possession of the Haven so as he afterward with the help of the King of Spaine so still Princes are concerned against the Protestant made a Barricado so strong as when a Fleet from hence after re-Voyage attempted to relieve Rochell by Sea being then actually besieged by Land it could not be done 3. What will the Dr. say to that Voyage to Rey and that to releeve Rochell when it proved too late Why was not the King still concerned to helpe the King of France or was he 4 Will it be Just for the King to use Forraign Forces when to the understanding of Common Readers hee hath utterly disclaimed it in more then one Declaration 5 What Counsell would an Enemy to the King and Kingdome that hath read Stories and ours in speciall as the Dr. seemes to have done give but the using of Forraign Forces was not the Kingdome Conquered by this very meanes by the Saxons when King Vorteger was in debate with his Lords and People call'd them in to assist him Did not the Turkes so come into Europe and oft the like hath hapened 6. He counts it damnable to resist for defence meerly much more then as the Barons in K. Iohns time to call in a Stranger to make him King if then to call in other Kings to assist against the Parliament be as just as that was unjust it is a high vertue though to the utter endangering of the whole Kingdom whose Counsellour surely it were pity the Dr. should ever be who hath no more judgment or more Conscience or charity toward the publique good then to advise and commend such a practise 2. Next he propounds the Queens Religion as a matter which is urged to cause feares and jelousies Of which he saith It is no new cause REPL. 1. It is true to the great grief of all that truly love Religion or wish well to her Majestie but had others wish't it otherwise as the Dr. speakes for himselfe who have had accesse unto her She had not bin told by a great man in the Church in the worst season that could be when it is said shee had some Pangs about Her Religion and asked of it that Shee might well be saved in her Religion Or if any give no credit to this passage yet it is notorious
They may be resisted at pleasure and their words and actions deserving no charity or challenging none Consciences will judge and may without breach of charity how charitable or true these interpretations and imputations be And so I have done with him If any other now aske me why it is not as fitting easie to put off all imputations from the Parliament and lay it upon a Faction there as the Declarations in the Kings Name use to doe as it is for the Parliament to put off all from the King to his Councellours and Followers I answer in a word the Law commands the one and Reason gives a faire ground for it The King is but one and so if those about him fill his head with strange Doctrines in Religion and Maximes or interpretations of law and with strange relations in matters of Fact and answerable suggestions unles he were a Prophet or an Angell he can hardly avoid false opinions and errours in government Himselfe tels us in the fore-cited answer to the 19 Propositions of surreptiously-gotten commands from a King by followers and favourites against the Law which he is bound to protect when he knowes it Therfore according to our Law The King may be mis-informed but hee cannot be mistaken and the King can doe no wrong because it supposes hee doth nothing but by Advise of his Councellours in matters of State and Judges in matters of law Therfore he grants the Commons may impeach such Favourites and Followers of his and then the Lords are to judge and punish them Would this have bin suffered or would it yet the Parliament and he would soon accord But they get him to let them lay all upon him which themselves say and doe and this hazards our undoing We would not charge or distrust the King We dare not must not unlesse we meane to be ruined trust or discharge his Councellours But we hope and pray that God will blesse him so at last as that those being taken away from before him or rather being yeelded up by him as drosse from the silver his Throne shall be established in righteousnesse Majesty and Honour Meane time we proclaime they injury him and us and the law that interpret what is said or done against the multitude of his Followers and Army or any of them though sheltred by his Name and Presence as done against him On the contrary side the Parliament is a numerous Body where each one Votes single and it must be a Maior part that carries any thing and there is no other sence of a Parliament in Law and Reason then the maior part at least Therfore the Votes and Orders and Declarations that come as all do from the maior part cannot be lesse then the Votes of the Parliament themselves 〈◊〉 the Counsellors Judges and have none on whom to discharge any imputation So thâ— unles a Parliament can be a Faction which in our Law is a meere contradiction It iâ— impossible that a Faction can carry things there or what is there done can be so putâ— off and the Parliament discharged I conclude then a King may be charitably believe to meane well as he protests only to be mis-informed and abused by wicked Councellours But the Parliament cannot be is not well thought of by charity it self in it's highest perfection if the maior part vote and act evill things The Parliament is then the offendor before God and man For conclusion of all Let me adde 5 or 6 Qualifications or Cautions upon the whole matter 1. All Governours Supreme specially have somewhat of Prerogative beyond written or expresse Lawes But this to be used for the Subjects good not hurt 2. A Christian though able and innocent is not to resist all injuries done to him in his Estate or person no not by private persons much lesse if done by the command of Governours specially of the Supreme Christian meeknes requires the one and Christian subjection the other 3. An open and publike resistance by armes is the last Refuge under Heaven of an oppressed and endangered Nation Many injuries are to be let paâ— while appearing but personall not politicall or designed as presidents Jealousies are not to be suddenly taken up nor too deeply taken in And all possible meanes of redresse and satisfaction is to be endeavoured before this course be taken 4. If Lawes doe injury they must not be resisted unles they command undeniably against God and not only so but threaten extreame extremity 5. Whatsoever injury happens to be done to innocent persons is to be recompenced as speedily and fully as may be 6. A Peace is to be imbraced desired pursued with all faithfullnesse so it may be but rationally safe and not betray to the misery which war was undertaken to prevent or remedy 7. The Nation and Parliament that is put to this necessity of a warr must acknowledge Godâ— just and heavy displeasure which so threatens them so endangers them and therefore must before all and in all and with all humble themselves most unfainedly to God and seeke to make their peace with him and thus may hope He will blesse their Arms and desires of peace with sufficient victory and a peacefull and happy Conclusion in due time Which the Lord of Hosts and God of Peace may doe for us as He will for all His. I shut up all with that Prayer and Prophesie Psal 125.4 5. Do good O Lord to those that be good and to them that are upright in their hearts As for such as turne aside to their crooked wayes the Lord shall leade them forth with the workers of iniquity but peace shall be upon Israel Amen Amen FINIS His Epist 2 Cor. 1.12 2 Cor. â—â— 17 18 19. Act. 24.5 Ezâ— 4.15 Act. 17. Luther Bâ—genhagius Iusâ—â—s Ionas Amâ—sdoâ—sias Spâ—latiâ—â—â—â—nct hoÌ„ Câ—â—tâ—â—gâ—â— and 〈◊〉 Lawyers and States-meÌ„ puâ—lished a writing Anno 15â—1 to justifie defensive Armes c. K Iames Speech in Paâ—â— An. 1609. See Remonstr Dec 15. 1641. Votes May 20 Remonst May 26 1641. Declar. Iuly 13 Aug 3. Aug 15. Aug. 20. Octob. 22. Petitions of Parl March 26 May 20. Iun. 27. Iul. 15. Petitions of London and severall Counties for the Kings returne With the L. Generals Petit. which would not be received c. Ier. 27.3 c. Ier. 16 1â—