his Successours but not to exclude some that are at home namely the Parliament from having a part of it So that in respect I mean in respect of the extent of the King's Supremacy over all Persons in all capacities Mr. Baxter might find more in Mr. Hooker than he could approve of viz. the King's Supremacy over all Persons in his Kingdom and consequently his being the onely Supreme Governour being utterly inconsistent with the division of the Sovereignty betwixt the King and Parliament which is Mr. Baxter's fundamental Principle upon which he grounds his defence of the late Rebellion and lays a foundation of the like Rebellions from Generation to Generation for the future Again as Mr. Baxter might find more in Mr. Hooker than he could approve for the extent of the King's Supremacy in regard of the Persons over whom so might he likewise in regard of the Things whereunto it is extended concerning which in the general Mr. Hooker saith Our Kings when they are to take possession of the Crown have it pointed out before their Eyes even by the very solemnities and rites of their Inaugurations to what affairs their supreme Power and Authority reacheth crowned saith he we see they are inthroniz'd and anointed The Crown is a sign of their military Dominion the Throne of sedentary or judicial the Oil of religious or sacred power So that according to Mr. Hooker the jus gladii the Power of the Sword or the right of making War as likewise of making Laws both Civil and Ecclesiastical belongs to the King's Supremacy And to both those ends as he tells us afterwards it is one of our King's Prerogatives to call and dissolve all solemn Assemblies about our publick affairs either in Church or State so that there can be no such voluntary Associations of Churches as Mr. Baxter would have nor no such Associations of the People without the King's leave as others would have no nor no making of Laws neither either in Parliament for the State or in Convocation for the Church when they are called and met together but by the King and that not onely because no Law of any kind can be made without the Royal Assent by reason of the King 's Negative without which saith Mr. Hooker the King were King but in name onely but because it is the Royal Assent that makes it to be a Law For though as the same Mr. Hooker observes Wisedom is requisite for the devising and discussing of Laws he means the Wisedom of the Lords and Commons in Parliament for the devising and discussing of Laws for the State and the Wisedom of the Representatives of the Clergy in the Convocation for the devising and discussing of Laws for the Church yet it is not that Wisedom saith he that makes them to be Laws but that which establisheth them and maketh them to be Laws is Power even the Power of Dominion the chiefty whereof saith he amongst us resteth in the Person of the King Whereunto he adds Is there any Law of Christ's which forbiddeth Kings and Rulers of the Earth to have such sovereign and supreme Power in making of Laws either Civil or Ecclesiastical Which question being virtually a negative Proposition implies that there is no Law of God to prohibit any King to doe what our King doeth that is as he positively and clearly affirms to make Laws for his own Subjects by that supreme Power that resteth in his own Person and consequently is not divided betwixt him and the Parliament no not in the making of Laws which is the onely instance given by Mr. Baxter to prove the Sovereignty or supreme Power in this Kingdom not to be in the King alone or in the King onely which as I said before is the Foundation on which he superstructs the building of his Babel or the Justification of the late Confusion and Rebellion And therefore he had reason to say he found more in Hooker than he did approve because to approve all he found in Hooker touching the supreme Power either of all Kings in general or of our own Kings in particular had been to condemn himself who is much more for the restraining and resisting of Kings by their Subjects than Mr. Hooker who as I said before hath not a word of resisting nor of restraining them neither any otherwise than as they have restrained themselves by Laws of their own making So that Mr. Hooker may still retain that honourable title which learned Men have given him of judicious Hooker whatsoever voluminous Mr. Baxter hath said upon this or any other occasion to take it away from him CHAP. III. Bishop Bilson though in an errour yet saith not so much for the resisting of Kings as Mr. B. doth The Case stated of Subjects rebelling upon the account of Religion and of other Princes assisting them AS for Bishop BILSON whom Mr. Baxter saith I advised him to reade I confess I cannot say He hath nothing for the resisting of Kings by their Subjects in any of his Books but this I can say that he hath nothing to that purpose in that Book of his which I advised Mr. Baxter to reade no nor in any of his Books hath he so much for resisting of Kings as Mr. Baxter himself in his Book of the Holy Commonwealth And therefore I wonder he should say he found more in BILSON for the resisting and restraining of Kings than he could approve Bishop Bilson was one of my Predecessours in the Bishoprick of Winchester and much more before me in Learning than he was in Time but Bernardus non vidit omnia and the learnedst and best of Men are but Men and therefore may err and good men very good men may be the apter to fall into some kind of errours both speculatively and practically by indulging too much even to their good affections And therefore I believe it was his Zeal for the true Religion and his compassion to those that were persecuted for it that made this Learned and Good Man say so much as he doth which is more than I wish he had in excuse of taking up of Arms by the French Dutch and Scotch Protestants in defence of themselves and their Religion against their several respective Princes And I think we ought to believe that it was for the same reason and not for reason of State onely that Queen Elizabeth did at the same time assist with Men Money and Arms all the aforesaid Subjects against their aforesaid Sovereigns But yet for all that I do not think that either the Queen did well in doing what she did or that the Bishop did well in writing what he writ in defence of them because I do not think they themselves I mean the subjects of those Princes did well in making that resistance which they did contrary to the Precepts of the Gospel and to the Practice of the Primitive Christians And I remember that upon this consideration during
the time of our own troubles I have often thought and sometimes said to some of my familiar friends that I was afraid that God had permitted the Peoples rising up in Rebellion against the Crown and the Church here because the Crown had assisted and so eminent a Church-man had excused the rising up of other Princes Subjects in Rebellion against them abroad For though ours had not really the same provocation to rebell as the Subjects of those Princes had viz. of being persecuted and oppressed for Conscience sake and for professing the true Religion as they were yet they pretended themselves to be so and so may Subjects of any Prince or of any Religion at any time and whether truly or falsely it is all one as to the endangering of the publick Peace and Welfare of all Kingdoms and States which will be always in danger of a Civil War if but in any one case onely it be allowed to be lawfull for Subjects to resist those that have the supreme Power and of a foreign War also if the Rebellious Subjects of one Prince or State may be lawfully assisted by another State or Prince because they are of the same Religion whether the true one or a false as I said before it makes no matter for it is not the trueness of any Religion but Mens believing it to be the true and onely true Religion that makes men think they are obliged in Conscience to contend for it as appears by some Mens being as zealous for the maintaining and propagating of Judaism and Mahometanism as others are for Christianity and amongst Christians so many of them being as zealous and perhaps more zealous for Schism and Heresie than others are for Vnity and Orthodoxy And we see the Papists have their Confessours and their Martyrs as well as Protestants And therefore if a Protestant King may assist Protestant Rebels against their Popish Kings because they are of his which he believes to be the onely true Religion why may not a Popish King for the very same reason assist Popish Rebels against their Protestant Kings because he believes the Popish to be the onely true Religion also and consequently as long as there are diversities of Religion in the World as there will be till the Worlds end there will be no security of Peace or safety at home or from abroad either for King or Subjects The great and good God therefore who is the Authour of Peace and lover of Concord as he will not have Subjects to resist their Princes so he will not have one Prince to assist another Prince's Subjects in their Rebellion against him in any case or upon any account whatsoever Mediate or intercede for their pardon or for the mitigation of their sufferings he may but encourage or assist them in resisting he may not For the Rule Quod tibi fieri non vis alteri ne feceris To doe as we would be done by holds in Princes and States as well as in private persons and surely there is no Prince or State that would have their rebellious Subjects to be assisted in their Rebellion by any other Prince or State and consequently they must needs be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 condemned by themselves when they doe that unto others which they would not have done unto themselves What shall we say then Are we not to help those that are persecuted for the professing of our own and the true Religion No we are not to help them in resisting and making War against their Sovereign but rather to admonish them to suffer patiently and then to help them by our Prayers to be delivered by God who can and will deliver them if they suffer patiently and wrongfully or if he do not deliver them here he will abundantly and superabundantly recompense them hereafter In the mean time if they be banished or forced to fly out of their own Country we are to receive them kindly and to relieve them charitably and bountifully as we would be glad to be received and relieved our selves if we were in their condition And this is all I have to say as to this particular of which I need to have said no more to discover Mr. Baxter's fraudulent and disingenuous dealing with me and with his Readers than what I said at first viz. That although I did advise him to reade Mr. Hooker and Bishop Bilson yet I did not advise him to reade either of them upon that Argument or to that end and purpose as he pretends I did thereby to insinuate that there being more in them for the restraining and resisting of Kings than he did approve I that advised him to reade them must needs be more for the restraining and resisting of Kings than he was This was that which he principally aimed at but I hope I have made it appear he hath missed his mark CHAP. IV. The Bishop charged with helping to bring Mr. B. and his party under By his party he means not the Presbyterians but all the Nonconformists MR. Baxter in his Preface to his Book of Concord addressing himself to the Bishop of Ely and me saith You have above all men I know effectually helped to bring us under but whom he means by Vs or what he means by bringing them under he doth not tell us nor how We have done it effectually or more effectually than any he knows besides But sure it is some heinous crime or other at least in his opinion that he intends to charge us with And therefore he should have done well to have expressed more fully and clearly what he meant by it But seeing it hath not pleased him to do so we must guess at his meaning as well as we can both in regard of the Thing he saith We have done and of the Persons We have done it unto And first for the Persons whom he means by Vs I should have thought he had meant the Presbyterians but that by Vs must be meant some of whom he himself is one and he hath not onely disclaimed his being a Presbyterian but takes it for an injurious and scandalous expression of an Episcopal Indignation against him to be said to be the Antesignanus or Standard-bearer of the Presbyterians being no Presbyterian himself and therefore could not be their Antesignanus or not theirs onely But why might not he be a Presbyterian then when I thought he was so though he was not so afterwards nor be not now For sure he hath not been semper idem Always of the same Opinion Time was when he was an Episcoparian or he would not have been ordained by a Bishop as he saith he was nor would not have subscribed to what he did And yet whatsoever it is that he is for now I am sure it is not Episcopacy in the controverted Notion and sense of it And therefore his disclaiming his being a Presbyterian now doth not prove he was not so then when I thought he was But
a most illegal and insolent and impudent Invasion and Vsurpation of the Kings authority in the one nor of a most Trayterous avowed and bold-faced Rebellion against the Person as well as the Soveraignty of the King in the other and consequently that all that assisted them whether it were with their hands or with their tongues with their Swords or with their Pens with their prayers or with their Purses were as arrant Traytors and Rebels as they were Whereas if Mr. Baxter can make it evidently to appear that there was such an Original constitution of Government by such a compact or contract betwixt the People on the one part and the King and his Successors on the other part and that by virtue of the said Original constitution the Parliament was appointed and agreed on by both Parties to be such Trustees for the People as he saith the Parliament was we are now speaking of and that they might legally do what that Parliament did for the discharging of their Trust If he can make this I say evidently appear from any authentick Record I must and will confess that the Government here with us is indeed no Monarchy and that not only for the reason given by Mr. Baxter because the whole Soveraignty is not in one Person namely in the King but partly in the King and partly in the Parliament but also because according to Mr. Baxter's supposition the Soveraignty is not at all in the King but wholly in the Parliament as it was in the Ephori in Sparta and as it is now in the Senate of Venice But thanks be to God it is not come to that yet though it were once very near coming to it when they had gotten an Act to sit as long as they listed and took upon them to make Laws to raise Mony and to make War and consequently to play REX as we say by exercising all the Acts of Soveraignty and by pressing the King to devest himself of them by making another Act not only to justifie what they had done but to enable them to do the same things for one and twenty Years more And by that time the Monarchy would have been like an old Almanack worn out of date and either an Aristocracy or rather a Democracy not only set up but setled instead of it as we saw it was assoon as the Monarchy by the Murder of the then Monarch seemed to be quite down the House of Commons assuming and usurping to themselves the whole Government of the Kingdom without King or Lords which the Lords as well as the King ought to remember calling themselves a free State and behaving themselves as such both at home and abroad for the short time of their Raign which was until their Servant made himself their Master by making use of that Army for the pulling of them down which they were forced to keep in pay at the excessive charge of the People for the keeping of themselves up And then They and the People too saw and felt the difference between a legitimate and legal Monarchy and the despotical Arbitrary Government of an Vsurped Tyranny which made them wish and pray and long for the Return of the right Heir and the restoring of the right Government having found by woful experience that every change they had made was first from good to bad and then from bad to worse and lastly from worse to worst of all I mean the Rump-Parliament that so having made tryal of them all they might be the more careful to hold fast the best if God should be pleased to restore it to them again which in his infinite goodness and mercy he hath done and that in a strange and almost miraculous manner by making the Thieves fall out amongst themselves in dividing of the spoyl that so the true Owner might have what they robb'd him of again The End of the Fourth Section SECT V. An Expedient proposed for the preservation of our Government and Religion as now by Law Established from Arbitrary Power and Popery or Presbytery c. without Exclusion of the Right Heir CHAP. I. People bugbear'd with Popery and Arbitrary Government The Priviledges of English Subjects by the Favour and Grants of their KINGS Their Representatives in Parliament Grotius thwarts Mr. B. in his main Principle AND now one would have thought that being so lately delivered from so base and shameful as well as heavy and grievous a Bondage we should not so soon have forgotten what we suffered under a Succession of various Tyrannies nor so soon have been weary of our Quails and Manna as to be so desirous as many of us seem to be to return to the same or perhaps if it be possible to a worse Bondage than that they were under before and to that end there be some that do as good as say one to another as that rebellious backsliding and ever-murmuring Generation of the Jews did Let us us make us a Captain and let us return into Egypt And why so why so soon so weary of well-being Is there any Nation under heaven in a better nay in so good a condition as we are Are not we the only People of Europe that are in Peace when all our Neighbours are in War with one another Doth not every one of us from the highest to the lowest enjoy the Liberty of his person the Propriety of his gooods and the fruit of his Industry without having any of it without his own consent taken away from him So that if ever it might be said of any it may now most emphatically be said of us Happy are the people that are in such a case Yes may some men say if we were sure to continue always as we are but we are afraid we shall not we are afraid of Popery we are afraid of Arbitrary Government which may take away all we have from us that is or ought to be dear to us But why should we fear where no fear is Is not our Religion our Liberty and our Properties secured unto us by the Laws and by such Laws as can never be repealed but by our own consents Did not such a needless fear as this make us rebell against our late Gracious Soveraign Lord the King and by that Rebellion make our fellow Subjects nay the basest and vilest and meanest of our fellow Subjects to be Lords over us And if ever we come into such a slavery or any slavery at all again it must be by such a Rebellion produced by such a pretended fear or by a Foreign Invasion invited by our divisions amongst our selves that must be the cause of it Never was there a better Constitution of a Government than ours is nor ever was there better security for the keeping of it as it is than we have Never were there Subjects that had more and greater or so many and great Priviledges as the Subjects of England have neither do our Kings
out of them that seem to be possessed with him which is above all things to be wished and prayed for or those that are so possest be kept from infecting others by teaching and printing with that intolerable licence as they do and have done for so many years together we are not to expect to be long without another Civil War and whether the effects of that will not be as bad or worse than the former no man can tell I am sure we are not always to expect miracles I mean such a miraculous deliverance as we have once had from so many several sorts of arbitrary and Tyrannical Governments as that War brought us to or rather as we our selves brought our selves to by that Rebellion and as such a rebellion as that was may and nothing but such a rebellion as that was can probably and humanely speaking bring us to again CHAP. IV. An Expedient proposed to secure the Government both in Church and State viz. some such Law as the Scotch Test. The Heir of the Crown 's being a Papist or a Presbyterian c. comes much to the same pass FOR the preventing whereof why should not we follow the example of the Scots in that which is good as well as we did follow their example in that which was evil We took such a Covenant as they did in order to the making and helping us to make such a War against our King and theirs as they did and for the alteration of the Government and Religion established by Law in both Kingdoms And why should not we make such a Law as they have now made for the preservation of their Government and Religion as it is now by Law established amongst them why should not we I say make such a Law for the maintenance and preservation of the Government and Religion established by Law amongst Vs also I mean such a Law whereby all Men are disabled and made uncapable of any Office or Place of Power and Trust either Military or Civil or Ecclesiastical as likewise of being chosen themselves or of choosing others to be Members of Parliament as will not take such a Test and Oath as they have taken in Scotland that is never to give their consent to the Alteration either of the Religion or of the Government either in Church or State as it is there by Law established Such a Law as this and no worldly means but such a Law as this will secure us and our Posterity from all that we fear or pretend to be afraid of especially from Arbitrary Government and Popery and from Presbytery too For the Heir of the Crown may be a Presbyterian or an Independent or an Antinomian or an Anabaptist or a Socinian and may be every whit as great a Zealot and as much a Bigot in any of those perswasions as any Papist can be in his and consequently be as zealous and industrious to promote bring in and set up his Religion for the Only or at least for the Predominant Religion of the State as any Papist can be to bring in Popery and consequently to suppress all of any other perswasion but his own and that perhaps with as bloody a persecution as ever any Papist did when he hath as much power to do it Of this One of the Sects hath given us proof more than enough already I mean the Presbyterians who for the setting up of their Dagon instead of the Ark of God and for the abolishing of Monarchy in the State as well as Episcopacy in the Church entred into that Antichristian League and Covenant with the Scots whereby both Nations were ingaged in a bloody War with and against one another of which the execrable effects as no Act of Oblivion can ever make to be forgotten so can they never be remembred without horror nor indeed should be remembred without detestation of the procatarctical or promoting causes of it of which the most principal and most energetical was that Presbyterian Solemn League and Covenant for the setting up that Idol of theirs the Presbyterian Government for which they were so peremptorily and pertinaciously zealous and ambitious that in all their Treaties with the late King one of the conditions of Peace always was the abolishing of Episcopacy and setting up Presbytery instead of it without consenting whereunto and without taking of the Covenant as the Scotch Presbyterians did refuse the late King so the English Presbyterians would if they might have had their will have refused the present King to reign over them as might be made appear by the Consultation had amongst the Grandees of that Party to that purpose till they found it would be in vain to stand upon such terms the Noble and never to be forgotten General the late Duke of Albemarle being resolved to bring in the King as a King without condition and therefore as well for that as for his whole most prudent as well as loyal and couragious Conduct in that great affair I think that which was said of Fabius Maximus may be as properly and truly verified of him Vnus homo nobis cunct ando restituit rem That is One Man by his wary conduct hath restored our State and welfare And I wish it were engraven in Golden Letters upon his Tomb ad sempiternam rei memoriam for an everlasting Memorial But to return unto what I was speaking of what I have said already is enough to prove that a Presbyterian Heir of the Crown would do what he could to bring in and set up the Presbyterian Government which can no more consist with Monarchy in the State than it can with Episcopacy in the Church and make us all Presbyterians as well as a Poâ—ish Heir would to bring in Popery and to make us all Papists And that they would not suffer any that would not conform to them and comply with them is evident not only by what they did against us that were as they call'd us Cavaliers and Malignants but against their own Brethren in Iniquity the Independents and all the rest of the Sectaries their Fellow-Rebels against the King and Companions in Arms against Us all of whom they would have suppressed as well as they did Us if it had been in their power to do so as appears by their Books Sermons and Addresses to that which they call'd a Parliament against them And what the Presbyterians did against us and would have done against the Independents by the Parliament the Independents did against them by the Army And so no doubt would any other of the Schismatical Parties have done against all the rest that were not of their perswasion if they had got the power into their hands But none of them may some of their Friends say would have been so cruel as the Papists who hold it not only lawful but meritorious to put Hereticks that is all that are not Papists to death Did not the Presbyterians and Independents and the
according to the legal establishment thereof of so sound so healthful so orderly and so well compacted a constitution as it is and which by long experience we have found so agreeable to the established Government of the State that we cannot make any alteration in the one without great disordering of the other Let us not give ear to any of those Church and State Mountebanks or Empericks who if we let them alone a little longer will never leave mending till they have marr'd all Mr. BAXTER'S Recantation referred to page of the Conclusion Printed 1670. at the end of a Book of His called The Life of Faith after a Catalogue of Books Written and Published by the same Author LET the Reader know that whereas the Bookseller hath in the Catalogue of my Books named my Holy-Commonwealth or Political Aphorisms I do hereby recall the said Book and profess my Repentance that ever I published it and that not only for some by-passages but in respect of the secondary part of the very scope Though the first Part of it which is the defence of God and Reason I recant not But this Revocation I make with these Proviso's 1. That I reverse not all the Matter of that Book nor all that more than ONE have accused As e. g. the Assertion that all Humane Powers are limited by God And if I may not be pardoned for not defying DEITY and HUMANITY I shall prefer that ignominy before their present Fastus and Triumph who defie them 2. That I make not this Recantation to the Military fury and rebellious pride and tumult against which I wrote it nor would have them hence take any encouragement for impenitence 3. That though I dislike the Roman Clergies writing so much of Politicks and detest Ministers medling in State matters without necessity or a certain call yet I hold it not simply unbeseeming a Divine to expound the fifth Commandment nor to shew the dependance of humane Powers on the Divine nor to instruct Subjects to obey with judgment and for Conscience sake 4. That I protest against the judgment of Posterity and all others that were not of the same TIME and PLACE as to the mental censure either of the BOOK or the REVOCATION as being ignorant of the true reasons of them both Which things Provided I hereby under my hand as much as in me lyeth reverse the Book and desire the World to take it as non Scriptum April 15. 1670. R. B. ACT Anent Religion and the TEST August 31. 1681. Made in the Third PARLIAMENT of Our Most High and Dread Sovereign CHARLES the Second Holden at EDINBURGH the 28 day of July 1681. By his Royal Highness JAMES Duke of Albany and York c. His MAJESTIES High Commissioner for holding the same Referred to Section V. OUR SOVERAIGNE LORD With His Estates of Parliament Considering That albeit by many wholsom Laws made by his Royall Grand-father and Father of glorious memory and by himself in this and His other Parliaments since His happy Restauration the Protestant Religion is carefully asserted established and secured against Popery and Phanaticism Yet the restless Adversaries of our Religion doe not cease to propagat their errours and to seduce His Majesties Subjects from their duty to God and Loyalty to his Vice-gerent and to overturn the established Religion by introducing their Superstions and delusions into this Church and Kingdom And knowing that nothing can more encrease the numbers and confidence of Papists and Schismatical dissenters from the Established Church than the supine neglect of putting in Execution the good Laws provided against them together with their hopes to infinuat themselves into Offices and places of trust and publick Imployment THEREFORE His Majesty from His Princely and pious zeal to maintain and preserve the true Protestant Religion contained in the Confession of Faith recorded in the first Parliament of King James the Sixth which is founded on and agreeable to the written word of GOD DOETH with advise and consent of His Estates of Parliament Require and Command all his Officers Judges and Magistrats to put the Laws made against Popery and Papists Priests Jesuits and all persons of any other Order in the Popish Church especially against sayers and hearers of Mass Venders and dispersers of forbidden Books And Ressetters of Popish Priests and excommunicat Papists As also against all Phanatick Separatists from this National Church Against Preachers at House or Field-Conventicles and the Ressetters and harbourers of Preachers who are Intercommuned Against disorderly Baptisms and Marriages and irregular Ordinations and all other Schismaticall disorders To full and vigorous execution according to the Tenour of the Respective Acts of Parliament thereanent provided And that his Majesties Princely care to have these Laws put in Execution against those Enemies of the Protestant Religion may the more clearly appear HE DOETH with advise and consent foresaid STATUT and ORDAIN That the Ministers of each Paroch give up in October Yearly to their respective Ordinaries true and exact Lists of all Papists and Schismatical-withdrawers from the publick Worship in their respective Paroches which Lists are to be subscribed by them and that the Bishops give in a double of the saids Lists Subscribed by them to the respective Sheriffs Stewards Bailies of Royalty and Regalitie and Magistrats of Burghs To the effect the said Judges may proceed against them according to Law As also the Sheriffs and other Magistrats foresaids are hereby ordained to give an account to his Majesties Privy-Council in December yearly of their proceedings against those Papists and Phanatical Separatists as they will be answerable at their highest peril And that the diligences done by the Sheriffs Bailies of Regalities and other Magistrats foresaids may be the better enquired into by the Council the Bishops of the respective Diocesses are to send exact doubles of the Lists of the Papists and Phanaticks to the Clerks of Privy Council whereby the diligences of the Sheriffs and other Judges foresaids may be controlled and examined And to cut of all hopes from Papists and Phanaticks of their being imployed in Offices and Places of publick Trust. IT IS HEREBY STATUT and ORDAINED that the following Oath shall be taken by all Persons in Offices and places of publick Trust Civil Ecclesiastical and Military especially by all Members of Parliament and all Electors of Members of Parliament all Privy-Counsellors Lords of Session Members of the Exchequer Lords of Justiciary and all other Members of these Courts all Officers of the Crown and State all Arch-Bishops and Bishops and all Preachers and Ministers of the Gospel whatsoever all Persons of this Kingdom named or to be named Commissioners for the Borders all Members of the Commission for Church Affairs all Sheriffs Stewards Bailies of Royalties and Regalities Justices of the Peace Officers of the Mint Commissars and their Deputs their Clerks and Fiscals all Advocats and Procurators before any of these Courts all Writters to the Signet all Publick Nottars and
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 As they were moved or inspired by the holy Ghost and for all ages and times as well as for those wherein they were written is worse than with David's fool to say in his heart that there is no God For to Blaspheme God is worse than to deny him and how can a Man or the Devil himself blaspheme God more than to make men believe that he who is Truth it self is a Lyar or at least a deceiver one that hath sent his Ambassadours the Apostles nay his Son himself into the World with Credentials under his broad Seal I mean the doing of Miracles in his name to assure the World and the Princes of the World that those that were Christians were because they were Christians to be the best of Subjects such as how ill soever they were used or how much soever they were oppressed nay how cruelly soever they were persecuted by their Princes yet were indispensably obliged by their Religion never to rebell or so much as to attempt to defend themselves by force against even such Princes and consequently that the Princes and Potentates of the world whatsoever Religion themselves were of needed not to fear nor consequently ought not in reason to persecute any of their Christian Subjects who were obliged by their Christianity it self because they were Christians to be the best of Subjects and to continue to be so how numerous or how powerfull soever they might grow to be or how heavy or hard the yoke might be which they groaned under which being published and made known to the world to be the will of God as it was by St. Peter his Apostle or Ambassadour to the Jews and by St. Paul his Apostle or Ambassadour to the Gentiles for any that comes after them whether it be a Bellarmine a Buchanan or a Baxter to endeavour to make it to be believed that God and his Ambassadours St. Paul's and St. Peter's meaning was to oblige Christians to be such Subjects to such Sovereigns so long and no longer than they were too weak to resist them but assoon as they were able that they were then left at liberty with God's good leave not onely to revolt from them but to revenge the wrongs they had suffered under them for any men now I say to make it or endeavour to make it to be believed that this was Christ's or his Apostles meaning what is it but to make it to be believed that Christ was indeed such a one as the High Priest falsely told Pilate he was 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 A deceiver and that his Apostles were Legati ad mentiendum missi Ambassadours sent on purpose by him to deceive those they were sent to as perhaps some Ambassadours may be sent from one earthly Prince to another But to say that Christ hath done so or that he had or could have any need to doe so is in a very high degree to Blaspheme Christ himself as well as his Apostles and to make whatsoever they taught besides to be suspected of insincerity and consequently the whole Christian Religion to be but a design or contrivance for worldly ends onely as it is indeed by the Papists made to be and by all such Protestants also as make Religion a Cloak for any kind of licentiousness in general and especially for the lawfulness of the Rebellion of Subjects against their Sovereigns as all they do that would have those Apostolical Precepts against resisting of Princes by their Subjects to be but Temporary and to be obliging not in point of Conscience but in point of Prudence and for fear of punishment onely which is in terminis directly to contradict the Apostle or rather the Holy Ghost speaking in or by the Apostle who tells us in express terms that there is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a necessity for Subjects to be Subjects and consequently by no means nor upon any provocation 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to resist or rebell against their Sovereigns and that not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 saith the Text for wrath onely not for fear of punishment onely but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for Conscience sake and especially for Conscience or for fear of offending God more than for fear of offending man and therefore if at all for fear of punishment it must be more for fear of that punishment which the Text calls damnation and which God will inflict hereafter upon those that rebell against his Viceroys and consequently against himself than for fear of any punishment that can be inflicted upon them by Men here I will conclude this Topick with that saying of Grotius in the fourth Chapter of his first book de jure Belli Pacis and in the seventh Section of that Chapter viz Certè Christianis Veteribus qui recentes ab Apostolorum Apostolicorum Virorum disciplina eorum Proecepta intelligebant meliùs perfectiùs implebant summam ab iis injuriam fieri puto qui quo minùs ipsi se defenderent in certissimo mortis periculo vires putant illis non animum defuisse Certainly there cannot I think be a greater injury done to the first Christians who coming newly from the Discipline of the Apostles and Apostolick men did better understand and more perfectly practise their Precepts than there is done by them that think the reason why they did not defend themselves when they were sure to die if they did not was not because they would not have done so if they could but because they wanted strength to doe so Which saying of Grotius I desire the Reader to take special notice of the rather because Grotius himself in the very same Section seems to make it lawfull for Christian Subjects to resist the Supreme Magistate in several cases and some of them such wherein the Primitive Christians did not think it lawfull for them to doe so as Grotius himself in his aforesaid saying tells us and because it is upon the authority of Grotius and what Grotius saith to justifie the resisting of Sovereigns by their Subjects that Mr. Baxter doth especially ground his justification of the Rebellion against our late Sovereign Therefore whether those sayings of Grotius be true or no in themselves or whether if they be true they be pertinently and rationally applyed by Mr. Baxter for his and his Parties doing what they did in the late War against the King or no we shall examine hereafter In the mean time to the Doctrine of the Scriptures and the practice of the Primitive Christians we will subjoyn the Judgment of our own Church the Church of England as of that which of all Churches now extant in the World is both for her Doctrine Government and publick form of Worship the most Apostolical whatsoever the Papists or any other Hereticks or the Presbyterians or any other Schismaticks and Sectaries do or can say to the contrary But what the Judgment of the Church of England is as to this or any other
but hence it will not follow that he was bound to do so nay thence it will follow that neither he nor any of his Predecessors were bound to do so for then they that were the boldest in their demands that ever met and sate in Parliament would have claimed it as of right and not Petition'd for it as they did at least if they had vouchsafed to have Petition'd for it they would have called their Petition a Petition of Right which they did not So that by very Petitioning the King to grant those things which they proposed as agreed on by both Houses they acknowledged that the King was not bound by any Law Custom or Precedent from his Predecessors to consent to what both Houses had agreed on and consequently that there was no such Co-ordination betwixt the King Lords and Commons by the fundamental Constitution of this Kingdom as by the aforesaid Aâ—â—hor was pretended to be And therefo 〈…〉 in his answer to the Petition of the 〈…〉 the 19 Propositions which they pretend humbly to desire but indeed peremptorily press him to grant tells them That to say he is obliged to pass all Laws that shall be offered unto him by both Houses howsoever his own Judgment and Conscience shall be unsatisfied wiih them is to broach a new Doctrine a point of Policy as proper for their present business as destructive to all rights of Parliaments adding that it was out of a strange shamelesness that they would forget for sure there being so many Lawyers among them some of them could not chuse but remember it a Clause in a Law still in force made in the second year of King Henry the V. wherein both Houses of Parliament acknowledg that it is of the Kings Regality to grant or deny such of their Petitions as pleaseth himself And if it were so and acknowledged by both Houses of Parliament to be so in Henry the V's time I would fain know in what Kings Reign or by what Kings consent that Act or the aforesaid Clause in that Act which was in force so lately comes to be repeal'd or whether any Law or Act of Parliament can be either made or repealed without the Kings consent CHAP. XIII An Ordinance of both Houses no Law and consequently no legal Authority for the late War against the King The Militia or the Power of the Sword acknowledged by the two Houses themselves to be in the King A Sermon of Arch-Bishop Ushers in the Isle of Wight Preached to the same Purpose NOT a Law perhaps may Mr. Baxter say properly so called but an Ordinance of both Houses may and that without the Kings consent to it nay notwithstanding the Kings declaring and protesting against it oblige all the People of England to do or not to do what the two Houses will have them as much as any Law consented to by the King ever did or can do nay and may repeal any Law made by the King by the advice and with the consent of both Houses any Law or Custom to the contrary in any wise notwithstanding But per quam Regulam by what Rule Mr. Baxter By what Law of God or man can this be done Why by an Ordinance of both Houses which is equivalent at least to an Act of Parliament properly so called and so it had need to be Mr. Baxter and more too to warrant the doing of such things such horrible mischiefs and Villanies as have been done against God by Sacriledg against the King by Rebellion and by Subjects against their fellow Subjects by plundering and imprisoning and murdering one another of which side soever they were for all will be put to the account of them that had no authority I mean no legal and just Authority to warrant them to do what they did And therefore Mr. Baxter you were best be very sure that the two Houses had Authority to make such a War as they did not only without Commission from the King but against the King and to engage you and by you to engage so many thousands as you say they did in it You were best I say be very sure of it for it is not your head or your neck only which you say you are willing to hazard upon that account but your soul it self and the Everlasting Woe or Welfare of it that lies at stake for it Be not deceiv'd God is not to be mocked It is not the Confederacy of the two Houses it is not the Covenanting of the two Nations that can justifie either their commanding or their being obeyed in any thing which God hath forbidden or not allowed them to command or to be obeyed in by some known Law of his own or of the Land neither of which I am sure can be produced by them Moreover it is not the redressing of Grievances had they been as many or more and as great or greater than the House of Commons in their virulent and malicious Remonstrance to the People represented them to be nor the Reformation of Religion though there had been much more need of it than there was no nor the truly intending as well as pretending never so good or never so necessary an End for the publick Good either spiritual or temporal of the whole Nation that can justifie the Means they made use of if they had not Authority to make use of them I mean in their taking of the Sword out of the Kings hands where the Law of God and of the Land had placed it and taking it into their own notwithstanding Gods and mans Law to the contrary For the proof of the first part of which Assertion of mine I appeal to Mr. Baxter himself for amongst his many false and impious and pernicious Aphorisms he hath this true one that it is not lawful for a Nation to fight for the preservation of their Religion or their worldly goods and liberties without just authority and licence Whereunto he adds by way of exposition and illustration of his meaning That it is but a delusory course of some in these times that write many Volumes to prove that Subjects may not bear Arms against their Princes for Religion as if those that were against them did think that Religion only as the end yea or Life or Liberty would justifie Rebellion or that the Efficient Authorizing Cause were not necessary as well as the Final Where bearing Arms against Princes is warrantable quoad fundamentum as to the ground of it this will warrant it quoad finem as to the end of it A good End must have a good Ground Again for proof of the latter part of my Assertion namely that the Sword or the Power of making War was by Law in the Kings hand and not in theirs I appeal to the Acknowledgment of the two Houses themselves who after they had setled the Militia before the War was actually begun yet knowing and being conscious to themselves that they had done it illegally
inconsistent History and Experience have taught us the inconvenience of the one and the other No fear of either's Return A just commendation of our Church-Government What duty we owe to such a Constitution * Rom. c. 16. v. 17. A mark to be set upon Dividers The Character of Separatists Ep. Jude v. 16. V. 19. They are sensual * 1 Cor. 3. 4. What Spirit it is guides them The ill Consequence if that Spirit be not restrained The late example of the Scots recommended Their Test. Vid. the Acts and Laws made in Scotland when the Duke of York was the Kings Commissioner there An. 1681. The Heir of the Crown being a Presbyterian c. all one case as his being a Papist Just Reflections upon the Presbyterian Covenant General Monks conduct prais'd The Sectaries will not indure Vs nor one another They and the Papists much alike as to cruelty Their Principles much what the same And practices too upon occasion The Tryers a kind of Inquisition An Instance from the Anabaptists The like may be judg'd of the other Sects The danger if the Heir of the Crown be of any other Religion alike as if he be a Papist What Means to be used to prevent this danger The Exclusion of the right Heir against the practice of all Nations And consequently against the Law of Nature Jacob 's three eldest Sons forfeited their Birth-right Gen c. 49. v. 3 4. Two Cases of disherison The Right of Inheritance according to Gods positive Law The like in succession of Kingdoms 1 Kings c. 2. v. 22. A donijah his Case and why Solomon preferr'd to the Throne 1 Kings c. 1. v. 6. Ibid. Granting that the Judicial Law obligeth none but Jews The Exclusion of the right Heir is contrary to the Law of the Land No such Law now in being Nor can be made without the Kings consent Nor were it made would be just in the present Case The dangerous consequence of such a Law Such a Law if made and executed would not be effectual against future Heirs Arbitrary Government may be brought in by other ways as well as by Popery A brief commendation of the Church of England and the Civil Government The Scotch Test proposed to keep out Popery and Arbitrary Government Which upon the supposition of such a Law cannot be brought in Neither by force Nor by fair means An Objection from what Queen Mary did The Case much different then from what it is now Prebytery more likely to alter the Government than Popery Such a Test will be an assurance of no change to be An Objection that a Popish Successor will be absolv'd from his Oath The thing the same if a Presbyterian The full ground of that Assurance of no Change to be in the Government Mr. B. 's own commendation of our Government Vid. H. Com. p. 207. What he means by the Government of this Common-wealth Vid. H Com. from 89. to the 104 page His wish for better order in Election of Parliament-men H. Com. W. Page 27. 208. Wherein the Bishop agrees with him Whom Mr B. perhaps thinks worhty to choose or be chosen Whom the Bishop thinks such The main qualification of a Parliament-man An Objection against the Test. A threefold Answer A reinforcement of the Test * Which if consented to by the Successor no reason to believe but it will be kept A Recital of some of Mr. B 's Principles by which he justifies the late Rebellion and by which upon the like occasion Rebellion is incouraged for the time to come The Parliament how the Peoples Representatives and Trustees in Mr. B. 's sense The Peoples Rights and Priviledges H. Com. W. p 471. The Priviledge of Parliament An Instance of an unhappy difference betwixt the two Houses concerning Priviledge In what sense the King sole Law-giver The blessed frame of English government A caution against seditious Preachers and Scriblers Several ways to prove it lawful to take up Arms against the King Calvin 's way Herl 's way Mr. Baxter 's way Vpon such Principles the King in continual danger of Rebellion Some of Mr. B. 's Principles peculiarly such What the late King meant by saying The Laws are jointly made by King Lords and Commons How Christ alone will judge the World and yet the Saints shall judge it too How the Laws made by the King alone and yet jointly by the King Lords and Commons Some Instances ad hominem to convince Mr. B of this meaning Vid. M B 's second Def. of meer Nonconf p. 127. A brief Rebearsal of our Law-making How Laws made in the Roman Common-wealth How in our Monarchy The ancient stile of our Laws Our King not an absolute but a legal Monarch The three Estates Whence Mr. B. 's errour of dividing the Soveraignty The Soveraignty how in its streams divided and in its acts limited The King 's Negative voice necessary to preserve Monarchy Who Enemies to Monarchy A Caveat to Soveraigns The Conclusion of this and the three foregoing Sections Mr. B 's insincerity of dealing The true account of the Bishop's advising him to read thâ—se 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 s. Mr. B 's fallacious intent in giving the account as he does Mr. Hooker 's judgment of Kingly power whether he be King by choice Vid Hooker 's Eccl. Pol. lib. 8. p. 456. Or by Conquest Vid. Hooker 's Eccl. Pol. lib. 8. p 454. This of Conquest our case at first Vid. Hooker p. 454. Our Kings since have restrained themselves What it is that Mr. B. doth not approve Mr Hooker 's judgment of the descent of the Crown More than Mr. B. approves pag. 184. Of the King's Supremacy Over all persons This again more than Mr. B. approves Of the King's Supremacy as to things Eccles. Pol. p. 457. lib. 8. Lib. 8. p. 469. Of his Negative voice p. 471. Of his making of Laws p. 472. This against Mr. B. And therefore not approved by him Bishop Bilson in an errour about resistance The ground of his errour The censure of it A Remark upon our late Rebellion Religion true or false inspirits men alike Not safe nor lawfull for one Prince to assist another's rebel-Rebel-Subjects How we are to help those who are persecuted for Religion Mr. B 's design in this reflexion defeated Whom he means by Vs He disowns himself to be a Presbyterian And takes it for an affront to be thought so Why called their Antesignanus Mr. B. an Apologist for all the Nonconformists What his Nonconformist Ministers are What he means by bringing them under Independents and Presbyterians like Caesar and Pompey Vnder whom they are brought viz. the King How Mr. B. and his party brought in the King An account of Ministers silenced by the Bishop Intruders as well as Non-conforming Ministers put out The silencing of the Nonconformists a just and equitable punishment Mr. B 's own case the same as he makes Abiathar 's to be The silencing of them prudent and necessary also by way of caution No thanks to