diverse plainely dissented to that Bill The injustice of them that remained was intolerable that refused all reparation or securitie to such as were injured by the Tumults and it was a most perfidious Act in them to enforce their members to desert the house that they might exercise their Arbitrary power over the kingdome the injury was so apparent the pretēce of malignancie so ridiculous against the deserting members that noe sober man can imagnie enticement or overawing to be the cause of their withdrawing and these remaining members ought to have forborne by their dutie to the kingdome the passing of such a Bil in the absence of soe many members but they that will forbeare noe degree of treason cannot probably abstaine from breakes of priviledge and lesse injuries He sayes this degrading of the Bishopps was orthodoxall in the Church ancient and reformed What will not this man say Wee neede not wonder at his other impudencies that will affirme the taking away the order of Bishopps orthodoxall in the ancient Church which never wanted them The King sayes he was bound besides his judgment by a most strict and vndispensable oath to preserve that order and the rights of the Church And sayes the Libeller If the letter of that oath be not interpreted by equitie reformation or better knowledge then was the King bound to graunt the Clergie all priviledges graunted to them by Edward the Confessour and so bring in Popery Equitie must be admitted in all interpretations of oaths and soe must better knowledges but the knowledge of other men is noe exposition to him that takes an oath if his owne knowledge be not convinced The King hath sworne to preserve the priviledges of the Church to be a protectour of the Bishopps and by what equitie reformation or better knowledge would this libeller induce the King to breake this oath If Sectaries say the calling is vnlawful against the judgment of the vniversall Church must the king beleive this thinke himselfe absolved of his oath The King never doubted that his oath could not binde him to sin but he was assured that it was a sin to breake his oath when it was no sin to keepe it and while his conscience was not informed of any vnlawfulnes in the matter of his oath his sin must be the more hainous to act against his oath aswell as his knowledge The Libeller talkes of lawes of God and truth of the Gospell But his schismaticall fancies must over rule lawes and oath though the German Emperours or other Kings had noe cause to leavy warrs vpon Protestant subjects vnder colour of a blinde and literall observance to an oath it had been a wickednes in their subjects to make a warr on them to compell them to breake that oath It is not to be imagined if what shal be established come in question but that the Parliament should oversway the King and not the King the Parliament Neither can it be imagined that he which is to be overswayed by the Parliament is a King By all law and reason that which the Parliament will not is no◅ more established in this Kingdome neither is the king bound to vphold it as a thing established Certainly lawes are very vainely said to be made by the King if he have no voyce in the making of them and if they may be vnestablished without him and it was a wickednes aswell as weakenes to binde him to vphold lawes and to governe his people justly that had not soe much as voyce in the making of their lawes that was bound to governe by wicked lawes if the Parliament would have them such Imaginary powers cannot consist with Religion law nor reason in the Government of England The King sayes had he gratified he thinkes their Antiepisconall faction with his consent and sacrifised the Church Government and Revenues to the fury of their Covetuousnes they would then have found noe colourable necessitie of raysing an Army The Libeller to this sayes It was the fury of his owne hatred to the professours of the true Religion which incited him to persecute them with the sword of warr when whipps pillories exiles and imprisonments were not thought sufficient It s certen such a generation of Traytours as have persecuted the King with a warr justly merited to be whipt out of all Kingdomes and while this Libeller frequently sports at the Kings necessities he is not ashamed presently to call the warr voluntary on his part If the Kings fury incited him to a warr he would not soe often have sought peace nor been denyed peace without the sacrifice of the Church But the Libeller sayes to colour this warr the K̄ing cannot finde wherewith all but that stale pretence of Charles the fifth and other Popish Kings that the Protestants had only an intent to lay hands on the Church Revenues The King neede not a colour for making a warr whereto necessitie enforced him It is apparent that the sectaries in England intended to devoure these Revenues and have effected it and they professe to seeke it by the sword because they could not have it otherwise But the Libeller sayes it was never in the thoughts of the Parliament till exhausted by warr their necessitie seized on that for the Commonwealth which the Luxury of the Prelates had abused to Common mischeife They neede not have been exhausted if reason Justice or Religion could have contented them They will make a warr and robb and steale from other men to maintaine it Did not their pretended necessitie come from their warr to take away Episcopacy and is not the necessitie of their owne making to get these Revenues What if goods dedicated to Gods service were abused to luxury were there none els in the Kingdome soe abused Must they make choise of the Patrimony of the Church for a sacrifice to their Covetuousnes that they may spare their private That the King consented to the vnlording of Bishopps at Canterbury the cheife seate of their pride for God would have it soe And can he tax the King for his allusions vpon the fate of Hotham and obserring the course of Gods judgments and himselfe make such an observation from the Kings passing the Bill at Canterbury May it not be an aggravation of the offence in passing the Bill there rather then a punishment vpon those that were wronged by it but Canterbury had not relation to their peace in Parliament but in Church and therefore his scene is mislayed The King sayes his consent to that Bill of putting Bishopps out of the house of Peeres was from his firme perswasion of their contentednes to suffer a present diminution of their rights The Libeller from hence argues the pure mockery of a Royall assent to delude for the present May not sober times revoke what distempered madnes had necessitated and ◅ad not the King just cause to thinke that after times would see the obliquitie of that Bill The Libellers consequence is that we may hence perceive
a truth should be incredible from any hand Was not Jeroboams new Religion the foundation of a Tyrany and have not all vsurpers in the Civill state pretended some false Religion Was not Mahometts wicked imposture and Tyraniall vsurpation bredd togeather and have not the present Tyrants introduced a false Religion to support their power Hath not schisme been joyned with the Rebellion We may have learnt both from sacred story and times of reformation that the Kings of this world have ever hated and instinctively feared the Church of God It s manifest Sectaries hate King and Church malefactours will compliane that Judges hate them for their vertues We finde in the ancient Church that Kings were the greate protectours and reformers of the Church and its strange that the Libeller if he had looked backe at all had not seene David Solomon Hezechiah Josiah and others The Kings of Israell politiquely opposed the true Church for feare the people should returne to the house of David and if we looke vpon Pagan Kings we finde Cyrus and Artaxerxes helping the establishment of the true Church This Libeller hath discovered a greate Misterie of Rebellion that having made such outcryes of Tyrany against his late Maj heere tells vs the Tyrany was Monarchy they would not be subject to the Kings of this world to such impostors is England now subject that kill Kings and make Tyrants and this blaspheamer stickes not to charge the Church of God and the Doctrines thereof with opposition to Civill Government and to commaund the destruction of Kings Because the doctrine seemes to favour Libertie and equalitie And are there not Republiques that oppose the true Religion True Religion presseth obedience faâ—…hood and imposture allwayes hold foorth licence to the people Is there through all the booke of God one word in favour of this Rebell libertie and equallitie And did not God plant his Church at first in an apparent inequallitie and subjection both in the state Civill Ecclesiasticall And this broode of Sectaries have heeretofore complained that their doctrines were traduced as opposite to Monarchy And neither Libertie nor equallitie is sought for to the people but to betray them to the power of these deceivers who are growne to that impudence to pretend doctrines of confusion and Rebellion to be the true Religion The Church as ancient prophesies foretold should dissolve all their power Dominion Few sects professing Christ have appeared more Turkish then these present of England they fancie an earthly Kingdome for the Church as Mahomett his Paradise and then that themselves are the true Church and shall have Dominion over all and avow their intention to destroy all Kings and whoever submitt not to them But certenly Kings vnderstood not any such prophesies nor feared such pretenders who make prophesies to agree with their owne wicked Actions and ambitious desires His first instance is in Pharaohs oppressing of the Israelites And doth he beleive that Pharaoh knew their doctrines or prophesies the man might have learnt more from the Text that being strangers they might over power him and thence grew his persecution not from the libellers imaginary doctrine He makes a strange leape that passes by all stories els and would prove his position by his owne authoritie and expects that his libell against the King shall make good his position that Kings ever feared and hated the true Church a strong way of disputing to prove that kings hated and feared the true Church because the King did soe and to prove the King did soe because kings did soe this is a stout Champion There neede no answeare to his bawling of the kings suspition of men most Religious for time hath tryed that they were Rebellious and wicked Traytours vnder the Masque of Religion He could not vse violence as Pharaoh did and therefore chuses a more misticall way of Antichristian fraude and like Balak to hire against a nation of Prophetts other esteemed Propheâ—…s and to weare out the Church by a false Ecclasiasticall Policie The Summe is to supresse Sectaries and prevent Traytours is this Ecclesiasticall Policie but where is this Mistâ—… of Kings hating the true Church is there noe true Church of God where there is Government And what proportion hath this supposition of his to the kings proceedings Did he erect Bishopps or was there any Religion established or publiquely profest which he opposed but only false and hipocriticall factionists which outwaâ—…lly professing the established Religion sought for gaine and pride seâ—…retly to draw disciples after them to the disturbance subversion of the Church There needes not any thing be said to his rayling his corruption being apparent by objecting it to the calling of Bishopps and hates it for the remedy against schisme which the Church had by them The King bestowed livings according to the law and the Policie was not his but the ancient constitution of the Church and this Monster that reproaches the retaining any thing in Leiturgie or Government practised by the ancient Church is not ashamed to charge the king with breach of Canons and the ancient practice of the Church in conferring Ecclesiasticall dignities and the peoples right in Elections was never pretended in England and justly and anciently forbidden in the Church neither doe any Canons in force support that pretence That influence which the king sayes is necessarie for the Prince to have vpon Churchmen noe man that beleives the Scripture will thinke vnfitt but how can the Libeller make good that the many Emperours and Kings that imbraced the Christian Religion hated and feared it for soe they must by his grounds And how can he conclude from Pagans hatred to Religion that it was only from their kings when as the stories are soe plentifull in setting downe the madd rage of the multitude the truth is seditious innovatours know that their hopes and strength lie to seduce the silly people and that it is the interest of governours to prevent their lewde endeavours and thence proceede their declamations against Rulers and their proclamations of Libertie and that which they cal the Bishopps Tyrany is only their office to take away schisme and schisme is the way to Rebellion The Libellers judgment touching callings founded on Scripture reformation or graces of the Bishopps and others is of the same authoritie as the determinations of Traytours touching loyaltie and heretickes touching sound doctrine and his end never agrees with his beginning but in rayling and incongruitie for but now he made it the Kings Policie to hire the Bishopps now it is the Bishopps Policie to worke that perswasion in the King of noe Bishopp noe King the man well knowes that noe Bishopp noe king was the perswasion of King James who found it true by his owne experience without the helpe of Bishopps and yet soe sottish doth this Libeller presume his readers that makes the dependence which Bishopps have only of the king the cause of such perswasions yet in their owne
ourselves if wee could not judge those men that are proud-boasters despisers of Parents despisers of Dominion Traytours faith-breakers to be such as descerne not the things of the spirit though they pretend to them The Reformation they could expect from him must be some politique forme of an imposed Religion or perpetuall vexation to such as comply not with that forme And let all the Churches that professe the name of Christ through the world be produced and there is none of them but have a forme of Religion which this libeller heere calls politicke and an imposed Religion and the observation of such formes are in all Churches exacted with some penalties and heereby all men may see that wee have not to doe with a confined Rebell that hath only disaffection to the Government of the place where he lives but one that accuses all Churches but his owne Conventicle to have litle ore no judgment in Religion and not acquainted with a thing so spirituall for the ground of this reproach is from his Majest resolution to vse formes in the publique duties of Religion in the Church The like amendment he sayes he promises in state not a step further then his reason and conscience told him was fitt to be desired wishing he had kept with in those bounds and not suffered his owne judgment to have been overborne in some things And this he sayes is to set vp an Arbitrary Government all Brittany to be chained to the conscience judgment and reason of one man as if those guifts were entayled vpon him with his Fortune to be a King Wee know not the Misteriâ—…s of this mans Religion otherwise we might demaund of him why the King should goe further then his reason and conscience directed him and why the libeller his Mates should hould it lawfull for them to spurne at al lawes both in Church and state vpon pretence of their reason and conscience against them he cannot deny to have â—…oue this they should doe well to shew how the King may goe against his reason conscience Is it intayled vpon him with his Fortune as a King to have lesse priviledge then they must he renounce his owne reason and conscience to the advice of a Parliament And must they controll him and the Parliament Surely the King must give an account to God for the Talents he hath lent him But how can the breaker conclude from the Kings forhearance of Acts wherein he is vnsatisfied in his conscience that is to set vp an Arbitrary Government when as nothing is introduced And why must not all Brittaine be chained to the judgment reason and conscience of the King as well as all Israell Gods owne peouliar people and not only all Brittaine but the whole world are Chained to the reason judgment and conscience of their Rulers be they one or many And the seducers would perswade vs that Brittaine could not be happy vnles it were reduced to its 〈◊〉 and governed by a multitude of Kings Religions God had promised peculiar assistance to Kings and Commaunds the peoples obedience to them the miseries of the Kingdome many be imputed in a greate part to what his Majest observed that he had suffered his owne judgment to be overborne in some things A Tyrant may make this pretense and it were in vaine for any Parliament to have reason judgment or conscience if it thâ—…arted the Kings will It were much more tollerable for a Tyrant to pretend conscience in governing then for a people to pretend conscience in rebelling and this libeller hath reprehended the peoples levitie and violence so sharpely as he cannot if he pretend reason subject the reason judgment and conscience of the Rulers to the controll of the subjects Because Tyrants may pretend conscience therefore by good logicque no King may vse it and because some Kings may not rightly governe therefore he will have the right judgment in the people which he so much despises and which as it hath been the meanes of the Rebells present power so it hath been in all ages the cause of confusion and miserie to states and Kingdomes The reason judgment and conscience of a Parliament is not therefore in vaine because not infallible it is most probable that a King will follow the best Councell but it cannot be presumed that in Parliaments the greater part will continue subjects if they may be Kings by saying they wil be and it was the wisedome of our Ancestours that would have no lawes made without the will of their King and they never trusted such as they chose further then to present their desires and offer their Councell vnto him and consent to what should be ordeyned by him with advice of the Lords it were in vaine to have a King if he were not impowred to judge of Councells or if lawes might be obtruded vpon him and the people without him The present Calamities testifie how vnhappily and absurdly a Parliament seekes to Commaund whose office is to Councell and pretend Councell vseles vnles they may deprive him whome they advise of the benifit of Councell taking away his power to vse it To what end doe they Councell if there be none to be Councelled but all to be commaunded That thus these promises made vpon experience of hard sufferings and his most mortified retirements being thorowly sifted containe nothing much different from his former practices His Majest expressions being thorowly sifted containe nothing in them but pious and Princely considerations and from this libellers owne mouth all men may see that his Majest practices against which they maliciously exclaime were consonant to Religion and Justice and only opposite to Trayterous and schismaticall licence It was the libellers profession to parrallell his Majest faire spoken words as he calls them to his owne farr different Actions and now his words and deedes being sifted by malice it selfe are not much different the libeller is some what ingenuous to discover his owne vanitie and falshood He leaves it to prudent foresight what fruites in likelyhood his Majest restorement would have produced We have seene already the fruites of the inhumane cruelties exercised vpon him and the continuance and encrease of those abominable impieties that attend such Actions where of the libeller makes a large profession who confidently obtrudes lavish lyes for knowne truths petulant insolence for sober sense maximes of villany for sound Arguments which are the bitter fruites of disobedience and Rebellion To that part of the section which he calls the devout of it and modelled into the forme of a private Psalter he objects nothing but his spleene that it is not to be admired more then the Arch-Bishopps late Breviary and other manualls and handmaides of Devotion and these he calls the lip worke of every Prelaticall leiturgist quilted out of Scripture Phrase with as much ease and as litle neede of Christian diligence or judgment as belongs to the compiling of any ordinary saleable
law and Government for have not his Masters changed the stile of proceedings against offenders which the law formerly vsed in regard of their change of Government and devised one according to their new modell It s possible they that devised that clause in the Act did not expect it would be retorted vpon them they were blinded with their fury and precipitation But the Image breaker might have observed that a greater evidence of their injustice could not have been provided He that is so shamelesse to insinuate the Kings instigation to that clause in the Act for the death of the Earle Strafford which were a madnes in any man to suppose may aswell pretend it for his death The six members must stand condemned if he acquit them for the contrary of what he affirmes is constantly true And it were folly to aske him why he should conclude the six members guiltles that never were tryed when they were accused of such facts as he himselfe sayes were Treason in others for he will certainly say it though he thinke it not He concludes against the Kings conscience in saying that he bare that touch of conscience with greater regret then any other in regard of the proditory aide he supposes sent to Rochell and Religion abroade and a Prodigalitie of shedding blood at home as he phrases it There cannot be a greater evidence of the Kings innocence and the Rebels lewdenes then their absurd accusations of him who after their barbarous reproaches and crueltie make his greatest Cryme the resistance of their Rebellion and the misfortune of an expedition in favour of Rochell and Religion No man is so senseles to beleive that Rochell could have defended it selfe without other aide then their owne if the King had not intended their releife he needed not have vndertaken such chrageable and dangerous expeditions whence can any reasonable man collect that the Kings assistance to them could beproditory when they were not their by hindred to vse their vtmost endeavours besides the English succours and heereby wee may see how miserably the people of England have been misled by hipocriticall Traytours who while they made profession of conscience and Religion acted the greatest villanies against Religion and conscience that the worst of Atheists ever attempted and shame not at such assertions of falshood as common States blush to be detected of The reason he sayes is worth the notinge why the King would have notice taken of so much tendernes which is he hoped it would be some evidence before God and man to all posteritie that he was farr from bearing that vast loade and guilt of blood laid vpon him by others which hath he sayes the likenes of a subtill dissimulation When the Prophet David humbled himselfe and put on sackcloth even that was turned to his reproach and his Majest teares and afflictions of soule are no lesse reproached by theis vipers then the greatest sins that could be repented of Cursed shimi will call David a man of blood and his repentance for the murther of one man with bitternes of soule shal be counted a dissimulation rather then the wretch will allow it any evidence that he was innocent of that blood he would lay to his charge This was not the first time his Majest charged himselfe with that innocent blood the Rebells published his Cabinet wherein they found it and he might well hope that God would cleere his innocence as the light and his righteousnes as the noone day Prayers may be made for mercy to a mans name and a penitent may piously hope God will make his repentance evident to men and his sorrowes for one sin an evidence he was not guiltie of many of the same Kinde His Majest hopes not that his expressions heere wil be evidence but that his regretts which were Knowne not only to God but men could be evidence how farr he was from the guilt of what his Enemies charged him with and to declare a hope of the benifit of repentance is no more like a dissimulation then repentance is like a justification If his Majest had shed the blood of thousands whome he counted Rebells as this Author mentions he could not suffer regretts of conscience though he had a sorrow of heart his vnderstanding being satisfied of the Justice and necessitie of the fact But those horrid Traytours that imbrewed themselves in the blood of that innocent King were hardned against the sparing of multitudes and would secure their consciences by reproaching his Majest repentance and transferring the blood of warr vpon him which their Rebellion and crueltie had spilt This libeller in this very page within few lines told vs that strafford was by him put to death vnwillingly and presently concludes thus by dipping voluntarily the tipp of his finger in the blood of strafford whereof all men cleere him he thinkes to escape that sea of blood wherein his owne guilt hath plunged him And may not a mans owne conscience strike him for that which all men cleere him of but that himselfe hath related to be otherwise in this case where so many concurred in Judgment against the death of the Earle of Strafford and when so many have made confession of their owne vnhappines in the consent to that Action and so few at present that doe not abhorre it and thinke it a greate cause of Gods displeasure against the nation it is farr from truth that all men cleere him The Libeller holds a single murther but dipping the tip of the finger in blood gives just cause to conclude that his conscience is not toucht with shedding aâ—…ea of blood Al men must confesse it a cause of greater regret to have his hand in the blood of one man against the perswasion of his conscience then erroneously to enter into a warr where many are distroyed vpon the opinion of Justice but the knowne Justice of his Majest cause layes the blood of this warr at the Rebells doores whose malice and Treason not ignorance or errour drew vpon them the guilt of that blood of Strafford those thousands which the warr hath devoured If the King had never published his repentance for the blood of Strafford all knowing men would have judged he had cause to doe it and if he had never gone about to purge himselfe of that blood which the warr had shed all men would have cleered him of it Vpon his going to the HOUSE OF COMMONS COncerning his vnexcusable and hostile march from the Court to the house of Commons there needs not much be said There neede litle to be said for his Majest defence in going to the house of Commons who had so high a provocation to make an hostile March and tooke the way of so milde and peaceable a comming to it but this Authors impudence in calling it vnexcusable after the many violences and hostile Marches of his Masters vnto that house and their taking out and driving away the members will never be excused How shameles
libeller most reasonles and vnconscionable is the vtmost that any Tyrant ever pretended over his vassalls Tyrants were never esteemed by their pretences but by their Actions it shewes that these men knew not what Tyrany was who make a just right of all Governours the vse of reason Tyrany and that which never king was thought fitt to be denyed though Tyrants abused it Tyrany is in the abuse of power not in the rule of Government In all wise nations the Legislative power and the judiciall execution of that power have been distinct But never devided being allwayes subordinate one to the other the judiciall execution depending on the Legislative He makes an assumption If then the king be only sett vp to execute the law he ought noe more to make or forbidd the making of any law then other inferiour Iudges But if the king be set vp to make law by the advice of his Councell the Parliament can they make lawes without him but this Libeller that would be thought soe strong at Arguments talkes himselfe into contradictions and allowes the king neither the one power nor the other for he affirmes the king cannot judge and make lawes he must not and what will he conclude sure that his owne nation is not wise nor himselfe honest or rationall He cannot reject a law offred him by the Commons no more then make a law which they reject And hath it sense that because a man cannot doe an Act without the advice of another therefore he must doe what that other advises The man dictates and would be beleived though the Commons never did nor could offer a law to the king for he wel knowes it must passe the Lords before it come to the king but he was loath to mention the Lords least it should cry downe the noyse he hath made of the kings single judgment for the Lords house may not have a negative in his judgment notwithstanding their number But why is it offred the king if he may not reject it and whence hath it been that so many Bils have been rejected in al ages without any complaint When Kings come soe low as to fall vpon Philosophy which before he neither valued nor vnderstood is a figne they are then put to their last trump If the king had not valued nor vnderstood Philosophy he could not have made soe pertinent vse of it and if the Libeller had vnderstood Philosophy or valued truth he would have given better signes of it Could not his Majest discourse of his reason and will but it must be out of the way or above his abilitie But why is this a signe that kings are then put to their trump why the vse of Philosophy more then other learning Though kings come low Rebells will come to seeke corners to hide themselves He shewes not how Philosophy breakes the necke of their cause or how he hath made advantage of Philosophy against the king but we finde how his elaborate contradictions have broken the necke of his owne cause through out all his discourses The king sayes he cannot thinke the Majest of the Crowne of England to be bound by any Coronation oath in a blinde and brutish formalitie to consent to whatever its subjects in Parliament shall require And sayes the Libeller What Tyrant could presume to say more And the law it selfe Religion and reason never said lesse It cannot but be yeilded that the oath which bindes him to performance of his trust ought in reason to containe the summe of what his cheife trust and office is But what if it doe not is there an argument to be drawne from what the oath ought to be but is not The oath may containe the generall dutie of Justice right but it neither did nor could comprehend all the wayes of effecting it The libeller sayes that the Kings negative voyce is not contained in that oath But that oath oblidges him to governe by just lawes which comprehends a negative to all vnjust lawes and can it impose an obligation vpon the king of doing Justice and not give him a libertie of judging what is just or vnjust The Libeller sayes that his oath requires only his assent to those lawes which the people have already chosen or shall chuse there is noe such word in that oath and his mention of the Lattine and old English of that oath are of another sense that the libeller was conscious of therefore he sayes All reason admits that the people should not loose vnder a new king what freedome they had before but their freedome consists not in an exemption from soveraigne power It is the custome of Rebels to contradict corrupt al lawes vpō pretence of their private reason allow no reason but what concludes against just authoritie he wel knew there was not that double sense he assignes but we wil make his sens the kings oath if the peoples choise be referred to the time past it implies not that their choise was or ought to be a law though they had a choise in the laws made as stil they have they could not loose what they never had the Parliament which at first mētioned the kings oath acknowledged that as they did not determine the questiō how far foorth the king is obliged to follow the judgmēt of his parliament so as to conclude that a new law might be mad without his consent so they acknowledge that the contrary may be truly inferred out of al they had said That if the King deny what the Parliament hath chosen he makes himselfe superiour to his whole Kingdome And who doubts but he is doe not they which take the oath of supreamacie acknowledge it The libeller sayes the generall maximes of Policie gainsay it The general maximes of Rebellion doe but Policy cannot It is impossible in Policy that he to whome every soule must be subject should not be superiour to them all Our owne standing lawes gainsay it as hath been cited in Remonstrances that the King hath two superiours the law and his Court of Parliament The merit of those remonstrances are neere the rate of this libell though as yet they never mentioned such standing lawes if there had been such standing lawes the Author would have found them enrolled but that he doth not how absurdly such a pretence is obtruded whē the superiotie of persōs places is in quesstiō to name the superiority of law which holds comparisō with sciences not with persōs that the Parliament should be above the king who is the head of the Parliament without whom a Parliament hath no being is as Monstrous to reasō as law it is impossible that the law cā say that the king hath no superiour but God say that the Parliament is his superiour the king might wel say that this was blinde brutish formalitie and no part of the law his oath or dutie but such brutish formalities Rebells vse to blinde the people The
he meane by defending the Tumults seizing the forts and Militia raysing an Army vpbraiding the king with feares to hazard such a scuffle But were it otherwise the Protestants have disclaimed his Trayterous pretence of taking Armes against the King vnder colour of Religion or otherwise hold it dishonour to their Religion that such Rebellious principles should be charged vpon them and nothing could be more for the interest of Papists then that Protestants should maintaine and practice that doctrine of Rebellion The world is satisfied how disloyally the King was prosecuted by Armes and had it been otherwise subjects ought to petition not returne violence and in all the excuses that these Traytours have vsed they never mention any offer of satisfaction to the King or desire to lay downe his Armes but require his submission and giving vp his rights or otherwise they would take it by force The precedence of the Scotts warr will not take of the dishonour He sayes It s a groundles and dissembled feare that shee that was for many yeares averse to her husbands Religion should be now the more alienated can the Libeller deny but that the aversion of any may be encreast and confirmed by the wickednes of the persons of the contrary Religion how groundles then and shameles is his exception If the feare of her delinquencie and Iustice demaunded on her was any cause of her alienating the more to have gained her by indirect meanes had been no advantage to Religion As the King observed that this was the first example of Protestant subjects that tooke Armes against their king soe this of charging the Queene with Delinquencie was the first example in that kinde that trayterous impudence had produced when it shal be heard that a compaine of such vile persons charge the Queene with Crymes fot assisting her husband they wil be assured that not feare of Delinquencie but their barbarous crueltie might more alienate her disadvantage Religion Them who accused her he sayes well enough knowne to be the Parliament the King censures for men yet to seeke their Religion whether doctrine discipline or good manners And soe doth the whole world whatever name the Libeller give such men who are well enough knowne to be a Trayterous faction The name of true English Protestants is a meere schismaticall name And why Are there not severall confessions in the Protestant Churches doe they hold one another Schismatickes for that reason How often hath this Libeller named the best reformed Churches is not that as much a name of schisme he is ignorant in the nature of schisme though he be soe well practised in it and its strange he would observe a Schismaticall name from the title of a nation and not from his title of Independencie that produceth as many titles and distinctions as there be Parishes or Parlours The King ascribes rudenes and barbaritie worse then Indian to the English Parliament To the Libellers Parliament he very well may He sayes the King ascribes all vertues to his wife vndervaluing the greate Councell of his Kingdome in comparison of one woman And not only he but all good men abominate that wicked Councell which vsed such rudenes and barbaritie towards her and from hence the Libeller tells vs there are examples of mischiefe vnder vxorious Magistrates and Feminine vsurpation And must Magistrates therefore have noe wives or noe affections to them And the examples of feminine vsurpation are more frequent in Republican Tribunes then Monarchs The king sayes her tarrying heere he could not thinke safe among them who were shaking hands with Allegiance to lay faster hold on Religion The Libeller sayes that he taxes them of a dutie rather then a Cryme it being just to obey God rather then man And is periury and the breach of Alleagiance obedience to God and doe men obey God that breake one Commaundement vpon pretence to keepe another The Scripture tells vs he that breakes one Commaundement is guiltie of all but these are they that say they love God and yet hate their brother hate and kill their King Gods vicegerent The libeller sayes it was the fault of their courage that they had not quite shaken of what they stood shaking hands with It s like their conscience and Religion were not the cause they did not but the Libeller was not of their Councell for the time required they should keepe their maske longer He is offended at the Kings prayer that the disloyaltie of his protestant subjects may not be a hindrance to her love of the true Religion and sayes that he never prayes that the dissolutenes of his Court the Scandalls of his Clergie vnsoundnes of his owne judgment Lukewarmenes of his life letter oâ—… compliance to the Pope permitting his nuntio heere may not be found farr greater hindrances All these put togeather are farr short of the scandall of the disloyaltie of his subjects The Court dissolutenes is made a common place of scandall not veritie in respect of the application there being not such excesses in his Majest Court that deserved a speciall observation and the restraint of dissolutenes was more observable then the Cryme As to the scandalls of his Clergie though we must beleive that offences wil come yet the scandall of the present disloyaltie was more offensive to those of different Religion then any disorders in Civil conversation and the injustice of the Rebells towards the Clergie hath shewed the vntruth of the scandalls that were cast vpon them though their malice traduced persecuted them their proofes could not convict them of the scandall supposed His Majest owne judgment cannot be overcast by a Rebells malice and his examplary life cannot be stained by a Libellers pen. His letter to the Pope was noe complaince nor could it give offence to protestant or hope to Papist these Rebells that comply with Turkes and infidells least of all thinke it a compliance The Libeller well knowes there was noe nuntio in England and if the King should have denyed the Queene the exercise of her Religion whereto he was bound by the Articles vpon the match he had given greater scandall by breaking the Articles then by permitting her the repaire of persons in matters of her Religion But sayes the Libeller they must not sit still that is not Rebell and see their Religion snatcht away But they have Rebelled to snatch away Religion He sayes It s knowne that her Religion wrought more vpon him then his vpon her and his favouring of Papists and hatred of Puritans made men suspect shee had perverted him Noe doubt suspitions were industriously raysed and carrefully nourisht against the King though they beleived them not that made vse of them The King was not bound to destroy all Papists and could not deny them the protection of a King he had just reason to suspect those bloody Puritans whose inclinations he descerned to that wickednes they have since avowed From his suppositions he ascends to
which were as impertinent to an inference of the Kings friend-ship or causing the Rebellion as the vse of such persons by Ministers of State though of different Religion He engaged the Irish Papists in a warr against the Scotch protestants there was never popish engagement against the Scotts for the King if in the kings Army raysed in that kingdome there were Papists it was without the engagement of their partie but their engagement by alleagiance to their King and whence doth it follow that because the King raysed an Army in Ireland he must therefore rayse the Rebellion in Ireland and as it s well knowne that the keeping vp of that Army would probably have prevented the Rebellion of Ireland that it was disbanded long before that Rebelliō brake foorth so they which complained so much of that Army and importuned to have it disbanded thereby prepared the way to their owne Rebellion as groundlesse and cruell as that of the Irish. The summer before that dismall October a Committee of active Papists all since in the head of the Rebelliō yet Sr. Hardresse waller was one of them were in greate favour at whitehall and admitted to private consultations of the King and Queene Then all Companies of Traytours are Committees from the example of the late Parliament But he was loath to say they were a Committee as they were from the lower house of Parliament in Ireland which kept correspondence with the faction of the English Parliament and made addresses to them and were encouraged by them in their proceedings with the King and their comming over was wholy to serve the designe of the faction in England But noe meane matters were the subject of these conferences for he gave away his peculiar right to more then five Irish Counties for an inconsiderable Rent But it was not his right of soveraigntie neither was this which he calls noe meane matter a conference about the Rebellion and this peculiar right which this Libeiler accuses the King for parting with not to Papists peculiarly but subjects in generall the accusers of the Earle of Strafford charged him for asserting to the King and that inconsiderable Rent was in their judgment excessive these are the colours of Justice and truth which these Rebells put on their Calumnies They departed not till within two moneths before the Rebellion Rebells ordinarly disgiuse their intentions and therefore such might frequent the Court as the faction in Parliament pretended affection and dutie while they plotted to destroy the King and now the Libeller resorts to his Scotch Author who he sayes declares What should move the King to those close meetings he that beleives Sanders Carries and other Papists in their virulent forgeries against Queene Elizabeth may likely give credit to the Libeller and his friend the Scotchman and take vp infamous Libells for true stories The Libeller flies from hence to one of his common haunts the designe of bringing vp the English and Scotch Army and thinkes it noe repetition which he had soe often obtruded and he inferrs that because the King could not prevayle with them he betakes himselfe to the Irish who had in readines an Army of eight thousand Papists and a Committee heere of the same Religion But what to doe to kill one another If the King sought to make vse of the Irish that rebelled he might more advantagiously have done it then by cutting one anothers throates and had they intended him assistance they would not have consumed themselves against his subjects there and how could he transport that Army from Ireland that was disbanded before ever the Rebellion brake foorth and the Committee departed two moneths before He tells vs from his friend the Scotchman that there were they who thought now was the time to doe service for the Church of Rome against the Puritant Parliament It s very likely there were they who thought the Puritan faction in Parliament had done more to the advantage of the Church of Rome by the embroyling of England then ever had been done since the reformation and they might well thinke it a fit time to attempt any designe against the Kingdome And did not the Libeller thinke that there are among the vulgar such capacities as receive legends and Romanses for true stories he would not soe grossely produce such discourses of five Counties given to the Irish and fower offred to the Scotch And of like stuffe is his mention of the Kings attempt to pervert the Scotch Army from their way homeward and the plot which he hath taken from his Scotch Colleague to remove out of the way such as were most likely to withstand or not further his designes With this libertie of invention doe theis Traytours seeke to maske their villany That a Commission vnder the greate seale of Scotland commaunded this Rebellion Was taken vp after the pretence of the greate seale of England was detected of falsitie and as this greate seale of Scotland hath asmuch vntruth soe it hath noe more colour there being noe possibilitie for the King to vse that seale not at all in his power to such a Commission The sending of the Ld. Dillon is of the same stampe what the Irish did is easily graunted but the falshoods of this Libeller and his friend the scotchman are no misteries of iniquitie but open and detected cheates one quotes the authoritie of the other as if they were strangers mett by chance and make Libelling their worke to distract the people and yet from these devices the Libeller will conclude that the King cannot be doubted to be Author or instigatour of that Rebellion It had been ridiculous to cite a gazett but a branded stigmaticke infamous If his reason be moved by such Arguments t is the lesse wonder that his language and practice is foe corrupt and he may reckon himselfe among that rabble of the vulgar he soe much despises These Testimonies likelyhoods evidences and apparent Actions which he mentions in the declaration of July 1643. Are of as litle credit as his friend the Scot◅hman And there is not a more evident conviction of malefactours then their declarations against the king are of the guilt of those that contrived them setting foorth their dutie which they dissembled and condemning their actions which they disavowed It is not credible that the Irish Rebells would be foe farr from humanitie as to stander him being soe well received by him at Oxford If a man had wanted an proofe of the Libellers absurditie he might heere be furnished by himselfe that drawes an Argument from the humanitie of the Irish whose barbaritie and Treacherie is soe greate a part of his accusation against the king They who were received at Oxford vpon offer of submission were very farr from pretence of such a Commission and it may be aswell concluded they had a Commission at Oxford as before because they were there and aswell concluded that th◅y never Rebelled as that they made noe salfe pretences of their Rebellion
persecutours not Evangelicall Reformers who though they feare not their adversaries yet will not give them cause of scandall nor desperation and such as make destruction their Reformation shew they feare men whome they seeke to kill not God whome presumptuously and hipocritically they pretend to serve His instance of King James is as impertinent as scurrilous that after the powder plot King Iames durst never doe other then equivoiate and collegue with the Pope his adherents Doth this viper beleive the Pope or his adherents had any such thoughts Was the writing against the the Pope a Colloguinge The many invectives of Popish writers against him signifie the plaine contrary besides the lawes made by him against Popish recusants shew that the Author was in one of his lunatique transes when he dreamt of that heckticke trembling The retarding and delayes of releife to Ireland against that Rebellion were soe apparently discovered to proceede from the faction in Parliament that there rests not the least colour to charge it vpon the King They converted the subjects money and other preparations for the releife of Ireland to the raysing of the Rebellion in England and they hindred the going over of a new governour into that kingdome because they would vse his helpe to their designes at home They were diffident to trust the King with an army and therefore refused his offer to goe in person against the Rebells It seemes they had litle compassion on that people that preferred their jealosies before their pittie it is a plaine Treason and encouragement to that Rebellion to pretend distrust of their King and shewes they sought their owne personall securitie before the remedie of that Rebellion the safetie of the kingdome His Majest might justly finde fault with those who threatned all extreamitie to the Rebells and they that exclude all mercy to every single person where multitudes are involved and such as followed Absolom with a simple heart shew neither humanitie nor Christianitie when Fathers Brothers Wives and Children were destroyed by such an occasion neither is Magistracie and warr vnder the gospell giuded by such passions but by the rules of Christian pittie and such as give themselves the licence of vniversall Massacres will not abstaine from embruing their hands in the blood of their Fathers Brothers Wives and Children sparing neither ancient nor suckling King nor Priest defacing all Monuments of Christianitie and turning Religion into the discourses of their hirelings and all devotion into squint eyes and disfigured faces and erect an Empire in themselves with the slaughter of all that submitt not to them The repetition of making the warr by the King in England is his Catholicon against all exceptions and Gewgawes of the Crowne and Copes and anâ—…â—…lisses and such trinketts he thinkes are names to sublimate his braine sicke Sectaries into their frenetique fitt and make them cry out greate are the Calves of their vnknowne Religion whither they contemne the wisedome of God vnder the law his mercy vnder the gospel and will rather wade through the blood of their Country then endure power in the King or decencie in the Church There is greate difference betweene the instances of the destruction of the sichemites and the disciples calling for fire from heaven against the Citie that denyed lodging and this of a nation by just warr execution to slay whole famelies of them who had slaine whole families before But where lies the odds there was asmuch threatned to the Irish as was done to the sichemites Though there were a difference betweene the sins of some there was noe difference betweene the innocence of many and there is noe difference betweene them that will destroy promiscuously without mercy where all are not guiltie in the one case and the other But why doth not the Libeller state his case right and insteede of families sett downe the whole nation as the truth was Did he shrinke at the expression of the truth at large and name families to diminish the guilt That which was done against the Benjamites was by Gods revealed will in that particular Case and yet there was a remnant reserved of them that escaped the present stroake of the warr and they returned againe to their possessions The Libeller sayes he speakes not this that such measure should be meated to all the Irish or as remembring that the Parliament ever soe decreed But if they did soe then this shall serve for their justification for to what end els is it that he offers excuses To shew that this homily meaning it seemes the Kings discourse hath more of craft and affectation then sound doctrine But either it is sound doctrine or else the Libeller must justifie the contrary to which he sayes that which he speakes is not intended and that which he hath brought shewes that the homily he intends is sound Doctrine and his intended opposition signifies nothing but his owne corruption The King would have some punished which he sayes were of least vse and must of necessitie have been sacrifised to his reputation And can he thinke that the king caused the Rebellion and yet would punish any for his reputation might they not then produce it and how then could he sacrifise them to his reputation which would be more wounded by the punishing of one then the sparing of all The king sayes some were to be pretected vpon their submission from the fury of those who would soone drowne them if they refused to swim downe the popular streame with them The Libeller sayes that fury is applyed to the Parliament If such were their condition it s not misapplyed The Libeller sayes he remembers not they had soe decreed if not how could it be applyed to them And wherefore doth he except to the soundnes of the doctrine if it concerned them not Those who would not swim downe the streame are Papists Prelates and their faction He meanes not English Prelates for they have not yet been charged with the Irish Rebellion and if he meane the Romish Prelates it were superfluous having named Papists before and why doth he say that he speakes not that such measure should be meated to all the Irish when he would have the king esteemed a favourer of the Jrish Rebellion if he protected any Irish Papists vpon their submission For he sayes by this who sees not that he and the Irish Rebells had but one aime And whoever thinkes he sees it by this hath neither sight nor reason and there is nothing to be seene in the Libellers inference but excessive impudence and falshood The King sayes some kinde of zeale is not seldome more greedy to kill the Beare for his skin then for any harme he hath done This the Libeller renders our zeale and would inferre from thence that the Parliament is more bloody in the prosecution of their Iustice then the Rebells in their crueltie And by what construction can he make that good may there not be by ends
vnsetling the Religion established is just and necessary and it inferrs not that the most part of Protestants were against him because an active faction had surprized the strength of the Kingdome and necessitated him to seeke succours where he might have them the King never obtruded setlement of any thing new but defence against violence of what was established and Papists may fight for their King though Traytours pretend to the Protestant Religion for the ground of their quarrell That noe man ever thought that the King had learned that difference of perswasion in Religious matters may fall out where there is the samenes of dutie Alleagiance and subjection And the Libeller askes wherefore then such compulsion to the Puritans and Scotland about conformitie to the Leiturgie Doth the King say that those of different perswasions ought not to be better informed and sought to be gained to a right vnderstanding though there may be the samenes of alleagiance ought he not to seeke the samenes of perswasion in points of difference This is his common logicke and he askes wherefore then noe Bishopp noe King He might have answeared himselfe that there may not be the samenes of opinion touching alleagiance in differences of Religion though there may be and it s now plaine though formerly not believed that such as would have noe Bishopps would have noe King and had not the samenes of intention though the same dutie and obligation of alleagiance to their King as those of the contrary perswasion and that Episcopacy is agreeable to Monarchy the contrary not but Rebells catch at every shaddow and offer â—…very dreame for a truth and are as light in obtrudinge pretences as resolute to act their villanies either with or without them How diversified sects can be all protestants must be shewed by some doctrines that protestants yet vnderstand not and the medly of Papists and protestants in a religious cause is noe more disproportioninge of Religions then the mixing of those diversified sects which are noe more protestants then Papists Maskes and disguises were the foreprophesied garments of Sectaries and it is a sure signe that their errours are willfull not weake sparing noe falshoods whereby they may get power and confating their pretences by their practice They heretofore professed greate opposition to Papists for doctrines of Rebellion now they preach the same doctrines are angry that there are papists that disclaime them The ancient Christians held it a Religious cause to defend their King Countrey were mixed with Pagans in that cause and soe of late the protestants of France and they held it vnchristian to forsake that Religious cause vnder pretence of Religion and those pretences taken from Religion the letter to the Pope and evill Councellours are apparent to be nothing but vulgar cheates to enforce the King to consent to the Rebells demaunds and wrest hisscepter from him The sharpe afflictions of the Kingdome shew they were not inveterate diseases of Government but a suddaine pestilence and such as can beleive that the Tyrany of the present Masters are the lawes of Parliament deserve to be governed by a whip not by a scepter The Libellers reproofe of the peoples levitie prayse of popularitie are inconsisteÌ„t and his argument of reproach from dissenting to what the Parlianâ—… advised and his charging the Parliament for want of wisedome and integritie turne all his arguments to his owne shame and shew that it is not right but Rebellion he pleades for and that he esteemes neither Civill nor Philosophicall libertie which are confined to Government but confusion and licence without limitts If this Libeller would be subject 〈◊〉 Magistrate and in the lawes as he professes why doth he Rebell against the Magistrate and the lawes and why doth he pretend the Parliaments Authoritie if he may breake that authoritie As indeede he doth alow that noe obligations of Government can hold him and by the same rule he pretends injury to be restrained in one thing he may in every thing and these Rebells like Lâ—…r vsurpe above all 〈◊〉 Though men ought not to speake evill of diginties which are just yet nothing hinders to speake evill of those who in their dignities doe evill as oft as it is the truth TheÌ„ the Scripture vnnecessarily forbad to speake evil of dignities for we may not speake vntruth of any person if the Scripture meant noe more then not to slander in commaunding not to speake evill of the Ruler of the people St. Paul needlessely retracted his words of the high Priest It shewes how neere the spiritt of Lucifer these men are that pretend a right to practice whatever our Saviour or such as were inspired of God forbad vpon pretence of actions done by power extraordinary and yet there is no example of this speaking evill of dignities as the Libeller imagines nor of publique reproaches Though Kings were reproved iâ— was by such as had particular directions from God not by every wandring â—evite and they did not defame them to others And as his Maj we beleive was heard of God in mercy so he might without injury to the Prerogative of Christ pray to be made the head stone of the conrer according to that subordination which he held vnder God and Christ in ruling his people Vpon the ORDINANCE against the booke of COMMON PRAYER INnovations are generally more dangerous then old errours by how much peace is more desireable then broyles and combustions We have noe warrant to beleive such a condition in the Church of God that should allwayes be reforminge nor that the Christian Church had never lawfull Pastours nor any thing practised according to Christs institution till the present Sectaries revealed it to the woâ—…ld We have found by experience that there is noe dotage equall to thaâ—… men have vpon their owne opinions nor any greater errours nor mischeifes more dangerous then such which are introduced by pragmaticall Reformers who would conforme the world to their fancies and innovation is oftner obtruded vnder the name of reformation then reformation is censured and opposed vnder the name of innovation The King sayes not that the removing of the Leiturgie was a thing plausible to the people as he falsely relates but sayes that after popular contempts offred to the booke and those that vsed it it must be crucified by an ordinance His Majest likens not the rejection of the booke to the crucifying of our Saviour but the carriage of the rejecters to the cursed Jewes who crucified our Saviour and these men that rejected the booke shewed as litle reverence to him that was to be prayed to by the formes in that booke as to the booke it selfe King Edw. 6. confesses to the Cornish Rebells it was noe other then the old masse booke done into English some few words expung'd which is very false though al that is in the old masse booke is not therefore to be rejected and these men may aswell make an Argument they may not pray at all because
wicked commaunds but detested by all Christians that vsed violence against their Pagan Governours and the reformed Churches may see what Communion can be had with those that professe those best Christians that were least subject to their King The King of Spaine may professe to have his Kingdome from Christ whatever his Religion be he hath a just Civill right which none ever doubted to acknowledge but these hell bred Sectaries that allow noe right but what is founded on their will his repetition of the Letter to the Pope vpon this occasiō shewes he is vnder a famine of reason that makes the Kings constācy to the doctrine of the Church of England to proceede from his letter to the Pope calling it enmitie to the true Church are any soe madd to thinke that the Pope was pleased with the doctrine of the Church of England Did the Libeller thinke there were a God would he write soe willfully against his owne vnderstanding that the King engaged himselfe to hazard life Estate for the Roman Religion he would then thinke that God were neere him writt downe those words which he will one day require an account of The King prayed against his hipocrisie and Pharisaicall washings whose prayer is thou who must give truth for hipocrisie suffer vs not to be miserably deluded by Pharisaicall washings Poeticall licence will not wash away willfull slander and malicious falsification but this man makes hipocrisie and Pharisaicall washings his cheife study and hates the prayers of others for his conversion from such wickednes Vpon his LETTERS taken and DIVULGED THE Publication of the Kings Letters had quite contrary effects to these which the publishers intended and insteede of discovering matter to their advantage cast shame on their false aspersions whereby they sought to withdraw the affections of his people from him they sett foorth both his judgment and affections opposite to Poperie the Irish Rebells and the peace made with them not out of favour but necessitie to divert the finall destruction of the Protestant partie there The endeavours to be assisted with forraigne forces when soe horrid a Rebellion had taken deepe roote was neither against any former professions nor any rules of Justice and pietie but naming of Papists and forraigne forces were the bugbeares wherewith the faction affrighted the silly people and vnder pretence of revenging the blood of Ireland sought to draw men inclinable to assist the King or vnwilling to fight against him into that imployment that he might be more exposed to their power and they might have the better meanes to weaken him and support their owne Rebellion These Letters have discovered their grosse impostures in representing the King wholy Governed by the Queene or others shewing cleerely that his owne judgment cheifely steered his owne affaires and it s like the faction long since saw their owne rashnes in that Publication and that the world tooke notice that they were soe farr from doubting the Kings affection to Popery that their designe was cheifely to declare his aversenes to it that they might prevent his succours from Princes of that Religion That it was done by them without honour Civilitie no man boubts vnles infected with Schismaticall or Rebellious malice and betweene King and subjects matters can never be in that condition that his honour and their dutie are trifling and superficall vanities and with whome they are soe we may not wonder at any brutish and inhumane Barbaritie when was there an example of such a Treason against nature and humanitie to divulge the Letters betweene man and wife touching conjugall privacie And honour and Civilitie being taken as he would have it for discretion honestie prudence and plaine truth the publishers of these Letters not only stand guiltie of the breach of those vertues but appeare the venemous and vnnaturall Traytours to mankinde To cover this base Act the Libeller sayes that such courses are familiar with none more then Kings and produces an Example out of Commines relating the discovery of a Letter by Lewes the eleventh written to him from the Dutchesse of Burgundy which he sayes the Historian doth not charge with incivili◅ie or dishonour And is that the case of publishing Letters that passed betweene man and wife and may subjects doe to their King what Enemies may one to another The Libeller will say yes for he holds noe subordination though the publishers professed the contrary and would not be thought to have abjured their Alleagiance or that they tooke their King for their Enemy but their practices were noe more consistent then the Libellers Arguments The injury offred to the Kings Mother was too well knowne to be a fained suspition or jealosie in him and if they had not been guiltie of that base aspersion they would have acquitted themselves some other way then by the publication and frequent repetition The Libeller appeares to glory more in recitall of it then in the argument which he can draw from pretence of saining a suspition and he that suckes any imputations vpon the King out of those letters must be a Beetle not a Bee and they that from placing constancy to his wife before the mention of Religion and law will spin a webb of determination for the prioritie of affection have more of the spiders venom then the Bees sweetenes They which esteemed their King though one man the breath of their nostrills thought the nation could not be happy without him And the late Parliament whereon the Libeller buildes his faith affirmed in their declarations the happines of the Kingdome did soc mainely depend on his Majest and the Royall branches of that roote as in an ordinary way of providence they would not except it from any other fountaine or streame And are they therefore a nation of Ideots and miserable as he sayes The happines of a nation consists in true Religion pietie Iustice prudence temperance fortitude contempt of avarice and ambition And how shall these be preserved in a nation by the rule of the rabble And bandying the Government with a racket betweene opposite factions but these Rebells with the madd men of Munster will introduce new Ierusalem with the destruction of their Kings and Rulers and the Libeller its like lookes to be a greate saint in this terrostriall Paradise who sayes they in whomesoever these vertues dwell eminently neede not Kings but are the Architects of their owne happines and whether to themselves or others are not lesse then Kings The world hath been well acquainted with these Architects of Treason and shall never want pretenders to those vertues whose practice shewes them the builders of Babell that place their happines in their power and other mens confusion the King appeares eminent in these vertues not only by his constant actions but in his lious hold which was admired for itts order amongst strangers above other Courts though by the Libeller traduced as all laudable things are To make reconciliation desperate the Libeller holds
Kingdome now feele who vnderstood not the word when they were at first hoodminckt by it to seeke they knew not what The deliverance which these men boast of is the deprivation of just Government and the substitution of lawles will and the people see that they are soe farr from a deliverance that they are delivered over to a languishing miserie vnder the sharpest servitude and they now finde their Idolizing a Parliament hath drawne them from their loyaltie to him whome God had set over them and cast them vnder the hard bondage of these Masters and like them which rejected the sonns of Gideon and tooke the sonne of his servant to raigne over them they feele a fire of division kindled among them to devoure one another This Libeller allowes not any thoughts of revenge in his Majest now living for the murder of his father and yet reproacheth him for making peace with the Irish and not seeking their totall extirpation and the peace with them he calls a sordid dishonourable and irreligious seeking of his Crowne But the man is vnwilling he should have any wayes at al and would perswade his Sectaries for none els will beleive him that the King may not make peace with a Rebell submitting to oppose a Rebell persevering That the Presbiter Scott which woes the King now living is put of proceedes from his termes not from his qualitie Should not the people of England seeke the restitution of their King and legall Government whereof they have been cheated with the adulterate ostentations of libertie and redresse of greivances they would appeare arrant beasts that cryed out and below'd by the instinct of their drivers fighting like brutes till they ran into the pinfold where they are reserved for servitude and slaughter by those Masters who allured them with foode to put the yoake on their neckes The Libeller dislikes the kings conclusion that Religion to God and loyaltie to the King cannot be parted without the sinne infelicitie of a people And sayes its contrary to the teaching of Christ that noe man can serve two Masters These are fit Judges of our dutie to God or man and fit reformers of Church and state that will have the service of a Master or obedience to a father the serving of another Master then God and the spirit of God speaking by St. Peter feare God and honour the King must contradict the teaching of Christ such Church makers doe we now live with Such as served heathen Masters may not leave their service though they serve not their heathen Gods at their Commaund and if they did desert their earthly Masters for that reason they did not serve their Master in heaven who will be served by their subjection to their earthly Masters but he that will serve himselfe cannot serve God and that selfe service is the whole worke of these Rebells who pretend to put God in the first place that they may leave him noe place and such as desert their King vpon pretence of Gods service desert God to serve themselves and they will only enjoy their power and wealth and ease for Gods sake but suffer for him they will not that kinde of testimony to the truth of Religion they account among the corruptions of the first ages of the Church and they have found a more accurate and pleasant way to serve God Intitled MEDITATIONS VPON DEATH BEcause the King affordes time to inveigh bitterly against that murder but in the Libellers language Iustice done on him it will be as he sayes needefull to say something in defence of those proceedings Doubtles all that witt or impudence can offer in defence of that Barbarisme is farr short of a colourable excuse He is courting of apocripha and makes a Prologue out of Esdras and Josephus Authors in his judgment not lesse beleived then any vnder sacred brings forth the story of the three wise questions and zorobabells determination for women and truth Quorsum haec Though he be not asked nor in a nation that gives such rewards to wisedome his Masters have not that bountie to restore the King that he may sitt next him their gratitude being of the same Stampe with their loyaltie he shall pronounce his sentence somewhat different that eyther truth and Iustice are all one or els that Iustice by his office is to put forth more strength in the affaires of mankinde To what purpose doth he soe solemnely produce this peice of Apocripha and pronounce his sentence different Iustice is a vertue of the minde and putts forth noe more strength in the affaires of mankinde then truth but he talkes of justice and truth as if they were members of the house of Commons The sensuall appetite of some is too strong for their vnderstanding and thence proceeded the conclusions for the strength of wine and women In others the vnderstanding and reason are stronger and there truth is strongest but we may be assured that in this Libeller and his Masters ambition crueltie and falshood are strongest and thence their Actions are an oppression and defiance of truth and Iustice and they are growne soe absurd as from the Titles of strength given to vertues and passions this triflinge Libeller would haue them non resident and to act without a subject If Zorobabell had made truth a fantastical person as this man strives to have justice vnderstood he had surely lost his reward as well as the opinion of his wisedome This man would have Iustice vnderstood as shee is painted in a peice of Tapistry Iustice had a sword putt into her hand to vse against all violence oppression in the earth By whome was this sword putt into her hand Doe theis Traytours beleive that their magnifying of Iustice makes any man looke on their Barbarous Actions with lesse detestation or that justice is any part of their end or Actions Justice teaches Rulers how to vse the sword put into their hands but is armelesse against any violence and oppression without the power of the Ruler If the Magistrate doe injustice there is noe justice committed to others against him The wise man by the spirit of God tells vs that he beheld wrong and injustice and the cryes of the oppressed and there was noe deliverer and where then was the Libellers justice was not violence there stronger then justice Though divine justice cannot be avoyded humane justice often fayles and cannot reach the offender Shee is most truly who accepts no person and exempts none from the severitie of her stroake Though by the Rules of justice there is no accepting nor exempting of persons yet the Magistrate to whome alone the Rule belongs is confined to persons and places justice forbidding all vsurpation and striking is oppression where lawfull power gives not the sword Shee never suffers injury to prevayle but when falshood first prevailes over truth and that is a kinde of justice done on them who are soe deluded And is not falshood an injury why should justice suffer falshood
a Title the constitution of that State being a Republique and their King noe other then a Consul of Rome or a Duke of venice The Decree in Rome is farr wide from the matter and what the Senate did against Nero was in vindication of their ancient power not acknowledging the Justice of his soveraigntie Though Theodosius decreed the law to be above the Emperour yet he decreed not any person to have power over the Emperour The law was above him in reguard it was his Rule but could not make any person or societie above him The law is the directive power to Kings but subject them not to any and it is a senseles deduction from the superioritie of the Rule to imagine an inferioritie of the Rulers to the people or a communitie in power by the Rule That Bracton or Cleta say the King is inferiour to the Court of Parliament is a manifest vntruth and Bracton sayes expressely the King hath not a superiour on earth to punish him and that only God is the avenger of his Actions soe farr were theis men from affirminge that he stands as liable to receive Iustice as the meanest of his subjects But this man thinkes that some of his Readers will believe that the name of an Author is sufficient Authoritie though he speake contrary to what he alleadges It is said in an ancient booke the King ought to be subject to the law by his oath Though the King be bound to performe the law by his oath is there any to judge him when all are his subjects and derive their power from him or is he subject to any person And who can judge another that is not subject to him Because Kings bound themselves to doe Justice therefore did they give other men power over them That the king permitted questions of his right to ordinary Iudicature is an vse of Counsell not subjection all Courts being his Counsells for decision of controversies but it s a sorry inference that Counsellours in his affaires should have power over his person As the Parliaments right is circumscribed by lawes in regarde of the subject soe it cannot be imagined absolute over the king By what the Libeller hath said he might well conclude that kings are oblidged to doe justice but that the people or particular persons may judge their king by any law divine or humane he hath not offred a colour soe barren is he in an Argument which he calls over copious Who should better vnderstand their owne lawes and when they are transgressed then they who are governed by them and whose consent at first made them Certenly he might very wel have answeared himselfe that they which governed by such lawes and whose consent at first made them better vnderstand them and when they are transgressed then they that are governed and it is a course very agreable to these mens confusion that the suiter should teach the judge The Libeller askes who have more right to take knowledge of things done within a free nation then they within themselves And surely they will not be free long from destroying one another where that 's the libertie for there wil be as many Transgressours and as many lawes as there are opinions He goes about to answeare the taking the oath of Alleagiance and supreamacy And to this his answeare is very ready that these oaths were to his person invested with his Authoritie and his Authoritie was by the people given him conditionally vnder law and oath And if his Authoritie had been conditionall their oaths could not be absolute as they are This guift and condition they imagine were engraven in Seths Pillars and they have been long enquiringe for a Cabballisticke Rabbyn to finde out the Characters How the kings hereditary succession is become a conditionall guift must have better evidence then Aphorismes of confusion never law contained either the guift or condition nor was there ever such impudence before theis Traytours that avowed because they swore faith to their kings person invested with his Authoritie they might take away his Authoritie and not breake their oath And it were a prophane oath aswell as vaine that should be voyde at the will of the taker The kings oath added nothing to his right being only an obligation of his conscience noe condition annexed to his right and if he never tooke the oath his subjects obedience is noe whit diminished and a king by inheritance needes not admittance the death of his predecessour puts him in possession this is the knowne law of England The Couquerour tooke on oath at his Crowninge and other times that made noe condition to his Government There is not only reason but absolute necessitie for the avoyding of confusion ruine of mankinde that the subject be bound to the king though the kinge faile in his dutie for the destruction of Government is more sinfull and inconvenient to humane societie then any evill that can come by a kings misgovernment He proceedes to answeare objections touchinge the Covenant wherein we shall not much insist but to detect the shifts of Malefactours to elude the evidence of truth They were accused by the King and his partie to pretend libertie and reformation but to have noe other end then to make themselves greate and to destroy his person and Authoritie for which reason sayes the Libeller they added the third Article to preserve the Kings person and Authoritie in defence of Religion priviledge of Parliament and liberties of the Kingdome And to shew with what ingenuitie he dealt in seeking to avoyde that just accusation the Libeller tells vs that they added that cause for a shew only and they intended not to preserve the Kings person further then it might consist with their opinions touchinge Reformation extirpatinge of Prelacy preservinge liberties of Parliament and Kingdome and in this very clause they called the world to be wittnes with their consciences of their loyaltie and yet made the preservation of their Kings person and Authoritie arbitrary by their owne opinions and while this Libeller would have their Rebellion a defensive warr he forbeares not to tell the world that they resolved the Kings destruction to attaine their ends The sixth Article gives asmuch preservation and defence to all that enter into the league as to him And it seemes more for they have dealt with none of them as with him and he sayes if the Covenant were made absolute without respect to these superiour things it was an vnlawfull vow and not to be kept It is agreed that vnlawfull vowes are not to be made nor kept but it is an vnlawfull vow to destroy the Kinge in order to his supposed ends yet they feare not to vow the destruction of any that oppose them though the honour and innocence of the persons were without the reach of lawes and they will exempt neither callings nor integritie from their lawles Injustice and that appeared by his glosse vpon the fourth Article of the Covenant to bring
scorne And if God were mocked in pretending the Covenant in Scotland and Vlster he was much more in England by crying out the King Religion lawes and libertie and the Libeller might have found such men whose prosperitie was sinne that Triumpht in the afflictions of him whome they persecuted and said tush God hath forsaken him let vs smite him that he rise noe more The sinne of Ahas that transgressed more in the tyme of his affliction hath noe resemblance to a vertuous Prince afflicted by Traytours whose crueltie encreased while they oppressed him and exceeded the inhumanitie of the cursed Moabites that burnt the bones of the King of Edom into lime The Kings Charatie in forgivinge his Enemies will finde a right construction with all true Christians but malice and detraction of all Acts of pittie cannot meete with lesse then detestation in all men any way quallified with Religion or reason Hipocrites Almes are not more odious then hipocrites censures the crueltie of Hipocrites will receive a greater condemnation then their Almes Prayers for Gods Compassion are not to share victory with Gods Compassion But such as strive to slander mens prayers to God are as malicious to Gods victory as the devotions of those that pray vnto him Such as reade this impudent Libell may rightly call it the Rebells Image conteyninge precepts and positions of violence against Government confusion of States doctrines of falshood and hipocrisie prayses of insolence and crueltie prophaninge of Gods name and word scoffes at things sacred dissolution of all bonds morall Civill and Religious of all orders and degrees among men And it must be hatred to God and a Diabolicall impulsion that drives on such persons to fill vp the measure of their wickednes FINIS ERRATA PAge 25. Line 6. Reade not after needed Pag. 25. L. 27. Sollecisme for Sollesisme Pag. 25. L. 30. that for then Pag. 31. L. 19. for insteede of from Pag. 33. L. 10. in before their Pag. 34. L. 1. Basilice for Aclastos Pag. 40. L. 11. from after lawful Pag. 44. L. 12. Conventions for contentions Pag. 58. L. 3. supercilious for supersilious Pag. 63. L. 8. vses be before vsed Pag. 67. L. 25. notions for motions Pag. 67. L. 26. administred for administrated Pag. 69. L. 43. by for the. Pag. 72. L. 30. is for in Pag. 81. L. 17. and 19. Psalmistry for Psalmastry Pag. 83. L. 23. is for in Pag. 84. L. 25. Iingle for Inigly Pag. 87. L. 25. it is for is it Pag. 88. L. 18. few for fer Pag. 90. L. 8. aspersion of the before most Pag. 91. L. 2. occasion for reason Pag. 94. L. 9. connaturall for vnnaturall Pag. 94. L. 13. refrained for restrained Pag. 94. L. 20. vigour for rigour Pag. 95. L. 43. Cheates for States Pag. 111. L. 21. like for the. Pag. 111. L. 22. vapours for raignes Pag. 123. L. 9. prevent for present Pag. 137. L. 19. he for wee Pag. 147. L. 31. cause before had Pag. 149. L. 35. Stafford for Strafford Pag. 150. L. 15. noe before part Pag. 153. L. 11. we for he Pag. 156. L. 37. screeching for streching Pag. 156. L. 37. Batts for Catts Pag. 156. L. 39. we for who Pag. 159. L. 12. possession for oppression Pag. 160. L. 10. not before strange Pag. 164. L. 5. place for peace Pag. 172. L. 38. long for strong Pag. 173. L. 38. if for is Pag. 179. L. 25. peace for place Pag. 182. L. 2. principij for principy Pag. 184. L. 36. Saviour for Saviours Pag. 184. L. 37. noe for one Pag. 185. L. 25. date for dale Pag. 186. L. 8. incestuous Pag. 194. L. 38. while they for whether Pag. 197. L. 36. a junto Pag. 208. L. 28. miseries for misteries Pag. 208. L. 30. now for not Pag. 213. L. 26. quilting for questing Pag. 214. L. 9. infirme sor assured Pag. 220. L. 28. preach for reproach Pag. 220. L. 44. subordination sor subordinate Pag. 221. L. 24. after poisoned reade Silvester the whole Church Pag. 224. L. 19. dele him Pag. 228. L. 32. crum for crim Pag. 229. L. 34. convictions for convertions Pag. 230. L. 15. is for a Kinge insteed of by Parliament Pag. 236. L. 14. expect for except Pag. 262. L. 15. Fleta for Cleta
had caused distempers might returne to a right minde seeing his temper and their little reason to desire such Parliaments as make it their whole worke to divide the peoples affections from the King and follow the Councells of such as are malecontents for want of preferment and if men had been quallified to his Majest will Parliaments would have had happier successe and the people pleased with their agreement that now groane vnder the miseries of their division But whence his insatiate povertie in the middest of his excessive wealth should constraine him is not vnderstood wants and wealth are inconsistent This libeller hath greate povertie of sense in the middest of his excessive expressions He goes an ill way to prove that the King was so vninclined to Parliaments and that povertie compelled him if he had wealth certainly that would have kept him from hazarding a course so disliked He shal be rich and poore that some may contemne his povertie others may grudge his wealth The King hoped by his Freedome and their moderation to prevent misvnderstandings To this sayes Iconoclastes wherefore not by their Freedome and his moderation The Champion cannot fuffer a King to passe without signifying to him that there is no difference betweene King and subject The King had resolved to vse Freedome in his concessions and hoped they would vse moderation in their demaunds This man would have him say that they should vse Freedome in their demaunds he would vse moderation in his concessions hath he not made it a proper speech Will his wise and well principled men thinke him a fit Champion to breake Bell the Dragon But he gives a reason why the King would speake sense for he thought sayes he Freedome to high a word for them and moderation to◅ meane for himselfe and he concludes this was not the way to prevent misvnderstanding It s sure this man tooke the way to make misvnderstandings that would have Freedome applyed to the people what ever the subject be that is spoken of and its like he would be well pleased that they had Freedome from law prosperitie loyaltie and obedience which might be as well spoken as the sense he hath framed to prevent mis-vnderstandings He sayes the King still feared passion and prejudice in other men not in himselfe and doubted not by the weight of his owne reason to counterpoise any faction it being so easie for him and so frequent to call his obstinacie reason and other mens reason faction He had greate reason to feare passion and prejudice in others which he had so often tryed and which they that then feared not have since found true and the concessions the King purposed and performed might make him confident to counterpoyse any faction but the libeller will have it beleived that he which graunted more then any of his Predecessours was obstinate and they that demaunded what former Parliaments thought vnreasonable and impious had reason But the King was deceived that had to doe with Monsters not reasonable men We in the meane while must beleive that wisedome and all reason came to him by Title with his Crowne Passion prejudice and faction to others by being subjects Kings have advantages above others for wisedome and reason they are assisted with diverse Councells and in publique affaires reason must be presumed in Kings and faction feared in subjects nature being averse to submit and interests and partialities incident to all greate Assemblyes and the detraction from the wisedome of Rulers in the Rebells foundation and a sure signe of corrupt intentions He was sorry to heare with what popular heate elections were carryed in many places To these words of the Kings he sayes sorry rather that Court letter and intimations prevailed no more to divert or to deterre the people from their free election of those men whome they thought best affected to Religion their Countryes libertie both at that time in danger to be lost They were in danger to be lost by a Trayterous conspiracie with an invading enemy but no other danger imaginable to any There was never lesse cause to complaine of Court letters and intimations nor ever greater mistakes of persons chosen the Countryes affections to Religion and libertie making way for the insinuations of Hypocriticall seducers and had the Countryes knowne the dispositions of the men they chose as their Actions have since discovered they would not have trusted them with their Religion and libertie which they have betrayed This Image breaker declaimes against the violence levitie of the people and heere calumniates his Majest for observing the popular heate whereby elections were carryed in some places it being a most knowne truth that popular heate is as frequent vpon such occasions as any other witnes the long annimosities between families and the greate contentions that arise from such Elections Among the many clamours in the late Parliament where malice was as busie as this Author is now to finde out Court letters to divert or deterre the people from free Elections there was not one instance produced of such letters or intimations How wickedly industrious many were to blow abroade jealosie suspition of the danger of Religion libertie how causelessely the people in many places were drawne into passion by vaine surmises is too well knowne and it is too late for the Image breaker to seeke to reduce the people into those misopinions which they have detected by too deare bought experience for they well see that there was no way so certaine to endanger Religion and libertie as that they were seduced into vpon pretence to preserve them And such men they were as by the Kingdome were sent to advise him not sent to be Cavilled at because elected or to be entertained by him with an vndervalue and misprision of their temper judgment or affection Though such as were elected were not sent by the Kingdome but by the respective places one not intermedling with another yet if Iconoclastes had not been more forward to expresse his impotencie then warry in producing reason he would not have spokē of being Cavilled at whereof he had not montioned the least colour and if he hold the persons of men elected so sacred the King faultie for not esteeming them as he ought what is the reason that he defends the Tumults that reproacht and assaulted them◅ What is the reason he professes so much honour to those Masters that plucked them out of the house kicked them into prisons Kings send for their subjects to advise with them and Iconoclastes might finde by the Elections of members of the lower house that they were sent to doe consent to such things as should be ordained with the common Councell of the Kingdome and therefore mistakes their directions that sayes they were sent to advise him with what childish levitie doth he insult on his soveraigne for vndervaluing of the temper judgment or affection of persons chosen as if their Elections refined their natures
To folly or Blasphemy or both shall wee impute this shall the Iustice of God give place serve the mercies of a man all other men who know what they aske desire of God that their doings may tend to his glory And doth not he that prayes he may be able to shew mercy to his Enemies pray that his Actions may tend to Gods glory Is not God glorified in the mercies of men Is not mercy in men a guift of God and can this tri◅ler pretend sin in that prayer which desires of God that his Justice may not prevent their mercie to their Enemies May not men pray for their Enemies pray to have judgments diverted from them pray to have an occasion to shew them mercy But this libeller that esteemes soe litle to Blaspheame is careles how falsely he charge it on others Vpon the listing AND RAYSING ARMIES HE begins with the Kings mention of Tumults the demonstrations he calls them of the peoples love loyaltie to the Parliament Which in their nature more then the kings denomination were demonstrations of disobedience to law hatred of Government disloyaltie to the king Their petitioning was in the Authors owne judgment the height of violence Barbarisme which he compares to the Iron flaile those Armes which he cals defensive were so apparently a Trayterous histolitie that the ends which he assignes for them admit not the least colour for the appellation of defensive The King takes noe notice that those listed about him were the beginners of these Tumults Neither could he of soe strange an imagination The king sayes his recesse gave them confidence that he might be conquered The Libeller sayes other men supposed both that and all things els who knew him neither by nature warlike nor experienced nor fortunate yet such sayes he are readiest to imbroyle others How well he performes the first period of his booke not to descant on the kings misfortunes his readers may heere see that makes the kings misfortune his reproach and a ground of their wicked confidence to Rebell against him but that such men are readiest to imbroyle others is not soe certaine but vndoubted they are not readiest to imbroyle themselves and noe valour nor experience whereof his Majest is wel knowne to have had a greate measure can stopp a slandrous tongue The mischeifes brought vpon his Majest kingdomes sprung from such persons as sought their advantage by such broyles which all men see the King could never expect The King sayes he had a soule invincible And the Libeller sayes what prayse is that the vnteachable man hath a soule to all reason invincible And is an invincible courage noe prayse He seekes to shew his witt by applying invincible to vnteachable when as if he had cited the Kings next words as he ought he had lost his jest for the King sayes he had a soule invincible through Gods grace enabling him but he breaketh sentences and truth least he should breake for want of matter That the King labours to have it thought that his fearing God more then man was the ground of his sufferings The Libeller sayes he pretended to feare God more then the Parliament who never vrged him to doe otherwise And did they not vrge him to doe otherwise when they vrged him to doe that which was against his conscience But there neede not more be spoken of this for the Libeller calls that a narrow conscience which will not follow a multitude against its owne perswasion He shewes his levitie beyound that Creature he calls the vulgar who now affirmes the King was drawne by his Courtiers and Bishopps and yet in the beginning of his booke he sayes that the discourses and preachings of Courtiers and Prelates against the Parliament was but a Copy taken from his owne words and Actions that all remissenes in Religion issued originally from his owne authoritie all miscarriages in state may be imputed to noe other person cheifely then to himselfe He goes on to compare the words of Saul that he had performed the Commaundement of God to the Kings mention of his fearing God the kings vpholding the Prelates against the advice of the Parliament example of al reformations is not much vnlike if not much worse noe neerer like then this Authors writings to modestie loyaltie Is the advice of the Parliament and the example of all reformations equall to the expresse Commaund of God The examples of all Reformations himselfe tells afterward are not concurrent in the matter he mentions and if they were soe are all points of reformation equally necessary and of the same obligation with the commaund of God and was the Reformation of the Church of England noe reformation Why then doth he say all Reformation And is not the Church of England equall if not superiour to any part of the world that hath reformed But we see what account these hipocrites make of the Example of all Reformation that have set vp schismaticall confusions of Religion in contempt of all Reformation His Majest did noe more in vpholding the Prelates then what the example of the most primitive times Godly Emperours holy martyrs instructed him in which noe Reformation ever contradicted and he had no reason to hearken to the advice of such as then called themselves a Parliament who had broken all the lawes and priviledges of Parliament expelled the members and were governed by Tumults a company of Bedlam Sectaries against the doctrine and practice of the vinversall Church The practice of Saul in persecuting David wel sutes with the course of these Rebells but they have gone beyound him in malice and disobedience in the matter both of David and alsoe the Amalekites he brake the Commaundement of God in sparing Amaleke these traytours presumptuously breake the Commaund of God in destroying their King Church And this man exceedes Sauls presumption that makes the preservation of an order continued in the Church in all ages as bad or worse then the sin of Saul He sayes acts of grace are proud vnselfe knowing words in the mouth of any King who affects not to be a God Certainly this Libellers words shew him not only in affection but in Act a proud vnselfe knowing man Are there noe Acts of favour noe Acts of mercy in Kings but all of necessitie but enough hath been said to these brainesicke dreames Never King was lesse in danger of violence from his subjects till he vnsheathed his sword nay long after when he had spilt the blood of thousands they had still his person in a foolish veneratiō Should a Christian cal that which God Commaunded David practised foolish veneration but they whose wisedome is Rebellion hold Divine wisedome foolishnes And was he in so litle danger from those that held that veneration foolish were there none that held soe when they affronted him and threatned him every day To what end should multitudes come about his Pallace and cry Justice when they sought murder What