SCRIPTURE AND REASON PLEADED FOR DEFENSIVE ARMES OR The whole Controversie about SUBjECTS taking up ARMES WHEREIN Besides other Pamphlets an Answer is punctually directed to Dr. Fernes Booke entituled Resolving of Conscience c. The Scriptures alleadged are fully satisfied The rationall Discourses are weighed in the ballance of right reason Matters of fact concerning the present differences are examined Published by divers Reverend and Learned Divines IT is this fourteenth day of Aprill 1643. ordered by the Committee of the House of COMMONS in Parliament concerning Printing That this Booke entituled Scripture and Reason pleaded for Defensive Armes be Printed by Iohn Bellamy and Ralph Smith JOHN WHITE LONDON Printed for Iohn Bellamy and Ralph Smith at the Signe of the three Golden Lions neare the Royall-Exchange M.DC.XLIII To the READER T Is a bitter Controversie that our poore sinfull Nation is fallen upon wherein not onely Armes are ingaged against Arms but Bookes written against Bookes and Conscience pretended against Conscience In this perplexed condition What shall the people doe What shall they resolve They expect to receive Councell from Divines who though it be a mixt Argument are most likely to settle them And they have great reason to doe it for the truth is The world takes sufficient notice that the Cause as it now stands hath many Divines strongly ingaged unto it on either side and that their Resolutions have had a great Influence upon it and upon the people We know upon whom Doctor Ferne layes the burthen when he saith Many in the simplicity of their hearts have been wrought upon by such as misled them But we pleade in the words of the great Apostle That our rejoycing is this that in simplicity and godly sincerity not with fleshly wisdome but by the grace of God we have had our conversation to the world and more abundantly towards our Congregations To whom wee appeale and to our Sermons preached among them whether wee have taught any thing but humble and holy obedience to all just and lawfull authority sincere love and constant maintenance of the Truth What is it that We may be suspected of What Designes may we be thought to carry on What Interesses What ends What is it that Wee hold deare unto us but the Gospell of our Lord but the soules of our people Did we make a gaine of them Did Titus make a gaine of you Thinke you that wee excuse our selves Wee speake before God in Christ 'T is not a new thing to be challeng'd as Seditious as Tertullus accused Paul To be hurtfull unto Kings aâ—d Provinces as Rehum and others wrote against the Jewes To be setters forth of new Doctrines as the Epicureans blasphemed that chosen vessell But our witnesse is with God and in our consciences and before the people in our preaching and in our conversation That we are not the troublers of Israel That we pray for the Peace of our King and that we seeke the wellfare of our Nation and that we teach no new no other Doctrine then what the Scriptures confirme as this Treatise will fully shew Theâ— what our King himselfe hath allowed in his clearing our Brethren of Scotland by Proclamation when they had Covenanted and taken up Armes then what our State hath formerly favoured in yeelding ayde to Rochell Then what other Churches Scotland the French Protestants the united Provinces and great Divines have given suffâ—â—ge unto And as for the State of this Kingdome in the very Constitution of it The Case is yet clearer King James himselfe blamed a Bishop for a right-Court-Sermon that hee preached before Him and the House of Peeres That hee had not distinguish'd well betweene a King at large and the King of England And in a manner even all the points of the present difference might be answered against the King by the King Himselfe in His Majesties Answer to the nineteene Propositions pag. 17 18 19 20. Which wee desire the Readers seriously againe to peruse as out of which a politicall Catechisme might be drawne to instruct the people just so as wee have instructed them To conclude After the Kingdome hath duely considered the many provocations it hath had which will appeare by the Remonstrances Declarations and Votes of Parliament The Noâ—successe of other Remedies as namely frequent Petitions and Treaties and hath read this following Discourse with a minde not prejudiced We hope that this present Action of Parliament will stand justified and our Judgement and Consciences cleare Especially after this our Protestation That wee seeke nothing but the Truth and to the Truth if others can convince us we are resolved to yeeld SCRIPTVRE AND REASON PLEADED For Defensive Armes SECT I. The Question rightly stated THe Question which the Doctor hath propounded as necessary to be scanned is thus exprest Whether if any King will not discharge his Trust but is bent or seduced to subvert Religion Lawes and Liberties Subjects may take up Armes and Resist He maintaines the negative and his principall place of strength is Rom. 13.2 Whosoever resists shall receive to themselves damnation This he interprets of resisting the higher power mentioned ver 1. by which he understands the King or Supreame and the resisting a resisting by Armes But it seemes to me however he make a shew of distinct handling his matter that he either carelesly or sophistically confounds things which ought to have been more distinctly exprest by one that truly desired to have resolved consciences in so weighty a cause as forbearing to defend Religion Laws and Liberties when they are all in danger of subversion To which purpose I shall make bold to propound divers considerations towards a better clearing of the true state of the question and the strength of his proofes for it 1. It cannot be imagined that a King who is bent or seduced to subvert Religion Lawes and Liberties meanes to doe this by a meere personall strength For which no Sampson-like strength would suffice but by the assistance of others whether men in office and trusted with the civill Sword under him if he can draw them into his designe or by the souldiery ordinary or extraordinary and that not in one part of the Kingdome but in severall parts as fast as he can get instruments for his turn 2. Here then will come divers questions belonging to the case 1. Whether the resisting by Armes the illegall attempts of an under Officer of Justice suppose a Major or Sheriffe though armed with Commission under the Kings hand or seale be a resisting of the higher power and damnable 2. Whether the resisting a Captaine of the Souldiery comming to act any illegall commands with his bands of armed men though he also have a like Commission from the King be a resisting of the King and so forbidden Both these where the King is not present but in another part of the Kingdome 3. It will be further questioned in case he should grant resistance lawfull thus farr
whether it be lawfull to resist the officers or souldiers of the King he being besides them and animating them with his commands to doe violence I will suppose for the present the Kings person is and shall be safe notwithstanding the resistance or that els the resistance must be forborne I onely aske whether his followers commanded by him standing by to doe murthers and rapes may be resisted with armes or not 4. If he will say that in all these cases resistance may be made so the Kings Person may be safe 1. The King may thanke him for the care of his Person but his Power and Authority is as much impugned by this as by many that plead for the defence now actually under-taken 2. The Cavaliers and Followers of the King will thanke him never a whit For they may all be knocked on the head or starved and yet the Kings Person be safe And they would soon desert the cause if this were beleeved or would be rooted-out if this were generally practised and that is all the Defendants desire who honour the Kings Person and authority as much as the Doctor or any of his fellows not to say more how ever they resist his Cavaliers 5. If he will deny resistance where the King is present because there his commands are certainly knowne to be his which may be doubted of in remote Countries Then 1. So should it have been exprest for cleare understanding and not coucht in uncertainty 2. Then all these Cavaliers are justly resisted where the King is not present which againe if it were believed and practised would soone end the businesse For even in the next Parish to the King they might be resisted though not where he appeares and speakes 3. What if it be doubted whether the King be not forced by threatnings and feare of his life to command so and so Kings have been prisoners and have commanded so and by wise and good Subjects Castles and Townes have bin kept by force of Armes against such as they bad to assault it if not yeelded Our Law supposes The King can doe no wrong yet supposes wrong may be done in his name by his followers If he then command a notoriously wicked thing The Law will suppose him forced or the like And then resistance shall be as well lawfull as if he were absent Or even necessary to rescue him out of such wicked hands 4. What if it be doubted whether a King be bewitched by sorceries There have bin such things of old and the Devills power doth not seeme to be lessned now 5. What if it be doubted whether the King be distracted A thing that hath befallen Kings as well as meane men Are subjects bound from resisting the commands of a bewitched or distracted Person to the ruine of Religion Lawes and liberties still preserving his person safe 6. Suppose it be certaine he is not forced nor bewitched nor distracted Yet doing as bad as any forced bewitched or distracted person can possibly doe by commanding such tyrannicall Acts what reason can be imagined why such a command should tie subjects hands from resisting his followers offering to act his tyranny more then if he were forced bewitched or distracted Is the liberty of his body and mind from those violences an enslaving of his people to his lawlesse lusts of crueltie and mischiefe 6. If he say further that even his officers or souldiers if they have his Seale or warrant may not be resisted in the remotest Country Then besides the former inconveniences these are to be added 1. Any that come among ignorant common people may abuse them at their pleasure if they will but pretend the Kings Seale or Warrant It hath bin counterfeited for Briefes How ordinary would it be if it might not be resisted How would malicious men murther with it Robbers spoyle with it and who could remedy it 2. By this meanes any that had a designe to depose the King and usurpe the Kingdome might by a counterfeit Seale and Warrant kill all the Kings faithfullest Subjects and strengthen so himselfe and his party as the King should after have no power to save himselfe Lawes observed will secure sufficiently from this And liberty to resist illegall violences will appeare to be necessary to the Kings safety as well as the Subjects Kings have seldome or never bin murthered or deposed where Lawes have bin preserved in their vigour But often where illegall violences have had place Let this also not be forgotten 7. Well but thus the case I suppose is understood if not by the Doctor yet by the generall of those that take the Kings part against the Parliament that neither the King in Person nor any of his officers or souldiers that have commission from him may be resisted because that were to resist the King which say they all the Apostle forbids and threatens Rom. 13.2 But here again I blame the Doctors negligent handling of that place upon divers considerations further 1. Without doubt the first verse is to be regarded as being the foundation of the second as appeares by the word Therefore Yet that he hath greatly neglected Perhaps for feare the scanning of it would doe him an ill turne as I shall by and by endeavour to shew by comparing the subjection commanded with the resistance forbidden 2. In the first verse he doth very ill to reade alwayes except once by chance as I thinke higher power for higher powers and so never to tell us whether the other powers who are higher in relation to the common-people though inferiour in relation to the supreme S. Peters governours may be resisted or not even with Arms. Perhaps this fraudulently also 3. In the second verse he is very carelesse to tell us whether resistance which is three times in English but there are two Greeke words the first being different from the second and third signifie all kind of opposition though without Armes to the higher and supreme power at least but then much more with Arms Or whether it only signifie resisting with Armes and no other there forbidden and made damnable Yet this a needfull Question for a conscience to be resolved in and more ordinarily then about resisting And so would well have become the Doctors learning and pretended care of Conscience and even regard of Authority to have discoursed upon But since he hath not vouchsafed to doe any of these I shall take the paines to doe it for him and for the conscientious Readers as well as I can 1. The first verse begins 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Let every soule be subject to the higher Powers Here are two questions 1. What is meant by being subject 2. What by higher Powers By being subject is meant yeelding obedience either active or at least passive that is doing or forbearing acccording to command or submitting to suffering when one do's otherwise It cannot be denied but both these are parts of subjection and that so much is commanded by the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉
of Nature to defend my self from outragious Violence being altogether an Innocent I cannot see specially in a case concerning GODS immediate Honour as well as my safety 2. If Lawes cannot tie my hands in all Cases in the forenamed from resistance much lesse an Arbitrary Power but of that it will be convenient to discourse a little further and apply it also to Civill Matters as well as to Religion wherein we shall also see whether all Civill Lawes doe so tie us as none of them neither may be resisted and if any which and which not I say then an Absolute Arbitrary Power or absolute Monarchy as some call it is not at all the Ordinance of GOD and so no lawfull Power secured from resistance by Rom. 13.2 First GOD allowes no man to rule as hee list to make what Lawes he list to punish how and whom hee list But his Word speaks the Contrary every where Secondly GOD not allowing Men cannot give it to a Conquerour or any other They can give but what GOD allowes for they have no more their owne in that sence Now no man can give any thing but what is his owne Thirdly particularly no man is allowed by GOD or can be made by Man an absolute Monarch a meere Arbitrary Prince in point or Religâ—on I am farre from denying Authority about Circumstantialls in Religion But I meane he hath no Authority to bid what GOD forbids or to forbid what GOD bids or punish them that obey GOD rather than him GOD never gave this Power nor can men give it Fourthly no Monarch hath any Power from GOD or can have from men to violate the Chastity of any A Law of Platoes Community is null because against GODS expresse 7th Commandement and may and ought to be resisted yet now we are among civill matters Fiftly no Monarch hath any Power from GOD or can have from men to take away the life of his Subjects any one at his meere pleasure or without a Law broken whether Civill or Martiall and knowne to the Transgressour or which he ought to have knowne and might which Ionathan could not hee had no meanes to know of his Fathers Oath being then made and in his absence Lycurgus his Law to destroy all Children that were deformed or weakelings and Pharaohs Arbitrary Command to destroy all the Israelitish Males were both alike tyrannous and null and might have been resisted In all these cases there is I say no absolute Monarchy no meere arbitrary Power Lawfull none that is GODS Ordinance And whosoever challenges such Power is in that not GODS Deputy but an Vsurper whether King or Caesar Roman or Turkish Emperour or any other Sixtly but the only Cases wherein a Monarch may be absolute in Matter of Liberty of mens persons of Goods anâ— manner of Judaciall proceedings and making or taking away Officers and Honours and such like in those I grant that as GOD denies not but a Monarch may have absolute Authority onely he must use it to Good so men may give away their Liberty by Feare or otherwise and become much enslaved to their Princes Will in comparison of what others are And if any bee so which I beleeve not of the Roman State though much was done arbitrarily by the Emperours I yield they may not resist though they be sorely pincht They may thanke themselves who bound their owne if therefore our Parliament in after Ages or this by being forsaken by the People seduced by the Dr. should so enslave us we must beare it and not resist because it is our owne Act who choose them and put all such things into their hands but in other things we should not could not be bound as I said before The Doctor hath a third Reason We cannot expect absolute meanes of safety and security in a State but such as are reasonable REPL. If by absolute meanes of safety and security hee meane such as God cannot defeat we grant what he saith or such as God hath forbidden But if he take it of rationall means he saith nothing at all that allotts any means which are not absolutely sufficient according to humane proceedings to procure sâ—ch a safety as a State shall nâ—ed A State is a most considerable body and may challenge all possible meanes which God hath not denyed them and so even a private man may being altogether innocent except where a greater good then his Particular life calls him to venture it or yeeld it up But there is no greater good on earth in civill respects then the safety of a state Therefore all meanes not forbidden from Heaven are reasonable and to bee expected and used though not expressly provided for that is mentioned in the Fundamentalls of this Government which the Doctor would require Then he falls a commending the excellent temper of the three Estates King Lords Commons having each a power of denying REPL. They have so in making particular Lawes But the Quest now is of exercising the generall and maine fundamentall Law of all States to save the whole from ruine and subversion Here though all three agreeing and none denying makes the safety more secure and more comfortable and honourable Yet no reason but in a Co-ordinate Power as here it is plainly so see the Fuller Answer to the Doctors Booke any two or of three or even any one of them rather then all should faile and be dissolved should have Power to endeavour the common safety which the others neglect or intend to subvert or betray And I verily beleeve the Doctor himselfe or any other of his partie if hee forbeare not to say so much least it should be retorted on himselfe will confesse that the King and the Lords may save the Kingdome from ruine without or against the House of Commons and the King and the House of Commons without or against the Lords and which is yet more the King alone without or against both Lords and Commons For indeed this is the very thing now pretended by the King for his taking Armes to save the Protestant Religion and the Lawes and his owne Rights c. which he saith the Lords and Comâ—ons whom he termes the Major part of both Houses present intend and goe about to subvert And if they did so certainely all true Subjects and Paâ—riots ought not onely not to joyne with them in their Armes but to joyne with the King in his against them And if it could be possible that all the three Estates should agree to ruine Religion and the State even the Body of the People should by vertue of the power which each State hath for its necessary safety have Authority sufficient to defend themselves and resist all outragious Attempts of mischiefe as hath been proved before though then for want of many conveniences and perhaps of wisedome to manage it the defence and resistance must needs be much more hazardous and dfficult The power therefore of denying and so all other power in each of the 3.
in maintaining that of May. 26. do professe to be unlawfull 2. If hee meane deposition of the King or which is more change of the Monarchy into Aristocracy or Democracy I deny that this may proceed necessarily or Rationally from a necessary defence unlesse the Dr. will undertake to prove that the state by no resistance or defence can bee safe without deposing their King or taking away Monarchs which hee neither will nor can as I durst undertake against him if that were now the Qu in hand which I hope shall never be Though sure there is no such temptation to it as to see Tyranny acted and all sober necessary defence cryed out upon as Rebellion all bloodshed in such defence murther and the end of it damnation And when Religion if ever it should bee is onely laid wast by the countenance of such doctrines improved as the Jesuite Advised then if a people should be greatly oppressed in their Civill liberty there might be some danger they would deny the Drs. grounds and all their allegiance and respect to Monarchy together And I dare be bold to say it Monarchy never received such a blow since States were as the Counsellors of Princes and Court-Chaplaines have provoked men to give it Because Kings must be absolute and People meer slaves formerly in doing and now in suffering 2 He saies This power of resistance when used and pursued is accompanied with the evills of a Civill Warr c. Reply 1. Whose fault is that Suppose the people that is a great many Papists would rebell unlesse the King and Parliament would subvert Religion and bring in popery and take away all the Lawes that displeased them must they doe this to avoid the evills of a Civill Warre and if not then neither must the Parliament or People sacrifice Religion Lawes and Libertie to the feare or danger of a Civill Warre No war so bad as the Parisian massacre or that of Ireland The King of France commanded the one the Irish people the Rebells acted the other In a Civill warre wee may save something and after recover all Under a Tyrannie not to be resisted we have nothing have lost Religion Laws and Liberties and have neither goods nor Lives Wives nor Children that we are sure of a day to an end He that rationally preferres such a Tyranny before a civill War surely hopes upon some speciall grounds that Tyranny will be none to him who pleads so well for it's indempnity but rather an advancement to him much good may it doe him 3 He saith the people may be discontented even with the Parliament and so it will come to â—ade and Tyler and overthrow all government Reply 1. I have satisfied this Objection for the maine of it already 1. That it is lawfull for the people to resist even the Tyranny of a Parliament when altogether outrageous as in our Questâ—on not else 2. That the principles of defence cannot be drawne to a necessary change of the Government Of which I adde 2. Reasons One that the defence will suffice without it if wisely managed to secure the safety of the State and Religion so morally For still men some or other must be trusted and those that discredit themselves a while may merit a trust againe afterward Enough for their honour and comfort and not too much for the Common-wealth and they need not be trusted as before till they do merit a trust againe And yet no opposition much lesse change of government 3. The next government suppose each shire as the Dr. talkes a Common-wealth and all governed by a Folkmoot is still liable in all reason to mischiefes as bad or worse then were in that goverment rejected And this they among the people that are not growne barbarous and bruitish by suffering Tyranny and losse of Religion and Liberties by the Drs principles may be made so sensible of that they will never offer to attempt such a madnesse 3. Make a people Religious as much as man can make them and let them enjoy the comfort of doing that which is good as St Paul speakes of Rulers praising such And then the Rulers need not feare the multitude of them though some will ever be wicked that they will Rebell and change the Government The People indeed by Absaloms flattery Rebelled against David a righteous and just Ruler But there was more then ordinary in that GOD threatened it to him for his adultery and murther They did not so to the great Reformers Asa Iehosaphat Hezekiah Iosiah specially yet questionlesse they 2. offended very many for the Princes and People as I noted before on a speciall occasion were very bad even in their times Some Papists as did rebell against King Edward the 6. and some against Queen Elizabeth But both soon and easily subdued GOD will not suffer a just Prince or State to be troden under foot David was humbred not overthrown and men will still be found to take theiâ— parts As then St. â—aul bids Christians doing that which is good not feare the powers he exhorts to submit to and not to resist that is legally ruling by Civill laws under God So I may say to Rulers Kings and Parliaments doing well Ruling according to GODS Ordinances they need not feare the power of Resisting Tyranny in the peoples hands which I say againe Though people have often used it and prevailed against Tyrannous Governors yet never did they prevaile against Just Rulers to Depose them or much lesse alter the Government Tyranny then helped forward now by the Doctors Principles will be onely that that in a despaire will drive People to Cantoning and Folkmoots if any thing will and not at all our Position of a sober necessary Defence The Reasons that the Dr. hath brought againh Resistance are so far from being the Apostles Insinuations that they are wholly unsufficient to discredit it with Reasonable and unpartiall Men to whom next under GOD we Appeale His conclusion Ergo repeating that because some must be trusted therfore Ergo the K is still I must tell him most unreasonable when his case supposes he will not discharge his trust but is bent to subvert Religion Laws and Liberties So perpeatually the Dr. doth or will forget the State of the Qu. The King ought ordinarily to be trusted and a just King a David is worth 10000. nay 100000. of us his Subjects but the will and Lust of such a Tyrant as the Qu. speakes of is not to be satisfied upon one Ionathan or Naboth the meanest of those thousands yet it must be if he must still be trusted when he is bent upon extreame Tyranny What the Dr alleadges further of the Oathes of Allegeance and Supremacy and the late Protestation prejudices not defensive Resistance no more then Scripture and Reason hath done The Oathes of Allegeance and Supremacy are onely to the Kings Legall power and Authority which no man disputes against The Protestation is to defend as far as lawfully I may according
not to foresee that their very flying to Armes was and would be a great suffering and might prove if God should defeat them the meanes of extreame suffering A people so taught so enured to Passive obedience and no way enured to Warre could not be supposed willing or forward to engage themselves their purses or much lesse their Persons against the Name of their King and each day since the first Necessity hath continually sounded this out so that they had no reason to be forward to fly to Armes 3. By what I said on the former Section and added with the Petition by the E. of Holland even now mentioned It appeares they did not fly to Armes but fly from it as far as they could and durst 3. Wheras the Dr. often in this Section in the beginning middle and end insists mainly upon the breach of Charity in suspecting the King upon Remote feare and meere Jealousies causelesse Jealousies c. Repl. This may sufficiently be satisfied both in the behalfe of the Parliament and then of the People that adhere to them joyntly and singly For the Parliament and people both joyntly This may justly be said 1. The Dr. mistakes it is not simply a Jealousie of the King but rather of the Kings Councellors and Followers who find so much favour with him as they and others did before the Parliament against the Scots and us both and Ireland too witnesse all their heavy complaints against the Great Favourite Strafford that they are able to put him from time to time upon these Actions which his goodnesse of it selfe rightly informed and councelled would abhorre and hath so often declared against and yet Actions againe have discredited those declarations as the Memory of those that have been awake cannot forget both Referring to Religion and Liberties and the Parliament Remonstrances do amply set out besids other Books If therfore Security be once obtained against such persons I am perswaded the King will be no more suspected and in the meane time it must be a strange Charity that can chuse but suspect them 2. Where the danger is of much importance both for Greatnesse of Mischiefe and Inevitablenesse according to Man if not timely prevented Charity to ourselves and others will not onely allow but commend and even command to suspect and accordingly prevent such dangers by suspecting Persons and Actions which in lesser matters they would and might and should venture to trust Fire neere straw or Gunpowder is to be suspected more then neere hard wood Hedge-breakers and breakers of Houses are not equally to be suspected Religion Laws and Liberties are precious things and may be sooner lost then recovered And his Charity hath drunk of the water of Lethe that forgets these were lately attempted and endangered The Kings own Declarations acknowledge Laws and Liberties have been broken And how since the E. of Straffoâ—ds death all the old Projectors are become Converts is too hard a morsell for Charity to swallow when it must hazard such deare things to many of the same Persons againe Specially seeing still what they have done since the first sitting of the Parliam toward their old Projects as hath been partly noted already and somewhat more must be said by and by Next for the Parliament alone They are the great Councell of the Kingdome the publique Watch-men the Highest Court of Judicature it concerns them therfore to exercise their Charity for the safety of those that have trusted them Charity towards Attempters against a City is none of the Vertues of a Watchman nor toward Attempters of dangerous Treasons against a King and Kingdome the Vertue of a Judge Were they onely to loose their own Liberties or Lives their Charity might venture much further then now it may when they must Answer for Religion Laws and Liberties and so Lives and Consciences of a whole Kingdome of 2 Kingdomes England and Ireland as formerly of England and Scotland if not rather then and still of all 3. in a degree Who would not Curse their Charity detest their Folly if by their Credulity all this should be betrayed and ruined If Rhetorick needed in this cause no Subject could deserve it better then to cry down such a pernitious Charity as this would prove if they should be deceived with credulity And then for the People alone have they not a charity to exercise toward the Parliament as well as toward the Kings Followers whom have they trusted to be publike Watchmen the one or the other Whom hath the law trusted to be the great Councell and chief Judges the one or the other Who hath pleaded for their Liberties the one or the other 12. Subsidies were demanded with intent thereby to engage us in a bloody War against Scotland in the Parliament of Aprill 1640. Onely for taking away of Ship-money But this Parliament hath proved it so illegall and other things more that it was taken away without any cost at all by way of Exchange and many other happy Lawes hath the â—arliament passed and obtained for us But what one thing did the Kings former Counsellors move him to offer to his people by way of prevention for State or Religion in a whole yeer together To whom then must the People exercise their charity Must they condemn their watchmen as scaring them needlessely with Old Enemies discredit the law that saith No dishonourable thing ought to be thought of such a great Councell such a high Judicature And that when they more then ever any Parliament before give account to all men of all their Actions and the grounds of them Well shall that People deserve a ruine that believe Old Wolves rather then their faithfull Dogs then their Councell of Shepheards That shall thinke themselves bound to be charitable to those that have attempted their ruine and uncharitable to those that under God have hitherto saved them In a word let those that love Religion and Laws and Liberties compare the best actions on the one side with the best on the other and the worst on the one side with the worst on the other and then let charity judge if it dare or can the Parliament Fooles or Traytors to GOD and the KING and the STATE and the Kings followers the only wise men that have discovered their cunning Treachery and the only faithfull men to Religion his Majesty and Kingdome Take in then the Declarations and Protestations on the one side and on the other and remember is is not a single charity whether I shall suspect the King but first mixt whether I shall or may suspect the Kings followers who can doe any thing with him so farre as that they may doe contrary to what he saith and then a distinguishing charity whether I shall suspect them who were once most of them apparently Delinquents against Religion and the Laws Or the Publike Watchmen and the great Councell an Judicature of the Kingdom who have done so much and with such diligence to save and restore
enough that her illumination hath been so farre from the endeavours of those who might have bin heard by the King and the Queen both that Ministers have bin check't for praying for Her conversion 2. But no man hath said this alone is a sufficient Cause nor was the Chief cause at the first It is well known thaâ— at the first and for diverse yâ—eâ—s Shee carryed her self so as those that loved the true Religion pitied her rather then severely blamed her and hoped good of her if any meanes were used for Her good But when after some yeeres a Nuncio from the Pope was brought over and setled here those about her have been more active and yet more since the Qâ— Mother came first over things have ripened apace and how farre Her Religion hath beene a Cause of the dangers of Scotland England and Jreland by the countenance of the Popish Party generally and multitudes of Jesuites and Priests in Court City and Country any common understanding may judge that remember specially what even a Solomon did for Out-Landish Idolairous wives which Nehemiah set so home â— 13. 3. The little businesse of her journey into Holland and the great businesse that hath been acted by meanes of that is but an unhappy commâ—nt or explication of the iustnesse of feares and Jealousies from her Religion 4. As for the Doctrines and practises of these Times which the Doctor saith are not the way to make her fall in love with our Religion and draw her to it She hath little reason to be offended with them if she be pleased with the Doctrines and practises of her own Popish Religion Witnesse the Parisian Massacre the powder Treason and the present too lamentable rebellion of Ireland Let but that be compared with the worst can be imagined of our Doctrines and practises and then let her love which is fairest and meekest 3. Then he comes to the resort of Papists and his Majesties entertaining them and Davids example 1 Sam. 22.2 toward Ziba is alledged to justifie it Rep. 1. But the Dr. forgets that the time before the Parliament the Papists and popish party had undeniably made an inrode upon our Doctrine publike Worship Laws and Liberties and against them in speciall was the Militia desired to be setled by people and Parliament And after all this upon a difference about the Militia to imploy them against the Parliament sooner or later is an example beyond example and beyond the power of words to take off the exception Suppose a Woman suspected of incontinence And Popery is spirituall whoredome should take to her selfe the parties with whom she were suspected to be her servants the better to defend her honour were this a way to cleare her selfe Or a Captaine to take in Forces to defend himselfe having been challenged that they had a designe to ruine his Army or Castle 2. What charity can stretch it selfe to beleeve they intend to assist the King in maintaining the Protestant Religion and the Laws against themselves which yet his Protestations proclaime Surely some about him must needs give them other assurance or they would not be so mad as to fight for their own suppression and their Adversaries promotion 3. But if they be so good subjects as the Dâ—maintaines and helpe the King in such an extremity must they not be counted to deserve a great reward and what can that be but Ziba-like to divide the Land A Tolleration at least they must needs expect if not indent for or be promised 4. Or if they be strong enough to overthrow the Parliament will a division content them Will they not be able to command King and All hence-forward N. B. If Protestants charity can be so sottish by this Doctors delusions as to trust to their faire dealing with Religion and Laws when the Parliament is by their force ruined they deserve no other pitty then a bewitched or distracted Man who is not afraid of Fire nor Water but let Straw or Gun-powder lye neare the one and pulls up floud-gates to give the other passage 5. Davids followers 1 Sam. 22.2 were far from Popish qualities The Text describes them thus Every one that was in distresse and every one that was in debt and every one that was discontented bitter of soule Here is not a word of all this that signifies them to be wicked A faithfull Man may be in distresse severall wayes he may be in debt through Gods hand upon him not his mispending and not able to pay but willing if he were able and resolved when he should be able and may be bitter of soule through oppression c. So that though in likelihood among so many there were some vicious Yet here is nothing to affirme that they came as vicious but as afflicted 6. Had any of them been Idolaters as Papists are had they been of confederacy with the professed enemies of Gods true Religion and people and so known then David had been too blame to have entertained them and Saul would have been sure to have laid it to his charge Neither could he ever have purged himselfe so long as he had made them his Guard that he meant to be faithfull to God and Israel And specially if Saul had before excepted against such Men as treacherous This is the Case now The enmity of Papists by their very Religion against ours our Parliament and Protestant people is known to all the world that understands any thing The Parliament hath often and often declared their feare of them these two Yeares and in reference to the setling of the Militia that so their designe on the Kingdome might be defeated The King protests not to owne them nor their helpe Yet things all along since the first discontents are still acted as they could wish and did and doe applaud And now after all this to take them into the Armies and imploy them against the Parliament is as far from Davids fact in entertaining his Troopes as their designes against the Parliament are far from his against Saul 7. It is true indeed that professed Papists were not actually entertained at the first It had been too grosse for them to have appeared at the first specially in any number and would have raised all the Kingdome against them The Ice therefore must be broke by others first and by Court-converts Of whose Religion the Priest that had lately written on the subject on which Dr. Featly had animadverted hath given a faire warning sufficient to startle any man almost To which purpose let me adde a word of a Booke I have seen cal'd Jesuitica Negotiatio printed neare 20 Yeares since by Order of the States of Frizeland which containes Instructions surprized of the Jesuites toward the Conversion of the united Provinces Among which this was one That whosoever they could convert to the Romish Religion should be still allowed to professe the Protestant Religion and keep any Office or place he was possest of and give sentence against any Papist
of goods as may appeare by what hath bin said whereas the King is not an absolute Monarch The absolutenesse whereof is indeed as hath bin fore-noted in power over goods but not at all over the chastity of any nor so much as over their lives further then they offend known Laws Thirdly He says we have not only example but resolution and conclusion out of Scripture That the people might not be gathered together either for civill Assemblies or for warr but by his command that had the power of the Trumpet that is the supreame as Moses was Num. 10. Rep. The Text puts in no such restraint no restraint at all but only that the Trumpet should blow for such and such occasions and where it did blow they should assemble I grant while the supreame and those under him do their duties there may be no Assemblies but by their Authority Laws and commands but when they neglect it and will not discharge their trust much more when they abuse it to destroy those by and for whom they are trusted This Text hath neither word nor intimation forbidding the people to assemble even for warr Himselfe granted not long since That the body politicke might defend it selfe against an outward force Suppose a Fleet of Spaniards or Danes or Irish invaded our Coast The Prince and all his Officers are ignorant or neglectfull or even consenting Shall the people not assemble for defence because the Prince blows not the Trumpet Or a band of high-way-robbers set upon a village and the Constable and Officers are secretly confederate with them May not the village without their officers and the neighbour villages also run together as to quench a common fire We use to say Necessity hath no Law or knows no Law The meaning is good That ordinary laws for setled times give way to present pressing necessities not only before men but God too who in saying I will have mercy and not Sacrifice directs to prefer necessities of mercy and safety before all ordinary Formalities either of Religion or of civill Justice How els might a private man kill one that assaults him And if one may defend himself I say again as before much more many and to that end Assemble even for war and make Trumpets of their own when they that have the ordinary Trumpets will not use them at all or against the common good And Num. 10. hath not the least shadow to the contrary Also without the Trumpet may not the Church assemble Fourthly For Davids carriage towards Saul and his Army 1 Sam. 26. it is partly answered before But he urges That though it be said they intend not hurt to the Kings Person yet might they not as well have hurt his person in the day of battell as any of them that were swept away from about him by the fury of the Ordnance which put no difference 'twixt King and common Souldiers Rep. Indeed this is the hardest case can be put against defence by Arms. But supposing as hath bin partly proved already and will be more the further we proceed that against his messengers and instruments arms may be taken battles fought to prevent the subversion of Religion Laws and Liberties upon which they are bent I only ask 2 or 3 Questions 1. By what rule of conscience or God is a State bound to sacrifice Religion Laws and Liberties the conservation of which is the end of all governments and so of all Princes Authorities rather then endure that the Princes life should come into any possibilities of hazard by defending them against those that in his name are bent to subvert them 2. If he will needs thrust himself upon the hazard when he needs not whose fault is that Is it theirs that desire not to have him hurt in the least and resolve not to hurt him wittingly or willingly but meerly to defend themselves upon necessity and offend others that are his seducers or instruments or both And to this purpose let it be remembred that I have proved that David would have kept Keilah against Saul and then if Saul would have bin obstinate to assault it in his own person how could David have helped it if an arrow or a stone from the wall had hit him and killed him And then withall whether there be not somewhat this way in that of David Either the Lord shall smite him or his day shall come that he must die or he shall goe into the battle and perish If he might fight with Sauls Army as in Keilah he would and Saul would goe downe into the battell his bloud would have bin upon his own head As if a King disguised should offer any private violence a watchman that would not or even might not hurt him being knowne were without blame if he knock't him down or even killed him as he might in like case a disorderly private person Now in battell to many or most and especially to the Gunners that give fire to great Ordnance he is altogether disguised and so they are blamelesse in reference to his personall hurt The fault is wholly his owne and those wicked Councellors that have thrust him upon the fury of the battell 3. For also why should not all that truly wish well to the King of all other times keep him out of the battell when it is against Rebels I am sure Davids men would not let him hazard himself 2 Sam. 18. though he offred it and said he was worth 10000 of them They then that put him upon such desperate dangers against supposed Rebels shew they love their owne rapine for which they fight and to subvert Religion Laws and Liberties above his person and life And then let God be Judge who stretcheth out the hand against him unlawfully They or others Fifthly He observes two things more concerning the point of resistance 1. That all the seeming instances for it are out of the old Testament Rep. 1. Why should he insinuate this to be insufficient Is not the old Testament Gods word and a direction for our lives as well as the new Was not Honour thy Father and Mother under which himselfe comprises obedience to Princes a law of the old Testament And if it were lawfull as the instances have bin justified against all that he hath said to resist then how comes it to be unlawfull now Did Christ come to make Tyrants secure from resistance who were not before 2. I would intreat him if he be at leasure to rejoyne to this reply to tell us the intent of Christ in the new Testament bidding his Disciples rather sell their garments then want a Sword I am perswaded for my part that he thereby directs them to a just and necessary defence against any out-ragious attempts of violence illegall Though he afterwards blames Peter for using the Sword without warrant The new Testament then hath somewhat also toward Resistance But 2. He saith It is a marvellous thing That among so many Prophets reprehending the Kings
Realm and that he is in all causes and over all persons supreame Repl. But some Lawyers will tell him That the Oath of Supremacy is either only against forraigne powers and namely the Pope having to doe here or against all particular persons having authority above the King within the Realme But that with all Law-books intimate a superiority in curia Comitum Baronum c. which is the two Houses of Parliament And secondly That he is supreame not to judge all persons and causes at his pleasure but as assisted according to Lawes with his Counsell and Judges and specially his great Councell and chiefe Judicature during their sitting the two Houses of Parliament His Supremacy then still appeares limited by and according to Law 3 But hee adds This is also acknowledgedged by the Petition of the two Houses addressed unto his Majesty wherein they stile themselves his Loyall Subjects Repl. True and right but still this is to be understood to be Subject according to Lawes and for the good of King and Kingdome neither of which is promoted or preserved by a restraint of a defensive Resistance of tyranny which restraint the Doctor so contends for Adde here what must elsewhere be further urged That the King himselfe in his answer to the 19 Propositions acknowledges that the two Houses have legall power more then sufficient to prevent or restraine Tyranny Which I would faine have any man shew me how it can bee done but by taking up Armes and then I will yeeld him the cause That all Armes taken up are unlawfull But till then the King hath granted the cause legall and just against the Doctors first maine Proposition and all his Arguments His next ground is That in the Text of the Apostle all persons under the higher Power are expressely forbidden to resist for Whosoever in the second verse must be as large as every soule in the first verse and the resistance forbidden here concrnes all upon whom the subjection is injoyned there or else we could not make these universals good against the Papists exempting the Pope and Clergy from subjection Repl. 1. He still runnes on in his errour to limit the higher power to the supreame But secondly I grant him that all other powers under the supreame are forbidden to resist in the Apostles sence A Constable Justice Major Sheriffe Judge of Assize nor the very Houses of Parliament may not resist the authority of the King commanding according to Lawes But yet it remaines to be prooved that they may not resist his violence when he is bent to subvert Lawes and Liberties and Religion and all Or the violence of his followers even though doing it by his warrant or in his presence Also because he doth so much insist upon the phrase of higher power let me put him a case A wicked Robber that hath committed twenty most bloudy murthers one after another in cold bloud is led away after legall condemnation by the Sheriffe to be put to death Suppose a King would come with armed souldiers and offer to take him violently and by force out of the hand of Justice Who resists damnably now that power which is the Ordinance of God and to whom the Sword is committed The Sheriffe and his men that resist the violence or the Kings followers or even himselfe that resist the due Execution of Justice Let him study on it and give an Answer at his leisure 3. He proceeds In those dayes there was a standing and continuall great Senate which not long before had the supreme power in the Roman State and might challenge more by the fundamentals of that State then our great Councell I thinke will or can But now the Emperour being supreame as S. Peter cals him or the higher power as S. Paul here there is no power of resistance left to any that are under him by the Apostle Thus for the persons that should resist all are forbidden Now consider the cause Rep. 1. Doubtlesse Saint Paul wrote not to the Roman Senate nor Saint Peter neither And if the Doctor will proove it unlawfull for them to resist he must proove it from the Law of nature or at least from some ancient Law of the old Testament given to the Ancestours of the Roman Senate Or else shew how this could concerne them who never heard any thing of it For any thing then â—e saith it was lawfull for the Roman Senate and the Heathen Subjects to resist though not for Christians 2. If he or any for him shall say that it suffices for his cause that it was forbidden to Christians and accordingly is now Rep. 2. If you reply that supposing it not forbidden to Heathens No more was it to Christians before S. Paul and S. Peter wrote And if so then belike as was formerly toucht the Apostles laid a yoake upon the necks of Christians worse then all the Jewish ceremonies which the Gentiles were ever freed from For whereas before the Romans might resist their tyrannous Emperours now by becoming Christians their hands must be tyed to have all their throats cut even though the whole Senate were Christians at one Neroes pleasure He that wisht that all Rome had but one neck that he might strike it off at a blow had done wisely to have endeavoured to have made them all Christians and then he and his Guard with him or his Army might by this Doctrine have struck off all their heads or runne them all through one after another as fast as they could deale blowes and so he should have his will in their destruction though there must have beene a little more paines taken about it Surely Christ who came to purchase liberty to his people never meant to enslave them to tyrants above all others of Man-kind The Doctor must goe prove resistance unlawfull from some other grounds of natures law or the ancient lawes of Scripture or else this Text of S. Paul will appeare to have another interpretation even that which hath beene given before in the explication of the Text and inference from it Thirdly I will not therefore trouble my selfe to compare the Authority of the Roman Senate with our Parliament much lesse argue for that power which they had lost about a 100 Yeares before S. Paul writ It suffices he hath not disproved at all their present power of resisting tyranny when S. Paul wrote and that by the same argument I have disproved that S. Paul forbids Christians to take any such power to themselves 4. But he adds was there ever more cause of resistance then in those dayes Were not the Kings then not only conceived to be enclined so and so but even actually were enemies to Religion had overthrown Laws and liberties Rep. If it had been before demonstratively proved that resisting the power or higher power did properly signifie taking Armes against the Supreame when he plays the tyrant This fourth step were a just illustration and confirmation of it But now he only beggs the
to averre and very hard to prove that the Emperours were or any other Princes are absolute Monarks under whom there is a government by written Lawes as among the Romans were the 12. Tables and many other Lawes But I adde that no Prince can be an absolute Monarch to have power over mens lives at his pleasure or over the chastity of any at all He can have no power but according to the Ordinance of God Now it is certaine God never ordaines any such Arbitrary or iniurious power Therfore no Monarch hath any such de jure As for that any hath de facto as he speakes of the Emperours ruling absolutely or arbitrarily If they did so as they oft did for evill I have formerly shewed and he hath not refelled it that they might have been resisted 2. What he speakes of their becomeing Monarchs touches not our case at all For however he insinuates Who ever hath soberly written for defence and resistance against Tyrranny doth not plead any right in the people of this Land against the succession of this Crown But though the King and his rightfull succcessions ought still to hold the Crown This forbids not a necessary defence against their unjust violences when ever they shall use them 3. Yet withall I add that though so long as there was any in the Roman State who had not by Oath or the like exprest their consent to the usurpation of the Roman Emperours they were free to have thrust them out againe or rather bound to have done it and restore the Senate to their lost authority yet when any have with the generality yeelded to the change of an Aristocracy wherein no man hath personall right of succession into a Monarchy they and specially the posterity of those that have so yeelded are from thenceforth for ever bound to that government according to just and equall Lawes already in being or to be made hereafter even by the Monarke alone if they have trusted him with it alone But never can they lose their right no not by their owne consent of just defence of Chastities or of their lives untill they forfeit them by their misbehaviour against some just Lawes or other 4. As therefore the Doctor disclaimes the pleading for an arbitrary power such as Conquerours use in this crowne so if he can plead no better against resisting our Kings then he hath in the case of the Roman Emperours he will merit but small reward for his paines But for that viderit ipse 5. I come to his last objection That Christian Religion was then enacted against by Law but the Religion contended is establisht by Law Hee answers two things First Is the Religion establisht denyed to any that now fight for it c. REPL. This with the rest belongs to matter of fact in the third Proposition and seventh Proposition Thither I referre it that I may not say over needlesly the same things or say but a little here or that which hee will needs make necessary to say a great deale more then I desire Secondly the prohibition saith hee not only concernes Christians but all the people under those Emperors and not only Religion was persecuted but liberties also lost the people and Senate were enslaved by edicts and Lawes then inforced upon them and they according to the principles of these dayes might resist notwithstanding the Apostles prohibition and the Laws then forced upon them or else the State as they usually say had not means to provide for its safety Thus one fancy of theirs thwarts another because both are groundlesse REPL. 1. Wheâ—her the Christian Religion being condemned by law then did deny them resistance in its selfe I shall perhaps give him account in another place Meane time he cannot deny but the difference is very great betweene a Right to defend that which the Law defends and that which the Law punishes Secondly I have proved that the prohibition of resisting Tyranny by armes did not concerne the Heathen Romanes and therefore not the Christians neither Thirdly what ever liberties were lost and new Lawes enforced yet so long and so farre as the Emperours ruled by the Lawes the people and Senate were in no such slavery that they needed resist to save the State But when they used lawlesse violences according to their lusts neither the Lawes nor the Apostle prohibited a defensive resistance So that although Christians might not defend their Religion against Law yet he hath brought nothing to shew they may not defend it when the Law hath establisht it But of the meanes of safety in state he will speake more anon and so will I. And now I shall oppose his conclusion wiâ—h a little change of his words Hitherto of Scripture which how strong so ever it seems against resisting tyranny by Armes yet saith nothing at all to prohibit it rather the Reasons forbidding resistance of just power legally administred favour this resistance of Tyranny as hath bin shewed By which conscience will clearely see that according to the examples of David and Elisha and the rest that have been justified it hath cleare warrant for such resistance of Tyranny notwithstanding all the Dr. hath alleadged to the contrary Now let us see what Reason can enforce SECT III. I Have been so large in refuting his strength from Scripture that I need not spend a like proportion upon the rest and so shall I forbear such a Syllabicall REPLY as I have made to his former SECTION I shall here only touch Materiall Passages the rather becouse of other paines upon the following SECTIONS Our Dr. examines the Fundamentalls of this Government as hee saith though hee after urge that the Fundamentalls talked of are asserted common to all Governments which is true of that which this â—ECTION maintaines Power being Originally from the people at the first Upon this hee descants and meddles not with any particular fundamentalls of our State which indeed is a more proper businesse for Lawyers and Statists then Divines except the peoples right is now in the two Houses of Parliament the representative bodie of the People I will therefore keep only to what he saith and not meddle much with our State in Speciall For if the power of Râ—sistance belong to all States in time of need by the common Fundamentalls of all States it will be reason enough to prove it so in ours And whereas he saith that the Fundamentalls must have a correspondencie with the established Lawes I grant it in a right Sense that is that the Lawes must flow from those Principles which are transcendents to all particular Lawes but not if hee meane that they must be ever limited by particular Lawes In Nature the safetie of the Universe is the Fundamentall of the Harmony of the Elements and the power and inclination of each Creature towards its preservation Yâ—t this Fundamentall is not limited by the particular inclinations of Creatures which as himselfe told us above give way to the safetie of the
by Reassuming as I said before a taking of the whole power from him to themselves but onely for the particular Case in hazard and for the present necessity And now to begin with what he first mentions the Derivation of power I must tell him that he forges what he before complained of in others that they confounded the power it selfe with the person and the Qualification I am sure he doth so here if ever man did Hee before granted the Person and Qualification from men and then they approved of God and more then that no man pleads to be derived nor more to be forfeited plead not for so much nor he Paâ—liament neither But only the Qualification for he particular Case of danger and till that danger may be sufficiâ—ntly secured Yet here now at first to oppose the Forfeiture but of this particular which is only in question now before us he denies the power to be from the People and appeales to what he hath cleared which is onely by his owne saying but not altogether as hath beene shewed that the Power it selfe is from God But for all that if no more can be said against the persons forfeiting his reigning Power and specially in the Qualifications of it even for ever it may undoubtedly be forfeited and so re-assumed all of it which is more then I say Secondly but he will prove that though the People have this Power absolutely which himselfe hath more then once granted of the Designation of the Person and Qualification yet could they not have right to take it away REPL. The King will have no cause to thank him for his undertaking as well because he doth it not with any great strength as also because hee hath hereby provoked men to dispute even this Case which no way needed since the Parliament never pretended to this Right in generall but rather disclaimed it First he saith Many things which are altogether in our disposing before we part with them are not afterward in our power to recall REPL. True but some things are and that both if conditions be not observed and even at our owne pleasure A King makes some Officers for terme of life others quamdin se bene gesserint others aâ—â— ante bene placite To the latter hee may send a Writ of Ease at his pleasure and every day it s in his power to recall their Authority To the second their offices are sure without power of recalling till they are legally convicted of misbehaviour To the third as long as they live their Authority is firme and no power of recalling it wholly Yet even such may bee hindred from some Administrations by Accusations by and apparency of Crimes making it unfit for them to be trusted in the particular We imagine not the People to have power to recall that Regall Authority at their pleasure we argue not that they have power to recall it wholly upon any Case of Mal-administration All that we plead for is power to administer a part of it upon necessity which he will not administer for good but rather for evill And there are not many things that were altogether ours and in our disposing before we part with them but are still so farre ours as to use them againe in our necessity for that turne at least though there are some Secondly But he will prove this to be one of those that are not after in our power to recall especially saith he such in which there redounds to God an interest by the Donation as in things devoted though after they come to be abused REPL. 1. Grant this true in referrence to the Power of recalling them wholly which yet is not universally true as will appeare straight yet may there be power enough to administer so much as is of necessity A Wife is tyed to her Husband by the Covenant of God so called Prov. 2. by the Ordinance of God more ancient and no lesse strong then that of Politick Government She cannot recall wholly her Husbands Authority over her though shee was once altogether at her disposing to choose or another or none to be her head All the goods of the Family are his in Law and not here but by his leave and order Yet for her necessity she may by the Law of God and conscience administer so much of the goods as is fit and secure her Person from his violence by absence though that ordinarily be against the Law of Marriage and the end of it or any other meanes of nccessary defence But secondly it is not altogether true that there is no power or recalling any thing devoted to God Hezekiah took off the gold from the Doores of the Temple and the Pillars which he had overlaid and all the silver in the house of the Lord to pay the King of Assyria his demanded Ransome 2. Kings 18.14 15 16. If the Doctor will not owne this Act of Hezekiah I am sure he will that of David taking the hallowed Bread which was not for any by Gods Law to eate but onely the Priests This was devoted to God and not so much as abused and by him assigned to a speciall use yet from that diverted and lawfully without question And now I appeale to all Consciences Whether the necessity of saving a Kingdome from the subversion of Religion Lawes and Liberties be not greater then Davids necessitie was And if I will have mercy and not sacrifice did justifie Davids act will it not theirs who in a necessity use or administer the power of the Militia or Armes which ordinarily is only to be admieistred by the King Neither will Abimelech the Priests consenting to David alter the Case for it was devoted to God and but in necessity he might not have consented nor David accepted Necessity then recalled that particular Bread through devoted So necessity may recall this parcell of power in question Thus the Doctors ground failes him for our Case yet 3. see what he adds so although it were as they would have it that they give the power and God approves himselfe oft hath said and cannot deny but they give the Person his power and if they take it from his person yet they may leave it to his Heire but wee argue not for so much yet because the Lords hand and his oyle also is upon the Person elected to the Crowne and then he is the Lords Annointed and the Minister of God those hands of the People which were used in lifting him up to the Crowne may not againe be lift up against him either to take the Crowne from his head or the Sword out of his hand this true inform'd Conscience will not dare to doe REPL. 1. Is not Gods hand upon a Judge Is not hee the Minister of God Is not a King bound to God and to his People to appoint Judges who may lesse be spared in their Power then the Monarch himselfe for what is his Power when an Infant Is not the Kingdome then administred
purposes aforesaâ—d And this Parliament what ever oâ—her mighâ— bee is not deposeable dissoluble but by themselves The Sword cannot be Legally taken from them till they give it up It remaines then that they are bound in Conscience to GOD and to the People and King too that have entrusted them with this Power to use it to these ends to punish Delinquents and tempters though under Colour of surreptiously gotten Commands from the King to subvert Religion Lawes and Liberties and to prevent Tyranny and preserve themselves and Religion Lawes and Liberties They may not onely Lawfully doe this upon these Premises and suppositions but they are by all Obligations to GOD and Man necessitated to doe so and even to take away the wicked from before the King that so his Throne may bee establisht in Righteousnesse This is clearely theâ— the Parliaments not onely Power but duty Iâ— they mâ—stake in the present case of which anon yet the generall case stands good they may and ought to doe so to take Armes when such a case comes The Dr. hath somewhat more to say against the Peoples power applicable to our Kingdome Let us heare it also How shall Conscience be satisfied concerning the Peoples power derived from their Election when our Kings are such by Inheritance and claime not by Election and the Crowne hath been oft setled by Conquest REPLY Neither is Conquest any thing of it selfe to power or Lawfull Authority of which onely we argue but only as it obtaines consent by agreement which is all one in Sence and Effect with Election Only Election sounds more Freedome of will Conquest Imports a Force occasioning that will But it is evident in Reason that he that is free as all men are by Nature as was said before except their bond to Parents becomes not subject de jure till his Consent Agreement or Election makes him so and to no more then his Consent reaches explicitely or implicitely and so for many men they can no other way be subject to one to a Prince or Monarch but by their Agreement whether for feare of his Force or hopes of his vertue he is not their King or Lord till he be made so by their Consent I meane at first and Originally But what need I stand to provâ— this largely when our Dr. hath confest it in sence before in saying the designing the person and Qualification of the Power is from Men Mans invitation what is this put mans choyce Agreement Consent together And if there be 100. Conquests the Conqueror hath not the qualification of his power one whit enlarged by Right untill the People have consented and yielded up their former Rights and when they have then his Right is setled accordingly and to his sâ—ccessours if so consented to else not and to hâ—s â—eâ—res if consented to else not and to Heires male onely as in France or Femaâ—e also as in England according to the consent Or if the Conquerour to obtaine the Peoples 〈…〉 his posterity will offer to have leâ—t power then his Predecessour bed â—eâ— upon such consâ—â—t the qâ—alification of his power is lessened for ever after to hâ—m and his Conquest thâ—n first or last one or many are no more to right oâ— power then an occasion or Motive to consent consent Choise Agreement are all in all Secondly as for Inheritance it is nothing but a succession of consent Indeed posteritie are bound to the consent of their Parents for the Person Family qualification but to no more In all other Cases and respects they are as free as their Parents at first were A Prince then onely inherites what was given the first of the Nation or others since by consent of the people and by written Law or custome he must claime any power he will exercise or else he cannot plead any right title to it And his qualification of power admits of encrease or decrease as he and the People agree and consent His power is altogether derived by Election and consent first and last whence I will inferre no more but as before that therefore in case of necessity the people may use so much of it as may suffice to save themselves from Ruine and that may be inferred from it by what went before As for his Repetition of Rom. 13. and the Roman Emperours being Monarchs absolute I need say nothing to now I have said enough before After this he comes to the Covenant and Oath which the Prince takes to confirm what he promised which he denies to make the Kings Admitttance to the Kingdome altogether conditionall as is the meerely Elective Kingdomes of Polonia Swethland c. and that it is nothing to allow resistance unlesse in the Covenant could be shewed that in case he will not discharge the trust it shall be Lawfull for the States to resist REPLY The Oath is onely urged to shew that the Kings Conscience is bound more firmely then what he is sworne to and as a Testification of the Câ—venant The mattâ—r sworne to is the maine nor that urged for an absolute forfeiture but for the case of necessitie Secondly in more Elective Kingdomes the conditions of the Covenant are more largely perhaps and more solemnely explicite then in successive and the Power is morâ— Restrained then in some successive yet consent bâ—ing the foundation of succession as was said before a King that enters upon the succession doth by that verâ—ually before his Oath oâ— Coronation consent to the first Conditions or Covenant those that have been made consequently and in that sence his Admittance is altogether conditionall not that the people may refuse him at their will without new Conditions but that he may not refuse the former Covenant and Conditions by offering to take more power then those gave him or his Ancestors which is all one And if he doe the people are not bound to obey those Commands the Dr confesses before and I adde as before they may resist his illegal Violences 3. For now the case is all one as if the choyce or agreement Covenant oâ— consent were originally made but yesterday And then consider it We are a multitude of Free-men and whereas we might have agreed on an Aristocracy We agreed on a King on such and such Covenants or Conditions without mention that wee will resist if he break them But simply promise Obedience on those Conditions and he on those accepts the Crowne But next day breakes all and shewes hee is bent to subvert all Religion Lawes and Liberties How now in Reason for of Scripture we spake enough before can it be supposed that such a choyce or agreement hath turned us into such Slaves as we must onely suffer and not at all resist or rather is not all reason plaine that I have given away no more of my naturall freedome which is to resist all violence and wrong then I meant and exprest to give away I say then that unlesse a Nation have covenanted not to resist in such and
doe all they doe that so they may prevent and restraine the designed tyranny Fiftly Yet I have one thing more to alleadge supposing the power of calling and dissolving wholly in the King ordinarily yet there may be such power in them so long as they doe sit to command Armes to bee rais'd for the suppressing of any Delinquents maintaining themselves with Armes even under the colour of the Kings Authority which I thus make good If there be any such kind of Power in the very Judges in their Courts at Westminster for the whole Kingdome and in their severall Circuits for the Shires they sit in although themselves are made Judges at the Kings will meerly and put out ordinarily at his pleasure and they can neither keepe Assizes at any time nor keep any Terme any where but when and so long as the King pleases to give Commission if I say there be such a power in the Judges and even in one of them then much more in the whole Parliament which is unquestionably and undoubtedly the highest Judicature in the Kingdome and hath most power during their sitting Now that such a kinde of power is in the Judges I appeale to experience in the case following A private man hath a suite with the King about Land or House and the like The King hath possession and some Officer or Tenant of his holds it for the King The Judges having heard the Cause give Sentence for the Subject adjudge him to have the possession delivered him by the Kings Tenant or Officer he refuses and armes himselfe to keep possession still Upon this after due summons and processe of law a Writ of Rebelliâ—n shall goe out against the Officer of the Kings even though he should pretend to keepe possession still by a command and warrant from the King and the Sheriffe shall be commanded to raise Armes even the whole posse Comitatus if need be to expell this Officer of the Kings and bring him to condigne punishment from resisting the Kings auâ—hority in his Lawes Here now is raising Armes by the Kings legall Authority against the Kings Title and the Kings Officer notwithstanding any pretended authority from the Kings personall command and that Officer haâ—h a Writ of Rebellion sent against him and shall bee punisht by Law for offering to resist the Law upon any pretence Aâ—ke the Lawyers whether in sense â—his be not the Law and ordinarily practised save that the King doth not command the contrary but whether that would hinder Law or not The Parliament then may in the case of necessity raise Armes against the Kings personall Command for the generall safety and keeping possession which is more necessary then the hope of regaining of the Houses Lands Goods Liberties Lives Religion and all And this by the Kings legall Authority and the resisters of this are the Rebells in the Lawes account and not the Instruments so imployed Legally though with Armes by the Parliament If the Doctor now or any for him will retort upon me as he thinks what I said before that if this be granted a King intending Tyranny will not call a Parliament or if he have called it he will straight dissolve it as soone as they attempt any thing against his mind REPL. I reply he will doe so indeed if hee can perswade the people by the Doctors Divinity or Law to endure him and his followers to take away their Goods and doe what else he list and they for want of a Parliament called or sitting dare not defend themselves at all But if hee find that they believe no such Doctrine but without dispute of Law or Consciences resolve rustically not to be robbed of their goods at pleasure or used like meere slaves but that they will defend themselves and somwhat they begin to doe and beat away or kill some that come to take their goods away in such illâ—gall manner he may then be glad to call a Parliament to quiet the People who perhaps also may begin to mutiny by troopes and be willing to sacrifice perhaps some of his Followers unto them as â—mpâ—oâ— and Dudley were in the beginning of H. the 8. though they proceeded with colour of the penall Lawes and even to provide for his owne Maintenance as 〈◊〉 â— In such a case some against his will cal'd a Parliament Anno of his Reigne And that it may be he will not he dares not hearken to those that would perswade him to dissolve it because then hee should bring all confusion besides want upon himselfe againe which was Hen. the Thirds Case Anno. Therefore I conclude that the Parliament as I said before may have this power and upon advantage of the Kings necessities and Peoples not enduring oppression be able to exercise it even though they meet not but at the Kings will and are dissoluble at his pleasure And so I have said enough of this Section except onely that I must note that in the close of it he either thinks those he hath to doe with Parliament and all grosse fooles or else he shewes himselfe extreamly simple in reckoning up the remedies of Tyrranny though he love not to use so harsh a word but we must when hee hath stated the Case for us of a Prince bent or seduced to subvert Religion Lawes and Liberties The denying of subsidies and ayd c. If hee meane in Parliament such a Prince never meanes to call any If out of Parliament this is the grievance that he takes it against Law by Ship-moneys and Monopolies and Imposts and any way and if they deny it themselves are fetcht up by the Pursevants and put in prison and for not executing such illegall commands Fined at pleasure halfe or all their Estates and perhaps starved in prison or little better Kept so close that they fall sicke and dye Nay if the Prince proceed to command his Souldiers or Officers to kill without delay any â—hat shall deny Subsidie or Ayd though never so illegall Hath not then the Doctor propounded a goodly remedy of Tyranny to deny him Subsidy and Ayd As if to quench a house a fire hee should send for a paire of Bellowes to blow a coole breath Let him now consider whether hee uttered those words in scorne or in policie and with what science or skill in common Reason not to say in Politicks and so with how truely an informed conscience he deales justly between the King and the People We have yet some further strength of his reason to examine in the next Section Of which now SECT V. IN this Section hee propounds this Reason as alleadged for the peoples Power that else the State should not have meanes for its owne safety when c. REPLY This Reason we acknowledge ours and considering what a State is a Body composed of many thousands who by themselves or their Ancecestors set up a King over them for their safety and good this Reason is as much Reason as any thing can be betweene Man
better keeping all in due Subjâ—ction and Order This Major makes Lawes directly against the Kings against the King himselfe offers to sweare the people to another King Are not those Lawes then Null and his Authority Nuâ—l so farre forth or can it be thought that because the King commands subjection to the Maior and forbids to resist him as long as he rules by the Kings Lawes or by such as his Charter enables him to make being not against the Kings that therefore they may not resist him if he would massacre them or under colour of his new made Lawes condemne them because they will not be Traitors to their King and submit to an usurper will the Dr. say it or any else and is not this the very case if men will thinke of it if a King should make or hath made Lawes that men should worship the Sun worship an Idoll an Image Are not these traiterous Lawes against the King the GOD of Heaven can any then King they or the Authority commanding them iâ— quo ad hoc GODS Authority GODS Ordinance or deny them to be resisters of him The Lawes that are in themselves Null the Authoritie Null so farre forth no kind of Subjection then is due to them in this from this Text. Nor is any Ordinance of GOD at all resisted in resisting them Rather is it not a Duty But the Christians did not resist though Tertullian say they had number and Force sufficient REPLY Mr. Goodwin in his Anticavalierisme hath very rationally shewed first that in all probability Tertullian was mistaken in his Computation if he mean it throughout the Empire They might have some considerable number and so force in one place or City and not enough in generall Secondly that if they had so yet generally it was not knowne to Christians and that is all one in such a case he that knowes not his strength dares not resist no more then hee that hath no strength Thirdly that if they knew their strength yet they did not know it lawfull to resist generally Some might know it yet not preach it for feare and if it were not generally beleeved they would not resist Fourthly that there were speciall Reasons why GOD might conceale this from them this Liberty of resistance Of all this there are many considerable things in that treatise Vide I will only adde this One that if Resistance seeme so unfitting now it would have seemed much more then The Christian Religion came in upon the Roman Empire as a Novelty and neither they not their Ancestours for many Generations had any Principles but the remote ones of the Law of Naturâ— to perswade them to give it Entertainment So that to have resisted by Armes would have seemed a great obstinacy and perversenessâ— specially in Reference to the Doctrine of Christ a crucified GOD a Man risen from the dead and gone into Heaven which the Pagans counted foolishnes as well as it was a stumbling block to the Jewes Also Châ—ist himselfe founding his Church by his owne suffeâ—ings would have them specially like him in sufferings at the spreading of it in the World Whereby he also got farre more Glory in that not onely his Church was preserved like the burn in the midst of the Fire in the midst of sufferings without resistance But also iâ— propagated mainly and conquered by suffering meerly This I say was then greater glory then to have allowed them straightway to defend themselves and resist with Armes which also till a long time would have been in vaine and to their hurt besides Reproach without miracle But now the case is much otherwise in regard of Protestants persecuted by Popish Princes specially recalling Lawes of toleration or changing Lawes establishing the Religion For the Protestant Religion to shew it selfe no noveltie appeales to that which the Papâ—sts cannot denie the holy Scriptures and rejects nothing if even an unpartial Heathen were Judge and umpiâ—e between them which the Scripture calls to beleeve or practise Also â—t proâ—esses nothing which the Scriptures rejâ—ct Therefore their resistance may much more be justified to their Adversaries Consciences Who though they dare not deny the Scriptures plainely yet dare not trust to them alone to confute the Protestants by them but put them to death for things not onely besides the Scriptures but even against it as making and worshipping Images Crosses Crucifixes and the like Here the same King and Lawes being generally acknowledged yet will the Inferiour Governours make Lawes against the Kings and even Force the Kings Subiects to doe Homage and even sweare Allegeance to another besides Him Therfore they are not in this to be accounted GODâ— Lâ—eutenants or Deputies or their Lawes of any Validitie but they may be resiâ—ted as Rebells against the King of Heaven while they pretend to be his Servants The Roman Emperours then as meere strangers in point of Knowledge or Profession were rather but at lest for the time to be convinced by suffering then by resistance But pretended Christian Princes specially after a toleration and most of all after a Legall Establishment turning Persecuters of that truth whichas in the Bible he â—selves professe to hold may be resisted in a Defensive way And there is nothing in the Bible to gainesay it And whether now the Christians might also have resisted as soone as they had any strength â— ever they had any before Constantines Time I leave it to others to iudge For upon the Grounds fore noted it hurts not our Cause at all if they migâ—tâ—t The Dâ— proceedâ— so doe I â—f it bee replyed that things being so enacted by Law it was not lawfull to resist I answer saith he all that proceeded from those Emperours were meerely â—rbitrary and enforced upon the Senate who did not discharge their truth c. Reply First what is tyrannously done against humane Law may be resisted as we have sâ—id and so may by what we have lately proved tyrannous Lawes directly and clearely against GOD and his true Religion and therefore if ever wee should be so unhappy which I hope will never be unlesse the people beleiving this Drs. Position betray this Parliament that a Parliament should joyne with a King to cast out the true Religion and bring in Popery and so make Lawes against us which are now all for us yet might we resist and not suffer our selves to be massacred or condemned for not consenting to be Traitours to the King of Heaven LORD Jesus Christ whom yet they would pretend to rule by and for him If any man can shew me that it is Gods Ordinance wee should submit and suffer in such a case I shall not refuse to yield but I confesse I cannot see it though I know even those that defend the resistance now used Lawfull affirme it were not lawfull if the Law were against us as it is for us But how humane Lawes made without against GODS Authority can hinder me from the Liberty granted me by the Law
ready to doe all things for Ireland as if he had stayed at London 2. When he had been at Hull and demanded of the Parliament justice upon Sr. John Hotham he declared he would doe no businesse till he had satisfaction in that except only the businesse of Ireland 3. A few dayes after that he would in all haste goe over in Person to subdue the bloody Rebels and venture his Royall Person to recover that poore Kingdome Who now almost can beleeve his Eares or Eyes that any thing should be done to the prejudice of Ireland 4. If the dates be observed of some of those things mentioned in that Answer of the House of Commons they will be found done before the Parliament had done any thing more toward their own defence then when that profession was made after the Kings being at Hull when the King would have ventured himselfe to goe into Ireland 5. It is strange that the puniâ—hing of Sr. John Hotham and the suppressing the Militia the recovery of Hull and the Magazene which at last after many other Declarations perswading of no intention at all of a War against the Parliament the King declares he would loose his life but he would obtaine and this I think Quaere before there was any one man listed for the Parliaments defence should be thought a necessity allowing any retarding much lesse disappointing the crying necessities of Ireland after such Protestations of care for it 6. If the Parliament be not only not so good subjects as the now entertained Recusants but unlesse they be worse then those horrid Rebels of whom some of the Kings Declarations speake with destation enough while the Parliament protests before God and the Kingdome and the world that they have no Thoughts nor Intentions but loyall to the King and faithfull to the Religion and Kingdome and the Popish bloody Rebels who one while avouch they have the Kings authority for what they have done another while seeme to renounce him and to intend a new King But alwayes professe to intend the extirpation of the Brittish Nation and Protestant Religion in that Kingdome and then to come over into England to fight against the Parliament and Puritans and Protestants here If I say the Parliament be not worse then the Irish Traitours it is a prodegy that any necessity can be thought sufficient to doe such and so many acts as that Declaration of the House of Commons mentions or almost any one of them to the woefull prejudice of that bleeding Kingdome and great incouragement of the bloody Rebels It would be too long to insist on every particular which if a man would Rhetorically and but justly amplifie he might astonish all men how the former Protestations and those actions could agree and what necessity could be pretended for some of them as entertaining Irish Rebels c. vide 7. Unto all which adde but this as a corrollary that the whole is a most unhappy verification of that which at the first breaking out of the Rebellion was related as spoken from the Rebels that they had a considerable Party in England in the very Parliament and the Court and that they doubted not but to find us so much work at home as we should have no leisure to send succours to the Protestants there Nor can I forget what I heard a few dayes before the Irish Rebellion brake out that a Steward of a Popish great Lord disswading a Church-warden from obeying the Order of the House of Commons about taking away Idolatrous Pictures c. Bidds him not be too hasty for before a Moneth were at an end he should see great alteration and so it appeared though blessed be God not yet to the full of their hopes Lay now all these things together which the Dr. hath instanced in and forced this descant upon with those in the former Section and then let all consciences exercise their most unpartiall judgement and most ample charity and then suspect in whom the designe hath bin and is which hath necessitated the other party to take Armes to defend themselves and then let them say Amen to an Application of two Stories of Scriptures one of Jotham to the men of Shechem If you have done faithfully c. then rejoyce and â—et your party rejoyce but if not then fire come forth and devoure c. The other of Solomon concerning Abner and Amasa's bloud let it rest on the head of Joab c. but upon David and upon his house and upon his Throne let there be peace from the Lord for ever and let I say all that love God and the King and Justice and Truth say Amen But the Doctor will have us consider what the King hath done to exempt these scruples of feares and jealousies from the peoples minds Which in summe are the passing of Bils this Parliament and protestations for Religion Priviledges of Parliament Laws and Liberties For the first of these what are they worth in ill times and under ill Judges if once the Militia and the Navy be surrendred and this Parliament dissolved what did magna Charta the Petition of Right Articles of Religion serve to prevent all the illegalities and innovations upon Church and State before this Parliament or what did all the Laws and Priviledges of Scotland serve them for If suspected Councellours and followers be still about the King and favoured by him where shall be a security to take away these feares Also for the other What have Protestations prevailed to prevent former danger That unparallel'd danger to the House of COMMONS and the whole Kingdome by his comming into the House with such Followers waiting at the doors so weaponed so behaving themselvs and speaking then and since was it not the very day after his Message denying them the Guard they desired and protesting toward the close We do ingage unto you solemnly the word of a King that the security of all and every one of you from violence is and shall ever be as much Our care as the preservation of Vs and Our Children And how did all men judge that beleeved the Protestations set out at Yorke a while that no war was intended against the Parliament till some strength gotten as was noted before under the name of a Guard out of Yorke-shiere and more endeavoured by Agents in severall parts of the Kingdom and hoped for from beyond Sea altered the language and the face of things till it came to the present extremities Also whatever the Doctors Informations were at the time he was penning his clause of applauding the Kings excellent moderation amidst the pressures and extremities of warr shewing what respect he hath to the Property and Liberty of the Subject whosoever remembers what all but wilfully ignorant or altogether carelesse know of taking away armes from the Countries along to Chester and backe afterward the plundering of Banbury notwithstanding the Kings promise to the contrary and Abington Reading but most specially Brainford and Kingston
They may be resisted at pleasure and their words and actions deserving no charity or challenging none Consciences will judge and may without breach of charity how charitable or true these interpretations and imputations be And so I have done with him If any other now aske me why it is not as fitting easie to put off all imputations from the Parliament and lay it upon a Faction there as the Declarations in the Kings Name use to doe as it is for the Parliament to put off all from the King to his Councellours and Followers I answer in a word the Law commands the one and Reason gives a faire ground for it The King is but one and so if those about him fill his head with strange Doctrines in Religion and Maximes or interpretations of law and with strange relations in matters of Fact and answerable suggestions unles he were a Prophet or an Angell he can hardly avoid false opinions and errours in government Himselfe tels us in the fore-cited answer to the 19 Propositions of surreptiously-gotten commands from a King by followers and favourites against the Law which he is bound to protect when he knowes it Therfore according to our Law The King may be mis-informed but hee cannot be mistaken and the King can doe no wrong because it supposes hee doth nothing but by Advise of his Councellours in matters of State and Judges in matters of law Therfore he grants the Commons may impeach such Favourites and Followers of his and then the Lords are to judge and punish them Would this have bin suffered or would it yet the Parliament and he would soon accord But they get him to let them lay all upon him which themselves say and doe and this hazards our undoing We would not charge or distrust the King We dare not must not unlesse we meane to be ruined trust or discharge his Councellours But we hope and pray that God will blesse him so at last as that those being taken away from before him or rather being yeelded up by him as drosse from the silver his Throne shall be established in righteousnesse Majesty and Honour Meane time we proclaime they injury him and us and the law that interpret what is said or done against the multitude of his Followers and Army or any of them though sheltred by his Name and Presence as done against him On the contrary side the Parliament is a numerous Body where each one Votes single and it must be a Maior part that carries any thing and there is no other sence of a Parliament in Law and Reason then the maior part at least Therfore the Votes and Orders and Declarations that come as all do from the maior part cannot be lesse then the Votes of the Parliament themselves 〈◊〉 the Counsellors Judges and have none on whom to discharge any imputation So thâ— unles a Parliament can be a Faction which in our Law is a meere contradiction It iâ— impossible that a Faction can carry things there or what is there done can be so putâ— off and the Parliament discharged I conclude then a King may be charitably believe to meane well as he protests only to be mis-informed and abused by wicked Councellours But the Parliament cannot be is not well thought of by charity it self in it's highest perfection if the maior part vote and act evill things The Parliament is then the offendor before God and man For conclusion of all Let me adde 5 or 6 Qualifications or Cautions upon the whole matter 1. All Governours Supreme specially have somewhat of Prerogative beyond written or expresse Lawes But this to be used for the Subjects good not hurt 2. A Christian though able and innocent is not to resist all injuries done to him in his Estate or person no not by private persons much lesse if done by the command of Governours specially of the Supreme Christian meeknes requires the one and Christian subjection the other 3. An open and publike resistance by armes is the last Refuge under Heaven of an oppressed and endangered Nation Many injuries are to be let paâ— while appearing but personall not politicall or designed as presidents Jealousies are not to be suddenly taken up nor too deeply taken in And all possible meanes of redresse and satisfaction is to be endeavoured before this course be taken 4. If Lawes doe injury they must not be resisted unles they command undeniably against God and not only so but threaten extreame extremity 5. Whatsoever injury happens to be done to innocent persons is to be recompenced as speedily and fully as may be 6. A Peace is to be imbraced desired pursued with all faithfullnesse so it may be but rationally safe and not betray to the misery which war was undertaken to prevent or remedy 7. The Nation and Parliament that is put to this necessity of a warr must acknowledge Godâ— just and heavy displeasure which so threatens them so endangers them and therefore must before all and in all and with all humble themselves most unfainedly to God and seeke to make their peace with him and thus may hope He will blesse their Arms and desires of peace with sufficient victory and a peacefull and happy Conclusion in due time Which the Lord of Hosts and God of Peace may doe for us as He will for all His. I shut up all with that Prayer and Prophesie Psal 125.4 5. Do good O Lord to those that be good and to them that are upright in their hearts As for such as turne aside to their crooked wayes the Lord shall leade them forth with the workers of iniquity but peace shall be upon Israel Amen Amen FINIS His Epist 2 Cor. 1.12 2 Cor. â—â— 17 18 19. Act. 24.5 Ezâ— 4.15 Act. 17. Luther Bâ—genhagius Iusâ—â—s Ionas Amâ—sdoâ—sias Spâ—latiâ—â—â—â—nct hoÌ„ Câ—â—tâ—â—gâ—â— and 〈◊〉 Lawyers and States-meÌ„ puâ—lished a writing Anno 15â—1 to justifie defensive Armes c. K Iames Speech in Paâ—â— An. 1609. See Remonstr Dec 15. 1641. Votes May 20 Remonst May 26 1641. Declar. Iuly 13 Aug 3. Aug 15. Aug. 20. Octob. 22. Petitions of Parl March 26 May 20. Iun. 27. Iul. 15. Petitions of London and severall Counties for the Kings returne With the L. Generals Petit. which would not be received c. Ier. 27.3 c. Ier. 16 1â—
a body together in the market place and be assaulted by such a number or a quarter so many they must not offer to resist but let them cut all their throates because forsooth in the body politicke one part must not be set against the head and another part of the Whole 4. He grants the body politicke may defend it self against an outward force but not as now one part c. Reply Then belike if the King imploy Danes or Irish against the Parliament and Kingdome they may resist them and is not the case so now at least in part but not if he imploy only English-Cavaleers Surely the mighty wits of the Earle of Strafford who was condemned mainly for counselling to bring in nine thousand Irish to reduce this Kingdome wanted our Doctor to have advised him to forbeare that designe and only Arme English and then the peoples hands and consciences should have been tyed from resisting by the Doctors and his fellow-Chaplaines Divinity and must have yeelded Religion Lawes and Liberties and neckes too for feare of dissolving the whole politick body by defence 5. When the state of the Question by himselfe set is when a Prince is bent to subvert Religion Lawes and Liberties What dissolution of the Whole can bee feared by defence and resistance against such intentions worse then that or so bad While therefore he talkes of such defence tending to the dissolution of the Whole he perverts the Question or else forgets that the subverting of Religion Laws and Liberties cannot be accounted lesse then a dissolution of the whole politicke body 6. I say therefore by an Argument à fâ—rtiâ—ri retorting his words upon himself If a private person may defend himselfe a gainst illegall Assaults of the Kings Messenger or even of himselfe as before then much more the representative Body of a State and even any considerable part of the Body with them or even without them to save Religion Lawes and Liberties against an intent to subvert them And if against outward forraigne Force then much more against homebred unnaturall Members who exceed rather then come short of any outward Force in rage and câ—uelâ—y tending to the subversion of the Whole and all such unnaturall and gangren'd members are justly and necessarily cut-off for the safety of the whole though their cutting oâ— cannot be without a maime and lamenesse at least for the present I say for the present for new members will grow up in the politicke body in time though never in the body naturall 2. He hath yet another Answer for us in these words Personall Defence may be without all offence doth not strike at the order and power that is over us as generall resistance by Armes doth which cannot be without many unjust violences and doth immediately strike at that order which is the life of the Common-wealth And this makes a large difference 'twixt Elisha's shutting the doore against this Messenger and their shutting-up the way against the King by armed men Repl 1. If some personall defence may be without all offence yet not all And he at least seems to have yeelded all personall defence lawfull so the Kings person may not be violated 2. Whose fault it is originally that generall resistance by Armes cannot be without offence Are the Plunderers not in fault but the defenders must be counted guilty And whose hand is it that strikes immediately at the order which is the life as he saith of the Common-wealth The defendants of Religion Laws and Liberties Or theirs who intend and attempt to subvert them all 3. How doth personall Defence if offensive to the Messengers assaulting strike lesse at the power over us then generall or common defence doth Or rather neither doth since the power over us as intended and ordained both by God and man is for the preserving and defending not subverting Religion Laws and Liberties and so defends the true power strikes not at it 4. If generall Defence cannot be without many unjust violences no more is any warre at all in a forraigne Country de facto But as the impossibility to restrain these wholly do's not make all warrs unlawfull so much lesse doth it a necessary defence in case of such danger to Religion Laws and Liberties 5. Whose fault is it that these unjust violences cannot be avoided the Assaylants or the defendants Let God and conscience be Judge To Him we feare not to appeale and while the conscientious Defendants labour as much as morally they can to prevent and rectifie all such unjust violences whether the danger of some acting them who must be imployed in the defence altogether forbids the generall defence to the utter subversion of Religion Laws and Liberties 6. And this indeed makes a large difference betwen Elisha's case and ours He defended but one against a sudden passionate command He pleades against malicious deliberate intents for defence of many the generall of all faithfull Prophets Magistrates Princes and all with Laws and Liberties for all posterity Let Heaven and Earth judge who is the wrong-doer and whether the defendants may not as Innocents call for justice as well as David against Saul 1 Sam. 24. 26. vide locum As for the Parliaments power to conclude of the Kings intentions without the Spirit Prophetick of Elisha I wonder we had not here also that Elisha defended himself by an extraordinary way being an extraordinary person as well as David before that belongs to the third Proposition handled in his third Section thither I refer it Only saying that since the printing of the Doctors book some bloud hath bin shed by the Kings Counsell of war at Reading in a pretended legality So at Oxford some others have lately been condemned with pretence of Law and what shall become of them who knows whether they will put them to death in terrorem to others Or reserve them for feare some of their party should be served with the same sawce Finally whereas he saith the King desires not any punishment should be inflicted on any that oppose him then what a legall tryall shall adjudge them to which no good Subject ought to decline Reply This were credible if we were assured what is meant by a legall tryall and that it did signifie not a tryall by such Judges and Juries as are apparantly partiall or if we could forget that the six Members accused of High-Treason in January last offered themselves to be tryed and the Parliament offered to try them in Parliament according to their Priviledges being Members of their Houses and from thence forth the Accusation was laid a sleepe till of late notwithstanding the reiterated importunities of both Houses of Parliament who also in one of their Declarations or Petitions to the King urged a Statutes how such accusations ought to be managed and conclude to this effect that by Law and Justice this ought not to be denyed And thus I have vindicated the Examples of Scripture by the Doctor alleadged for us and from
Aristocratically But there must alwayes be Judges and inferiour officers in a large Dominion or all government is lost Will the Doctor say that the hands that have lift up the Judge or Officer to his seat that is the Kings hands may not bee lift up against him to pull him downe and pull off his Robes or take the Sword out of his hand The interest that God hath in him shall it preserve him in his Office in case especially of Mal-Administration But shall it or hath it done even so long as no offence is proved against him The Parliament hath indeed desired it for Judges and great Officers but hath it been granted Or what meanes the putting out of so many old Justices of Peace lately without any Crime alleadged against them at all of which more Countreys then one have at the Assises complained as a great grievance What will the Doctor say to this Yet they were Gods Ministers and had the Sword committed to them If hee say the King was their Superiour and so might take their Authoritie away but the people is not Superiour to the King REPLY This satisfies not because notwithstanding here is a Person in whom GOD hath an interest and who is his Minister deprived of his Authoritie not only when he abuses it but meerely at pleasure The Drs. Reason then hath no strength in it thus faare or this done to inferiour Magistrates is not lawfull 2. But secondly what strength is in his Argument lies in the Kings being GODS anointed and therefore the Crowne may not be taken from his Head by Men this I have granted him before and am so farre from recalling or disputing against that I will adde this word of confirmation to it Supposing wee speake of such a Prince or Monarch call him King or Emperour or Duke or what you will that is not deposeable by the expresse Lawes of that Common-Wealth as the Duke of Brabant was and the Duke of Venice is for such as those Dukes were not properly supreame nor GODS immediate Vicegerents as Saul and David and the like I say then that though in case of Mal-Administration an inferiour Magistrate may be Lawfull and most justly and necessarily deposed by the Kings Authoritie I will not say the like so long as they carry themselves well and are not meerely Annuall Officers who also are glad usually when their yeare is out because their Office is a burthen and charge yet a Supreame may not by the people because hee is GODS immediate Vicegerent and so specially owned by Him and have none upon Earth unto whom GOD by any expression in his Word hath given Authoritie over them to take their Crownes from their Heads I say againe as a Wife cannot take away her Husbands Authority because she is in no sence above him So unlesse the Law of that State name a Superiour to him that is in Tittle the Prince to take his Crowne from him in such a case he cannot be deposed by the Law of GOD which appoints no persons to do such a thing to illustrate which Let me adde that in those times when GOD allowed by the Judiciall Law a Man to put away his Wife It did not allow a Woman to put away or forsake her Husband though I know about our Saviours Time Iosephus relates of Women having gotten that among the Iewes at least some of them as hee instances in Salome sister to Herod the Great who put away her Husband But GOD allowed it not And so that may bee lawfull for a Prince who is Superiour to doe to an Inferiour Magistrate which is not lawfull for the people to doe to the Prince who is Supreme no not in a like case of Mal-Administration I could instance in sundry other Prerogatives in GODS Word to Superiours which hold not no not in like cases to Inferiours but it needs not with the Parliament as hath been oft said 2. But whereas the Dr. addes Nor to take the Sword out of his hand This is inconsequent divers wayes First himselfe in the former SECTION in the case of Elisha granted a private man might resist the Kings Messenger and even hold the Kings owne hands sure he may he doth that while equivalently take the Sword out of his hand Secondly the people tooke it out of Sauls hand when he would have put Ionathan illegally to death Thirdly If hee would kill himselfe it may be taken out of his hand 4. Since out of all question GOD never put it into his hands to kill the Innocent nor much lesse to subvert Religion Lawes and Liberties he being GODS anointed and GODS Minister for good c. hinders not the taking the Sword so long out of his hand till it hath beene sufficiently imployed to punish those Malefactors and delinquents which he should but will not strike with it or rather will defend and imploy S. Yet I say further to doe that which the Parliament hath done supposing the necessity of which hereafter is not to take the Sword out of his hand himselfe grants as was noted before in his Answer to the 19. Propositions that the two Houses have a legall power to punish even such as doe violence being his followers or Favourites though countenanced with some surrâ—ptiously gotten Command from the King and moreover that they have power more than sufficient to prevent and restraine Tyrannie Their setling the Mâ—litia in safe hands and the Navy and securing Hull is by them declared to be for no other end nor their raising an Army since If then those that they would punish bee Delinquents and if in them whom the King trusts there bee though not at all in the King an intention to bring in a Tyranny even with Armes and to subvert Religion Lawes and Liberties which is the state of the present Question then by the Kings owne grants as aforesaid they may Legally and Lawfully take the Sword into their hands and doe not take it out of Kings but his wicked Followers 6. But because the Dr. closes his Assertion with saying This will not a a true informed Conscience dare to doe REPLY I will be bold to try whether Conscience many not say It dares doe no other then than this latter so farre to take the Sword into their hands whether even his Tower of Battery Rom. 13.21 not by what hath beene said formerly and even now so wonne from him as it is become ours to beat down his Principle in this first Question to the very dust Secondly I say the Parliament is a Power ordained of God it is the Minister of God It is to be a Terrour to evill Workes It is to be a Revenger to execute Wrath on them that doe evill It is to watch continually as GODS Minister in thâ—s very thing and so foâ— the prayse of them that doe well and so the secuâ—iâ—g of Religion Lawes and Liberties it is not to beare the Sword in vaine And a sword it hath by the Kings owne sentence to the
againe it can never be rationally conceived the people have given away such a naturall liberty such a necessary power for their common safety Unlesse it can be proved that they have done so The proofe then before the Barre of indifferency of judgement and unpartiall conscience will lie on the Doctors part not ours Fourthly But he saith the representative Body cannot meet but by the will of the Prince and is dissoluble at his pleasure REPL. 2. It hath been so de facto multo but whether it bee altogether so de jure may justly be questioned upon these grounds First for their meeting when the Prince is an Infant or if a prisoner in enemies hands and so cannot give out a legall Warrant for their meeting or if distracted hath not the State power to meet in Parliament for their common safety and the Princes too They have met in the infancy or minority of Kings and made Lawes as in Edw. the 6. time and not by the meere power of the Protectour for the Nobility after put him out his head was cut off afterward by a Law made while he was Protectour It was then and could be nothing else but the inherent power of State to meet so in cases of necessity Yet I beleeve there is no written Law for this but the generall Maxim of Salus Populi suprema lex And this will extend to the case of Tyranny as fully as any of the former if not more Withall did not the Lords in Richard the 2 nds time call a Parliament without the King wherein they had their grievances redressed and this afterward was confirmed in the first of Hen. the 4 th Secondly then for their dissolving It hath indeed beene very much practised by our two last Kings But our Histories so farre as I remember quare whether Hen. 3. did not dissolve some Parliaments in discontent mention not any such thing as a Parliament dissolved in displeasure or against the desire of the Houses But as they meet very frequently oft-times every yeare somtimes oftner so that in the space of a hundred yeares there are counted above a 100. Parliaments So they sate till they had ended the Princes and their owne businesses which went much together and so it never came to a matter of examination or discontent the delay of calling them to meet or the too timely dissolution of Parliaments Parliaments were not wont to bee so odious or dreadfull to Princes as within these forty yeares they have been By whose default they have been so since let the encrochments upon Magna Charta and the Subjects liberties direct any to judge 2. But further for both these First the Parliament averres that there are Lawes that there should be a Parliament every yeare and so they have abated of their Right rather then gained upon the King by the Act of the Trienniall Parliament 2. And for the dissolution I have heard some wisemen affirme that by Law it cannot be dissolved while there are any Petitions of grievances or such matters of importance depending and unfinished Whereunto may be added most justly that in ordinary times Countrey Gentlemen and Noblemen and in a manner the whole body of the Parliament would be as sick of a long Parliament and continuall attendance as the King could wish and would petition rather then be tyed so by the legge for a dissolution or at least a Prorogation And it 's well enough knowne that even this Parliament after the Act of Continuation past were as weary of sitting as need to be desired till the Rebellion in Ireland seconded by the growing evills at home put new spirits into them and forced them to that diligence of attendance and unwearied labours so many as have taken the common good to heart as no Age or Story can parallel here or in any other Kingdome or Nation Thirdly beyond all this I appeale againe to the Kings Answer to the 19. Prepositions formerly mention'd and aske whether if the King have absolute power to forbeare calling them at his will and to dissolve them at his pleasure it be not a meere nothing that hee saith the House of Commons have power to impeach his owne Followers and Favorites who have broken the Lawes even by surreptitiously gotten commands from the King and that the Lords have power to judge and punish and are an excellent skreene between the King and the people to assist each against any incroachings of the other and by just Iudgements to preserve the Law which ought to be the rule of every one of the three and that the Power legally placed in both Houses is more then sufficient to prevent and restraine the power of Tyranny What serves all this for when his Favourites will keepe him from calling a Parliament perhaps all his dayes unlesse unlook'd for neceâ—sity force him to it We haoe â—eene our selves about 13. yeares without one and had there not beene conceived hopes that there would have beene Money given against the Scots it had not been then called as it was Againe what serves the calling them when the same Favourites being questioned shall counsell a dissolution We have knowne that too even three times in this Kings Reigne and no other dissolution but on these grounds And the last was within three weekes because they would not in all hast and contrary to all former Presidents and Priviledges give mony against the Scots and embroyle the two Kingdomes in a perpetuall Warre not having had one grievance redressed And in the case of a Prince bent or seduced to subvert Religion Lawes and Liberties which is the Doctors Case propounded It is undoubted he will if he can dissolve them as soone as they offer but to punish any of his Favourites and so to crosse the designe unlesse he dare not of which anon because therefore I believe the King in that Answer hath not ascribed more then right to the Parliament It will follow that in right specially in such case they ought not to be dissolved And that if by force they should be or should not have been called at all the People have right to meet together when and where they can in a Parliamentary manner or otherwise to such end as to defend themselves and one another from tyranny and the designed subversion of Religion Lawes and Liberties as hath beene often said Fourthly but for the present condition of our Kingdome and Parliament I must professe that as I admire the providence of God in the Act passed for the continuation of this Parliament so I doe for the forementioned expressions of the King in that answer Which laid together may to any understanding men wholly decide this first Question betweene the Doctor and us in point of Legality in our Kingdome if there were nothing else said or to be said that supposing such a designe to subvert Religion Lawes and Liberties This Parliament hath if no other had or could have being dissoluble at pleasure compleat power and Authority to
tell shewed the Kings hand for to have had Hull and the Magazine delivered up to him And all this before the setling of the Militia by an Ordinance or Sir Iohn Hothams taking in Forces to keep Hull safe Let Conscience now judge whether all this gave not just occasion for a preparation for Defence and of a long time after this nothing more was done the Militia setled in very â—ew Countries till the Kings proceedings hath further warned them â—o stand upon their guard in other places besides London It is true the King for a time had nothing but Proclamations and Declarations to oppose them But after he was once gone Northward and the Qu. beyond Sea what did hee ever doe or say but in opposition to them and while his Declarations renounced all thoughts of Warre notes were sent over into Holland for Armes and a beginning of an Army raised at Yorke under the name of a Guard When first the Houses having petitioned the Removing the Magazine at Hull to London Upon a counter-Petition of a very few Gentlemen of Yorkshire pretending the name of the whole County that it might be kept cleare still the King goes instantly to Hull and demands entrance intending as he declares to the Parliament after that he meant so to doe to take possession of the Towne and Magazine and dispose of it and being denyed proclaimes Sir Iohn Hotham Traitor without any processe of Law or sending first to the House to know if they would owne it and after demands justice so peremptorily as to deny before hand all other businesses but that of Ireland and how well that was done we must remember anon and then was the Army raised under Colour of a Guard the Yorkshire men not comming in readily enough to make it appeare a great Army And all this before ever it was declared by the Houses that the King seduced by wicked Councell intended to make war against his Parliament and so before ever they set out the Propositions for Money Plate Horses and therefore certainly before any one man was listed In all which the event hath shewed that they were rather in wisdome too slow then in conscience too quick in their Preparations for defence Remembring also that as soone as the Ship Providence was come to them a provdence indeed to discover what was before intended the Siege was straight â—aid to Huâ— and the Declarations then spoke another Language then common men understood them to speake before For after all the Lords present with the King had subscribâ—d about Iune 16. that they saw in the pretented Guard c. no intention of Warre against the Parliament within few dayes the King tels them that if to seeke to recover Hull and the Magazine then at London and suppresse the Militia in all which the Parliament was engaged as much as could be were to make Warre against the Parliament he ever meant to doe these things and had ever declared so though I beleeve none that beleeved him did or could so understand Let Conscience now judge who began first As touching the cause of these Armes the Doctor would perswade us that it is for somthing which the King hath right to Deny To evince which he first affirmes that it cannot be for Religion or Priviledges and ancient Rights and Liberties for these the King doth not deny REPL. But now sufficient verball promises with such actions done as were noted even now are to secure Religion or the State Conscience must judge and it may a little the better when we come to consider them againe in the proper place for them for here they outrunne their season like Abortives in the next Section Secondly he saith it must then be for denying the Militia the disposing offices of State and such like also the government of the Church and the revenue of it and for not denying his power of denying in Parliament REPL. 1. For the Militia I referre to what hath beene said how just reason the Parliament had to petition the securing it and after to settle it as in case of necessity by Ordinance Of which their Declarations have given more full account 2. For disposing Offices of State it was never desired till the difference was very farre advanced and Hull attempted and Sir Iohn Hotham proclaimed Traitour and the Army raised at Yorke called a Guard And so onely desired as a Security after such a breach and no way a cause of the breach Thirdly For the Kings power of denying it was never in question betweene him and them till the Militia was absolutely and peremptorily denyed And in all their Declarations they never take it away but contrarily in the defence of that May 26. they grant that though the King be bound by Oath and care of his people not to deny any Bill for generall safety and good for in ordinary matters they yeeld he may deny Yet if he doe deny it is no Law without him Onely in case of the common safety they say the two Houses may doe what is necessary and it binds the Subjects for that necessity though he doe deny The denyall then of the Militia only in the case of necessity with other things noted before forced them to doe what they did toward Armes and not any difference about a power of deniall in generall 4. For the government and Revenue of the Church I beleeve indeed it was a part of the cause of taking Armes but not on the Parliaments part the major part of whom in either House never till very lately declared nor shewed any purpose of taking either away quite but only reforming which the Doctor saith his Majesty is alway ready to agree as may appeare even by the great agitations for so long in the House of Commons of the Bill against Episcopacy root and branch and at last it was wholly laid aside which shewes the major part never owned it as their delight Else they would first have absolutely concluded the destructive part and then consulted what to have in the roome Bâ—t to consult first for Successours was Pacuvius his Policy to preserve the Senatours of Capua though he made shew to condemne them all And had the Commons past the Bill against them yet did the Lords never shew any such intendment who were not easily wonne to take away their Votes till their Protestation against both Houses in their absence helped to perswade them to it It can then no way appeare to Conscience that ever the Parliament had thoughts of Armes to obtaine their taking away But I am verily perswaded by all I could ever heare from the Episcopall Party that their feare of this made them who had still enough of the Kings eare and heart urge the King to many Actions which have helped the Warre forward Among the rest I cannot but note one not a weeke passed betweene the 12. Bishops for their Protestation before the King first accused of high Treason the L. Kimbolâ—on and the other five
though helping them in and having promise of all favour and then at Marlborow and great cruelties to those that were led away Prisoners and this since the Kings Proclamation against plundring and since that Newbury and many other Townes formerly and of late in Bark shiere Oxford shiere Surrey Buckingham shiere will have little cause to believe the Doctors intelligences or assurances that all protestations that come in the Kings name may be trusted And whereas he urges that we may not raise an evill thought against the King Eccl. 10. What shall we say to those men unlesse that of David concerning Sauls Councellours 1 Sam. 24. That at least they deserve to be accursed that force men either to distrust or to suffer ruine because they have power and will to breake that which we would trust the King in most gladly and desiredly if he had no such men about him I have no desire nor will to prosecute particulars further But the Doctor abuses his Readers to cast an oblique aspersion as if the Parliament had any thoughts of contending for a new frame of Religion which deserves no answer so grosse a slander it is And then 2dly to insinuate plainly that the 19. Propositions were urged as so necessary as unles they were granted the Kingdom must be imbroyled in a civill warr and the reliefe of Ireland neglected The fore-named Petition by the Earle of Holland clears that sufficiently and the Petition too that the Earle of Essex should have presented or sent but the King would receive none from him The rest of the Doctors book is but recapitulations Rhetoricall of what he hath said before and an Answer to the instance of Libna's revolt which I will be no justifier of because so little is said of it in Scripture To which I have only these things to adde 1. Though Absalom which he mentioned before and I slipt did falsly calumniate David what ever petty neglect might be in some officers as appears by 2 Sam. 8. 1 Ch. so being a comly person which takes much with the multitude a strange fâ—atterer of all that came for Justice what ever their cause were 2 Sa. 15. and the heire apparant of the Crown might invegle the people into a Rebellion Yet neither is this any thing like to the causes of complaint or suspitions that we have had and have still nor yet is there any probability that a people justly governed should by Parliamentary Declarations be armed against their King As besides all other Arguments appeares by the small assistance of armed men any Country hath yeelded to the Parliament even where they think them in the right in the cause and themselves too in danger to be plundered 2. If the Parliaments actions in all things about their defence cannot be excused or justified specially by those that see not the whole of their actions and much lesse the reasons of them yet their consciences that see the justnes of the action for the main of defence and grounds to believe their Protestations of their intentions in the defence are not bound to be Neuters much lesse to assist the King against them because they are not or cannot be satisfied in this or that particular For then scarce any warre might lawfully be joyned in 3. In speciall for the sufferance of so many Sects to vent their doctrins with such liberty and to commit unsufferable out-rages upon the worship of God 1 Hath not the Parliament declared against Brownists Anabaptists in the first Remonstrance 2. Have not some Sectaries bin punished as he that made the new Creed was he not imprisoned 3. How many scandalous and innovating Ministers have bin complained of and yet few of them questioned and those not fully censured scarce one by both Houses the Doctor will not lay to their charge the suffering of such which yet he may with more reason as being offendors of longer continuance and more danger 4. The truth is partly the multitude of offendors at first complained of and partly for neare a yeare and an halfe of late their owne extreame danger by the Malignant parties getting strength since the Irish rebellion broke out and so multitude of businesses over-whelming them have hindred that Justice which else those Sects and out-rages the Doctor mentions would have found and may yet in due time if legally proved 5. And if he will say some speciall men favoured them in the very Houses he cannot say more then may be made good of others favouring Superstitions Arminianisme Socianisme and even Popery it selfe Yet this were most unjustly charged upon the Body of either House and much lesse on both And when it shall please God that the Consultation of Divines shall meet for which they have more then once passed the Bill for his Majesty to confirm it will I doubt not appeare to all the world that they never ment to suffer any such opinions or practises as are truly dishonourable to the true Reformed Protestant Religion as even in the mean time the Orthodoxisme and Moderation of the Members of that Assembly generally known to all that know the persons may be a sufficient pledge among them all there being very few that are liable to any pretence of exception for Sects and perhaps none at all for countenancing any such out-rage as the Doctor cryes out upon 6. In fine the worst of the Parliament charged upon them with any shadow in matter of Religion is but omissions or delayes which are but Moats to the beames which the Doctor overlooks in their Adversaries of old and still Who have made stables of Churches but they Who have burned and troden under foot Bibles but their Partisans of Ireland Not to insist on their horrid blasphemies which if Gods word be true as they will one day find it makes our Land groane and mourne under them If a conscience comes to weigh these in the ballance with the Parliament let it if it dare be charitable to the Cavaliers and their Army so as to believe Religion is like to be defended by them when the Parliament intends to ruine it I will say no more to the Doctor but this one thing that a sober conscience that peruses his whole Treatise will wonder what kind of conscience his is that Rhetorizes so for charity on the one side and wholly neglects it on the other telling us more then once that though we lay downe our lives for our Religion it is nothing if we have not the charity he cals While himselfe with all confidence charges the Parliament with many grievous faults against Religion Allegiance Lawes and Liberties and Liberties and discredits all their Protestations and Declarations to the contrary as if he thought that as his great Text Rom. 13. speaks only in his conceit of Monarchs so 1 Cor 13. related also to them only No resisting that higher power but all charity to him what ever he doe or say But as for the Parliament their power is of no regard