Security indispensibly required of him before at his entry to the Government Yet this Liberty cannot be Complyed with without recognoscing his Authority that he arrogates in giving it Seeing he tenders it to all his good Subjects and gives it by his Soveraign Authority and to the end that by the Liberty thereby granted the peace security of the Government in the practice thereof may not be indangered And in the Declaration to England it is offered as an expedient to establish his Government on sach a foundation as may make his Subjects happy and unite them to him by inclination as well as duty to which indeed the Acceptance thereof hath a very apt subserviency seeing it implies not only ouning of the Government out of Duty but an union joyning with it and him by inclination which is a cordial Confederacy with Gods enemie and a cooperating to the establishment of his Tyrannie that the peace security thereof may not be endangered And in his former Proclamation he gives them the same security for their Rights Properties which he gives for Religion And in the English Declaration addeth that to the perfect enjoyment of their Propertie which was never invaded c. Which to accept were not only to take the security of a manifest lie but to prefer the word of a man that cannot must not will not keep it without going cross to his principles to the Security of Right Law which is hereby infringed and to acknowledge not only the Liberty of Religion but the Right of Property to his grant which when ever it is removed there must remain no more Charter for it but stupid slavery entailed upon Posterity and pure perfect Tyranny transmitted to them The sin absurdity where of may be seen demonstrated Head. 2. 4 Considering the Fountain whence it flowes they cannot defile themselves with it In the English Declaration it flowes from the Royal will pleasurâ— which speaks a Domination Despotical Arbitrary enough but more gently expressed than in the Scots Proclamation where it is refounded on Soveraign Authority Prerogative Royal and Absolute Power Proclaiming by sound of Trumpet à Power Paramount to all Law Reason Religion and outvying the hight of Ottoman Tyranny A Power which all are to obey without resâ—rve A power to Tolerate or Restrain the Protestant Religion according to his Royal will or pleasure An Absolute power which can not be limited by Lawes nor most Sacred Obligations but only regulated by the Royal lust whereby indeed he may suffer the Protestant Religion but only precariously so long as he pleases and until his Royal pleasure shall be to command the establishment of Poperie which then must be complyed with without control Whereby all the tenure that Protestants have for their Religion is only the Arbitrary word of an absolute Monarch whose principles oblige him to break it and his ambition to disdain to be a slave to it Now the Acceptance of this Grant would imply the recognizance of this power that the Granter claims in granting it which utterly disolves all Government and all security for Religion Liberty and all the precious Interests of men Christians Which to acknowledge were contrare to Scripture contrary to Reason and contrary to the Principles of the Church of Scotland particularly the Declaration of the Gen. Ass. Iulij 27. 1649. See pag. 89. c. and contrary to the Covenant 5. Considering the Channel in which it is conveyed they cannot Comply with it Because it comes through such a Conveyance as suspends stops disables all penal Lawes against Papists and thereby everts all the Securities legal Bulwarks that Protestants can have for the establishment of their Religion yea in effect leaves no Lawes in force against any that shall attempt the utter subversion of it but ratiâ—ies leaves in ful vigour all wicked Lawes Acts of Parliament against such as would most avowedly assert it and stops disables none of the most cruel bloody Lawes against Protestants for the most cruel are such as have been made against Field-Meetings which are hereby left in ful force vigour Hence as he hath formally by absolute power suspended all Lawes made for the Protection of our Religion so he may when he will dispense with all the Lawes made for its establishment and those who approve the one by such an Acceptance cannot disallow the other but must recognosce a power in the King to subvert all Lawes Rights Liberties which is contrare to Reason as wel as Religion and a clear breach of the National Solemn League Covenants 6. Considering the Ends of its Contrivance they dare not have any accession to accomplish such wicked Projects to which this Acceptance would be so natively subservient The expressed ends of this Grant are to unite the hearts of his Subjects to him in Loyaltie and to their Neighbours in love as in the former Proclamation And that by the Liberty granted the peace security of his Government in the practice thereof may not be endangered as in the latter Proclamation And to unite the Subjects to him by inclination as well as duty which he thinks can be done by no means so effectually as by granting the free exercise of Religion as in the English Declaration Whence we may gather not obscurely what is the proper tendency of it both as to the work worker to wit to incline induce us by flatterie to a lawless Loyaltie and a stupid contented slavery when he cannot compel us by force and make us actively cooperate in setting settling his Tyranny in the peaceable possession of all his Usurpations Robberies Encroachments upon our Religion Lawes Liberties and to incorporate us with Babylon for wbo are the Neighbours he would have us unite with in love but the Papists against whom all the Lovers of Christ must profess themselves irreconcileable Enemies The English Declaration does further discover the design of this device in one expression which will most easily be obtained to be beleeved of any in it viz. that he heartily wishes that all the People of these Dominions were members of the Catholick Church which clearly insinuates that hereby he would entyce them to commit fornication with that Mother of harlots which entycing to Idolatrie if we consult the Scripture should meet with another sort of entertainment than such a kind thankful Acceptance which is not an opposing of such a wicked wish but an encouraging corroberating of it And further he sayes that all the former tract of Persecutions never obtained the end for which it was employed For after all the frequent pressing endeavours that were used to reduce this Kingdom to an exact conâ—ormity in Religion it is visible the success has not answered the design and that the difficultie is invincible Wherein we may note his extorted acknowledgment that all former endeavours to destroy the Work of God have been
visible Kingdom of which the Government is layd upon His shoulders against the heaven-daring Usurpations encroachments made thereupon both as He is Mediator King Head of the Church and as He is God Universal King of the world As He is Mediator it is His Peculiar Prerogative to have a Supremacy Sole Soveraignty over His oun Kingdom to institute His oun Government to constitute His oun Lawes to ordain His oun Officers to appoint His oun Ordinances which He will have observed without alteration addition or diminution untill His Second Coming This His Prerogative hath been is invaded by Erastian Prelacy Sacrilegious Supremacy and now by Antichristian Poperie which have overturned His Government inverted His Lawes subverted His Officiers Perverted His Ordinances As He is God Universal King it is His in communicable Property Glory not only to have Absolute Illimited Power but to invest his Deputed Ministers of Justice with His Authority Ordinance of Magistracy to be administred in subordination to Him to be regulated by His Lawes and to be improved for His Glory the good of Mankind This Glory of His hath been invaded by Tyrants Usurpers arrogating to themselves an Absolute Power intruding themselves without His investment into Authority in a Rebellion against Him in opposition to His Lawes and abusing it to His dishonour and the destruction of Mankind Against both which Encroachments the Present Testimony is stated in a Witness for Religion Liberty to both which these are destructive This will appear to be the Result Tendency of the Testimony in all its parts opposed by the Enemies of Religion Liberty and the end of all their oppositions to bring it to this Crinomenon who shall he King Iesus or Cesar Let any seriously search into all their Proclamations Edicts against Religion Liberty this will be found to be the soul sense of them practically Really speaking to this purpose especially since this man came to the Throne J. R. JAmes the 7 2 by the V. of G. King of Scotland England France Ireland Defender of the Antichristian faith To'all sundry our good subjects whom these presents do or many concern Greeting We having taken into our Royal Consideratiâ—n the many great inconveniences which have happened in that our Ancient Kingdom of Scotland especially of late years through the persuasions of the Christian Religion the great heats animosities betuixt the Professors therof and our good faithful subjects whose faith Religion is subject subservient to our Royal will the Supreme Law Reason publick Conscience to the disappointment of our Projects restraint of our pleasures and Contempt of the Royal power Convertingâ— true Loyaltie absolute subjection into words names which we care not for of Religion Liberty Conscience the Word of God thereby withdrawing some to the Christian faction from an absolute implicite subjection to us our will as if there were a Superiour Law to which they might appeal And considering that these Rebellious Christians do never cease to assert maintain strange Paradoxes such Principles as are inconsistent with the glory interest of our Government as that the Authority of Kings should be hem'd in with Limits and that their Acts Actions are to be examined by another rule than their oun Authority to make them Lawful that somethings in the Kingdom are not subject to the Kings Authority That there is a Kingdom within a Kingdom not subordinate to the King And that there is another King Superior to the Supreme whom they will rather obey than us And that we must either take Laws from Him or otherwise we are not Magistrats And Considering also their Practices are Conforme to their Principles They will not obey our Lawes but the Lawes of Another inconsistent with ours and will calculate their Religion according to His Lawes and not according to ours And continually make their Addresses to and receive Ambassadours from a Prince whom we know not whom our Predicessors of truely worthy memory did crucify One Iesus who was dead whom they affirm to be alive whose Government they alledge is Supreme over all Kings Whom they acknowledge but as His Vassals Being now by favourable fortune not only brought to the Imperial Croun of these Kingdoms through the greatest difficulties but preserved upon the throne of our Royal Ancestors which from our Great founder Nimrod of Glorious Memory and our Illustrious Predecessors Pharaoh Nebuchadnezzar Herod the Great Nero Caligula c. of blessed pious Memory hath been ever opposite to and projecting the Destruction of that Kingdom of Christ Do after their Laudable example resolve to suppress that Kingdom by all the means might we can use because His Government is hateful to us His yoke heavy His sayings are hard His Lawes are contrary to our lusts Therefore we will not let this man reign over us we will break His bonds and cast away His Cords from us And advance exerce our Soveraign Authority Prerogative Royal Absolute Power which all our subjects are to obey without reserve And as by virtue of our Supremacy whereby we are above all but such as we are pleased to subject our selves to settled by Law and Lineally Derived to us as an Inherent right to the Croun we have Power to order all matters of Church as well as State as we in our Royal wisdom shall think fit All Laws Acts of Christ to the contrary notwithstanding And accordingly in our Royal wisdom have overturned the plat-form of that Government which Christ hath instituted razed all Courts fenced in His Name and severely interdicted all Meetings of His subjects and intertainment of His Ambassadours many of whom in contempt of Him that sent them we have punished according to Law for negotiating His Affairs in our Kingdoms without our pleasure requiring Allegiance obedience to Him after we had exauctorated Him we have also established our Right Trusty Entirely beloved Clerks in Ecclesiastick affairs and their underlings by our Authority to have the Administration of the business of Religion and impowered our Right Trusty well beloved Cousins Counsellers to Compell all to submitt to them by Finings Confinings Imprisonment Banishment Oaths Bonds and all Legal means So now having prosecuted this war against Christ to this length that we have no fears of a Rally of His forces again so often beaten we are now engaged with other Antichristian Princes to give our Power to our holy Father Antichrist so far as may serve his purpose to oppse Christ in his way but we reserve so much to our seeves as may encroach upon Him in our Capacity And therefore we have thought fit to restore to Antichrist our Ecclesiastical Supremacy from whom we borrowed it and for which we have no use at present But we resolve to maintain prosecute our Soveraign Authority Prerogative Royal and
him as King which was one great cause of his persecuting them It s true he persecuted them also for other things as for their not denying Christ So are we persecuted for many other things than for our simple disouning of the King yet this is reckoned as a distinct cause of their suffering by Mr Mede on the Revel Part. 1. Pag. 43. Gees Magist. Origin ch 10. Sect. 7. Pag. 361. The same last cited Author shewes that when Albinus Niger Cassius successively usurped the Empire having none of them any Legal investure the Christians declined the recognition of their Claim and would not oune them and that upon this Tertulian sayes Nunquam Albiniani nec Nigriani vel Cassiani inveniri potuerunt Christiani that is the Christians could never be found to be Albinians or Nigrians or Cassians meaning they were never ouners of these men for Magistrats And so may we say Pudet inveniri inter Carolinianos Iacobinianos hujus temporis Not unlike is the passage of Ambrose who in favors of Valentiniaâ— the rightful Governour contested against Maximus the Tyrant and not only disouned him but excommunicated him for which he was threatened with death And yet it is observable that when Maximus offered to interpose his power in defence of Ambrose that he might not be banished by Iustina the Empress he would not accept of the help of Maximus whose power he disallowed disouned Whence I observe that it is not without a Precedent for a Minister to disoune a Tyrant to refuse favour from him yea and to excommunicate him yea even without the concurrence of his fainting brethren for all which some of our faithful Ministers have been much condemned in our day especially Mr Donald Cargil for excommunicating Charles the Second Iames Duke of York as if such a thing had never been done before Whereas we see what Ambrose did to Maximus And this same faithful Minister Ambrosius Minister at Millain in Italy did also hold out of the Assembly of the Christians Theodosius the Emperour though a most vertuous Prince for that grievous Scandal committed by him against the innocent people at Thessalonica in killing so many of them in a Passionate transport But 3. since this objection of the Primitive Christians is much insisted on both against this and the head of defensive Armes I shall further take notice of several distinctions that do make the difference between their case Ours very vast 1 There is a great difference betuixt a Prince of the common Religion of his Subjects but distinct from some of them whom yet he does not seek to entice to his Religion but gives them liberty the benefite of the Law as other Subjects which was the case of many in these primitive times sometimes And a Prince by all means both foul fair pressing to a revolt from the true and to embrace a false Religion In this case which is ours with a witness it must be granted we should be wary that we neither engage with him nor oune Allegiance to him when he would withdraw us from our Allegiance to God. 2 There is a great difference betuixt a Prince persecuting the true Religion which only a few of his subjects here there did profess who in regard of their Paucity were never in capacity to be looked upon as the body of the people impowering him as their publick Servant which was their case And a Prince persecuting that Religionâ— which was professed by the body of the Nation when they sett him up In this Latter case men of great sense have denyed he should be ouned for a Prince because then he is stated against the Common good This was our case under the former King and yet under this though all Professors be not now persecuted the publick Religion Ancient Reformation is persecuted in a few whom he intends to destroy and in their destruction to bury it 3 There is a difference betwixt a Prince Persecuting Religion publickly ouned received of his subjects yet never approved nor confirmed by Law as it was not in the primitive times And a Prince persecuting Religion ratified established by the Laws of the Land which is our case It will seem clear to every soul not benighted with Court darkness that he then deâ—acto and ipso jure falleth from his right in this case because now he is not only stated against the common good but against the very Laws by which the Subjects must be ruled Then he ruleth not as a Prince to whom the Law giveth his Measures Bounds but rageth as a Tiger Tyrant and ought to be carried towards as such 4 There is a difference betwixt a Prince suppressing that Religion established by Law which he never professed nor never gave his consent to these Laws as might be the case of some of the Arian Emperours though it be unlawful for any people to set up any Mortal over them who is not in this case bound to the good behaviour And a Prince opposing oppressing that Religion which himself hath professed and is ratified by Laws with his oun consent which was our case under the former King who did give the most solemn Ratification of them that ever was given but afterwards most perfidiously retracted it As also this Apostate Papist did somtime profess himself Protestant and consented to the Laws establishing it and the Penal Statutes against Papists though now he is going about to raze all and ruine that alone valuable Treasure of our Nation Religion 5 There is a difference betwixt a Prince consenting to Laws establishing Religion which he now persecuteth which might have been the case of Iulian the Apostate And a Prince who not only consented to these Laws but who did upon these very terms no other get receive his Croun Scepter that he should preserve the Religion as Reformed and protect as a Father the Professors thereof and maintain the Laws establishing it which yet he perfidiously perniciously being once settled in the Government Breaks Casts Cassats Overturns which was done by Charles Or And a Prince who will neither be bounded by the Laws he consented to nor be bound to the Observation of any Laws whatsoever but challenges it as his prerogative Royal to be absolute above all Laws and denying all Security upon terms is free to destroy Religion Liberty and all the valuable Interests of the Nation when he pleases This is Iames his Character 6 There is a difference betwixt a Prince breaking the main only Article of his Covenant in a fit of fury rage being transported upon some Mistakes which was the case of Theodosius the Emperour And a Prince not only violating this upon deliberation but plainly Declaring that neither Oath nor Declaration can or will bind him but these being made void he will destroy without restraint all these Covenanted priviledges This was the case of Charles Or And a Prince who as he never will come
if he do so so the subjects shall be loosed from all bonds of obedience then when he does so he becomes a meer private person Grotius there supposes the power is transferred upon a resolutive condition that is if he transgress the condition the power shall be resolved into its first fountain much more if it be transferred expressly also upon a suspensive condition that he shall continue to maintain the ends of the Covenant defend Religion the Liberties of the Subjects in the defence whereof we shall oune Allegiance to him otherwise not in that case if he do not maintain these ends plain it is our obligation ceases for how can it stand upon a conditional obligation when his performance of the condition sists But whatever be the conditions Mutual it flowes Natively from the Nature of a Mutual compact that qui non praestat officium promissum cadit beneficio hac lege dato he who doth not perform the conditions aggreed upon hath no right to the benefite granted upon condition of performance of these conditions especially if he performe not or violate these conditions upon supposition whereof he would not have gotten the benefite It were very absurd to say in a Mutual conditional compact one party shall still be bound to perform his conditions though the other perform none but break all Were it the act of rational Creatures to set up a Soveraign upon conditions he shall not play the Tyrant and yet be bound to him thô he Tyrannize never so much We have the Nature of Mutual compacts in the Spies Covenant with Rahab Iosh. 2. 20. If thow utter this our business then we will be quite of thine Oath which thow hast made us to swear if she should break condition then the obligation of the Oath on their part should cease But next all the stress will ly in proving that the Covenant on such such conditions between a Prince Subjects doth equally mutually oblige both to each other for if it equally oblige both then both are equally disengaged from other by the breach on either side and either of them may have a just claim in Law against the other for breach of the conditions But Royalists Court-slaves alledge that such a Covenant obliges the King to God but not to the people at all so that he is no more accountable to them than if he had made none at all But the contrare is evident For 1 If the compact be Mutual and if it be infringed on one side it must be so in the other also for in contracts the parties are considered as equalls whatever inequality there may be betwixt them otherwise I speak of contracts among men 2 If it be not so there is no Covenant made with the people at all And so David did no more Covenant with Israel than with the Chaldeans for to all with whom the Covenant is made it obliges to them Otherwise it must be said he only made the Covenant with God contrary to the Text for he made it only before the Lord as a Witness not with Him as a party Ioashs Covenant with the Lord is expresly distinguished from that with the people 3 If it be not so it were altogether non-sense to say there were any Covenant made with the King on the other hand for he is supposed to be made King on such such terms and yet by this after he is made King he is no more obliged unto them than if there had been no compact with him at all 4 If he be bound as King and not only as a man or Christian then he is bound with respect to the people for with respect to them he is only King But he is bound as King and not only as a man or Christian because it is only with him as King that the people Covenant and he must transact with them under the same consideration Next that which he is obliged to is the specifical act of a King to defend Religion Liberty Rule in Righteousness And therefore his Covenant binds him as King. Again if he be not bound as King then as a King he is under no obligation of Law or Oath which is to make him a Lawless Tyrant yea none of Gods subjects It would also suppose that the King as King could not sin against the people at all but only against God for as King he could be under no obligation of duty to the people and where there is no obligation there is no sin by this he would be set above all obligations to love his neighbour as himself for he is above all his neighbours and all mankind and only less than God and so by this doctrine he is loosed from all duties of the Second Table or at least he is not so much obliged to them as others But against this it is Objected both Prince people are obliged to performe their part to each other and both are obliged to God but both are not accountable to each other there is not mutual power in the parties to compell one another to performe the promised duty the King hath it indeed over the people but not the people over the King and there is no indifferent Judge Superior to both to compell both but God. Ans. 1. What if all this should be granted yet it doth not infringe the proposition what if the people have not power to compell him yet Iure he may fall from his Soveraignity though de facto he is not deposed he loses his right to our part when he breaks his part 2. There is no need of a Superior Arbiter for as in contracting they are considered as equal so the party keeping the contract is Superior to the other breaking it 3. There may be Mutual Coactive Power where there is no Mutual relation of Superiority Inferiority yea in some cases Inferiours may have a Coactive Power by Law to compell their Superiours failing in their duty to them As a Son wronged by his Father may compel him to reparation by Law And independent Kingdoms nothing inferior to each other being in Covenant together the wronged may have a Coactive power to force the other to duty without any Superior Arbiter 4. The bond of suretyship brings a man under the obligation to be accountable to the Creditor though the surety were never so high and the Creditor never so low Solomon sayes in General without exception of Kings yea including them because he was a King that spake it Prov. 6. 1 2. My son if thow be Surety for thy friend thow art snared with the words of thy Mouth Now a Kings power is but fiduciary And therefore he cannot be unaccountable for the power concredited to him And if the Generation had minded this our Stewarts should have been called to an account for their Stewardship ere now Hence I argue If a Covenanted Prince breaking all the Conditions of his compact doth forfeit his right to the Subjects Allegiance
Lawless licence to oppress whom they please Then when they turn Tyrants and arrogate a Lawless Absoluteness and cross the Rules transgress the Bounds prescribed by Gods Law mans Law and make their oun lust a Law and execute the same arbitrarly They must be Resisted by force when a legal resistence cannot be had in defence of Religion and Liberty But all Princes are limited c. Ergo The Minor is proved Head. 2. And the Connexion may be thus confirmed in short That power which is not the Ordinance of God may be resisted But an absolute illimited power crossing the Rules and transgressing the bounds prescribed by Gods Law and mans is not the Ordinance of God Ergo it may be Resisted 8. Further from the Rule of Government it may be argued several wayes 1. That power which is contrary to Law evil Tyrannical can tye none to subjection but if it oblige to anything it tyes to Resistence But the power of a King against Law Religion and the Interests of the subjects is a power contrary to Law evil Tyrannical Ergo The Major is plain for Wickedness can tye no man but to resist it That power which is contrary to Law evil Tyrannical is Wickedness 2. That power and those Acts which neither King can exerce nor command nor others execute nor any obey must certainly be Resisted But such is the power and Acts that oppress the subjects and overturn Religion Liberty Ergo The Minor is evident from Scriptures condemning oppression violence both in them that command and in them that execute the same and also them that obey such wicked commands The Major is clear from Reason both because such power such Acts as cannot be commanded cannot be executed cannot be obeyed Lawfully are sinful wicked and because it cannot be a Magistratical power for that may alwayes be exerced executed Lawfully And what a man cannot command the resisting of that he cannot punish But acts of oppression against Law Religion Liberty a man cannot command Ergo the Resisting of these he cannot punish 3. That Government or Administration which is not subordinate to the Law Will of God who hath appointed it must be Resisted But that Government or Administration which undermines or overturnes Religion Liberty is not subordinate to the Law Will of God Ergo The Major is clear for nothing but what is the Ordinance of God subordinate to His Law Will is irresistible Rom. 13. 2. The Assumption is undenyable 9. From the Ends of Government which must be acknowledged by all to be the Glory of God and the Good of Mankind yea all that have been either wise or honest have alwayes held that Salus Populi est Suprema Lex The Arguments may run thus in short 1. That Doctrine which makes the Holy one to cross His oun ends in giving Governours must be absurd Unchristian as well as irrational But such is the Doctrine that makes all Kings Tyrants irresistible upon any pretence whatsoever Ergo The minor I prove That Doctrine which makes God intending His oun Glory the peoples good to give Governours both as Fathers to preserve and as Murderers to destroy them must make the Holy one to cross His oun ends for these are Contradictory But the Doctrine that makes all Kings Tyrants irresistible c. is such For by Office they are Fathers to preserve and by Office also they must be Murderers vested with such a power from God actu primo if they be irresistible when they do so seeing every power that is irresistible is the Ordinance of God. Hence also when a Blessing turns a Curse it is no more the Ordinance of God but to be resisted But when a King turns a Tyrant overturning Religion Liberty then a Blessing turns a Curse Ergo 2. Means are to be Resisted when they are not useful for but destructive to the ends they were appointed for But Governours overturning Religion Liberty are Means not useful for but destructive to the ends for which they were appointed Seeing then they are neither for the Glory of God nor the good of Mankind Ergo 3. If all powers Prerogatives of men are only means appointed for and should vaile unto the Supreme Law of the peoples Safety and all Laws be subordinate to and corroborative of this Law and when cross to it are eatenus null no Laws and all Law-formalities in Competition with it are to be laid aside and all Parliamentary priviledges must yeeld to this and King Parliament both conspiring have no power against it and no Soveraign power by virtue of any resignation from the people can comprize any Authority to act against it Then it is duty to obey this Supreme Law in Resisting all powers Prerogatives all Laws Law-formalities and all conspiracies whatsoever against this Supreme Law the Safety of the people But the former is true as was proven Head. 2. Ergo 4. That power which is obliged appointed to command rule Justly Religiously for the good of the people and is only set over them on these conditions and for that end cannot tye them to subjection without Resistence when the power is abused to destruction of Laws Religion and people But all power is so obliged appointed Therefore whensoever it is so abused it cannot tye people to subjection but rather oblige them to Rejection of it 10. From the Obedience required to Government It may be argued thus 1. If we may flee from Tyrants then we may Resist them But we may flee from Tyrants Ergo we may Resist them The Connexion I prove 1 If all grounds of Justice will warrand the one as well as the other then if the one be duty so is the other But the former is true For the same justice equity that warrands declining a Tyrants unjust violence by flight will warrand Resistence when flight will not do it The same Principle of self defence that makes flight duty when Resistence is not possible will aso make Resistence duty when flight is not possible The same Principle of Charity to Wives Children that makes flight Lawful when by Resistence they cannot avoid Tyranny will make Resistence duty when by flight they cannot evite it The same Principle of Conscience to keep Religion free that prompts to flight when Resistence will not save it will also prompt to Resist when flight is not practicable 2 If to flee from a just power when in Justice we are obnoxious to its sword be to resist the Ordinance of God and so sin then to flee from an unjust power must be also a Resisting of the abusing of it and so duty for the one is Resistence as the other but the difference of the power resisted makes the one Lawful the other not Again if Royal power may be resisted by interposing seas and miles why not also by interposing walls armes both is resistence
vindicate these precious Interests from his usurpings into a state of Liberty And shall we imagine that that very Oath of God did lay upon them or us an obligation to defend the person who is a destroyer of all these contrary to the very nature of the Oath contrare to the scope of the Covenanters and contrary to their subsequent practise But then it will be urged why then was that clause cast into the Covenant I answer we have not the same cause to keep it as they had some cause to put it in with accommodation to the present possessor of the Soveraignity The ouning of it in our circumstances would be as great a reproach to us as the want of it was to them in theirs They put in the words to prevent the worlds mistake and to remove that odium industriously heaped upon the heads of those whose hearts were associate in the defence of Religion Liberty therefore they would profess they would not be disloyal while he was for God. And a defiance may be given to clamour calumnie it self to give one instance of the defect of performance hereof while he went not about to ruine those things incomparably more precious then his person or Authority and in ruining whereof no person can retain Authority IV. But now two things will chiefly be desiderated which now we oune in our Testimony for which many have dyed that seem not to be confirmed by or consistent with the Testimony of this Period One is that we not only maintain defensive resistance but in some cases vindictive punitive force to be executed upon men that are bloody beasts of prey and burdens to the earth in cases of necessity when there is no living for them This principle of Reason natural Justice was not much inquired into in this time when the sun was up whose warmth light made these beasts creep into their dens and when they being brought under subjection could not force people into such extraordinary violent courses when the ordinary orderly course of Law was running in its right Channel Yet from the ground of their ordinary Procedure Military Civil against such Monsters we may gather the lawfullness of an ordinary Procedure in a pinch of necessity conforme to their grounds I hope to make this evident when I come ex proposito to vincicate this head But there is another thing that we onne which seems not to have been known in these dayes viz. That when we are required to oune the Authority of the present Dominator we hold sinful to oune it Yet we find these Reverend renouned Fathers ouned King Charles I. and did not refuse the succession of Charles II. I shall answer in order First as to King Charles the first there was a great difference betuixt him and his sons that succeeded he never declared Parliamentarely that neither Promises Contracts nor Oaths should bind him as the first of his perfidious sons did It might have been then presumed if he had engaged so far for promoving the Work of God he would have been a man of his word for to say a King of his word is antiquitate in a good sense except that it means he is as absolute in his word as in his sword and scorns to be a slave to it Neither professed he himself a Papist as the second Son hath done Again it must be granted that more might have been comported with in the begining when there were some hopes of redress than after such process of time whereby now we see feel beyond all debate that the Throne stands and is stated not only in opposition to but upon the ruines of the Rights Priviledges both of Religion Liberty But was not the equivalent done by the Church anno 1648. when they refused to concur with that unlawful Engagment for restoring of the King till security be had by Solem Oath under his hand Seal that he shall for himself Successors give his assent to all Acts Bills for enjoining Presbyterial Government and never make opposition to it nor endeavour any change thereof Iulij ult 1648. Sess 21. But it will be said that in their renewing the Covenant that year they did not leave out that Article True thereby they stopped the mouths of their Adversaries And then they were not without hopes but that in his straits he might have proved a Manasseh taken among the thornes And the Covenanters at that time not being clear that he had done that which ipso jure made him no Magistrate chused rather while matters stood so to ingage to maintain him than simply to disoune him which yet our forefathers did upon smaller grounds many times in the hopes of being prevailed with at last But when they saw that this proved ineffectual therefore at the Coronation of the new King they made the Covenanted Interest the sole Basis upon which alone Authority was conferred upon him For the second though they did not refuse the succession of Charles the Second which vvas their blame and our bane of vvhich vve may blush this day yet vve find many things in that Transaction vvhich justifie our disouning of him and condemn the ouning of the present Possessor 1. In that seasonable necessary warning Iulij 27. Sess. 27. vvhereas many vvould have admitted his Maj. to the exercise of his Royal povver upon any termes vvhatsoever The Assembly declares first That a boundless illimited povver is to be acknovvledged in no King nor Magistrate neither is our King to be admitted to the exercise of his povver as long as he refuses to vvalk in the administration of the same according to this rule Secondly that there is a mutual stipulation obligation betvveen the King the people as both of them are tyed to God so each of them are tyed to one another for the performance of mutual reciprocal duties accordingly Kings are to take the Oath of Coronation to abolish Popery maintain the Protestant Religion As long therefore as the King refuses to engage oblige himself for security of Religion safety of his people it is consonant to Scripture Reason and Lavves of the Kingdom that he should be refused Thirdly in the League Covenant the duty of defending preserving the King is subordinate to the duty of preserving Religion Liberty And therefore he standing in opposition to the publick desires of the people for their security it vvere a manifest breach of Covenant and a preferring the Kings Interest to the Interest of Jesus Christ to bring him to the exercise of his povver Fourthly That it vvas for restraint of Arbitrary Government and for their Just defence against Tyranny that the Lords people did join in Covenant and have been at the expence of so much blood these years past And if he should be admitted to the Government before satisfaction it vvere to put in his hand that Arbitrary Povver and so to abandon their
over all persons therein And that it is unlawful for Subjects on any Pretence or for any Cause whatsoever to rise in Armes against him or any Commissionated by him and that I shall never so rise in Armes nor assist any who shall so do And that I shall never resist his power or Authority nor ever oppose this Authority to his person but shall to the utmost of my power assist defend maintain him his heirs lawful successors in the exercise of their Absolute power Authority against all deadly And by the same absolute power giving his ful ample Indemnitie to all the foresaid sorts of People under the foresaid restrictions Here is a Proclamation for a Prince That Proclaims him in whose name it is emitted to be the greatest Tyrant that ever lived in the world and their Revolt who have disouned him to be the justest that ever was For herein that Monster of Prerogative is not only advanced paramount to all Lawes Divine humane but far surmounting all the lust impudence insolence of all the Roman Sicilian Turkish Tartarian or Indian Tyrants that ever trampled upon the Liberties of Mankind who have indeed demanded absolute subjectio◠surrender of their Lives Lands Liberties at their pleasure but never arrived at such a hight of arrogance as this does to claim absolute obedience without reserve of Conscience Religion Honour or Reason Not only that which ignorantly is called Passive never to resist him not only on any Pretence but for any Cause even thô he should command his Popish Ianizaries to murder massacre all Protestants which is the tender mercy burning fervent charity of Papists but also of absolute Active obedience without reserve to assist defend maintain him in every thing whereby he shall be pleased to exercise his absolute power thô he should command to burn the Bible as well as the Covenant as already he applauded Iohn Gib in doing of it and to burn and butcher all that will not go to Mass which we have all grounds to expect will be the end of his Clemency at last Herein he claims a power to command what he will and obliging subjects to obey whatsoever he will command A power to rescind stop disable all Lawes which unhinges all stabilitie and unsettles all the security of humane societie yea extinguishes all that remains of natural Liberty Wherein as is wel observed by the Author of the Representation of the threatening dangers impending over Protestants Pag. 53. It is very natural to observe that he allowes the Government under which we were born and to which we were sworn to be hereby subverted changed and that thereupon we are not only absolved acquited from all Allegiance to him but indispensably obliged by the ties engagments that are upon us to apply our selves to the use of all means endeavours against him as an Enemy of the People subverter of the legal Government But this was so gross and grievously gripping in its restrictions as to persons as to the place as to the matter allowed the Presbyterians in Preaching that it was disdained of all and therefore he behoved to busk it better and mend the matter in a Letter to the Council the Supreme Law of Scotland bearing date March 31. 1687. of this tenor Whereas we did recommend to yow to take care that any of the Presbyterians should not be allowed to Preach but such only as should have your Allowance for the same and that they at the receiving the Indulgence should take the Oath contained in the Proclamation These are therefore to let you know that thereby we meant such of them as did not solemnly take the Test but if nevertheless the Presbyterian Preachers do scruple to take the said Oath or any other Oath whatsoever and that you shall find it reasonable or fit to grant them or any of them our said Indulgence so as they desire it upon these termes It is now our will pleasure to grant them our said Indulgence without being obliged to take the Oath with power unto them to enjoy the benefite of the said Indulgence during our pleasure only or so long as yow shall find they behave themselves regularly peaceably without giving any cause of offence to us or any in Authority or trust under us in our Government Thus finding the former Proposal not adequately apportioned to his design because of its palpable odiousness he would pretend his meaning was mistaken thô it was manifest enough and mitigate the matter by taking away of the Oaths altogether if any should scruple it whereas he could not but know that all that had sense would abhor it yet it is clogged with the same restrictions limited to the same persons characterized more plainly and peremptorly with an addition of Cautions not only that they shall not say or do any thing contrare to the wel peace of his reign seditious or treasonable but also that they behave themselves regularly peaceably without giving any cause of offence to him or any under him which comprehends lesser offences than sedition or treason even every thing that will displease a Tyrant and a Papist that is all faithfulness in seasonable Duties or Testimonies But at length lest the difformity disparity of the Proclamation for the Toleration in Scotland and the Declaration for Liberty of Conscience in England should make his Pretences to Conscience suspect of disingenuity and lest it should be said he had one Conscience for England and another for Scotland therefore he added a third eke to the liberty but such as made it still an ill favoured patched project to destroy Religion true Liberty in another Proclamation dated at Windsor Iune 28. 1687. wherein he sayes Taking into our Royal Consideration the sinistrous Interpretations which either have or may be made of some Restrictions mentioned in the last we have thought fit by this further to declare that we will Protect our Arch-bishops c. And we do likewise by our Soveraign Authority Prerogative Royal and Absolute power suspend stop disable all penal Sanguinary Lawes made against any for Non-conformity to the Religion established by Law in that our Ancient Kingdom to the end that by the Liberty thereby granted the peace security of our Government in the practice thereof may not be endangered we hereby straitly charge all our Loving subjects that as we do give them leave to meet serve God after their oun way in private Houses Chappels or Places purposely hired or built for that use so that they take care that nothing be Preached or taught which may any way tend to alienate the hearts of our People from us our Government and that their Meetings be peaceably publickly held and all persons freely admitted to them and that they do signify make known to some one or more of the next Privie Councellors Sheriffs Stewards Bailiffs Justices of the Peace or Magistrats
have acquired do seek the praise of Justice by injury of Liberality by robbery So he can make some shew of a Civil mind but so much the less assurance gives he of it that it is manifest he intends not thereby the subjects good but the greater security of his oun lusts and stability of empire over posterity having some what Mitigated the peoples hatred which when he hath done he will turn back again to his old manners for the fruit which is to follow may easily be known both by the seed and by the sower thereof An exact Copy of this we have seen within these tuo years as oft before in the rule of the other Brother After God hath been robbed of His prerogatives the Church of her Priviledges the State of its Lawes the Subjects of their Libertie property he is now affecting the praise captating the Applause of tenderness to conscience and Love of Peace by offering now Liberty after all his Cruelties wherein all the thinking part of men do discern he is prosecuting that hellish Project introducing Popery slaverie and overturning Religion Law Liberty 3. Regium imperium secundum Naturam est Tyrannicum contra Regium Liberi inter Liberos est Principatus Tyrannus domini in servas c. Tyranny is against Nature and a Masterly Principality over slaves Can he be called a father who accounts his subjects slaves or a Shepherd who does not feed but devours his flock or a Pilot who doth allwise study to make shipwrack of the goods and strikes a leak in the very ship where he sails what is he then that bears Command not for the peoples advantage but studies only himself who leadeth his subjects into manifest snares he shall not verily be accounted by me either Commander Emperour or Governour King Iames the 6 th also in a speech to the Parliament anno 1609. makes this one Character of a Tyrant when he begins to invade his subjects rights Liberties And if this be true then we have not had a King these many years the foregoing deduction will demonstrate what a slavery we have been under 4. Quid qui non de virtute certet câ—m bonis c. What is he then who doth not contend for vertue with the good but to exceed the most flagitious in vices If yow see then any usurping the Royal name and not excelling in any virtue but striving to exceed all in baseness not tendering his subjects good with native affection but pressing them with proud domination esteeming the people committed to his trust not for their safegaurd but for his oun gain will yow imagine this man is truly a King albeit he vapours with a numerous Lieveguard and makes an ostentation of gorgeous Pomp The learned Althusius likewise in his Politicks cap. 38. Num. 15. as He is cited by Ius Populi chap. 16. Pag. 347. makes this one Character of a Tyrant that liveing in Luxury whoredome greed idleness he neglecteth or is unfit for his office How these suite our times we need not express what effrontry of impudence is it for such monsters to pretend to rule by virtue of any Authority derived from God who pollute the world with their Adulteries Incests and Live in open defyance of all the Lawes of the universal King with whom to exceed in all villanies is the way to purchase the Countenance of the Court and to aspire to preferment No Heliogabulus c. could ever come up the length in wickedness that our Rulers have professed 5. Omnium vim Legum in se transferre c. He can transfer unto himself the strength of all Lawes and abrogate them when he pleases King Iames the 6. in that fore-cited speech saith a King degenerateth into a Tyrant when he leaveth to rule by Law. Althusius also loc cit saith there is one kind of Tyranny which consisteth in violating changing or removing of fundamental Lawes specially such as concern Religion such saith he Philip the King of Spain who contrare to the fundamental Belgick Lawes did erect an administration of Justice by force of armes and such was Charles the 9 th of France that thought to overturn the Salicque Law. All that knoweth what hath been done in Britain these 27 years can attest our Lawes have been subverted the Reformation of Religion overturned and all our best Lawes rescinded and now the Penal Statuts against Papists disabled stopped without against Law. 6. Ad suum eum unius nutum omnia c. He can revoke all things to his nod at his pleasure This is also one part of King Iames the 6 his Character of a Tyrant when he sets upon arbitrary power And of Althusius loc cit when he makes use of an absolute Power and so breaks all bonds for the good of humane Society We allow a King an absolute power taken in a good sense that is he is not subaltern nor subordinate to any other Prince but supreme in his oun dominions or if by absolute be meant Perfect he is most absolute that governs best according to the word of God. But if it be to be Legibus solutus loosed from all Lawes we thinke it blasphemy to ascribe it to any Creature Where was there ever such an arbitrary absolute power arrogated by any Mortal as hath been claimed by our Rulers these years past especially by the present Usurper who in this Liberty of conscience now granted to Scotland assumes to himself an absolute power which all are to obey without reserve which carries the subjects slavery many stages beyond what ever the Grand Seigneur did attempt 7. Tyranno ad cives opprumendos c. For by a Tyrant strangers are imployed to oppress the subjects They place the establishment of ther Authority in the peoples weakness and think that a Kingdom is not a Procuration concredited to them by God but rather a prey fallen into their hands Such are not joined to us by any Civil bond or any bond of humanity but should be accounted the most Capital enemies of God and of all men King Iames ub supra sayes he is a Tyrant that imposes un Lawful Taxes raises forces makes war upon his subjects to Pillage Plnnder wast spoil his Kingdoms Althusins ubi supra makes a Tyrant who by immoderate exactions and the like exhausts the subjects and cites Scripture Ier. 22. 13. 14. Ezek. 34. 1 King. 12. 19. Psal. 14. 4. It is a famous saying of Bracton He is no longer King then dum bene regit while he rules well but a Tyrant when-soever he oppresseth the people that are trusted to his Care Government And Cicero sayes amittitis omne exceritus imperit jiu qui eo imperio exercitâ— Rempublicans oppugnat He loseth all legal power in over an Army or Empire who by that Government army does obstruct the wel-fare of that republick What oppressions exactions by armed force our Nation hath been wasted with in part is
discovered above 8. Althusius in the place above quoted makes this an other mark when he keepeth not his faith promise but despiseth his very oath made unto the people What shall we say of him then who not only brake but burnt and made it Criminal to assert the obligation of the most solemnly transacted Covenant with God and with the people that ever was entered into who yet upon these termes of keeping that Covenant only was admitted to the Government And what shall we say of his Brother succeeding who disdains all bonds whose professed principle is as a Papist to keep no faith to Hereticks 9. In the same place he makes this on Character a Tyrants is he who takes away from one or moe members of the common wealth the free exercise of the Orthodox Religion And the Grave Author of the Impartial inquiry into the administration of affairs in England doeth assert pag. 3 4. whensoever a Prince becomes depraved to that degree of wickedness as to apply employ his power Interest to debauch withdraw his subjects from their fealty obedience to God or sets himself to extirpate that Religion which the Lord hath revealed appointed to be the rule of our living the means of our happiness he doth ipso facto depose himself and instead of being ouned any longer for a King ought to be treated as a Rebel Traiter against the Supreme Universal Soveraign This is the perfect Protracture of our Princes the former of which declared an open war against Religion all that professed it and the Latter did begin to prosecute it with the same cruelty of persecution and yet continues without relenting against us though to others he tolerates it under the Notion of a Crime to be for the present dispensed with until he accomplish his design 10. Ibid. he tells us that for corrupting of youth he erecteth stage plages Whore-houses other Play-houses and suffers the Colledges other Seminaries of Learning to be corrupted There was never more of this in any age than in the conduct of our Court which like another Sodom profess it to be their design to debauch mankind in to all villanies and to poison the fountains of all learning virtue by intruding the basest of men into the place of teachers both in Church University and precluding all access to honest men 11. Further he sayes he is a Tyrant who doth not defend his subjects from injuries when he may but suffereth them to be oppressed and what if he oppress them himself It was one of the Lawes of Edward the Confessor Quod si Rex desit officio nomen Regis in eo non constabit If the King fail in the discharge of his Trust office he no longer deserves nor ought to enjoy that name What name do they deserve then who not only fail in the duty of defending their subjects but send out their Lictors bloody Executioners to oppress them neither will suffer them to defend themselves But Althusius makes a distinct Character of this 12. Then in fine he must certainly be a Tyrant who will not suffer the people by themselves nor by their Representatives to maintain their oun rights neither by Law nor force for sayeth my Author Forecited he is a Tyrant who hindereth the free suffrages of members of Parliament so that they dare not speak what they would And chiefly he who takes away from the people all power to resist his Tyranny as Armes strengths chief men whom therefore though innocent he hateth afflicteth persecuteth exhausts their goods livelyhoods without right or reason All know that our blades have been all alongs enemies to Parliaments and when their Interest forced to call them what means were used always to pacque prelimit them and over-aw them and how men who have faithfully discharged their trust in them have been prosecuted with the hight of envy fury and many murthered thereupon And how all the armed force of the Kingdoms have been inhanced into their hand and the people kept so under foot that they have been rendered incapable either to defend their oun from intestine Usurpers or forreign Invaders All that is said amounts to this that when ever men in power do evert subvert all the ends of Government and intrude themselves upon it and abuse it to the hurt of the Common wealth and the destruction of that for which Government was appointed They are then Tyrants and cease to be Magistrates To this purpose I shall here append the words of that forecited Ingenious Author of the Impartial Enquirie Pap. 13. 14. There can be nothing more evident from the light of reason as well as Scripture than that all Magistracy is appointed for the benefite of mankind and the common good of Societies God never gave any one power to reign over others for their destruction unless by His providence where He had devoted a people for their sins to ruine but on whomsoever He confers Authority over Cities or Nations it is with this Conditional Proviso Limitation that they are to Promote their Prosperity good and to study their defence Protection All Princes are thus far Pactional And whosoever refuseth to perform this fundamental condition he degrades deposes himself nor is it rebellion in any to resist him whensoever Princes ceases to be for the common good they answer not the end they were instituted unto and cease to be what they were chosen for 6. It will not be denyed but when the Case is so circumstantiate that it would require the arbitration of judgment to determine whether the King be a Tyrant or not that then people are not to disoune him for if it be a question whether the people be really robbed of their rights Liberties and that the King might pretend as much reason to complain of the people their doing indignity to his Soveraignty as they might of his Tyranny Then it were hard for them to assume so for the umpirage of their oun Cause as to make themselves absolute judges of it and forth with to reject his Authority upon these debateable grounds But the Case is not so with us no Place being left for doubt or debate but that our fundamental rights Liberties Civil Religious are overturned and an absolute Tyranny exactly Characterized as above is established on the ruines thereof Hence we have not disouned the pretended Authority because we judged it was Tyrannical but because it was really so Our discretive judgment in the case was not our rule but it was our understanding of the rule by which only we could be regulated and not by the understanding of another which cannot be better nor so good of our grievances which certainly we may be supposed to understand best our selves and yet they are such as are understood every where To the question then who shall be Judge between these Usurping Tyrannizing Rulers us we answer
which case the people may make their Publick servant sensible he is at his highest elevation but a Servant Hence now when this species named in the Covenant viz Monarchy is by Law so vitiate as it is become the mean instrument of the destruction of all the ends of that Covenant and now by Law transmitted to all successors as a hereditary pure perfect perpetual opposition to the coming of Christs kingdom So that as long as there is one to wear that Croun but Iehavah will in righteousness execute Coniahs doom upon the race Ier. 22. ult write this man childless and enter heir to the Government as now established he must be an enemy to Christ there is no other way left but to think on a new Modell moulded according the true Pattern As to the Second we are far less obliged to oune acknowledge the interest of any of the two Monarchs that we have been Mourning under these many years from these Sacred Covenants For as to the first of them Charles the 2. Those Considerations did cassate his Interest as to any Covenant obligation to oune him 1. In these Covenants we are not sworn absolutely to maintain the Kings Person Authority but only Conditionally in the Preservation defence of Religion Liberties Now when this Condition was not performed but on the contrare professedly resolved never to be fulfilled And when he laid out himself to the full of his power Authority for the destuction of that Reformed Religion Liberties of the Kingdom which he solemnly swore to defend when he received the Croun only in the termes that he should be a Loyal subject to Christ and a true faithful Servant to the people in order to which a Magistrate is chosen and all his worth excellency valuableness consists in his answering that purpose for the excellency of a mean as such is to be measured from the end and its answerableness thereunto We were not then obliged to maintain such an enemy to these precious Interests 2. Because as the people were bound to him so he was bound to them by the same Covenant being only on these termes entrusted with the Government All which Conditions he perfidiously broke whereupon only his Authority our Allegiance were founded And thereby we were loosed from all reciprocal obligation to him by virtue of that Covenant 3. Though he and we stood equally engaged to the duties of that Covenant only with this difference that the Kings Capacity being greater he was the more obliged to have laid out that power in causing all to stand to their Covenant Engagments as Iosiah did 2 Chron. 34. 31 32 33. But alas there was never a Iosiah in the race yet he rose up to the hight of rebellion against God and the people in heaven-daring insolency and not only brake but burnt that Covenant and made Lawes to case rescind it and made a not-concurring in this Conspiracy a note of incapacity for any Trust in Church or State. Therefore to plead for an ouning of him in this case were only concludent of this that the Generation had dreamed themselves into such a distraction as may be feared will be pursued with destruction and make such dreamers the detestation of posterity and cause all men Proclaim the righteousness of God in bringing ruine upon them by that very power Authority they ouned in such circumstances 4. It is a known maxime Qui non implet conditionem a se promissam cadit beneficio qui remittit obligationem non potest exigere He that does not fulfill the conditions falls from the benefit of it and whoso remitts the obligation of the party obliged upon condition cannot exact it afterwards So then it is evident that the subjects of Scotland were by King Charles the 2 de his consent yea express command disengaged from so much of that Covenant as could be alledged in favors of himself So that all that he did by burning rescinding these Covenants and pursuing all who endeavoured to adâ—ere to them was a most explicite Liberating his subjects from remission of their Allegiance to him and in this we had been fools if we had not taken him at his word yea he rescinded his very Coronation by an act of his first Parliament after his return which did declare null void all Acts Constitutions establishments from the year 1633 to that present session not excepting those for his oun Coronation after which he was never recrouned And therefore we could not oune that right which himself did annul But as for his Royal Brother Iames the 7 2 we cannot indeed make use of the same reasons arguments to disoune him as we have now adduced yet as we shall prove afterwards this Covenant does oblige to renounce him So it is so clear that it needs no Illustration that there lies no obligation from the Covenant to oune him And also that for this cause we are obliged not to oune him 1. Because as he is an enemy to the whole of our Covenant and especially to these terms upon which Authority is to be ouned therein So he will not come under the bond of this Covenant nor any other compact with the people but intrude himself upon the Throne â—n such a way as overturns the Basis of our Government and destroyes all the Liberties of a free people which by Covenant we are bound to preserve and consequently as inconsistent therewith to renounce his Usurpation For a Prince that will set himself up without any transactions with the people or conditions giving Security for Religion Liberty is an Usurping Tyrant not bounded by any Law but his oun lusts And to say to such an one Reign thow over us is all one as to say come thow and play the Tyrant over us and let thy lust will be a Law to us which is both against Scripture Natural-sense If he be not a King upon Covenant termes either expressly or tacitely or general stipulations according to the word of God Lawes of the Land he cannot be ouned as a father Protector or Tutor having any fiduciary power entrusted to him over the Commonwealth but as a Lawless absolute Dominator assuming to himself a power to rule or rage as he lists whom to oune were against our Covenants for there we are sworn to Maintain his Maj. just Lawful Authority and by consequence not to oune Usurpation Tyranny stated in opposition to Religion Liberty which there also we are engaged to maintain Sure this cannot be Lawful Authority which is of God for God giveth no power against Himself Nor can it be of the people who had never power granted them of God to create one over them with a Liberty to destroy them their Religion Liberty at his pleasure 2. As he is not nor will not be our Covenanted sworn King and therefore we cannot be his Covenanted sworn subjects So
grand Interests of the Community must be seen to by Legal Securities for Religion Liberty which is the end use of fundamental Laws Now how these have been unhinged infringed by the introduction present establishment by Law of that Monster of the prerogative enacted in Parliament Anno 1661. the Apologetick Relation doth abundantly demonstrate Sect. 10. Concerning the Kings Civil Supremacy enhancing all the Absoluteness that ever the Great Turk could arrogate and yet far short of what hath been Usurped since and impudently proclaimed to the world especially by him who now domineers in his Challenges of Soveraign Authority prerogative Royal Absolute Power which all are to obey without reserve whereby the whole basis of our Constitution and Bulwark of our Religion Laws Liberties is enervated and we have security of no Law but the Kings lust Hence I argue Those Princes that contrary to their virtual compact at least at their coming to the Crown have overturned all fundamental Laws cannot be ouned But our Princes have contrary to their virtual compact at least at their coming to the Crown overturned all fundamental Laws Ergo they cannot be ouned The Major is plain for they that overturn fundamental Laws are no Magistrats thereby all the ends of Government being subverted and the subverter cannot be ouned as a Father or friend but an open enemy to the Common-wealth nor looked upon as Magistrats doing their duty but as Tyrants seeking themselves with the destruction of the Common-wealth And in this case the compact the ground of the Constitution being violated they fall from their right and the people are Liberated from their obligation and they being no Magistrats the people are no subjects for the relation is mutual and so is the obligation Ius populi chap. 9. pag. 183. The Minor is manifest both from the matter of fact and the Mischiefs framed into Laws by the Soveraign Authority Prerogative Royal Absolute Power foresaid whereby what remains of our fundamental Constitutions either in Religious or Civil Settlements unsubverted as yet may be subverted when this Absolute Monarch pleases Which Absolute Authority we cannot in conscience oune for these Reasons taken both from Reason Scripture First it s against Reason 1. A power contrare to Nature cannot be ouned Absolute power is such for that which takes away and makes the people to give away their Natural power of preserving their lives Liberties and sets a man above all rule Law is contrare to Nature such is Absolute power making people resign that which is not in their power to resign an absolute power to destroy Tyrannize 2. A power contrare to the first rise of its Constitution cannot be ouned Absolute power is such for The first rise of the Constitution is a peoples seting a Soveraign over them giving him Authority to administer justice over them But it were against this to set one over them with a power to rage at randome and rule as he lists It s proven before a King hath no power but what the people gave him but they never gave never could give an absolute power to destroy themselves 3. That power which is against the ends of Government cannot be ouned Absolute power is such for that which will make a peoples condition worse then before the Constitution and that mean which they intended for a blessing to turn a plague scourage to them and all the subjects to be formal slaves at the Princes devotion must needs be contrare to the ends of Government But Absolute power is such for against the exorbitance thereof no means would be left to prevent its obstructing all the fountains of Justice and commanding Laws Lawyers to speak not justice righteousness reason but the lust pleasure of one man and turning all into Anarchy confusion Certainly it could never be the intention either of the work or workers at the Constitution of Government to set up a power to enslave the people to be a Curse to them but their ends was to get comfort safety Liberty under the shadow of Government 4. That power which invalidates and is inconsistent with the Kings compact with the people cannot be ouned Absolute Power is such for the tenor of that is alwise to secure Laws Liberties to rule according to Law but to be Absolute invalidates is inconsistent with that That which were an engagment into Contradictories cannot consist with that compact but to engage to be absolute and yet to rule by Law is an engagment into Contradictories which no people could admit for a security It s inconsistent with this compact to give the King Absolute Power to overturn Religion Liberty and to assume it which was never given were to invalidate this compact and to make himself no King but to restore unto the people the power they conferred upon him for the defence of Religion Liberty 5 That power which is not from God nor of God cannot be ouned But Absolute Power is not of God because it is a power to Tyrannize Sin which if it were of God He should be the Author of Sin for if the Moral Power be of God so must the acts be but the acts of Absolute Power being Lawless cannot be from God Ergo neither the Moral Power to commit these acts 6. That Ruler who cannot be Gods Minister for the peoples good cannot be ouned for that is the formal reason of our consfiencious subjection to Rulers Rom. 13. 4 5. But Absolute Soveraigns are such as cannot be Gods Ministers for the peoples good for if they be Gods Ministers for good they must administer justice preserve peace rule by Law take directions from their Master and if so they cannot be absolute 7. A Tyrant in actu signato exercito cannot be ouned But an Absolute Prince is such being a power that may play the Tyrant if he pleases and jure as King And so if Kings be actu primo Tyrants then people are actu primo Slaves and so Royal Power cannot be a blessing to them yea a Lawless breaker of all bonds promises Oaths cannot be ouned as Lawful Power But Absolute Power is such for it cannot be limited by these Obligations at least people cannot have any seurity by them 8. A Lawless Power is not to be ouned An Absolute Power is a Lawless power Ergo not to be ouned The Major is plain Cicero sayes Lib. 2. de officio Eadem constituendarum Legum causa fuit quae Regum The reason of making Lawes was the same as of the creation of Kings And Buchanan de jure Regni very excellently when the lust of Kings was in stead of Laws and being vested with an infinite immoderate power they did not contain themselves within bounds the insolency of Kings made Laws to be desired for this cause Laws were made by the people and Kings constrained to make use not of their Licencious wills in judgment but of
yet in the case of Tyranny and violating his Trust there is a Tribunal virtual eminently above him in them that made him reposed that Trust upon him as is said 3. The fountain power is superior to the power derived The people though they constitute a King above them yet retain the fountain power he only hath the derived power Certainly the people must retain more power eminently than they could give to the King for they gave it and he receives it with limitations if he turn mad or uncapable they may put Curators Tutors over him if he be taken captive they may appoint another to exercise the power if he die then they may constitute another with more or less power So then if they give a way all their power as a slave selleth his Liberty and retain no fountain power or radical right they could not make use of it to produce any of these acts They set a King above them only with an executive power for their good but the radical power remains in the people as in an immortal spring which they communicate by succession to this or that Mortal man in the manner measure they think expedient for otherwise if they gave all their power away what shall they reserve to make a new King if this man die What if the Royal line surcease there be no Prophets now sent to make Kings And if they have power in these cases why not in the case of Tyranny 4. If the King be accountable by Law for any act of Tyranny done against one man then much more is he accountable for many against the whole state But the former is true a private man may go to Law before the ordinary Judges for wronging his inheritance and the King is made accountable for the wrong done by him Now shall the Laws be like Spiders webs which hold flies but let bigger beasts pass through Shall Sentence be past for petty wrongs against a man and none for Tyrannizing over Religion Laws Liberties of the Kingdom Shall none be past against parricide or fratricide for killing his Brother Murdering the Nobles and burning Cities Shall pettie Thieves be hanged for stealing a Sheep and does the Laws of God or man give impunity for robbing a whole Country of the nearest dearest Interests they have to Crowned heads for the fancied Character of Royalty which thereby is forfeited 5. If there be Judges appointed of God independently to give out execute the Judgment of the Lord on all offenders without exception of the highest then the King also must be subject to that Judgment But there are Judges appointed of God independently to give out execute the Judgment of the Lord on all offenders without exception of the highest Two things must be here proved first that in giving Judgment they do not depend on the King but are the immediate vicars of God Secondly that the King is not excepted from but subject to their Judgment in case he be Criminal First they cannot depend upon the King because they are more necessary then the King and it is not left to the Kings pleasure whether there be Judges or not There may be Judges without a King but there can be no King without Judges nor no Justice but Confusion no man can bear the peoples burden alone Numb 11. 14 17 If they depended on the King their Power would die with the King the streams must dry up with the fountain but that cannot be for they are not Ministri regis but regni they are not Ministers of the King but of the Kingdom whose honour promotion though by the Kings external call yet comes from God as all honour promotion does Psal. 75. 7 The King cannot make Judges whom he will by his absolute Power he must be tied to that Law Deut. 1. 13. To take wise men understanding known Neither can he make them dura ite beneplacito for if these qualifications remain there is no allowance given for their removal They are Gods the Children of the Mosâ— High appointed to defend the poor fatherless as well as he Psal. 82. 3 6. They are ordained of God for the punishment of evil doers in which they must not be resisted as well as he Rom. 13. 1 2. by me saith the Lord rule ... all the Iudges of the earth Prov. 8. 16. To them we must be subject for Conscience sake as being the Ministers of God for good they must be obeyed for the Lords sake as well as the King though they are sent of him yet they Judge not for man but for the Lord 2 Chron. 19. 6. hence they sit in his room and are to act as if he were on the bench the King cannot say the Judgment is mine because it is the Lords neither can he limit their sentance as he might if they were nothing but his deputies because the Judgment is not his nor are their Consciences subordinate to him but to the Lord immediatly otherwise if they were his deputies depending on him then they could neither be admonished nor condemned for unjust Judgment because their sentence should neither be righteous nor unrighteous but as the King makes it And all directions to them were capable of this exception do not so or so except the King command yow crush not the poor oppress not the fatherless except the King command yow yea then they could not execute any Judgment but with the Kings Licence and so could not be rebuked for their not executing Judgment Now all this is contrary to Scripture which makes the sentence of the Judges undeclinable when just Deut. 17. 11. the Lords indignation is kindled when He looks for Iudgment behold oppression for righteousness behold a Cry Isai. 5. 7. neither will it excuse the Judges to say the king would have it so for even they that are subservient to write grievousness to turn aside the needy from Iudgment c. are under the wo as well as they that prescribe it Isai. 10. 1 2. The Lord is displeased when Iudgment is turned away back ward and Justice stands a far of and when there is no Iudgment what ever be the Cause of it Isai. 59. 14 15. The Lord threatens He will be avenged on the Nation when a man is not found to execute Iudgment Ier. 5. 1 9. And promises if they will execute Judgment righteousness and deliver the spoiled out of the hand of the oppressor He will give them righteous Magistrats Ier. 22. 3 4. but if they do not He will send desolation ibid. He rebukes those that turn Judgment to wormwood and leave of righteousness in the earth Amos. 5. 7. He resents it when the Law is slacked and Judgment doth not go forth freely without overawing or overruling restraint Habb 1. 4. Can these Scriptures consist with the Judges dependence on the kings pleasure in the exercise execution of their Power Therefore if they would avoid the
Magistrate Hence a person that is incapable incompetent for Government cannot be ouned for a Governour But the D. of Y. is such a person not only not qualified as the Word of God requires a Magistrate to be but by the Laws of the Land declared incapable of Rule because he is a Papist a Murderer an Adulterer c. 3. There must be in Moral Power a Lawful Title Investure as is shewed above which if it be wanting the Power is null and the person but a Scenical King like Iohn of Leyden This is essentially necessary to the being of a Magistrate which only properly distinguishes him from a private man for when a person becomes a Magistrate what is the change that is wrought in him what new habit or endewment is produced in him he hath no more natural power than he had before only now he hath the Moral Power right Authority to Rule Legally impowering him to Govern. Let it be Considered what makes a subordinate Magistrate whom we may oune as such It must be only his Commission from a Superior Power otherwise we reject him If one come to us of his oun head taking upon him the style office of a Bailif Sheriff or Judge and command our Persons demand our purses or exact our Oaths we think we may deny him not taking our selves to owe him any subjection not ouning any bond of conscience to him why because he hath no lawful Commission Now if we require this qualification in the subordinate why not in the Supreme Hence that Magistrate that cannot produce his Legal Investure cannot be ouned But the D. of Y. cannot produce his Legal Investure his admission to the Crown upon Oath Compact and with the consent of the subjects according to the Laws of the Land as is shewed above Ergo 4. There must also be the Lawful Use of the Power which must be not only legal for its composure but right for its practice its Course Process in Government must be just Governing according to Law otherwise it is meer Tyranny for what is Government but the subjecting of the Community to the rule of Governours for Peace Orders sake and the security of all their precious Interests and for what end was it ordained and continued among men but that the stronger may not domineer over the weaker And what is Anarchy but the playing the Rex of the Natural power over the Moral Hence that Power which is contrary to Law evil Tyrannical can tye none to subjection But the power of the King abused to the destruction of Laws Religion Liberties giving his power strength unto the beast making war with the Lamb Revel 17. 13 14. is a power contrary to Law evil Tyrannical Ergo it can tye none to subjection wickedness by no imaginable reason can oblige any man. It is Objected by some from Rom. 13. 1. There is no power but of God The Usurping power is a power Therefore it is of God and consequently we owe subjection to it Ans. 1. The Original reading is not Universal but thus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for there is no power if not from God which confirms what I plead for that we are not to oune any Authority if it be not Authorized by God. The words are only relative to higher powers in a restricted sense and at most are but indefinite to be determined according to the matter not all power simply but all Lawful power 2. It is a fallacia a dicto secundum quid There is no power but of God that is no Moral Power as Universal negatives use to be understood Heb. 5. 4. no man taketh this honour unto himself but he that is called of God which is clear must not be understood for the negation of the fact as if no man at all doth or ever did take unto himself that honour for Korah did it c. but no man taketh it warrantably with a Moral right and Gods allowance without Gods call So also the universal imperative in that same Text must not be taken absolutely without restriction for if every soul without exception were to be subject there could be none left to be the higher powers but it is understood with restriction to the relation of a subject So here no Power but of God to be understood with restriction to the relation of a Lawful Magistrate It it also to be understood indiscriminately in reference to the diverse species sorts degrees of Lawful Power Supreme subordinate whether to the King as Supreme or to Governours c. as Peter expresses it Or whether they be Christian or Pagan It cannot be meant of all universally that may pretend to power and may attain to prevailing Potency for then by this Text we must subject our selves to the Papacy now intended to be introduced and indeed if we subject our selves to this Papist the next thing he will require will be that 3. To the Minor proposition I Answer The usurping power is a power It is Potentia I grant that it is Potestas 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or Authority I deny Therefore it is of God by His Providence I concede by His Ordinance I deny Consequently we owe subjection to it I deny We may be subject passively I grant Actively out of conscience I deny But some will Object 2. Though the Power be Usurped and so not Morally Lawful in all these respects yet it may do good its Laws administrations may be good Ans. I grant all is good that ends well and hath a good begining That cannot be good which hath a bad principle bonum ex integra causa Some Government for constitution good may in some acts be bad but a Government for constitution bad cannot for the acts it puts forth be good These good acts may be good for matter but formally they are not good as done by the Usurper They may be comparatively good that is better so then worse but they cannot be absolutely and in a Moral sense good for to make a Politick action good not only the matter must be warrantable but the Call also It may indeed induce subjects to bear improve to the best what cannot be remedied but cannot oblige to oune a Magistratical Relation II. The Nature of the power thus discovered lets us see the Nature of that relative duty which we owe must oune as due to Magistrates and what sort of ouning we must give them which to inquire a litle into will give light to the question All the duty deference the Lord requires of us towards them whom we must oune as Magistrates is comprehended in these two expressions honour required in the fifth Command and subjection required in Rom. 13. 1. c. 1 Pet. 2. 13. c. Whomsoever then we oune as Magistrates we must oune honour subjection as due to them And if so be we cannot upon a consciencious ground give them honour subjection we cannot
David on thy side thow son of Iesse Here was a formed Revolt from Saul unto David before he was King for after this he was made King in Hebron and there could not be two Kings at once Hence I argue if people may separate themselves from and take part with the Resister against a Tyrant then they may disoune him for if they oune him still to be the Minister of God they must not resist him Rom. 13. 2. But here is an example that many people did separate themselves from Saul and took part with the Resister David Ergo Here two of the first Monarchs of Israel were disouned Abimelech Saul 3. The first Hereditary Successor was likewise disouned as was hinted above likewise The ten tribes offer to Covenant with Rehoboam in terms securing their Rights Liberties They desired nothing on the matter but that he would engage to rule over them according to the Law of God To which when he answered most Tyrannically and avowed he would Tyrannise over them and oppress them more than any of his Predicessors they fell away from him and erected themselves into a new Common-wealth 1 King. 12. 16. So when Israel saw that the King hearkened not unto them they answered what portion have we in David neither have we inheritance in the son of Iesse to your tents O Israel now see to thine oun house David 2 Chron. 10. 16. Now however the event of this declared Revolt proved sorrowful when they and their new King made defection unto Idolatry yet if they had stated managed it right the Cause was good justifyable commendable For 1 We find nothing in all the Text condemning this 2 On the Contrary its expressly said the Cause was from the Lord that He might perform His saying which He spake by Ahijah 1 King. 12. 15. 2 Chron. 10. 15. And 3 When Rehoboam was preparing to pursue his pretended right he was reproved discharged by Shemajah ye shall not go up nor fight against your brethren for this thing is from me 1 King. 12. 24. 2 Chron. 11. 4. 4 Whereas it is alledged by some that this was of God only by His providence and not by His Ordinance the contrary will appear if we consider how formally Covenant-wise the Lord gave ten tribes to Ieroboam 1 King. 11. 35 37 38. I will take the Kingdom out of his sons hand and I will give it unto thee even ten tribes And I will take thee and thow shalt reign according to all that thy soul desireth and shall be King over Israel And it shall be if thow wilt hearken unto all that I command thee and will walk in my wayes and do that which is right in my sight to keep my statutes my commandments as David my servant did that I will be with thee build thee a sure house as I built for David and will give Israel unto thee Where we see the Kingdom was given unto him on the same Terms conditions that it was given to David He may indeed give Kingdoms to whom He wiâ— by Providential grant as unto Nebuchadnezzar and others but He never gave them a Kingdom upon these Conditions and by way of Covenant that does alwayes imply import His Word Warrant ordinance 5 If we consider the Cause of the Revolt we will find it very just for after the decease of the former King they enter upon terms of a Compact with the successor upon a suspensive condition to engage into fealty Allegiance to him as subjects if he would give them security for their Liberties Priviledges A very Lawful Laudable necessary transaction founded upon Moral equity upon the fundamental Constitutions of that Government and suitable to the constant practice of their Predicessors in their Covenanting with Saul David As for that Word 1 King. 12. 19. So Israel Rebelled against the house of David It is no more then in the margent they fell away or revolted And no more to be condemned then Hezekiahs Rebellion 2 King. 18. 7. The Lord was with him and he Rebelled against the King of Assyria That was a good Rebellion Hence If it be Lawful for a part of the people to shake off the King refuse subjection to him and set up a new King of their oun when he resolveth to play the Tyrant and rule them after his oun absolute power then it is a duty when he actually playes the Tyrant and by his absolute power overturns Laws Religion and claims by Law such a prerogative But the former is true Ergo See Ius Pepuli vindic chap. 3. Pag 52. 4. This same Ieroboam when he turned Tyrant Idolater was revolted from and deserted by the Priests the Levites and after them out of all the tribes of Israel by all such as set their heart to seek the Lord God of Israel because that King degenerating into Tyranny Idolatry had put them from the exercise of their office Religion as our Charles did and ordained him Priests for the Devils for the Calves So they returned to Rehoboam being induced by his administration of the Government which for a time was better then he promised for three years he walked in the wayes of David Salomon 2 Chron. 11. 13-17 Hence I argue If Idolatrous Tyrants may be deserted then they may be disouned for when they desert them they disoune them abroad in coming under another Government and if they may be disouned abroad it is the same duty at home though may be not the same Policy or Prudence 5. Another example of the like nature we have in the reign of Baasha who succeeded to Nadab Ieroboams son whom he slew reigned in his stead the same way that the Duke came to the Throne For he could not keep his subjects within his Kingdom but behoved to build Ramah that he might not suffer any to go out or come in to Asa. King of Iudah a good Prince 1 King 15. 17. yet that could not hinder them but many strangers out of Ephraim Manasseh Simeon fell to him in abundance when they saw that the Lord his God was with him 2 Chron. 15. 9. Hence If people may chuse another King when they see the Lord is with him then they may disoune their Country King when they see the Devil is with him 6. When Jehoram the son of Ahab reigned over Israel we have an express example of Elisha's disouning him 2 King. 3. 14. 15. And Elisha said unto the King of Israel what have I to do with thee As the Lord of hosts liveth before whom I stand surely were it not that I regard the presence of Jehoshaphat the King of Judah I would not look toward thee nor see thee Here he declares so much contempt of him and so litle regard that he disdains him a look And if he would not regard him nor give him honour then he did not oune him as King for all
Puritans in Queen Elizabeths dayesâ— whether it obliges to a King in Idea and in a more general consideration as one who is said never to die Or with reference to such an one as we have a mortaâ— man and an immortal enemy to all those precious Interests for preservation of which he only received his Kingship Whether it must be taken in that of the Imposers practically explained by their administrations or in any other sense alledged more Legal These would be clear before it can be taken with the due qualifications of an Oath 3. As for the Civil part of it or Ecclesiastical no other explanation needeth to be inquired after than what they give forth in their Acts on record The Act of Supremacy to be seen in the Historical Representation of the Sixth last Period pag. 111. senses the Ecclesiastical part of it And the Act for acknowledgment of his Majesties prerogative does sufficiently sense explain expound the Civil part Declaring That it is inherent in the Crown and an undoubted part of the Royal prerogative to have the sole choise appointment of all Officers of State the power of calling holding dissolving Parliaments and all Conventions Meetings of Estates the power of Armies making of peace war treaties leagues with forreign Princes or States or at home by the subjects among themselves and that it is high treason in the subjects upon whatsoever ground to rise in Armes or make any treaties or leagues among themselves without his Maj. Authority first interponed thereto That it is unlawful to the subjects of whatsoever quality or function to convocate themselves for holding of Councils to treat consult or determine in any matters Civil or Ecclesiastick except in the ordinary Judgements or make leagues or bonds upon whatsoever colour or pretence without his Maj. special consent That the league Covenant and all treaties following thereupon and acts or deeds that do or may relate thereunto are not obligatory and that none should presume upon any pretext of any Authority whatsoever to require the renewing or swearing of the said league Covenant c. Whereby it appears that all this screwing up the prerogative to such a pitch is by the Oath of Allegiance to defend all this jurisdiction justified and so these palpable encroachments on the priviledges of the Scots Parliaments that by the fundamental Constitutions of the Government alwayes had a share in making Laws and Peace War These robberies of our Natural priviledges of defending our selves by Armes in case of the Kings Tyranny oppression and of Convocating for Consultations about the best means thereof And these Invasions upon our Ecclesiastical priviledges in keeping General Assemblies for the affairs of Religion Prorenata alwayes strenously contended for as a part of the Testimony yea all these rescindings repealings and condemnings of the Way Manner Methods Measures of promoting the Covenanted Reformation are by this Oath explained by this Act acknowledged to be parts of that supremacy Jurisdiction to be defended maintained As like wise by many wicked Acts since promulgated which promote the Supremacy to a vast degree of Absoluteness which all do interpret what that Supremacy is which is sworn to be maintained to wit pure Tyranny established by Law. See the many grievous Consequences of this laid out at large in Apol. Relat. Sect. 10. 4. Here is absolute Allegiance sworn to an Absolute power Paramount to all Law engaging to faithful obedience to their Soveraign as Supreme over all Persons and in all causes and to defend assist maintain his said jurisdiction and never to decline his power there is no restriction here on obedience nor Limitation on the power nor definition of the Causes nor circumscription of the cases in which that assistance c. is to be given whether they be Lawful or not Now absolute allegiance to an absolute power cannot be sworn by any man of Conscience nor ouned by any man of reason as is proven Head. 2. Arg. 6. It cannot be Lawful in any sense to swear such an Oath to any Mortal nay not to a David nor Hezekiah because to swear unrestricted unlimited Allegiance to any man were a manifest mancipating of Mankind not only to an Ass-like subjection but to a servile obligation to maintain uphold the Persons Government of mutable men be what they will turn to what they will it is known the best of men may degenerate And by this no remedy is left to redress our selves bâ—t our heads hearts and hands all tied up under an engagment to defend assist maintain whosoever doth hold the Government manage it as he pleases This reason will also conclude against the English Oath of Allegiance though it be a great deal more smoothly worded and seems only to require a rejection of the Pope and legal subjection to the King yet that comprehensive Clause makes it border upon absoluteness I will bear faith true allegiance to his Maj. heirs successors and him and them will defend to the uttermost of my power against all Conspiracies attempts whatsoever There are no Conditions here at all limiting the Allegiance or qualifying the Object but an arbitrary imposition of true Allegiance and defence in all cases against all attempts even that of repressing their Tyranny not excepted not only of their persons but of their Dignities if this be not an illimited Allegiance to an absolute power I know not what it is 5. Here is an acknowledgment of the Ecclesiastical Supremacy resident in the King which is the most blasphemous Usurpation on the prerogatives of Christ and priviledges of His Church that ever the greatest Monster among men durst arrogate yea the Roman beast never claimed more And in effect it is nothing else but one of his Names of Blasphemie twisted out of the Popes hands by K. Henry the Eight and handed doun to Q. Elizabeth and wafted over to Iames the 6 th for that was the Original conveyance of it The iniquity whereof is discovered above Head. 1. Arg. 3. But further may be aggravated in these particulars 1 It is only a change of the Pope but not of the Popedâ—m and nothing else but a shaking off the Ecclesiastical Pope and submitting to a Civil Pope by whom Christs Head-ship is as much wronged as by the other And hereby a door is opened for bringing in Poperie as indeed by this Strategem it is brought now to our very doors for by the Act of Supremacy he hath power to settle all things concerning Doctrine Worship discipline or Government by his Clerks the Bishops having all the Architectonick power of disposing ordering ordaining these as he in his Royal wisdom thinks fit 2 By this Church State are confounded whereof the Distinction is demonstrate above making the Magistrate a proper Competent Judge in Church matters not to be declined wherby also he hath power to erect new Courts Mongrel-Judicatories
is not illegitimate and unto which resistence is forbidden for the fear of God and for conscience sake and therefore he is no further to be looked at than as an enemy This is so pat pertinent to the present possessor of the Government that no words can more particularly apply it 6. Grotius de jure belli Lib. 1. c. 4. granteth the Law of not resisting does not bind when the danger is most weighty certain And we do not plead for it in any other case And further he sayes The Law of non-resistence seemeth to have flowed from them who first combined together into societie and from whom such as did command did derive their power Now if it had been asked of such whether they would chuse to die rather than in any case to resist the Superior with Armes I know not if they would have yeelded thereto unless with this addition if they could not be resisted but with the greatest perturbation of the Common-wealth destruction of many Innocents And afterwards he hath these words Attamen indiscriminatim damâ—are aut singulos aut partem minorem quae ultimo necessitatis praesidio sic utatur ut interim communis boni respectum non deseruit vix ausim From which we need make no inference the Concession is so large that it answers our case 7. The Surveyer of Naphtali in the place above cited grants Legal self defence against the Soveraign by way of plea in Court for safety of a mans person or estate as also in the case of most habited notour Complete Tyranny against Law to the destruction of the body of a people and of all known Legal Liberties and the being of Religion according to Law And in case of his not being in his natural right wits Hence 1 If it be Lawful to resist the King by a Plea in Law for an Estate yea the Law will allow by actual force if he come to take possession of it illegally Then it must be Lawful for their lives estates Liberties Religion to resist him by force when the Legal resistence is not admitted But the former is yeelded here Ergo The reason of the Connexion is The Municipal Law permits the one and the Law of Nature Nations which no Municipal Law can infringe will warrand the other He hath no more right to be both Judge Party in this case more than in the other And he can no more act as Soveraign in this case than in the other 2 If it be Lawful to resist habited notour Complete Tyranny against Law to the destruction of the body of a people and of all known legal Liberties and the being of Religion according to Law Then we desire no more to conclude the duty of resisting this Tyranny exerced this 27 years habitually which the desolation of many hindered families the banishment of many hundreds to slavery the rivers of blood c. have made Notour to all Scotland at least and the perversion of all the fundamental Laws and all Civil Religious Liberties yea the subversion of every remaining Model of Our Religion as Reformed Covenanted to be preserved in Doctrine Worship Discipline Government and designs to introduce Popery establish Arbitrary Government have made Complete But the former is here granted Ergo 3 If in the case of his being out of his wits he should run upon an innocent man to kill him or attempt to cut his oun throat it were then Lawful to resist him yea a sin not to do it Then when in a rage oâ— deliberately he is seeking to destroy many hundreds of the people of God he may be resisted But the former is clear Ergo 8. King Iames the Sixth in his Remonstrance for the right of Kings against the Oration of Cardinal Perron hath these words The publick Laws makes it Lawful and free for any private person to enterprize against an Usurper of the Kingdom Then shall it not be duty to enterprize against a man who by the Laws of the Land is not capable of a right to reign who hath got into the Throne by the means of Murder and can pretend no right but that of Succession which I proved to be none Head. 2. However we see by these Concessions of Adversaries that the Absolute subjection they talk of will not hold nor the prerogative be so incontrollable in every case as they would pretend and that in many cases Salus populi hath the Supremacy above it And that also in these cases the people must be Judges whether they may resist or not 2. From the Law of Nature I may argue 1. If God the fountain of all power and Author of all Right hath given unto man both the power and the right of and reason to manage self defence and hath no wayes interdicted it in His Word to be put forth against Tyrants Then it is duty to use it against them upon occasion But the former is true Ergo 2. If this power right were restrained in man against the unjust violence of any it would either be by Policy or Grace or some express prohibition in the Word of God But none of these can be said Ergo Policy cannot destroy nature but is rather cumulative to it A man entering into a Politick Incorporation does not lose the priviledge of nature If one particular nature may defend it self against destroying violence out of Societie then must many of these Natures combined in Societie have the same right and so much the more that their relative duties superadde an obligation of mutual assistence Grace does not restrain the right of sinless nature though it restrains corruption but self defence is no corruption Grace makes a man more a man than he was And nothing can be more dishonourable to the Gospel than that by the Law of Nature it is Lawful to resist Tyrants but we are bound by Religion from withstanding their Cruelty The Laws of God do not interfâ—â—e â—ne with another 3. That Law which alloweth comparative re-offending so as to kill rather than be killed teacheth Resistence But so the Law of Nature alloweth except we be guilty or Murder in the culpable omission of self defence The reason is because the love of self is nearer and greater as to temporal life than the love of our Neighbour that being the measure of this Therefore it obliges rather to kill than be killed the exigence of necessity so requiring 4. If nature put no difference between the violence of a Tyrant than of another man then it teaches to Resist both alike But it putteth no difference but rather aggravates that of a Tyrant being the violence of a man the injustice of a member of the Common-wealth the cruelty of a Tyrant And it were absurd to say we might defend our selves from the lesser violence not from the greater 5. If particular Nature must yeeld to the good of Universal nature then must one man though in
fictionibus sese liceat involvere i. e. Whither the confiscation of goods can be sought back again from a Prince in the name and behalf of these who are forfaulted for Religion to which he Answers that it is certain it cannot be done without sin for the new right or the de novo damus as we call it granted by the Prince doeth really contain open blasphemies against the glory of God because therein mention is made of errors crims divine lese-Majestie whereof the condemned are found guilty which new right most in Law be exhibited by him who intendeth to use the same and that is a certain kind of approbation no ways to be tolerat Wherfore I see not that it is Lawfull for a Godly man rightly instructed in the Gospel to involve himself into such fictions 2. From the Fountain Conveyance whence they proceed the iniquity of these payments might be concluded which is nothing else than that Arbitrary Power domineering over us and oppressing overpressing the Kingdoms with intolerable Exactions which to pay is all the consent Concurrence required of us to entail slaverie on the posterity I mean to pay it out of submission only to the Moral force of its Imposition which is all the justification required of that absolute Tyranny imposing it For we have the Testimony of a King for it K. Iames Speech to the Parliament anno 1609. that a King degenerateth into a Tyrant when he leaveth to rule by Law much more when he begins to set up an Arbitrary Power impose unlawful Taxes c. It can be denyed by none that know either Religion or Liberty and are not enemies to both that these Impositions under consideration upon such accounts for such ends are as unlawful Taxes and as illegally and arbitrarily imposed as ever could demonstrate the most Despotical Absoluteness Paramount to all Law or precedent but that of Benhadad of a very Tyrannical strain Thus saith Benhadad thy silver thy gold is mine yet I will send my Servants and they shall search thine house and it shall be that whatsoever is pleasant in thine eyes they shall put in their hand take it away 1 King. 20. 3 6. which even an Ahab and his Elders would not hearken to nor consent But from an Exotick Dominator this were not so intollerable as from such as pretend an hereditary right to Govern who should remove violence spoyl and take away their Exactions from the Lords people as the Lord saith Ezek. 45. 9. but instead of that that they may do evil with both hands earnestly the Prince asketh and the Iudge asketh for a reward and the great man uttereth his mischievous desire so they wrap it up Mic. 7. 3. The easie Complyance with which makes Zion as the grape gleanings of the vintage If those Exactions be wicked then Complyance with them must be iniquity For it justifies the Court that enacts exacts them a paâ—qued Iunctâ— of a prevalent faction made up of perjured Traitors in a Course of enmity against God and the Country who to prosecute the War against the Almighty and root out all His people out of the Land condescend upon these Cesses Fynes c. as a fit adapted Medium thereunto Wherefore of necessity all that would not oune that Conclusion as their oun deed in these Representatives and oune them as their Representatives in that deed must bear witness against the same by a Refusal to oune the debt or pay the same But I shall conclude this with observing 1 The holy remarkable righteousness of the Lord that we who would not contend earnestly for the Liberty of the Gospel who would not acquit our selves like men in witnessing our Loyaltie to Christ were not fixed in our Engagements nor stedfast in holding the Liberties wherewith Christ hath made us free did not reclaim nor reluctate when we saw our Royal Masters Prerogative invaded should be trode upon in all Civills and treated as Slaves even by these whom we had gratified with a base sinful forbearance to plead for God and preserve from their violence these things these precious invaluable things which we should have kept more tenderly than the apple of our eye O the relucency of this Righteousness in making the Gods whom we have served smite us and in making them whose interest we minded with a misregard Perjury-involving neglect of the Interest of Christ thus to destroy our poor pitiful Interests And thus having taught them to be Captains over us we must now sit in the house of bondage in our Land. 2 Who will not adore admire the Righteousness of the Lord particularly in leaving some of these to be designedly trode upon who not only were involved in the common guilt of not with-standing these Encroachments but first went a great way in concuring to the making of these wicked Laws And now have been made to lye under the load laid upon their loyns by the hands of such to whom they gave the hand in overturning the Work of God Why should not they be spoyled Why should not the young Lyons roar upon them and make their Land wast Why should not men of the same mettal soul with the Children of Noph Tahapanes break the Crown of their head or feed upon their Crown who have sold set the Crown of Christ upon anothers head and concured to crush His faithful Remnant O let us learn to read revere Let us not be wheedled with we know not what out of our good old Principles into the espousing the Interest or embarquing into the same bottom with men of such Principles Practices And whoso is wise and will observe these things even they shall understand the loving kindness of the Lord Great loving kindness that He hath shewed to his poor Remnant in delivering us from deliverances by such Deliverers whereby the work had been more really and more shamefully ruined and the hope of the posterity more certainly razed 3. From the declared Ends of all of them declared either verbally or virtually and indisputably universally known To wit that by such Exactions they might be enabled to maintain prosecute the National Rebellion against Christ and root out His Gospel and all the faithful Preachers Professors thereof These designs being notour and the Impositions demanded being the best expedients and most adapted means to attain them it cannot but be manifest that whosoever complyes with the means do cooperate with the ends Which if any thing will involve the Complyers in the Contrivers sin and make the Payers obnoxious to the Enacters judgments If they that take rewards to slay Innocents be lyable to a Curse Deut. 27. 25. they cannot be free who give them They cannot say Amen to it who so cooperate to the effectuating the slaughter If any thing make Zion lyable to be plowed as a field when the heads thereof judge for reward Mic. 3. 11 11. it must be
lost as a prey in the Dragons Mouth Yet Christ having such undoubted manifold right to it will not so easily quit or forego His possession But also because He hath so constantly continued His possession maintained His Title by a long course of Contendings by the Testimonies of His witnesses against the Invaders thereof through all the Periods of the Church from the very infancy of this new Dispensation And because Scotlands conversion into the Christian Faith was among the first fruits of the Gentiles of the oldest date that any standing Church holding the head Christ this day can deduce its original from For it is clear from Ancient Records the Christian Faith was imbraced here a few years after the Ascension of our Saviour being taught by the Disciples of Iohn the Apostle received afterwards great increment from the Brittons flying to Scotland to escape the Persecution of the Emperour Domitian was long promoted by the ancient Culdees or Cultores Dei men whose memory is still fragrant for piety purity of faith life who continued some hundreds of years under various vicissitudes of Providence before either Prelacy or Poperie was known in Scotland They were first universally encouraged by King Cratilinth in the time of the last Persecution under Dioclesian which brought many of Christs witnesses hither for Shelter who were very helpful for the setling of Truth the total extirpation of the Idolatry of the Druides the Heathen Priests whereby the pure Doctrine Worship Government also of Christs Institution was established continued many years while these Witnesses of Christ had no other emulation but of well doing to advance Pietie In this Period these ancient first Confessors Witnesses of Christ did wrestle strenously according to their strength light for the Truths words of Christs patience controverted in their day both against professed Enemies Pagan Persecutors 〈◊〉 pretended friends corrupters of the Faith. Their Testimony was stated in a peculiar manner for the verity value vertue of Christs Natures Offices in 〈…〉 relâ—â—ive to either against the Malignants Sectaries of their time particularly for the concerns of His Prâ—phetical Office. And though we be at a loss that for the most art their witness is buried in oblivion through the darkness of the times succeeding yet the scraps fragments that are left do furnish us with these few Remarks I. They maintained the verity of the Christian Doctrine against both Pagan Persecutors Heretical perverters And the purity of His instituted worship without the vanity of humane inventions or conformity with either the Druides on the one hand or the Hereticks on the other with which sometime befor the end of that Period they were inâ—ested Chiefly the Pelagians with whom the faithful would have no communion but abstracted themselves in a Monastical life liveing exercising their Religion in Cells from whence many places in the Countrey yet retain the name as Kilmarnock Kil-Patrick c. that is the Cells of these eminent men among the Culdees And their Government also was that of the primitive order without Bishops with litle vanity but great simplicity holyness Many Authors do testity that near about 400 years the Church of Scotland knew nothing of the Episcopal Hierarchy untill Paâ—adius brought it in not without great opposition II. In these Recesses they had the advantage both of outward peace when others were in trouble of inward peace of conscience when others were debauched with many conjurations abjurations combinations confederacies imposed exacted by them that prevailed for the time whereby they might both keep themselves free of insnaring Oaths perfidious complyances Associations with the wicked also intertain incourage the oppressed for equity who fled unto their sanctuary for safety We find they refused to enter into League with malignant Enemies One memorable passage I shall insert though strictly it belong not to this Period as I distinguish it yet falling out within 80 years thereafter in the time of the Culdees it will not obscurely evidence the truth of this Goranus the 45 King of Scots earnestly dissuaded Lothus King of Picts to entertain the League with the Saxons not only because they were treacherous cruel but because they were Enemies to the Countreâ— to the Religion they professed concluding thus Homiâ—i vero Christiano id longe omnium videri c. But to a Christian nothing must seem more grievous than to consent to such a Covenant as will extinguish the Christian Religion reduce the profane Customes of the Heathen arme wicked Tyrants the enemies of all humanity piety against God His Law whereupon Lothus was perswaded to relinquish the Saxons Buchan Histor. rer Scotic III. Though they were not for partaking in wicked unnecessary Wars without authority or against it yet we have ground to conclude they were for War did maintain the principle of resisting Tyrannie since there was never more of the pactice of it nor more happy resistances in any age than in that Where we find that as their Ancestors had frequently done before so they also followed their footsteps in resisting reduceing to order repressing bringing to condign punishment Tyrant Usurpers And thought those actions which their Fathers did by the light of nature dictates of reason worthy of imitation when they had the advantage of the light of Revelation dictates of Faith the one being indeed moderate directed but no ways contradicted by the other Therefore we read that as their Predecessors had done with Thereus the 8 th King of Scotland whom they banished in the year before Christs Incarnation 173. With Durstus the II King whom they slew in Battel in the year befor Christ 107. Evenus 3. who was imprisoned dyed there in the year befor Christ 12. Dardanus the 20 th King who was taken in Battel beheaded by his oun Subjects his head exposed to Mockage his body cast into a sink Anno Christi 72. Luctatus the 22. King who was slain for his Leachery Tyranny anno 110. Mogaldus the 23. King slain anno 113. Conarus the 24. King a Leacherous tyrant dyed in Prison anno 149. Satrael the 26. King hanged anno 159. So after the Christian Faith was publickly professed they pursued Athirco the 29. King when degenerate into Tyranny who was forced to kill himself anno 231. They slew Nathalocus the 30. King cast him into a privy anno 242. They beheaded Romachus the 36. King and caryed about his head for a show anno 348. As they did with many others afterwards as witnesseth Buchan lib. 4. Histor. Scotic IV. Whence it is evident that as they attained even in these primitive times maintained the purity freedom of their Ministery independent on Pope Prelate or any humane Supremacy that Antichristian Hierarchy Erastian blasphemie not being known in those dayes so they contended for the order
also constrained by the valour of Archibald Douglas E. of Angus called Bell the Cat to reforme the Court and put away some wicked Sycophants from his Counsel and give way tho against his will to the execution of judgement upon others which was the occasion of that foresaid Agnomen to the Earle For he with other Nobles in a meeting at Lawder consulting how to reform repress the insolency of the Court had the Apologue of the Mice laid out before them that the Mice â—ell upon deliberating how to be rid of the Cat concluded the best way was to put a bell about her neck but when it came to be put in execution never a Mouse durst undertake it The Earle quickly made application saying I will bell the Cat forthwith went out meeting Cochran one of these wicked Consellours took hold of him hanged him with a horse halter over the bridge of Lawder rushing in to the Kings presence proceeded to snatch Ramsey another of the countreyes Enemies out of the Kings Armes but that he yeelded at length to the Kings earnest entreaties to spare him However we see how generously zealous these noble Patriots were for the countries good against Tyrannie thô they were ignorant of Religion Yet this all alongs was still the character of the Scots in these dayes none more terrible to Tyrants none more Loyal to Kings then they PERIOD III. Containing the Testimonie of the Reformation from Poperie AS in the former the Testimony was mostly Passive so in the following Period when they were increased in number strength that embraced the Gospel the Lord called spirited to an Active Testimony for these two Twins Religion Liberty that were then sought to be stifled in the birth are now designed more declaredly to be destroyed after they have growen up to some maturity Which as it renders the cruelty of the present destroyers the more grassant grievous so it rubs the more indeleble Infamie on the shamfull security Ass-like stupidity of this generation that have received such an excellent Testimony deposited to their trust transmitted to them through a continued traÌ„ct of the witnessings wrestlings of their worthy Ancestors and now let it slip slide through their feeble fingers And does the more justify yea magnify the poor endeavours of the present Sufferers who at least when they cannot react these mighty works in defending Religion Liberty do choose rather to die than to resign the Testimony or quite the least Priviledge that their Progenitors possessed them of And though they be superciliously despised as litle insignificant nothings in the eyes of the bulk of the big boasters of this blind age yet if these valiant Heroes who did such exploits for their God in commenceing carying on the work of Reformation were now to see the dull Dotages of this dreaming generation not only suffering consenting to but congratulating applauding the introduction reestablishment of Idolatry Tyranny Popery Slavery upon the ruines of the work they built with so great expence And were to read the pitiful Petitions and airy empty flattering fauning Addresses to this Antichristian Tyrant for the Toleration of that Religion Liberty under the odious notion of a Crime which they had conveyed to them under the security of a fundamental Law They if any would be acknowledged as their Children who disdain disoune such dishonorable dastardly yeeldings and are therefore most despised with disdain despight A brief Rehearsal of their Contendings will clear the Case While the Queen Dowager Regent reigned by the curse of God and employed all her power policy to suppress the Gospel in Scotland God so Counteracted her that the blood of the Martyrs she caused to be murdered proved the seed of the Church and the endeavours of His Servants had such success that no small part of the Barons Gentlemen as well as commons began to abhor the Tyranny of the Bishops yea men almost universally began to doubt whether they could without sin give their bodily presence to the Masse or offer their Children to the Papistical Baptisme Whether these that were in any publick trust could with safe conscience serve the higher Powers in maintainiâ—g of Idolatry persecuting their Brethren suppressing Christs Truth or whether they might suffer their Brethren to be murdered in their presence without any declaration that such Tyrannie displeased them And from the Scriptures they were resolved that a lively Faith required a plain Confession when Christs Truth is impugned And that not only they be guilty that do evil but also they that consent to evil and this they should do if seeing such things openly committed they should be silent and so allow whatsoever was done From doubts they came to determinations to endeavour that Christ Iesus His glorious Gospel should be Preached His holy Sacraments truely ministred Superstition Idolatry Tyranny should be suppressed in this Realme And that both as to the Worship Discipline Government the Reverend face of the first primitive Apostolick Church should be reduced again to the eyes knowledge of men And in this they never faâ—nted till the work was finished To accomplisâ— this famous and faithfull Mr Knox and other Servants of the Lord did Preach diligently in Private Meetings And for that when they were summoned before the Queen several zealous bold men repaired to her plainly in the hearing of the Prelats did charge them with the cruel device intended told her with a vow they should make a day of it because they oppressed them their tennents for feeding of their idle bellies they troubled the Preachers and would murder all should they suffer this any longer No it should not be Thereafter the more effectually to prosecute the Reformation begun they entered into Covenants to maintain advance that work of Reformation And to stand to the Desence thereof and of one another against all wicked Power that might intend Tyranny or trouble against them and to resent any injury done to any of their Brerhren upon the account of the Common Cause as done to all Of which Covenants they entered into many very solemnly one was at Edinburgh anno 1557. Another at Perth 1559. Another at Sterling 1559. binding that none should have any correspondence with the Queen without notifieing it to one another And that nothing should proceed therein without common Consent of them all Another at Leith anno 1560. Another at Air anno 1562. of the same tenor By which Covenants as their Conjunction was the more firme among themselves so was it the more fearful to their Adversaries when according to the tenor of them they kept their Conventions held Counsells with such gravity clossness that the enemies trembled I mention these things more particularly because these same very things commended in our Fathers are now condemned in a poor handful that woâ—ld aim at imitating
their example in renewing reiterating such Covenants of the same Nature Tenor binding to the same very duties and prosecute in the same methods of keeping General Meetings for Correspondence consultation about common mutual Duties in common danger whereunto they have not only present necessity to urge them but also preterite examples of these Worthies to encourage them and their experience of comfort tranquillity they reaped by these Christian Assemblies Godly Conferences as ost as any danger appeared to any member or members of their body These beginings the zealous Covenanted Reformers left no means unessayed to promote by Protestations to the Parliament Petitions many reiterated Addresses to the Queen Dowager From whom they received many renewed fair promises which she had never mind to keep and wanted not the impudence when challenged for breaking them to declare It becomes not Subjects to burthen their Princes with promises further then it pleased them to keep the same And at another time that she was bound to keep no Faith to Hereticks And again that Princes must not be strictly bound to keep their promises And that her self would make litle Conscience to take from all that sort their Lives Inheritance if she might do it with an honest excuse Wherein she spoke not only the venome of her oun heart but the very soul sense principle project of all Popish Princes Whereby we may see what security we have for Religion Liberty this day though the most part make such a pretence a pillow to sleep on But after many Discoveries in this kind of the Queens Treachery at length they would no more be bribed by promises blinded by pretences nor boasted by her Proclamations slandering their interprise as if it pertained nothing to Religion from their endeavours to prosecute the same but finding themselves compelled to take the Sword of Just defence against all that should persue them for the matter of Religion they first signified unto her That they would notifie to the King of France all Christian Princes that her cruel unjust most Tyrannieal murther intended against Touns Mnltitudes was is the only Cause of their revolt from their accustomed obedience which they ouned promised to their Soveraign provided they might live in Peace Liberty and enjoy Christs Gospel without which they firmly purpose never to be subject to mortal man And that better it were to expose their bodies to a thousand deaths than to deny Christ which thing not only do they who commit open Idolatry but also all such as seeing their Brethren purswed for the Cause of Religion and haveing sufficient means to comfort assist them do nevertheless withdraw from them their dutiful support And thereafter they published a Declaration to the generation of Antichrist the pestilent Prelats their shavelings within Scotland That they should not be abused thinking to escape just punishment after that they in their blind fury had caused the blood of many to be shed but if they proceeded in this their malicious Cruelty they should be dealt with all wheresoever they should be apprehended as Murderers open Enemies to God to Mankind And that with the same measure they had measured intended to measure to others it should be measured to them that is they should with all force power they had execute just vengeance punishment upon them yea begin that same War which God commandeth Israel to execute against the Canaanites that is Contract of Peace should never be made till they desist from their open Idolatry cruel Persecution of Gods Children I rehearse this Declaration the more expresly because in our day Declarations of this stile strain and aiming at the same Scope is hideously hissed houted at as unheard of novelties Finally when by all their Letters Warnings Admonitions Protestations they could obtain no redress but rather an increase of insupportable violence they proponed the Question in a General Meeting Whether she whose pretences threatened the bondage of the whole Commonwealth ought to be suffered so Tyrannically to domineer over them Unto which the Ministers being required to give their judgment answered that she ought not And accordingly they declared her deposed from all Government over them because of her persecuting the Professors of the true Religion and oppressing the Liberties of the true Lieges never being called nor convinced of any Crime because of her intrusion of Magistrats against all order of Election because of her bringing in strangers to suppress the Liberty of the Countrey and placing them in greatest Offices of Credite because of her altering and subverting the old Laws of the Realme c. Which I mention because hence we may see what things our Fathers judged did dissolve the relation between the people their Rulers And when applyed to our Case will justify their reasons that have renounced the present Tyranny This was done at Edinburgh anno 1559. And thereafter while they vindicated themselves went on with the work of Reformation throwing doun all monuments of Idolatry propogateing the Reformed Religion God so blessed their endeavours that their Confession of faith and all Articles of the Protestant Religion was Read Ratified by the three Estates of Parliament at Edinburgh Iulij 1560. And the same year the Book of Discipline containing the forme order of Presbyterial Government was subscribed by a great part of the Nobility Thus through the wisdom power of God alone even by the weaknesse of very mean Instrâ—ments against the rage fury of the devil and of all the powers of Hell was this work of Reformation advanced effectuated And came to the establishment of a Law which did not only ratifie confirme the Pâ—oteâ—â—ant Religion but abolish Antichristian Popery and appoint punishment for the Professors promoters thereof Which Law often confirmed ratified afterwards though it be now cassed rescinded by the Prerogative of the present Tyrant because it anulls invalidates his pretence to succession in the Government it being expressly enacted afterwards by a Parliament at Edinburgh 156. Confirming this that all Princes Kings hereafter before their Coronation shall take Oath to maintain the true Religion then professed suppress all things contrary to it yet is still in force in the hearts of all honest men that will not prostitute Religion Law Liberty to the lusts of Tyrants and will be accounted a better bottom to build the hope of enjoying Religion upon than the perfidious promises of a Popish Usurper pretending a Liberty to dissenting Protestants by takeing away the Penal Statuts the Legal Bulwark against Popery All which yet to the reproach of all Protestants some are applauding Congratulating in this time by their Addresses Petitions to this destroyer of Law Religion I wish they would look back to see what the building of this Bulwark cost our Fathers before they sell it at such a
Generall Assembly under the pain of excomunication Hereby they were awakened animated to a more vigorous Prosecution of the establishment of the House of God in its due Government In pursuance whereof the Assemblies from that time untill the year 1581. Did with much painfulness faithfulness attend the work untill by perfecting of the Second Book of Discipline they compleated their work in the exact Model of Presbyterial Government in all its Courts Officers Which was Confirmed Covenanted to be kept inviolate in the National Covenant subscribed that year by the King his Court Council and afterwards by all ranks of People in the Land. Whence it may be doubted whether the impudence of the succeeding Prelats that denyed this or their perjury in breaking of it be greater This was but the first brush a brisker assault followes Wherein for the better establishment of Prelacy that what it wants of Divine right might be supplyed by the accession of humane Prerogative and not only Diocesan but also Erastian Prelacy might be set up to destroy Christs Kingdom advance Sathans the Earle of Arran his wicked Complices move the King contrary both to the Word Oath of God to usurp the prerogative of Jesus Christ and assume to himself a blasphemous Monster of Supremacy over all Persons in all Causes as well Ecclesiastical as Civil But this also the faithful Servants of God did worthily valiantly resist and at the very first appearance of it gave in a Grievance to the King anno 1582. That he had taken upon him a spiritual Power which properly belongs to Christ as only King Head of the Church the Ministerie execution whereof is only given to such as bear office in the Ecclesiastical Government in the same so that in the Kings Person some men press to erect a new Popedome as though he could not be full King of this Commonwealth unless as well the spiritual as temporal Sword be put in his hand unless Christ be rest of His Authority and the two Jurisdictions confounded which God hath divided which directly tendeth to the wrack of all true Religion Which being presented by the Commissioners of the General Assembly the Earle of Arran asked with a frouning Countenance who dare subscribe these treasonable Articles Mr Andrew Melvin answered we dare will subscribe render our Lives in the Cause And afterward that same Assembly presented Articles shewing that seeing the spiritual Jurisdiction of the Church is granted by Christ and given only to them that by preaching teaching overseeing bear Office within the same to be exercised not by the injunctions of men but by the only Rule of Gods Word hereafter no other of whatsomever degree or under whatsomever pretence have any colour to ascribe or to take upon them any part thereof either in placing or displacing of Ministers without the Churches admission or in stopping the mouths of Preachers or puting them to silence or take upon them the judgment of tryal of Doctrine c. But in contempt contradiction to this and to prosecute exert this new usurped Power Mr Andrew Melvin was summoned before the secret Council for a Sermon of his applying his doctrine to the Times Corruptions whereupon he gave in his declinature against them as incompetent Judges and told them they were too bold in a Constitute Christian Church to pass by the Pastors Prophets Doctors and to take upon them to judge the Doctrine and to control the Ambassadors of a Greater then was there which they neither ought nor can do There are saith he Loosing a litle Hebrew Bible from his girdle my Instructions Warrant see if any of you can control me that I have past my injunctions For this he was decerned to be warded in the Castle of Edinbrugh but he being informed that if he entered in ward he would not be released unless it were for the scaffold he conveyed himself secretly out of the Countrey Hereafter when the Parliament 1584. had enacted this Supremacy and submission to Prelacy to be subscribed by all Ministers the faithful first directed Mr David Lindsey to the King desiring that nothing be done in Parliament prejudicial to the Churches Liberty who got the Prison of Blackness for his Pains And then when they could not get access for shut doors to Protest before the Parliament yet when the Acts were proclaimed at the Cross of Edinburgh they took publick Documents in name of the Church of Scotland though they were but two that they protested against the said Acts and fled to England leaving behind them reasons that moved them to do so And Mr Iames Melvin wrote against the subscribers at that time very pertinently Proving first that they had not only set up a new Pope so become Traitors to Christ and condiscended to that chief error of Papistrie whereupon all the rest depend but further in so doing they had granted more to the King than ever the Popes of Rome peaceably obtained c. And in the end as for those that Lamented their oun weakness feebleness he adviseth them to remove the publick slander by going boldly to the King Lords and shew them how they had fallen through weakness but by Gods power are risen again and there by publick note witness taken free themselves from that subscription and to will the same to be delete renouncing detesting it plainly and thereafter publickly in their Sermons and by their Declaration retractation in writ presented to the faithful manifest the same let them do with stipend benefice Life it self what they list This I insert because this Counsel is now condemned and when poor people offended with Ministers subscriptions of Bonds other Complyances desire acknowledgments of the offence they reject it as an impertinent imposition and plead they are not obliged to manifest any retractation but to an Ecclesiastical Judicatory To which I shall say nothing here but this is no novelty After this it is known what bickerings the faithful witnesses of Christ had in their Conflicts with this supremacy upon the account of Mr David Blacks Declinature which they both advised him to approved when he gave it in against the King Conncil as Judges of his Doctrine And the Commissioners of the General Assembly ordained all to deal mightily with the power of the word against the Councils encroachments for which they were charged to depart forth of Edinburgh After which he added a second Declinature Declaring there are two Jurisdictions in this realme the one Spiritual the other Civil the one respecting the Conscience the other externals c. Therefore in so far as he was one of the spiritual office-bearers and had discharged his spiritual Calling in some measure of grace sincerity should not nor could not be Lawfully judged for preaching and applying the word by any Civil power he being an Ambassadour Messenger of the Lord Jesus having his Commission from
imposing the Service-book and book of Canons c. the Lord in Mercy remembered His people and surprised them with a sudden unexpected Deliverance by very despicable means even the opposition of a few weak women at the beginning of that Contest which ere it was quashed made the Tyrant tumble headless off his throne The zeal against the English popish Ceremonies obtruded on Edinburgh did first inflame some feminine hearts to witness their detestation of them but afterwards was followed out with more Masculine fervor accosting King Council with Petitions Remonstrances Protestations Testimonies against the Innovations and resolving upon a mutual Conjunction to defend Religion Lives Liberties against all that would innovate or invade them To fortifie which and conciliate the favour both of God man in the Resolution All the Lovers of God and friends to the Liberty of the Nation did solemnly Renew the National Covenant wherein they were signally countenanced of the Lord vvhich though in it self obliging to the Condemnation of Prelatical Hierarchie and clearly enough confirming Presbyterial Government yet they ingaged into it vvith an inlargment to suspend the practice of Novations already introduced and the approbation of the Corruptions of the present Government vvith the late places povver of Church men till they be tried in a free General Assembly Which vvas obtaineâ— that same year and indicted at Glasgow and there not vvith standing all the opposition that the Kings Commissioner could make by Protestations Proclamations to dissolve it the six preceeding Assemblies establishing Prelacy vvere annulled The Service-Book and high Commission vvere condemned All the Bishops vvere deposed and their Government declared to be abjured in that National Covenant though many had through the Commissioners persvvasions subscribed it in another sense vvithout that application As also the five Articles of Perth vvere there discovered to have been inconsistent vvith that Covenant Confession and the Civil places povver of Church men vvere disproved rejected on the other hand Presbyterial Government vvas Justified Approved and an Act vvas passed for their keeping yearly General Assemblies This was a bold begining into which they were animated with more than humane resolution against more than humane opposition Hell as well as the powers of the earth being set against them But when the Lord gave the Call they considered not their oun deadness nor were daunted with Discouragments nor staggered at the promise through unbelief but gave Glory to God out braving all difficulties Which in the following year were much increased by the Prelats and their Popish Partakers rendevouzing their forces under the Kings Personal Standart and menacing nothing but misery to the zealous Covenanters yet when they found them prepared to resist were forced to yeeld to a Pacification concluding that an Assembly Parliament should be held for healing all grievances of Church and State. In which Assembly at Edinburgh the Covenant is ratified subscribed by the Earle of Traquair Commissioner and enjoined to be subscribed by the body of the whole Land with an explication expressly condemning the five Articles of Perth the Government of Bishops the Civil places power of Church men But the sons of Belial cannot be taken with hands nor bound with bonds of faith humanity or honour For in the year following King Prelats with their Popish Abettors go to arms again but were fain to accommodate the matter by a new Pacification whereby all Civil Religious Liberties were ratified And in the folowing year 1641 by Lawes Oaths Promises subscriptions of King Parliament fully confirmed The King Charles the I. being present and consenting to all though in the mean time he was treacherously encouraging the Irish murderers who by his Authority made a Massacre of many thousand Innocent Protestants in Ireland But in Scotland things vvent vvell the Kingdom of our Lord Jesus vvas greatly advanced the Gospel flourished and the Glory of the Lord did shine upon us vvith such a splendor that it avvaked England and animated the Lords People there then groaning under those Grievances from vvhich Scotland vvas delivered to aspire to the like Reformation For advice in vvhich because though all aggreed to cast off the yoke of Prelacy yet sundry forms of Church Government vvere projected to be set up in the room thereof chiefly the Independent order determining all Acts of Church Government as Election ordination and deposition of officers vvith Admission Excommunication Absolution of members to be done decided by the voices of every Particular Congregation vvithout any Authoritative Concurrence or interposition of any other condemning all imperative decisive povver of Classes c. as a meer usurpation Therefore the Brethren in England vvrote to the Assembly then fitting at Edinburgh vvho gave them ansvver That they vvere grieved that any of the Godly should be found not aggreeing vvith other Reformed Churches in point of Government as well as Doctrine and that it was to be feared where the edge of Discipline Government is different the Doctrine Worship shall not long continue the same without change That the Government of the Church by Compound Presbytries Synods is a help strength and not a hinderance to particular Congregations Elderships in all the parts of Government and are not an extrinsecal Power set over Particular Churches but the intrinsecal power where with Christ hath invested His Officers who may not exercise it Independently but with subordination unto Presbytries c. Which as they are Representative of particular Churches conjoined together in one under their Government so their determination when they proceed orderly whether in Causes common to all or brought before them by reference in case of aberration is to the several Congregations Authoritative not Consultatory only And this subordination is not only warranted by the light of nature but grounded upon the Word of God and conforme to the Pattern of the Primitive Apostolick Church for the Preservation of verity unity against Schisme Heresie Tyrannie which is the fruit of this Government where soever it hath place So from henceforth the Assembly did incessantly urge uniformity in Reformation with their Brethren in England as the chiefest of their Desires Prayers Cares And in the year 1643. prevailed so far that the English Parliament did first desire that the two Nations might be strictly united for their mutual defence against the Papists Prelatical faction and their Adherents in both Kingdoms and not to lay down Armes till these implacable Enemies should be brought in subjection and did instantly urge for the help assistance from Scotland Which being sent did return with an Olive branch of Peace and not without some beginings of a Reformation in England And afterwards a bloody War begining between the King Parliament with great success on the Kings side whence the Papists at the time got great advantage witness the cessation of Armes concluded in Ireland
advanced that the Government of the Church by Congregational Elderships Classical Presbyteries Provincial National Assemblies is aggreed upon by the Assembly of Divines at Westmnster and voted concâ—uded in both houses of Parliament After this the Malignants in England being crushed in all their Projects the King renders himself to the Scots in New castle by whom because by Covenant they were not obliged to defend him but only in defence of Religion Liberty which he had been destroying and they defending because in this war he did directly oppose oppugne these conditions under which they were only to defend him and therefore they had all alongst carried towards him as an enemy as he to them And because by the same Covenant they were obliged to discover render to condign punishment all Malignants Incendaries of whom he was the chief and to reâ—ain the Peace Union of the Kingdoms which could not be retained in maintaining their destroyer And to assist mutually all entered into that Covenant which he was fighting against he was delivered up into the English and kept under restraint in the Isle of Wight untill he received his just demerit for all his oppressions Murders Treachery Tyranny being condemned execute Ianuar. 30. anno 1648 9 Which fact though it was protested against both before after by the Assembly of the Church of Scotland out of zeal against the Sectarians the executioners of that extraordinary Act of Justice yet it was more sor the manner than for the matter and more for the motives ends of it than for the grounds of it that they opposed themselves to it and resented it For they acknowledged remonstrated to himself the Truth of all these things upon which that sentence execution of Justice was founded And when a wicked Association Unlawful Engagment was on foot to rescue him they opposed it with all their might Shewing in their Answers to the Estates that year 1648. and Declarations Remonstrances the sinfullness destructiveness of that Engagment that it was a breach of the Commandments of God of all the Articles of the Covenant Declaring withal they would never consent to the Kings Restitution to the exercise of his Power without previous assurance by solemn Oath under his hand seal for settling of Religion according to the Covenant By which it appears they were not so stupidly Loyal as some would make them Yet indeed it cannot be past without regrate that there was too much of this plague of the Kings-evil even among good men which from that time forth hath so infected the heads hearts of this Generation that it hath almost quite extinct all Loyaltie to Christ and all zeal for Religion Liberty Then it began to infuse diffuse its Contagion when after the death of Charles the first in the year 1649. they began after all that they had smarted for their trusting these treacherous Tyrants and after that Grace had been shewed them from the Lord their God by breaking these mens yokes from from off their necks and puting them again into a Capacity to act for the good of Religion their oun safety and the peace safety of the Kingdom to think of joining once more with the people of these abominations and taking into their bosoms these Serpents which had formerly stung them almost to death Hinc ilâ—â— lachrimae en origo Scaturigo nostrae defectionis There was indeed at that time a Party faithful for God who considering the many breaches of the Solemn League Covenant and Particularly by the late Engagment against England did so travel that they procured the Covenant to be renewed with the Solemn Acknowledgment of sins Engagment to duties which was Universally subscribed sworn through all the Land wherein also they regrete this tampering with Malignants And therefore the Lord did mightily save defend them from all their Adversaries subdued them at Stirling and in the North. They did also give warning concerning the young King that notwithstanding of the Lords hand against his Father yet he hearkens unto the Counsells of these who were Authors of these Miseries to his Father by which it hath come to pass that he hath hitherto refused to grant the just necessary desires of the Church Kingdom for securing of Religion Liberty And it is much to be feared that these wicked Counsellers may so far prevail upon him as to ingage him in a war for overturning the Work of God and bearing doun all those in the three Kingdoms that adhere therto Which if he shall do cannot but bring great wrath from the Lord upon himself throne and must be the cause of many new great Miseries Calamities to these Lands And in the same warning by many weighty reasons they prove that he is not to be admitted to the exercise of his power without security for Religion Liberty And when the bringing home of the King came to be voted in the Assembly there was one faithful witness Mr Adam Kae Minister in Galaway protested against it fore shewing fore telling what mischeef misery he would bring with him when he should come These things might have had some weight to demur the Nation from medling with that perfidious Traitor But all this serves only to aggravate the sin shame of that distraction which hath procured all this destruction under which the Land mourns to this day That notwithstanding of all these Convictions warnings yea and discoveries of his Malignancy Treachery inclinations to Tyranny They sent Commissioners and concluded at Treaty with him at Breda During which Treaty the Commissions which he had sent to that bloody villain Montrose his Cut throat Complices to raise an Armie wast invade the Countrey with fire sword the second time were brought to the Committee of Estates discovering what sort of King they were treating with Whereupon after serious Consulting not only together but with the Lord And after many debates what to do in such a doubtfull case wherein all was in danger the Estates concluded to break off the Treaty and recall their Commissioners To which intent they sent an Express with Letters to Breda which by providence falling into the hands of Libberton a true Libertine false betrayer of his trust Country was by him without the knowledge of the other Commissioners delivered unto the King who consulting the Contents of the Packet with his Jesuitical Hypocritical Cabal found it his interest to play the fox being disappointed at that time to play the Tyger and dissemble with God man. And so sending for the Commissioners he made a flattering speech to them shewing that novv after serious deliberation he vvas resolved to comply vvith all their Proposals Where upon the poor cheated Commissioners dispatch the post back with Letters full of praise joy for the satisfaction they had received The Estates perceiving themselves
upon thee from the Lord. Whereunto is subjoined his dying Testimony to the same purpose wherein are these words But if there shall be a falling back to the sin of complyance with Malignant ungodly men then I look for the breaking out of the wrath of the Lord till there be no remedy This was the warning of a worthy dying Man. Notwithstanding of which many other warnings witnessings a course of complyance was commenced by the pulick Resolutioners and continued in to this day wherein that faithful warning of a dying servant of Christ is verified But before I leave this purpose I must obviate an objection that some make use of for strengthening themselves in their incorporations joinings at least in Worship with the corruptions of the time and for condemning conscientious withdrawers That the Godly in those dayes did not separate from the men of these complyances defections as many do now to wit the protesting party did not withdraw from the publick Resolutioners Associators with Malignants I answer first many these the most Godly tender did withdraw even from their oun Ministers and would have gone 40. or 50 myles to hear a faithful Minister at that time yea Ministers themselves in the case of intrusion of the unfaithful would have supplyed the Paroch as if the Church had been vacant and when they could not get access to the pulpit they preached in the fields on purpose to witness against and professedly to withdraw the people from such an unfaithful Intruder as might be instanced particularly for time place if need were But next The Church then though broken by division and under the subjection of strangers deprived of her General Assemblies yet was in a constitut Case enjoying the priviledge power order of Synods Presbyteries to whom the people offended with their Ministers might address themselves for an orderly redress and removal of these Scandals in an ordinary way and so they needed not assume to themselves that power to regulate their communion that in a broken State as now is must be allowed to them And besides both the Ministers at that time who were faithful though they might have proceeded to censure silence the corrupt party as they were obliged yet not only found it difficult by reason of the injury of the times but also thought it best to spare them And the people to bear them as burdens untill as they were still in hopes they should obtain a General Assembly to take order with them but now it is not so And then the defection was but begining and people did not know and could not expect it would go such a length and therefore could not fall upon the rigor of that duty which such disorders call for at first but if they had seen where these beginings would Land them at length I doubt not but they would have resisted those beginings in such a way as would have precluded this imputation of novelty upon our necessitated with drawings III. We have in this Period not only an Illustrious Testimony for the Principle but a continued and unintermitted putting into practice the duty of defensive Armes in resisting the Soverain power malversing abusing Authority to the destruction of the ends of it which resistence was avowed encouraged furthered by the General Assembly both for the defence of themselves and for the help of their Brethren in England Take one expression in their Solemn seasonable Warning to all ranks Feb. 12. 1645. Sess 18. Unless men will blot out of their hearts the love of Religion cause of God and cast off all care of their Country Lawes Liberties c. all being in visible danger of present ruine destruction they must now or never appear actively each one stretching himself to yea beyond his power It is no time to dally or to go about the business by halfs nor be almost but altogether zealous Cursed is he that doeth the work of the Lord negligently If we have been forward to assist our Neighbour Kingdoms shall we neglect to defend our oun Or shall the Enemies of God be more active against His cause than His people for it God forbid In another seasonable necessary warning Iuly 27. 1649. Sess. 27. They say But if his Maj. or any having or pretending power commission from him shall invade this Kingdom upon pretext of establishing him in the exercise of his royal power as it will be an high provocation against God to be accessory or assisting there to so it will be a necessary duty to resist oppose the same These Fathers could well distinguish between Authority and the person abusing it And were not so Loyal as now their degenerate Children are ambitious to shew themselves stupidly stouping to the shaddow thereof and yet will be called the only Asserters of Presbyterian principles But we find they put it among the Characters of Malignants to confound the Kings honour Authority with the abuse pretence thereof and with Commissions warrants Letters procured from the King by the Enemies of the cause Covenant as if we could not oppose the Latter without increaching upon the former But here an Objection or two must be removed out of the way before we go forward One is from the Third Atticle of the Covinant where there seems to be a great deal of Loyaltie obliging to defend the Kings Maj. his person Authority in the preservation defence of the true Religion Liberties of the Kingdoms that the world may bear witness with our consciences of our Loyaltie And that we have no thoughts or intentions to diminish his Majesties just power greatness I Ans. There is indeed a deal of Loyaltie there and true Loyaltie because Lawfully limited being qualified with subordinate unto the preservation defence of the true Religion Liberties of the Kingdom as the makers of the Covenant do expound it in the Assembles declaration against the unlawful Eugagment Iuly ult 1648. Sess. 21. not that Reverse Loyaltie which makes duties to God conditional limited and duties to thee King absolute unlimited as our Loyalists do now And I wish others were free of it who have sworn Oaths of unlimited Alledgiances to maintain the King in any power unto which his force aspires and to justify this their Loyaltie will bring in this Article of the Covenant with a distorted sense reading it backward that we in the preservation defence of Religion must preserve defend the King As if Religion obliged to defend him do what he will. It were better such pretended Covenanters denyed the Covenant than to be such a reproach to it in wresting its genuine sense But I have adduced the sense of the best Interpreters of it the General Assembly Next when they entered under the bond of this Covenant they did it with a purpose to oppose all his invasions upon Religion the Liberty of the people and to
Witnesses did gradually ascend to the pitch it is novv arrived at I. These Enemies of God having once got footing again with the favour and the fawnings of the foolish Nation went on fervently to further and promote their wicked design and meeting with no opposition at first did encourage themelves to begin boldly Wherefore hearing of some Ministers peaceably Assembled to draw up a Monitory Letter to the King minding him of his Covenant Engagments promises which was though weak yet the first witness warning against that Heaven-daring wickedness then begun they cruelly incarcerate them Having hereby much daunted the Ministry from their duty in that day for fear of the like unusual outragious usage The Parliament conveens Ianuar. 1. 1661. without so much as a Protestation for Religion Liberty given in to them And there in the first place they frame take the Oath of Supremacy Exauctorating Christ and investing His usurping Enemy with the spoils of his robbed Prerogative acknowledging the King only supreme Governour over all persons in all Causes and that his power Iurisdiction must not be declined Whereby under all persons all Causeâ— All Church Officers in their most properly Ecclesiastick Affairs Concerns of Christ are comprehended And if the King shall take upon him to judge their Doctrine Worship Discipline or Government he must not be declined as an incompetent Judge Which did at once enervate all the Testimony of the 4th Period above declared and laid the foundation for all this Babel they have built since and of all this war that hath been waged against the Son of God and did introduce all this Tyrannie absolute power which hath been since carried to its Complement and made the Kings Throne the foundation of all the succeeding perjurie Apostasie Yet though then our Synods Presbytries were not discharged but might have had access in some Concurrence to witness against this horrid Invasion upon Christs Prerogative and the Churches Priviledge no joint Testimony was given against it except that some were found witnessing against it in their singular Capacity by themselves As faithful Mr Iames Guthrie for declining this usurped Authority in prejudice of the Kingdom of our Lord Jesus suffered death and got the Martyrs Crown upon his head And some others for refusing that Oath arbitrarly imposed were Banished or Confined when they had gained this Bulwark of Christs Kingdom Then they waxed more insolent and set up their Ensigns for signs and broke doun the carved Work of Reformation with axes hammers In this Parliament 1661. They past an Act Rescissorie whereby they annulled declared void the National Covenant the Solemn League Covenant Presbytrial Government and all Lawes made in favours of the Work of Reformation since the year 1633. O horrid wickedness both in its nature so attrocious to condemn rescind what God did so signally seal as His oun Work to the conviction of the world and for which He will rescind the Rescinders and overturn these Overturners of His Work and make the curse of that broken Covenant bind them to the punishment vvhom its bond could not oblige to the duty Covenanted And in its design end so base detestable for nothing but to flatter the King in making way for Prelacy Tyranny Popery and to indulge the licenciousness of some debauched Nobles who could not endure the yoke of Christs Government and to suppress Religion Righteousness under the ruines of that Reformation But O holy astonishing Justice thus to recompense our way upon our own head to suffer this work cause to be ruined under our unhappy hands who suffered this Destroyer to come in before it was so effectually secured as it should not have been in the power of his hand whatever had been in his heart swelled with enmity against Christ to have razed ruined that Work as now most wickedly he did and drew in so many into the guilt of the same deed that almost the whole Land not only consented unto it but applauded it by approving countenancing another wicked Act framed at the same time by that same perfidious Parliament for an Anniversary Thanksgiving commemorating every 29. of May that Blasphemy against the Spirit Work of God and celebrating that unhappy Restauration of the Rescinder of the Reformation which had not only the concurrence of the universality of the Nation But alas for shame that it should be told in Gath c even of some Ministers who afterwards accepted the Indulgence one of which a Pillar among them was seen scandalously dancing about the bonefires And others who should have alarmed the whole Nation quasi pro aris focis to rise for Religion Liberty to resist such wickedness did wink at it O how Righteous is the Lord now in turning our Harps into mourning Though alas we will not suffer our selves to this day to see the shining Righteousness of this Retribution And though we be scourged with Scorpions brayed in a Mortar our madness our folly in these irreligious frolicks is not yet acknowledged let be lamented Yet albeit neither in this day when the Covenant was not only broken but Cassed declared of no obligation nor afterward when it was burnt for which Turks Pagans would have been ashamed afraid at such a terrible sight and for which the Lords Anger is burning against these bold burners and against them who suffered it and did not witness against it was there any publick Testimony by protestation or Remonstrance or an publick witness though the Lord had some then and some who came out afterward with the Trumpet at their mouth whose heart then sorrowed at the sight And some suffered for the sense they shewed of that Anniversary abomination for not keeping which they lost both Church Liberty It s true the ordinary Meetings of Presbytries Synods were about that time discharged to make way for the exercise of the new power conferred on the four Prelats who were at Court reordained Consecrated thereby renouncing their former Title to the Ministry But this could not give a discharge from a Necessary Testimony then called for from faithful Watchmen However the Reformation being thus rescinded razed and the House of the Lord pulled doun then they begin to build their Babel In the Parliament anno 1662. by their first Act they restore reestablish Prelacy upon such a foundation as they might by the same Law bring in Poperie which was then designed and so settled its Harbinger Diocesan Erastiar Prelacy by fuller Enlargment of the Supremacy The very Act beginneth thus For as much as the ordering disposal of the external Government of the Church doth properly belong to his Maj. as an Inherent right of the Croun by virtue of his Royal Prerogative Supremacy in Causes Ecclesiastick what ever shall be determined by his Maj. with advice of the Arch Bishops and such of the
Clergy as he shall nominate in the external Government of the Church the same consisting with the standing Lawes of the Kingdom shall be valide effectual And in the same Act all Lawes are rescinded by which the sole power Jurisdiction within the Church doth stand in the Church Assemblies And all which may be interpreted to have given any Church power Jurisdiction or Government to the Office bearers of the Church other than that which acknowledgeth a dependence upon subordination to the Soveraign power of the King as Supreme By which Prelats are redintegrated to all their priviledges preheminencies that they possessed anno 1637. And all their Church power robbed from the Officers of Christ is made to be derived from to depend upon and to be subordinate to the Croun prerogative of the King whereby the King is made the only fountain of Church power and that exclusive even of Christ of whom there is no mentioned exception And his vassals the Bishops as his Clerks in Ecclesiastiks are accountable to him for all their administrations A greater usurpation upon the Kingdom of Christ than ever the Papacy it self aspired unto Yet albeit here was another display of a banner of defyance against Christ in altering the Church Government of Christs Institution into the humane Invention of Lordly Prelacy in assuming a power by prerogative to dispose of the external Government of the Church and in giving his Creatures patents for this effect to be his Administrators in that usurped Government There was no publick Ministerial at least united Testimony against this neither Therefore the Lord punished this sinful shamful silence of Ministers in His holy Justice though by mens horrid wickedness when by another wicked Act of the Council at Glasgow above 300 Ministers were put from their Charges and afterwards for their Non-conformity in not Countenancing their Diocesan Meeting and not keeping the Anniversary day May 29. The rest were violently thrust from their labours in the Lords vineyard and banished from their Parishes and adjudged unto a nice strange Confinement twenty miles from their oun parishes six miles from a Cathedral Church as they called it and three miles from a Burgh whereby they were reduced in to many inconveniencies Yet in this fatal Convulsion of the Church generally all were struck with blindness baseness that a Paper-Proclamation made them all run from their posts and obey the Kings Orders for their ejection Thus were they given up because of their forbearing to sound an alarm charging the people of God in point of Loyaltie to Christ and under the pain of the Curse of the Covenant to a wake and acquit themselves like men and not to suffer the enemie to rob them of that Treasure of Reformation which they were put in possession of by the tears prayers blood of such as went before them instead of those prudential fumblings fisflings then since so much followed Wherefore the Lord in His holy righteousness left that enemie against whom they should have cried contended and to whose eye they should have held the Curse of the Covenant as having held it first to their oun in case of unfaithful silence in not holding it to his to cast them out of the House of the Lord and dissolve their Assemblies and deprive them of their priviledges because of their not being so valiant for the Truth as that a ful faithful Testimony against that Encroachment might be found upon record Nevertheless somewere found faithful in that hour pour of darkness who kept the Word of the Lords patience and who were therefore kept in from that tentation which carried many away into sad shamful defections though not from suffering hard things from the hands of men only these who felt most of their violence found grace helping them to acquit themselves suitably to that dayes Testimony being thereby prevented from an Active yeelding to their impositions when they were made passively to suffer force However that season of a publick Testimony was lost and as to the most part never recovered to this day The Prelats being settled readmitted to voice in Parliament they procure an Act Dogmatically condemning several Material parts points of our Covenanted Reformation to wit these positions That it was lawful for Subjects for Reformation or necessary self defence to enter into leagues or take up Armes against the King And particularly declaring that the national Covenant as explained in the year 1638. and the Solemn league Covenant were are iâ— themselves unlawful Oaths and were taken by imposed upon the subjects of this Kingdom against the fundamental Lawes Liberties thereof That all such gatherings petitions that were used in the begining of the late troubles were unlawful seditious And whereas then People were led unto these things by having disseminated among them such principles as these That it was lawful to come with petitions Representations of grievances to the King That it was lawful for people to restrict their Allegiance under such such limitations and suspend it untill he should give security for Religion c. It was therefore enacted that all such positions practices founded thereupon were treasonable And furder did enact that no person by writing praying preaching or malicious or advised speaking express or publish any words or sentences to stir up the people to the dislike of the Kings prerogative Supremacy or of the Government of the Church by Bishops or justifie any of the deeds actings or things declared against by that Act. Yet not withstanding of all this subversion of Religion Liberty and restraint of asserting these Truths here trampled upon either before men by Testimony or before God in mourning over these Indignities done unto Him in everting these all the parts of Reformation even when it came to Daniels case of confession preaching praying Truths interdicted by Lavv fevv had their eyes open let be their vvindovvs in an open avouching them to see the duty of the day calling for a Testimony Though aftervvards the Lord Spirited some to assert demonstrate the Glory of these Truths duties to the vvorld As that Judicious Author of the Apologetical Relation vvhose Labours need no Elagium to commend them But this is not all for these men having novv as they thought subverted the Work of God they provided also against the fears of its revival making Acts declaring that if the outed Ministers dare to continue to preach and presume to exercise their Ministrie they should be punished as seditious persons requiring of all a due acknowledgment of hearty complyance with the Kings Government Ecclesiastical Civil And that who soever shall ordinarly wilfully withdraw absent from the ordinary Meetings for Divine Worship in their ouâ— Churches on the Lords day shall incur the Penalties there insert Thus the sometimes Chast Virgin whose name was Beulah to the Lord the Reformed Church
they were or to some other Paroches where they may be ordinary hearers and to declare condiscend upon the Paroches where they intend to have their Residence After this they assumed a Power to Dispose of these their Curats as they pleased and transport them from place to place whereof the only ground was a simple Act of Council the Instructions alwayes going along with them as the constant Companion of the Indulgence By all which it is apparent what ever these Ministers alledge in vindication of it to cover its deformity in their Balmes to take away its Stink and in their Surveyes to gather Plaisters to scurf over its Scurveyness viz. that it was but the removal of the Civil restraint And that they entered into their places by the Call of the People a meer mock pretence for a Prelimited imposition whereby that Ordinance of Christ was basely prostituted abused And that their Testimony Protestation was a Salvo for their conscience a meer Outopian fancy that the Indulgers with whom they bargained never heard of otherwise as they did with some who were faithful in testifying against their Encroachments they would soon have given them a Bill of Ease It cannot be denyed that that doleful Indulgeâ—â—e both in its Rise Contrivance Conveyance Grant Acceptance End Effects was a Grievous Encroachment upon the Princely Prerogative of Jesus Christ the only Head of the Church whereby the usurpers Supremacy was Homologated bowed to complyed with strengthened established the Cause Kingdom of Christ betrayed His Churches Priviledges surrendered His Enemies hardened His Friends stumbled and the Remnant rent ruined in that it was granted deduced from the Kings Supremacy and conveyed by the Council in that according to his pleasure he gave and they received a Licence warrant to such as he nominated Elected and judged fit qualified for it and fixed them in what particular Paroch he pleased to assign under the notion of a Confinment in that he imposed and they submitted to restrictions in the exercise of their Ministry in these particular Paroches inhibiting to Preach elswhere in the Church And with these restrictions he gave and they received instructions to regulate direct them in their functions All which was done without Advice or Consent of the Church And thereupon they have frequentlie been called coveened before the Counciâ— to give acâ—ount of their Ministerial exercise and some of them sentenced silenced deposed for alledged disobedience This was a manifest Treason against Christ which involved many in the actual guilt of it that day and many others who gaped after it could not obtain it and for more at that time since in the guilt of Misprision of Treason in passing this also without a witness Thus in holy judgement because of our Indulging Conniving at the usurper of Christs Throne He left a great part of the Ministers to take that wretched Indulgence and another part instead of remonstrating the wickedness of that deed have been left to palliate plaister Patronize it in keeping up the Credit of the King Councils Curats wherein they have shewed more zeal than ever against that wicked Indulgence Yet the Lord had some Witnesses who prettie early did give significations of their resentment of this dishonour done to Christ as Mr William Weer who having got the Legal Call of the People and discharging his duty honestly was turned out And Mr Iohn Burnet who wrote a Testimony directed to the Council shewing why he could not submit to that Indulgence inserted at large in the History of the Indulgence Where also we have the Testimony of other ten Ministers who drew up their Reasons of Non-Complyance with such a snare And Mr Alexander Blair who upon occasion of a Citation before the Council for not observing the 29 of Maij having with others made his appearance and got new Copies of Instructions presented to them being moved with zeal and remembering whose Ambassadour he was told the Council plainly that he could receive no Instructions from them in the exercise of his Ministry otherwise he should not be Christs Ambassadour but theirs and herewith lets their Instructions drop out of his hand knowing of no other Salvâ— or manner of Testifying for the Truth in the CaseØ› for which he was imprisoned died under Confinement But afterwards the Lord raised up some more explicite Witnesses against that defection All this Trouble was before the year 1673. About which time finding this device of Indulgences proved so steadable for his Service in Scotland he was induced to try it also in England which he did almost with the same or like success producing the same effects of defection security unfaithfulness The Occasion was upon his wars with the Dutch Which gave another demonstrative discovery of his Treacherie Popish perfidie in breaking League with them and entering into one with the French to destroy Religion Liberty in Britain Wherein the King of France assures him an Absolute Authority over his Parliaments and to reestablish the Catholick Religion in his Kingdoms of England Scotland Ireland to Compass which it was necessary first to abate the pride power of the Dutch and to reduce them to the sole Province of Holland by which means the King of England should have Zeland for a retreat in case of need and that the rest of the Low Countries should remain to the King of France if he could render himself Master of it But to return to Scotland While by the forementioned Device he thought he had utterly suppressed the Gospel in house field Meetings he was so far disappointed that these very means Machins by which he thought to bury it did chiefly contribute to its revival For when by Persecution many Ministers had been chased away by illegal Law-Sentences many had been banished away and by their ensnaring Indulgences many had been drawen away from their duty and others were now sentenced with Confinements Restraints if they should not choose fix their residence where they could not keep their Quiet Conscience both they were forced to wander and disperse through the Country and the People being tired of the cold dead Curats and wanting long the Ministrie of their old Pastors so longed hungered after the Word that they behoved to have it at any rate cost what it would which made them entertain the dispersed Ministers more earnestly and encouraged them more to their duty By whose Endeavours through the mighty power presence of God and the Light of His Countenance now shining through the Cloud after so fatal fearful a darkness that had over-clouded the Land for a while with such a resplendent brightness that it darkened the Prelatick Locusts and made them hisse and gnash their tongues for pain and dazeled the eyes of all Onlookers the Word of God grew exceedingly and went through at least the Southern borders of the Kingdom
supposing also they might be pardoned for that which is done from whose guiltiness the Land cannot be cleansed but by executing Gods righteous Judgements upon them yet they cannot now be believed after they have violated all that humane wisdom could devise to bind them Upon these accounts they reject that King and those associate with him in the Government and declare them henceforth no lawful Rulers as they had declared them to be no lawful Subjects they having destroyed the established Religion overturned the fundamental Lawes of the Kingdom taken away Christs Church-Government and changed the Civil into Tyrannie where none are associate in partaking of the Government but only these who will be found by Justice guilty of Criminals And declare they shall God giving power set up Government Governours according to the Word of God and the qualifications required Exod. 18. vers 20. And shall not commit the Government to any single person or lineal succession being not tyed as the Jewes were to one single family and that kind being lyable to most inconveniences aptest to degenerate into Tyrannie And moreover that these men set over them shall be engaged to Govern Principally by that Civil Judicial Law not that which is any way Typical given by God to His people of Israel as the best so far as it goes being given by God especially in matters of life death and other things so far as they reach and are consistent with Christian Liberty exempting Divorces Polygamie 6. Seeing the greatest part of Ministers not only were defective in Preaching against the Acts of the Rulers for overthrowing Religion but hindered others also who were willing and censured some that did it and have voted for acceptation of that Liberty founded upon given by virtue of that blaspemously arrogate Usurped power and appeared before their Courts to accept of it and to be enacted authorized their Ministers whereby they have become the Ministers of men and bound to be answerable to them as they will And have preached for the lawfulness of paying that Tribute declared to be imposed for the bearing doun of the true Worship of God And advised poor Prisoners to subscribe that Bond which if it were universally subscribed they should close that door which the Lord hath made use of in all the Churches of Europe for casting off the yoke of the whore and stop all regress of men when once brought under Tyrannie to recover their Libertie again They declare they neither can nor will hear them c. nor any who encouraged strengthened their hands and pleaded for them and trafficqued for union with them 7. That they are for a standing Gospel Ministrie rightly chosen rightly ordained that none shall take upon them the Preaching of the Word c. unless called ordained thereunto And whereas Separation might be imputed to them they refell both the malice and the ignorance of that Calumnie for if there be a Separation it must be where the change is and that was not to be found in them who were not separating from the Communion of the true Church nor setting up a New Ministrie but cleaving to the same Ministers Ordinances that formerly they followed when others have fled to new wayes and a new Authority which is like the old piece in the new Garment 8. That they shall defend themselves in their Civil Natural Divine Rights Liberties And if any assault them they shall look on it as a declaring a war and take all advantages that one enemie does of another but trouble and injure none but those that injure them This is the Compend of that Paper which the Enemies seised and published while it was only in a rude draught and not polished digested nor consulted by the rest of the Community yet whether or not it was for their advantage so to blaze their oun baseness in that Paper truly represented I leave it to the Reader to judge or if they did not thereby Proclaim their oun Tyrannie and the Innocency honesty of that people whom thereby they were seeking to make odious but in effect inviting all Lovers of Religion Liberty to Sympathise with them in their difficulties distresses there discovered However that poor Partie continued together in a posture of defence without the Concurrence or Countenance of their Covenanted Brethren who staid at home and left both them to be murdered and their Testimony to be trampled upon untill the 22. of Iulij 1680. Upon the which day they were attacqued at Airsmoss by a strong party of about 120 horse well armed while they were but 23 horse and 40 foot at most and so fighting valiantly were at length routed not without their Adversaries Testimony of their being resolute men Several of Zions precious Mourners and faithful Witnesses of Christ were killed and among the rest that faithful Minister of Christ Mr Richard Cameron sealed fulfilled his Testimony with his blood And with others the valiant and much honoured Gentleman David Hackstoun of Rathillet was after many received wounds apprehended brought in to Edinburgh and there resolutely adhering to the Testimony and disouning the Authority of King Council and all their Tyrannical Judicatories was cruelly murdered but countenanced eminently of the Lord. Now remained Mr Donald Cargil deprived of his faithful Collegue destitute of his Brethrens concurrence but not of the Lords Counsel Conduct by which he was prompted helped to prosecute the Testimony against the Universal Apostasie of the Church Nation Tyranny of Enemies Backsliding of Friends and all the wrongs done to his Master on all hands And considering in the zeal of God and sense of His holy Jealousie provoked and threatening wrath against the Land for the sins especially of Rulers who had arrived to the hight of Heaven-daring Insolence in all wickedness in which they were still growing going on without control That notwithstanding of all the Testimonies given against them by publick Preachings Protestations and Declarations remonstrating their Tyranny and disouning their Authority yet not only did they still persist in their sins scandals to make the Lords fierce Anger break forth into a flame but were ouned also by Professors not only as Magistrats but as members of the Christian Protestant Church And that however both the defensive armes of men had been used against them and the Christian armes of Prayers and the Ministerial weapon of Preaching yet that of Ecclesiastical Censure had not been Authoritatively exerted against them Therefore that no Weapon which Christ allowes His Servants under His Standart to manage against His Enemies might be wanting thô he could not obtain the Concurrence of his Brethren to strengthen the solemnity formality of the Action yet he did not judge that defect in this broken Case of the Church could disable his Authority nor deâ—ur the duty but that he might and ought to proceed to Excommunication And accordingly in September
Party of the Enemies in which they slew the Captain and about 12 or some moe of his men and afterwards they dispersed themselves also The Enemies searching the Country gleaned up the E. of Argyle himself Col. Rumbol an Englishman Mr Thomas Archer Minister Gawin Russel an David Law who were all condemned execute at Edinburgh and many others who were banished to America and about some 20 in the Highlands who were hanged at Inerarie In England the D. of Monmouths expedition though it had more action yet terminated in the same success the loss of many hundred lives many killed in Battel And afterwas by the mercy of the Duke of York several hunderds in the West of England were carried about and hanged before the door of their oun habitations and to make his Captains sport by the way according to the number of the hours of the day when the murdering humour came in their head so many of the poor Captives were hanged as a prodigious monument of monstrous Crueltie This was the Comencement of the present Tyrants Government In the mean time the Wanderers in Scotland thô they did not associate with this Expedition upon the account of the too promiscuous admittence of persons to trust in that Partie who were then and since have discovered themselves to be Enemies to the Cause and because they could not espouse their Declaration as the State of their Quarrel being not concerted according to the constant Plea of the Scots Covenanters and for other reasons given in their late Vindication yet against this Usurpation of a bloody Papist advancing himself to the Throne in such a manner they published another Declaration at Sanquhair May 28. 1685. Wherein Approving adhering unto all their former Declarations And considering that Iames Duke of York a Profest Excommunicate Papist was proclaimed To testify their resentment of that deed And to make it appear unto the world that they were free thereof by concurrence or connivance They Protest against the foresaid Proclamation of Iames Duke of York as King In regard that it is the choosing of a Murtherer to be a Governour who hath shed the blood of the Saints that it is the hight of Confederacy with an Idolater for bidden by the Law of God contrarie to the Declaration of the Gen. Ass. of the Church Iulij 27. 1649. And contrary to many wholesome laudable Acts of Parliament and inconsistent with the safety faith Conscience Christian Libertie of a Christian People to chuse a subject of Antichrist to be their Supreme Magistrate and to entrust an Enemy to the Work People of God with the Interests of both And upon many important grounds reasons which there they express they Protest against the validity Constitution of that Parliament approving ratifying the foresaid Proclamation And against all kind of Poperie in General Particular heads as abjured by the National Covenant and abrogated by Acts of Parliament and against its entrie again into this Land And every thing that doth or may directly or indirectly make way for the same Disclaiming likewise all Sectarianisme Malignancy and any Confederacy therewith This was their Testimony against Poperie in the season thereof which thô it was not so much condemned as any former Declarations yet neither in this had they the Concurrence of any Ministers or Professors who as they had been silent and omitted a seasonable Testimony against Prelacy and the Supremacy when these were introduced so now also even when this wicked Mysterie Conspiracie of Poperie Tyrannie twisted together in the present designe of Antichrist had made so great a progress and was evidently brought above board they were left to let â—lip this opportunity of a Testimony also to the reproach of the declining far degenerate Church of Scotland Yea to their shame the very rabble of ignorant People may be brought as a witness against the body of Presbyterian Ministers in Scotland in that they testified their detestation of the first Erection of the Idolatrous Mass and some of the souldierie and such as had no Profession of Religion suffered unto death for speaking against Poperie and the designs of the King while the Ministers were silent And some of the Curats and members of the late Parliament 1686. made some stickling against the taking away of the penal Statutes against Papists while Presbyterians from whom might have been expected greater opposition were sleeping in a profound submission I cannot without Confusion of Spirit touch these obvious dolorous reflections and yet in candor cannot forbear them However the Persecution against the Wanderers went on and more cruel Edicts were given forth against them while a relenting abatement of severity was pretended against other Dissenters At length what could not be obtained by Law at the late Parliament for taking off the Statutes against Papists was effectuated by Prerogative and to make it pass with the greater approbation it was convoyed in a channel of pretended Clemency offering a sort of Liberty but really introducing a licencious Latitude for bringing in all future snares by taking off some former as arbitrarly as before they were imposed in a Proclamation dated Feb. 12. 1687. Granting by the Kings Soveraign Authority Prerogative Royal and absolute power which all Subjects are to obey without reserve a Royal Toleration to the several Professors of the Christian Religion afternamed with under the several Conditions restrictions limitations aftermentioned In the first place tolerating the Moderate Presbyterians to meet in their private houses and there to hear all such Ministers as either have or are willing to accept of the Indulgence allanerly and none other And that there be nothing said or done contrare to the wel peace of his reign seditious or treasonable under the highest pains these Crimes will import nor are they to presume to build Meeting houses or to use out-houses or barns In the mean time it s his Royal will pleasure that Field Conventicles and such as Preach at them or who shall any way assist or connive at them shall be prosecute according to the utmost severity of Lawes made against them In like manner tolerating the Quakers to meet exercise in their forme in any place or places appointed for their Worship And by the same absolute power foresaid suspending stoping disabling all Lawes or Acts of Parliament Customs or Constitutions against any Roman Catholick subjects So that they shall in all things be as free in all respects as any Protestant subjects whatsoever not only to exercise their Religion but to enjoy all Offices benefices c. which he shall think fit to bestow upon them in all time coming And cassing annulling discharging all Oaths whatsoever and Tests and Lawes enjoyning them And in place of them this Oath only is to be taken I A. B. do ackowledge testifie declare that Iames the Seventh c. is rightful King Supreme Governour of these Realms and
contended against by Professors and is really the same with the Condition of the Cautionary Bond in the Indulgence after Bothuel of which see Pag. 129. And further they must be openly publickly held and all persons freely admitted to them which is for the informing trade exposing to all the inconveniences of Iesuites and other Spies Flies their delations in case any thing be spoken reflecting on the Government a great tentation to Ministers 4 The worst of all is upon ther matter of Preaching which is so restricted limited that nothing must be said or done contrare to the well peace of his reign seditious or treasonable And in case any treasonable speeches be uttered the Law is to take place against the guilty and none other present providing they reveal to any of the Council the guilt so committed as in the former Proclamation And in the last it is further declared that nothing must be Preached or taught which may any way tend to alienate the hearts of the People from him or his Government Here is the price at which they are to purchase their freedom a sad bargain to buy Liberty sell Truth which yet hardly can be so exactly paid but he may find a pretence for retrenching it when he pleases for if a Minister shall Pray for the overturning of a throne of iniquity or for confounding all that serve graven Images and for destruction to the Pope and all that give their power to that beast there will be something said against the well of his Government Or if any shall hear this and not delate it then the same pretence is relevant Or if he shall Preach against the Kings Religion as Idolatry and the Church of Rome as Babylon and discharge his Conscience Duty in speaking against the Tyrannie of the times Or let him Preach against any publick sin faithfully a Popish Critick or Romish Bigot shall interpret it to be an alienation of the Peoples hearts from the King his Government But who can be faithful and Preach in season out of season now but he must think it his duty to endeavour to alienate the hearts of the People from such an Enemy to Christ and his absolute Tyranny so declaredly stated against God What Watchman must not see it his indispensable Duty to warn all People of his Devilish designs to destroy the Church Nation and Preach so that People may hate the whore and this Pimp of hers Sure if he Preach the whole Counsel of God he must Preach against Poperie Tyrannie And if he think this Indulgence from Absolute Prerogative granted accepted on these termes can supercede him from this faithfulness then he is no more the Servant of Christ but a pleaser of men Therefore since it is so clogged with so many restrictions so inconsistent with duty so contrary to Scripture so clearly violatory of Covenant-Engagements so cross to the constant Contendings Constitutions of this Church and Acts of Ass. See Pag. 80. c. it were a great defection to Accept of it 11. Considering the Scandal of it they dare not so offend the generation of the Righteous by the Acceptance and dishonour God disgrace the Protestant Profession wrong the Interest thereof and betray their native Country as thus to comply with the Design of Antichrist and partake of this cruel tender mercy of the beast who hath alwayes mischief in his heart and intends this as a Preparative for inducing or inforcing all that are hereby lulled asleep either to take on his Mark or bear the Marks of his fiery fury afterwards For hereby forreign Churches may think we are in a fair way of reconciliation with Antichrist when we so kindly accept his Harbingers favours And it cannot but be very stumbling to see the Ministers of Scotland whose Testimony used to be terrible to the Popish and renouned through all the Protestant Churches purchasing a Liberty to themselves at the rate of burying betraying the Cause into bondage restraint and thus to be laid by from all active open opposition to Antichrists Designs in such a season The world will be tempted to think they are not governed by Principles but their oun Interest in this juncture seeking their oun things more than the things of Christ And that it was not the late Usurpation upon overturning of Religion Liberty that offended them so much as the Persecution they sustained thereby but if that Arbitrary Power had been exerted in their favours tho with the same prejudice of the Cause of Christ they would have complyed with it as they do now Alas sad dolorous have been the Scandals given taken by from the Declining Ministers of Scotland heretofore which have rent racked the poor Remnant and offended many both at home abroad but none so stumbling as this And therefore the tender will be shie to medle with it 12. Considering the Addresses made thereupon with such a stain of foulsome blasphemous flatteries to the dishonour of God the reproach of the Cause the betraying of the Church and detriment of the Nation and exposing themselves to the contempt of all the poor Persecuted Partie dare not so much as seem to incorporate with them I shall set doun the first of their Addresses given forth in the name of all the Presbyterian Ministers And let the Reader judge whether there be not Cause of standing aloof from every appearance of being of their number It is dated at Edinburgh Iulj 21. 1687. of this tenor To the Kings most excellent Majestie The humble Address of the Presbyterian Ministers of his Majesties Kingdom of Scotland We your Maj. most loyal subjects the Ministers of the Presbyterian persuasion in your Ancient Kingdom of Scotland from the due sense we have of your Maj. gracious surprising favour in not only puting a stop to our long sad sufferings for Non-conformity but granting us the Liberty of the Publick Peaceable exercise of our Ministerial function without any hazard As we bless the Great God who hath put this in your Royal heart do with all find our selves bound in duty to offer our most humble hearty thanks to your Sacred Majestie the favour bestowed being to us and all the People of our Persuasion valuable above all our earthly comforts especially since we have ground from your Maj. to beleeve that our Loyaltie is not to be questioned upon the account of our being Presbyterians who as we have amidst all former tentations endeavoured so we are firmly resolved still to preserve an intire Loyaltie in our Doctrine Practice consonant to our known Principles which according to the Holy Scriptures are contained in the Confession of faith generally ouned by Presbyterians in all your Maj. Dominions and by the help of God so to demean our selves as your Maj. may find cause rather to enlarge than to diminish your favours towards us throughly perswading our selves from your Maj. justice
goodness that if we shall at any time be otherwise represented your Maj. will not give credit to such information until yow have due cognition thereof and humbly beseeching that those who promote any dsloyal Principles practices as we disoune them may be looked upon as none of ours whatsover name they may assume to themselves May it please your most excellent Maj. graciously to accept of this our most hmble Address as proceeding from the plainness sincerity of Loyal thankful hearts much engaged by your Royal favour to continue our fervent Prayers to the King of Kings for Divine illumination conduct with all other blessings Spiritual Temporal ever to attend your Royal Person Government which is the greatest duty can be rendered to your Maj. by Your Maj. most humble mast faithful most obedient Subjects Subscribed in our Names and in the name of the rest of our Brethren of our Persuasion at their desire Which received this Gracious return The Kings Letter to the Presbyterians in his ancient Kingdom of Scotland We love yow well and we heartily thank yow for your Address we resolve to Protect yow in your Liberty Religion properties all our life And we shall lay doun such methods as shall not be in the power of any to alter hereafter And in the mean tune we desire yow to Pray for our Person Government To which may be added that kind Complement of the Chancellors Gentlemen My Master hath commanded me to tell yow that I am to serve yow in all things within the compass of my power These Gentlemen needed not to have been sollicitous that those who avouch an Adherance to the Covenanted Reformation and avow an opposition to Antichristian Usurpers which they call promoting Dislayal principles practices might not be looked upon as of their Confederacy for all that abide in the principles Practices of the Church of Scotland which they have deserted and that desire to be found Loyal to Christ in opposition to His and the Churches and the Countries Declared Enemy would count it a sin scandal laying them obnoxious to the Displeasure of the Holy Jealous God who will resent this heinous Indignity they have done unto His Majestie if they do not Address themselves unto Him for pardon of the iniquity of this Address which is the desire of those whom they disoune that they may find Grace to do so and a shameful Reproach exposing them to the Contempt of all of whom they expect Sympathie to be reckoned of their Association who have thus betrayed the Cause the Country These mutual Complements so like the Caresses of the Romish whore whereby she entyces the Nations to her fornication between the Professed Servants of Christ and the Vassals of Antichrist if they be cordial would seem to import that they are in a fair way of compounding their differences and to accommodate their oppositions at length which yet I hope will be irreconcileably maintained kept up by all true Presbyterians in whose name they have the impudence to give out their Address But if they be only Adulatory flattering Complements importing only a Conjunction of tails like Samsons foxes with a Disjunction of heads and hearts tending towards distinct opposite Interests then as they would suite far better the Dissmulations of Politicians than the Simplicity of Gospel-Ministers and do put upon them the brand of being men-pleasers rather than Servants of Christ so for their dissemblings with Dissemblers who know their Complements to be and take them for such they may look to be paid home in good measure heaped up running over when such methods shall be laid doun as shall not be in the power of any to alter when such designs shall be obtained by this Liberty and these Addresses that the after bought wit of the Addressers shall not be able to disappoint However the Address it self is of such a dress as makes the thing addressed for to be odious and the Addressers to forefault the respect merit the indignation of all that are friends to the Protestant Presbyterian Cause as may appear from these obvious Reflections 1. It was needful indeed they should have assumed the name of Presbyterians though it might have been more tolerable to let them pass under that name if they had not presumed to give forth their flatteries in the name of all of that Persuasion and to alledge it was at their desire which is either an illuding equivocation or a great untruth for though it might be the desire of the men of their oun persuasion which is a newly start up opinion that Interest hath led them to espouse yet nothing could be more cross to the real desires of true Presbyterians that prefer the Truth of the Cause to the external peace of the Professors thereof and call it the humble Address of Presbyterian Ministers for otherwise it could never have been known to come from men of the Presbyterian persuasion seeing the Contents of this Address are so clearly contrary to their known Principles It is contrary to Presbyterian Principles to Congratulate an Antichristian Usurper for undermining Religion and overturning Lawes Liberties It is contrary to Presbyterian Principles to justify the abrogation of the National Covenant in giving thanks for a Liberty whereby all the Lawes are called disabled therein confirmed It is contray to Presbyterian Principles to thank the King for opening a door to bring in Poperie which they are engaged to exstirpate in the Solemn League Covenant It is contrary to Presbyterian Principles to allow or accept of such a vast Toleration for Idolaters Hereticks as is evident above from all their Contendings against it which is also contrary to the Confession of faith generally ouned by Presbyterians as may be seen in the place forecited Chap. 20. Par. 4. It is contrary to Presbyterian Principles to consent to any Restrictions Limitations Conditions binding them up in the exercise of the Ministerial function wherewith this Liberty is loaded clogged whereby indeed they have the Liberty of the Publick peaceable exercise of it without any hazard of present Persecution but not without great hazard of sin and incurring the guilt of the blood of Souls for not declaring the whole Counsel of God which Addressers cannot declare if they Preserve an intire Loyaltie in their Doctrine as here they promise 2. There is nothing here sounds like the old Presbyterian strain neither was there ever an Address of this stile seen before from Presbyterian hands It would have looked far more Presbyterian like instead of this Address to have sent a Protestation against the now openly designed introduction of Poperie and subversion of all Lawes Liberties which they are Covenanted to maintain or at least to have given an Address in the usual Language of Presbyterians who used alwayes to speak of the Covenants and Work of Reformation But here never a word of these but of
Loyaltie to his excellent to his Gracious and to his Sacred Majestie of Loyaltie not to be questioned an Entire Loyaltie in Doctrine a resolved Loyaltie in Practice and a servent Loyaltie in Prayers And all that they are solicitous about is not lest the Prerogatives of their Master be encroached upon and the Liberties of the Church be supplanted and Religion wronged but lest their Loyaltie be questioned and they be otherwise represented And all that they beseech for is not that the Cause of Christ be not wronged nor Antichristian Idolatrie introduced by this Liberty but that these who promove any disloyal Principles Practices may be looked upon as none of theirs wherein all their encouragment is that they persuade themselves from his Maj. justice goodness that he will not give credite to any other information until he take due cognition thereof Here is a Lawless unrestricted Loyaltie to a Tyrant claiming an absolute power to be obeyed without reserve not only professed but solicitously sought to be the Principle of Presbyterians whereas it is rather the Principle of Athiestical Hobbes exploded with indignation by all rational men This is not a Christian Loyaltie o◠profession of Consciencious Subjection to a Minister of God for good who is a terror to evil doers but a stupid subjection absolute Allegiance to a Minister of Antichrist who gives Liberty to all evil men seducers This is not the Presbyterian Loyaltie to the King in the defence of Christ His Evangel Liberties of the Country Ministration of Iustice punishment of iniquity according to the National Covenant And in the preservation defence of the true Religion Liberties of the Kingdoms according to the Solemn League Covenant but an Erastian Loyaltie to a Tyrant in his overturning Religion Lawes Liberties protecting encouraging all iniquity This Loyaltie in Doctrine will be found Disloyaltie to Christ in a sinful shameful silence at the wrongs done to Him and not declaring against the Invasions of His open Enemies This Loyaltie in Practice is a plain betraying of Religion Liberty in lying by from all opposition to the open Destroyer of both And this Loyaltie in Prayers for all blessings ever to attend his person Government will be found neither consonant to Presbyterian Prayers in reference to Popish Tyrants nor consistent with the Zeal of Christians and the Cries of all the Elect unto God to whom vengeance belongs against Antichrist and all his Supporters nor any way conforme to the Saints Prayers in Scripture nor founded upon any Scripture promises to pray for a blessing to a Papists Tyrannie which cannot be of Faith and therefore must be sin It were much more suitable to pray that the God which hath caused His Name to dwell in His Church may destroy all Kings that shall put to their hand to alter destroy the House of God Ezrah 6. 12. 3. This Address is so stuffed with sneaking flatteries that it would become more Sycophants Court-Parasites than Ministers of the Gospel and were more suitable to the Popish Prelatical Malignant faction to congratulate rejoice in their professed Patroh Head and fill the Gazetts with their Adulatory Addresses which heretofore used to be deservedly inveighed against by all Dissenters than for Presbyterians to take a Copy from them and espouse the practice which they had condemned before and which was never commended in any good Government nor never known in these British Nations before Oliver's Usurpation Charles his Tyranny flatterie being alwayes counted base among ingenuous men But here is a Rhapsodie of flatteries from the deep sense they have of his Maj. gracious surprising favour finding themselves bound in duty to offer their most humble hearty thanks to his Sacred Maj. the favour bestowed being to them valuable above all earthly comforts One would think this behoved to be a very great favour from a very great friend for very gracious ends But what is it In not only puting a stop to their long sad sufferings which were some ground indeed if the way were honest but this not only supposes an also what is that but also granting us the Liberty which is either a needless Tautology for if all Sufferings were stopped then Liberty must needs follow or it must respect the qualifications of the Liberty flowing from such a Fountain absolute power through such a Conveyance the stoping all penal Lawes against Papists in such a Forme as a Toleration for such Ends as overturning the Reformation introducing Poperie This is the favour for which they offer most humble hearty thanks more valuable to them than all earthly comforts thô it be manifestly intended to deprive the Lords People at the long run of the Heavenly Comforts of the Preached Gospel Sure if they thank him for the Liberty they must thank him for the Proclamation whereby he grants it and justify all his Claim there to Absoluteness being that upon which it is superstructed and from which it emergeth And so become a listed faction to abett oune him in all his attemptings engaged now to demean themselves as that he may find cause rather to enlarge than to diminish his favours which can be no other way but in assisting him to destroy Religion Liberty at least in suffering him to do what he will without control O what an indeleble reproach is this for Ministers who pretend to be set for the defence of the Gospel thus to be found betraying Religion through justifying magnifying a Tyrant for his suspension of so many Lawes whereby is was established supported 4. It were more tolerable if they went no further than flatteries but I fear they come near the border of Blasphemie when they say that the Great God hath put this in his Royal heart which can bear no other Construction but this that the holy Lord hath put it in his heart to assume to himself a blasphemous absolute power whereby he stops suspends all Penal Lawes against Idolaters and gives a Toleration for all Errors Or if it be capable of any other sense it must be like that as the Lord is said to have moved David to number the People or that Rev. 17. 17. God hath put it in their hearts to fulfill His Will and to aggree aud give their Kingdom unto the Beast But to bless God and thank the Tyrant for this wicked Project as deliberate purposed by men I say is near unto Blasphemy And again where they say they are firmly resolved by the help of God so to demean themselves as his Maj. may find cause rather to enlarge than to diminish his favours this in effect is as great Blasphemy as if they had said they resolved by the help of God to be as unfaithful Time-serving Silent Ministers as ever plagued the Church of God for no otherwise can they demean themselves so as he may find cause to enlarge his favours towards
was not an Usurper over Iudea which not obscurely is insinuated by Paul himself who asserts that both his person his Cause Criminal of which he was accused it was not an Ecclesiastical Cause so no advantage hence for the Supremacy appertained to Cesars Tribunal and that not only in fact but of right Act. 25. 10. I stand at Cesars judgment seat where I ought to be judged We cannot say this of any tribunal senced in the name of them that Tyrannize over us 5. I will not stand neither upon the Names Titles of Kings c. to be given to Tyrants Usurpers in speaking to them or of them by way of appellation or compellation for we find even Tyrants are called by these names in Scripture being Kings de fact◠though not dejure and indeed not impertinently Kings Tyrants for the most part are reciprocal termes But in no case can we give them any Names or Titles which may signify our love to them whom the Lord hates or 〈◊〉 hate the Lord 2 Chron. 19. 2. or which may flatter them which Elihu durst not give for fear his Maker should take him away Iob. 32. 22. or which may be taken for honouring of them for that is not due to the vile◠of men when exalted never so high Psal. 12. ult a vile person must be contemned in our eyes Psal. 15. 4. Nor which may any way import or infer an ouning of a Magistratical relation between them us or any Covenant transaction or Confederacy with them which in no termes with them as such we will say or oune Isa. 8. 12. Hence many sufferers upon this head so bear to give them their Titles 8. It will be yeelded very readily by us that a Magistrate is not to be disouned meerly for his differing in Religion from us yea though he were a Heathen We do not disoune our pretended Rulers meerly upon that account but chearfully do grant subscribe to that Truth in our Confession of faith chap. 23. § 4. That Infidelity or difference in Religion doth not make void the Magistrates just Legal Authority nor free the people from their due obedience to him On which our Adversaries have insulted as if our Principles Practices were therby disproved But it is easy to answer 1. let the words be considered and we are confident that no sober man will think the acknowledgment of just legal Authority due obedience a rational ground to infer that Tyranny is thereby either allowed or priviledged Napth Pag. 60. Prior Edition 2. Though Infidelity or difference of Religion does not make void Authority where it is Lawfully invested yet it may incapacitate a person and Lawfully seclude him from Authority both by the word of God which expressly forbids to set a Stranger over us who is not our brother Deut. 17. 15. Which includes as well a stranger of a strange Religion as one of a strange Countrey and by the Lawes of the Land which do incapitate a Papist of all Authority Supreme or subordinate And so if this Iames the 7 2 had been King before he was a Roman Catholick if we had no more to object we should not have quarrelled his succession 3. We both give grant all that is in the Confession viz. Dominium non fundari in gratia that Dominion is not founded on Grace Yet this remains evident that a Prince who not only is of another religion but an avowed enemy to overturner of the Religion established by Law and intending endeavouring to introduce a false heretical blasphemous Idolatrous religion can claim no just legal Authority but in this case the people may very Lawfully decline his pretended Authority Nay they are betrayers of their Countrey Posterity if they give not a timeous effectual Check to his Usurpings and make him sensible that he hath no such Authority Can we imagine that men in the whole of that blessed work so remarkably led of God being convocate by a Parliament of the wisest worthyest men that ever was in England whom they did encourage by writing preaching every way to stand fast in their opposition to the then King displaying a banner for his prerogative a court dream against Religion Liberty should be so far left as to drop that as a principle part of our Religion which would sacrifice Religion it self to the lust of a raging Tyrant Must we beleeve that a Religion-destroying Tyrant is a righteous Ruler And must we onne him to be a Nursing father to the Church Shall we conclude that the common bounds Limits whereby the Almighty hath bounded Limited Mankind are removed by an Article of our confession of faith which hereby is turned into a Court creed Then welcome Hobs de Cive with all the rest of Pluto's train who would bable us into a belief that the world is to be governed according to the pleasure of wicked Tyrants I would fain hope at length the world would be awakened out of such ridiculous dreams be ashamed any more to oune such fooleries And it may be our two Royal Brothers have contributed more to cure men of this Moral madness than any who went before them And this is the only advantage I know that the Nations hath reaped by their reign 9. Though we deny that Conquest can give a just Title to a Croun yet we grant in some cases though in the begining it was unjust yet by the peoples after consent it may be turned into a just Title It is undenyable when there is just ground of the war if a Prince subdue a whole Land who have justly forfeited their Liberties when by his grace he preserves them he may make use of their right now forefeited and they may resign their Liberty to the Conqueror and consent that he be their King upon fair Legal not Tyrannical conditions And even when the war is not just but successful on the invading Conquerours side this may be an inducement to the Conquered if they be indeed free and uningaged to any other to a submission dedition delivery up of themselves to be the subjects of the victor and to take him for their Soveraign as it is like the case was with the Jewes in Cesars time whose Government was translated by dedition to the Roman power in the translation when a doing there was a fault but after it was done it ceased though the begining was wrong there was a post-fact which made it right and could not be dissolved without an unjust disturbance of publick order Whence besides what is said above in answer to that much insisted Instance of Christs paying tribute and Commanding it to be paid to Cesar the difficulty of that instance may be clearly solved That Tribute which he paid Math. 17. 24. c. and that about the payment whereof He was questioned Math. 22. 21. seem to be two different Tributes Many think very probably they were
he is not nor can not be our Crouned King and therefore we must not be his Liege subjects ouning fealty obedience to him For according to the National Covenant as all Lieges are to maintain the Kings Authority consistent with the subjects Liberties which if they be innovated or prejudged such Confusion would ensue as this realme could be no more a free Monarchy So for the Preservation of true Religion Lawes Liberties of this Kingdom it is statute by the 8 Act. Parl. 1 repeated in the 99 Act. Parl. 7. ratified in the 23. Act. Parl. 11. and 114 Act. Parl. 12. of King Iames 6. and 4 Act of K. Charles 1. that all Kings Princes â— at their coronation reception of their Princely Authority shall make their faithful Promise by their solemn Oath in the presence of the Eternal God That enduring the whole time of their lives they shall serve the same Eternal God to the utter-most of their power according as He hath required in His most holy Word contained in the Old new Testaments and according to the same Word shall maintain the true Religion of Christ Jesus the preaching of His holy Word the due right Ministration of the Sacraments now received Preached within this realme according to the Confession of faith immediatly preceding and shall abolish gainstand all false religion contrary to the same And shall rule the people committed to their charge according to the will Command of God revealed in His fore-said Word and according to the Laudable Lawes Constitutions received in this realme no wayes repugnant to the said Will of the Eternal God And shal procure to the uttermost of their power to the Kirk of God whole Christian people true perfect peace in all time coming And that they shall be careful to root out of their Empire all Hereticks Enemies to the true Worship of God who shall be convicted by the true Kirk of God of the foresaid Crimes Now this Coronation Oath he hath not taken he will not he cannot take and therefore cannot be our Crouned King according to Law. As there be also many other Lawes incapacitating his admission to the Croun being a Professed Papist and no Law for it at all but one of his oun making by a Pacqued Cabal of his oun Complices a Parliament wherein himself presided as Commissioner enacting matterially his succession and rescinding all these Ancient Lawes which Act of Succession which is all the legal right he can pretend to in Scotland because it cannot be justified therefore his right cannot be ouned which is founded upon the subversion of our Ancient Lawes But as he cannot be our Legally Crouned King so he is not so much as formally Crouned And therfore before his Inauguration whatever right to be King whom the Representatives may admit to the Government he may pretend to by hereditary Succession yet he cannot formally bemade King till the people make a Compact with him upon termes for the safety of their dearest nearst Liberties even though he were not disabled by Law. He might as they say pretend to some jus ad rem but he could have no jus in re The Kings of Scotland while uncrouned can exerce no Royal Government for the Coronation in Concret according to the substance of the Act is no Ceremonie as they who make Conscience it self but a Ceremony call it nor an accidental ingredient in the Constitution of a King but as it is distinctive so it is Constitutive it distinguished Saul from all Israel and made him from no King to be a King it is dative not only Declarative it puts some honour upon him that he had not before 3. Though the Lawes should not strike against his Coronation And though the Representatives Legally should take the same measures with him that they took with his brother and admit him upon the termes of the Covenant yet after such doleful experiences of such transactions with these Sons of Belial who must not be taken with hands nor by the hand it were hard to trust or entrust them with the Government even though they should make the fairest Professions Since they whose Principle is to keep no faith to Hereticks as they call us and who will be as absolute in their promises as they are in their power have deservedly forefeited all Credit Trust with honest men so that none could rationally refer the determination of a half Croun reckoning to any of them far less oune them their Government in the Managment of the weightiest affairs of State since their Male-versations are written in such bloody Characters as he that runs may read them At least it were wisdom is our duty to take our Measures from the General Assemblies Procedure with the other Brother before his admission to the Government to suspend our Allegiance to him until Authority be Legally devolved upon him and founded upon bounded by termes giving all security for Religion Liberty 12. As I said before wary Prudence in waving such an impertinent Ticklish Question cannot be condemned since what ever he may be in conscience no man in Law can be obliged so far to surrender the common Priviledge of all Mankind to give an account of all his inward thoughts which are alwise said to be free And as in nothing they are more various so in nothing they can be more violented than to have our opinion sentiments of the current Government extorted from us a declining of which Declaration of thoughts where no overt Act in project or practice can be proven against it cannot be Treason in any Law in the world So a Cautelous Answer in such a ticklish entrapping imposition cannot be censured in point of Lawfullnesse of expediency even though much be concedded to stop the Mouths of these bloody Butchers gaping greedily after the blood of the Answerer if he do not really oune but give them to understand he cannot approve of this Tyranny But as these poor faithful Witnesses who were helped to be most free have alwise been honoured with the most signal Countenance of the Lord in a happy issue of their Testimony So those that used their Prudentials most in seeking shifts to shâ—n severity and studying to satisfie these Inquisitors with their stretched Concessions were ordinarly more exposed to snares and found less satisfaction in their Sufferings even though they could say much to justify or at least extenuate their Shiftings I knew one who had proof of this who afterwards was ashamed of this kind of Prudence A short account of whose managing of Answers to this Question because it may conduce somewhat to the explication of it may here be hinted The question moved after the usual forme was Do ye onne the Authority of King Iames the 7 In answer to which he pleaded first for the immunity of his thoughts which he said were not subject to theirs or any Tribunal When this could
that right priviledge which the people had conferred upon them being taught by many experiences that it was better that their Liberty should be concredited to Laws than to Kings better to have the Law which is a dumb King than a King who is not a speaking Law. If then Laws be necessary for the making of Kings and more necessary than Kings And the same cause requirs both then a King without Laws is not to be ouned Rex must be Lex loquens a King must be a speaking living Law reducing the Law to practice So much then as a King hath of Law so much he hath of a King and he who hath nothing of the Law hath nothing of a King. Magna Charta of England saith the King can do nothing but by Law and no obedience is due to him but by Law. Buchanan rehearses the words of the most famous Emperours Theodosius Valentinianus to this effect Digna vox Majestate regnantis legibus se alligatum Principem fateri revero Imperio majus ost submittere legibus Principatum It is say they a word worthy of the Majestie of a King to confess he is a tyed Prince to the Laws and indeed it is more to submit a Principality to the Laws than to enjoy an Empire But now that an absolute power must be a Lawless power is also evident for that 's a Lawless power that makes all Laws void needless useless but such is absolute power for it cannot be confined to the observance of Laws 9. That power which is destructive to the peoples Liberties cannot be ouned Absolute power is such for such a Licencious freedom as is absolute cannot consist with the peoples Liberties for these he may infringe when he pleases Now these in their oun Nature and in all respects being preferable to the Kings prerogative And it being no prerogative which is not consistent with yea in its oun nature adapted to the precious Interests of Religion Liberty when the Kings Absolute Authority is stated in contradictory terms to these we cannot oune that Authority for now he hath another Authority than could be given him for the preservation of these Interests in the preservation whereof he can only have an Authority to be ouned seeing he claimes a power to destroy them if he please 10. If we should oune Absolute Authority then we should oune a Royal prerogative in the King to make dispense with Laws Now that cannot be ouned for it would infer that the King had a Masterly Dominion over his subjects to make Lawes inflict Penalties without their consent And plain it is they that make Kings must have a Coordinate power to make Laws also but the people in their Representatives make Kings as is proven Next a prerogative to dispense with Laws except such Laws as are in their oun nature dispensable without prejudice to any Law of God or Liberties of men cannot be ouned for any power to dispense with Reason Law not grounded on any other reason but meer will absolute pleasure is a brutish power It cannot be jus Coronae a right annexed to the Crown to do so for a King as a King illud tantum potest quod jure potest can do nothing but what he may do by Law. Nay this is not only a Brutish power but a Blasphemous power making him a Kind of God on earth illimited that can do what he pleases And to dispute it further were to dispute whether God hath made all under him slaves by their oun consent Or whether he may encroach on the prerogative of God or not By this prerogative he arrogates a power to dispense with the Laws of God also in pardoning Murtherers c. which no man hath power to do the Law of God being so peremptorly indispensable Gen. 9. 6. whoso sheddeth mans blood by man shall his blood be shed Numb 35. 30. 31. Who so killeth any person the murderer shall he put to death more over ye shall take no satisfaction for the life of a murderer but he shall be surely put to death These pardons are acts of blood to the Community If the Judgment be Gods as it is Deut. 1. 17. and not for man but for the Lord 2 Chron. 19. 6. then no King can arrogate a power to dispense with it no more then an inferior Judge can dispense with the Kings Laws for the King is but a Minister bearing the Sword not in vain but as a revenger to execute wrath upon them that do evil Rom. 13. 4. They are but bastard Kings who give out sentances out of their oun mouth contrary to Gods mind And if he may do acts of grace by Prerogative above Law then may he also do acts of Justice so pretended by the same Prerogative and so may murder Innocents as well as pardon Murderers he may condemn the just as well as justify the wicked both which are alike abomination to the Lord Pro. 17. 15. This power cannot be ouned in any man. 11. To oune Absolute power were to recognosce the King as the proper sole Interpreter of the Law. This Buchanan shews to be very absurd Cum regi Legum interpretationem c. when yow grant the interpretation of Laws to a King yow give him such a Licence that the Law should not speak what the Lawgiver meaneth but what is for the Interpreters Interest so that he may turn it to all actions as a Lesbian rule for his oun advantage And so what he pleases the Laws shall speak and what he will not it shall not speak Now the Kings absolute pleasure can no more be the sense of the Law than it can be the Law it self He is King by Law but he is not King of Law No mortal can make a sense to a Law contrare to the Law for it involves a Contradiction the true meaning is only the Law. This also would take away the use of all Laws for they could not declare what were just unjust but as the King pleased their genuine sense could not be the rule 12. If we oune the Law to be above the King then we cannot oune the King to be absolute But the former is true For he must be under it several wayes 1 under its Directive power that will not be denyed 2 under its Constitutive power he is not a King by Nature but by Constitution Law therefore the Law is above the King because it s only from the Law that there is a King and that such a man and not another is King and that the King must be so so qualified and they that made him a King may also unmake him by the same Law. 3 under its Limiting Restrictive power as a man he cannot be absolute nor as a King by Law. 4 under its Coactive power A Law maker said King Iames the 6. should not be a Law breaker but if he turn an overturner of the fundamental Laws that Law or
Lords displeasure they are to give Judgment though the King should countermand it Secondly that the King is not excepted from their Judgment is also evident from the General Commands Gen. 9. 6. whoso sheddeth mans blood â—y man shall his blood be shed there is no exception of Kings or Dukes here and we must not distinguish where the Law distinguisheth not Numb 35. 30 31. whoso killeth any person the murderer shall be put to death by the mouth of witnesses ye shall take no satisfaction for the life of a Murderer which is guilty of death but he shall be surely put to death What should hinder then Justice to be awarded upon a Murdering King Shall it be for want of witnesses It will be easy to adduce thousands Or shall this be satisfaction for his life that he is a Crowned King the Law saith there shall no satisfaction be taken The Lord speaketh to under Judges Levit. 19. 15. Ye shall do no unrighteousness in judgment thow shalt not respect the person of the poor nor honour the person of the Mighty If Kings be not among the Mighty how shall they be classed Deut. 1. 17. Ye shall not respect persons in judgment but yow shall hear the small as well as the great yow shall not be afraid of the face of man for the judgment is Gods if then no mans face can outdare the Law Judgment of God then the Kings Majestick face must not do it but as to the demerit of blood he must be subject as well as another It s no Argument to say the Sanhedrin did not punish David for his Murther Adulterie Ergo now it is not Lawful to punish a King for the same a reason a non facto is not relevant David did not punish Ioab for his Murder but Authorized it as also he did Bathsheba's Adulterie will that prove that Murders connived at or commanded by the King shall not be punished or that Whores of State are not to be called to an account Neither will it prove that a Murdering king should not be punished that David was not punished because he got both the sin pardoned and his life granted from the Lord saying to him by the mouth of the Prophet Nathan Thow shalt not die But as for the demerit of that fact he himself pronounced the sentence out of his oun mouth 2 Sam. 12. 15. As the Lord liveth the man that hath done this thing shall surely die So every king condemned by the Law is condemned by his oun mouth for the Law is the voice of the king why then do we so much weary our selves concerning a Judge seeing we have the kings oun Confession that is the Law. Buchanan de jure regni And there needs be no other difficultie to find a Tribunal for a Murdering king than to find one for a Murderer for a Judgment must acknowledge but one name to wit of the Crime if a king then be guilty of Murder he hath no more the name of a king but of a Murderer when brought to Judgment for he is not Judged for his kingship but for his Murther as when a Gentleman is Judged for Robbery he is not hanged neither is he spared because he is a Gentleman but because he is a Robber See Buchanan ubi supra 6. If the Peoples Representatives be superior to the king in Judgment and may execute Judgment without him and against his will then they may also seek account of him for if he hath no Power but from them and no Power without them to act as king no more than the eye or hand hath Power to act without the body then his Power must be inferior fiduciary accountable to them But the former is true The Peoples Representatives are superior to the king in Judgment and may execute Judgment without him and against his will. In Scripture we find the Power of the Elders and heads of the People was very great and in many cases superior to the king which the Learned Dr Owen demonstrates in his Preliminary Exercitations on the Epist. to the Heb. and proves out of the Rabbins that the kings of the Iewes might have been called to an account punished for transgressing of the Law. But in the Scripture we find 1 They had a Power of Judgment with the Supreme Magistrate in matters of Religion Justice Government Hamor Shechem would not make a Covenant with Iacobs Sons without the consent of the men of the Citie Gen. 34. 20. David behoved to consult with the Captains of thousands every Leader if it seemed good to them to bring again the Ark of God. 1. Chron. 13. 1 2 3. So also Solomon could not do it without them 1 King. 8. 1. Ahab could not make peace with Benhadad against the consent of the People 1 King. 20. 8. The men of Ephraim complain that Iephthah the Supreme Magistrate had gone to War against the Children of Ammon without them and threatened to burn his house with fire which he only excuses by the Law of necessity Iudg. 12. 1 2 3. The Seventy Elders are appointed by God not to be the Advisers only helpers of Moses but to bear a part of the burden of ruling governing the People that Moses might be eased Numb 11. 14 17. Moses upon his sole pleasure had not power to restrain them in the exercise of Judgment given of God. They were not the Magistrats depending deputies but in the act of Judging they were independent and their Consciences as immediatly subjected to God as the Superior Magistrate who was to adde his approbative suffrage to their actings but not his directive nor imperative suffrage of absolute pleasure but only according to the Law he might command them to do their duty but he could do nothing without them 2 They had Power not derived from the Prince at all even a Power of life death The rebellious Son was to be brought to the Elders of the Citie who had Power to stone him Deut. 21. 18 24. They had Power to punish Adulterie with death Deut. 22. 21. They had Power to cognosce whom to admit into and whom to seclude from the Cities of refuge So that if the King had commanded to take the life of an innocent man they were not to deliver him Iosh. 20. per tot But besides the Elders of Cities there were the Elders and heads of the People who had judicial Power to cognosce on all Criminal Matters even when Ioshua was Judge in Israel we find they assumed this Power to judge of that matter of the two tribes the half Iosh. 22. 30. And they had Power to make Kings as Saul David as was shewed and it must needs follow they had Power to unmake them in case of Tyranny 3 They had Power to conveen even without the indiction of the Ruler as in that Iosh. 22. they convene without him and without advice or knowledge of Samuel the Ruler they
further threatens that they should be removed into all Kingdoms of the earth because of Manasseh for that which he did in Ierusalem Ier. 15. 4. Certainly these passages were recorded for our Learning Rom. 15. 4. and for our examples to the intent we should not do as they did 1 Cor. 10. 6. and for our admonition vers 11. Whence we may be admonished that it is not enough to keep our selves free of publick sins of Rulers Many of those then punished were free of all actual accession to them but they became accessory to and involved in the guilt of them when they did not endeavour to hinder them and bring them to condign punishment for them according to the Law of God which respecteth not persons or at least because they did not revolt from them as Libnah did There might be other provocations on the peoples part no doubt which the Lord did also punish by these Judgments â—ut when the Lord specifies the sin of Rulers as the particular procuring Cause of the Judgment it were presumption to make it the Occasion only of the Lords punishing them for plain it is if these sins of Rulers had not been committed which was the ground of the threatening execution the Judgment would have been prevented And if people had bestirred themselves as became them in repressing restraining such wickedness they had not so smarted And when that sin so threatened punished was removed then the Judgment it self was removed or deferred It is just necessary that the subjects being Jointly included with their Rulers in the same bond of fidelity to God be lyable to be punished for their Rebellion Apostasie when they continue under the bond of subjection to them But how deplorable were our Condition if we shold stand obnoxions to divine Judgments for the Atheisme Idolatry Murders Adulteries of our Rulers and yet be neither Authorized nor Capacitated to hinder it nor permitted to withdraw our selves from subjection to them But it is not so for the Lords making us responsable for their debt is an impowering us either to repress their wickedness when He gives us Capacity or at least to save our selves harmless from their Crimes by disouning them that being the only way of standing no longer accountable for their faults 12. It remains to Consider the Ends for which Government was institute by God and constitute by men from whence I Argue That Government that destroyes the Ends of Government is not to be ouned But Tyranny and especially this under which we houl destroyes all the Ends of Government Ergo it is not to be ouned The Minor I prove thus That Government that destroyes Religion Safety destroyes all the Ends of Government But this Popish arbitrary Absolute power destroyes Religion Safety Ergo It is evident both from the Laws of Nature Revelation that the Ends of Government are the Glory of God the good of Mankind The first is the Glory of God the ultimate end of all Ordinances to which whatever is opposite is not to be ouned by them that fear Him whatever power then is destructive to Religion and is applyed imployed against the Glory of the Uuniversal King and for withdrawing us from our fealtie obedience to Him is nothing but Rebellion against the Supreme Lord Lawgiver and a Traiterous Conspiracy against the Almighty and therefore not to be ouned And they are enemies to Religion or strangers to it who are not sensible this hath been the design of the present Government at least these 27 years to overturn the Reformed Covenanted Religion and to introduce Popery Hence seeing a King at his best highest elevation is only a mean for preserving Religion and for this end only chosen of the people to be Custos utriusque tabulae keeper of both Tables of the Law he is not to be regarded but wholly laid aside when he not only moves without his sphere but his motion infers the ruine of the ends of his erection and when he imployes all his power for the destruction of the Cause of Christ and advancement of Antichrists giving his power to the beast he is so far from deserving the deference of the power ordained of God that he is to be looked upon treated as a Traitor to God and Stated enemy to Religion all Righteousness The Second End of Government is the good of the people which is the Supreme Cardinal Law Salus Populi est Suprema Lex Which cannot be denied if it be considered 1. For this only the Magistrate is appointed of God to be His Minister for the peoples good Rom. 13. 4. and they have no goodness but as they conduce to this end for all the power they have of God is with this Proviso to promote His peoples prosperity It were blasphemy to say they are His Authorized Ministers for their destruction to which if their Conduct degenerate they degrade themselves and so must be disouned He is therefore in his institution no more than a mean for this end and himself cannot be either the whole or half of the end for then he should be both the end the mean of Government and it is contrary to Gods mould to have this for his end to multiply to himself silver gold or lift up himself above his brethren Deut. 17. 17 20. if therefore he hath any other end than the good of the people he cannot be ouned as one of Gods moulding 2. This only is the highest pitch of good Princes ambition to postpone their oun safety to the peoples safety Moses desired rather than the people should be destroyed that his name should be razed out of the Book of life And David would rather the Lords hand be on him his fathers house than on the people that they should be plagued 1 Chron. 21. 17. but he that would seek his oun ambitious ends with the destruction of the people hath the spirit of the Devil and is to be carried towards as one possessed with that malignant spirit 3. Originally their power is from the people from whom all their dignity is derived with reserve of their safety which is not the donative of Kings nor held by concession from them nor can it be resigned or surrendered to the disposal of Kings since God hath provided in His universal Laws that no Authority make any disposal but for the good of the people This cannot be forfeited by the usurpation of Monarchs but being alwise fixed in the essential Laws of Government they may reclaim recover it when they please Since then we cannot alienate our safety we cannot oune that Authority which is inconsistent with it 4. The attaining this end was the main ground motive of peoples deliberating to constitute a Goverment and to choose such a forme because they thought it most conducible for their good and to admit such persons as fittest Instruments for compassing this end and to establish such
a Conveyance as they thought most contributive for this end When therefore Princes cease to be what they could be constitute for they cease to have an Authority to be ouned but ceasing to answer these ends of Government they cease to be what they could be constitute for 5. For no other end were Magistrates limited with Conditions but to bound them that they might do nothing against the peoples good safety Whosoever then breaking through all legal limitations shall became injurious to the Community lists himself in the number of enemies and is only to be looked upon as such 6. For this end all Laws are ratified or rescinded as they conduce to this end which is the soul reason of the Law then it is but reason that the Law establishing such a King which proves an enemy to this should be rescinded also 7. Contrary to this end no Law can be of force if then either Law or King be prejudicial to the Realme they are to be abolished 8. For this end in cases of necessity Kings are allowed sometimes to neglect the Letter of the Laws or private Interests for the safety of the Community but if they neglect the publick safety and make Laws for their oun Interests they are no more Trustees but Traitors 9. If it were not for this end it were more eligible to live in deserts than to enter into Societies When therefore a Ruler in direct opposition to the ends of Government seeks the ruine not only of Religion but also of the peoples safety he must certainly forfeit his right to reign And what a vast as well as innocent number have for Religion and their adherence to their fundamental rights been ruined rooted out of their families Possessions oppressed persecuted Murdered destroyed by this and the deceased Tyrant all Scotland can tell and all Europe hath heard If ever the ends of Government were perverted subverted in any place Britain is the stage where this Tragedy hath been acted 13. I may argue from the Covenant that to oune this Authority is contrary to all the Articles thereof 1. That Authority which overturns the Reformation of Religion in Doctrine Worship Discipline Government which we are sworn to preserve against the Common Enemies thereof in the first Art. cannot be ouned But the present pretended Authority overturned and continues more to overturn the Reformation of Religion c. Ergo it cannot be ouned for against what common enemy must we preserve it if not against him that is the chief Enemy thereof and how can we oune that Authority that is wholly employed applied for the destruction of Religion 2. If we are obliged to exstirpate Poperie without respect of persons lest we partake in other mens sins then we are obliged to exstirpate Papists without respect of persons and consequently the head of them For how otherwise can Poperie be exstirpated or how otherwise can we cleanse the Land of their sins But in the 2d Art. we are obliged to exstirpate Poperie without respect of persons lest we partake in other mens sins Ergo we are obliged to exstirpate Papists without respect of Persons and consequently the Crowned Iesuite and therefore cannot oune him for how can we oune him whom we are bound to exstirpate 3. If we be engaged to preserve the Rights Liberties of Parliaments and the Liberties of the Kingdoms and the Kings Authority only in the preservation defence of the true Religion Liberties of the Kingdoms then we cannot oune his Authority when it is inconsistent with opposite to destructive of all these precious Interests as now it is with a witness But in the 3. Art. we are engaged to preserve the Rights Priviledges of Parliaments the Liberties of the Kingdoms and the Kings Authority only in the preservation defence of the true Religion Liberties of the Kingdoms Ergo. All allegiance that we can oune to any man must stand perpetually thus qualified in defence of Religion Liberty that is so far as it is not contrary to Religion Liberty and no further for if it be destructive of these it is null If we should then oune this man with this restricted allegiance and apply it to his Authority as we must apply it to all Authority that we can oune it were to mock God the world and oune Contradictions for can we maintain the Destroyer of Religion in defence of Religion And the Destroyer of all our rights Liberties and all our legal securities for them in the preservation of these rights Liberties that were pure Non-sense 4. If we be obliged to endeavour that all Incendiaries Malignants c. be brought to condign punishment then we cannot oune the Authority of the head of these Incendiaries malignant Enemies But in the 4. Art we are obliged to endeavour that all Incendiaries Malignants c. be brought to Condign Punishment Ergo The Connexion of the Major cannot well be doubted for is it imaginable that the head of that unhallowed Party the Great malignant Enemy who is the spring gives life unto all these Abominations shall be exempted from punishment or ouned for a Sacred Majestie shall we be obliged to discover and bring to Justice the litle petty Malignants and this implacably stated Enemy to Christ escape with a Crown on his head Nay we are by this obliged if ever we be in case to bring these stated Enemies to God the Country to condign punishment from the highest to the Lowest And this we are to do as we would have the anger of the Lord turned away from us which cannot be without hanging up their heads before the Lord against the sun as was done in the matter of Peor Numb 25. 4. For hath not he his Complices made the Kingdom a Curse and we with our oun consent have made our selves obnoxious to it if we do not procure each in our Capacities and pursue these Traitors Rebells that the Judgment of the Lord be executed upon the accursed 5. No wilful oâ—poser of Peace union between the Kingdoms is to be ouned but according to the 5. Art. we are obliged to endeâ—vour that Justice be done upon him But this man his brother have been wilful opposers of Peace union between the Kingdoms all true Peace union except an union in Confederacy against the Lord for they have taken Peace from both the Kingdoms and destroyed annulled that which was the bond of their union viz. the Solemn League Covenant 6. If we are obliged to assist defend all those that enter into this League Covenant in the maintaining pursuing thereof and never to suffer our selves to be divided to make defection to the contrary part c. According to the 6 Art. Then we must not oun the Butcher of our Covenanted Brethren who hath imbrued â—is hands in their blood in the maintaining pursuing thereof and would have us
for their matter National Covenants about things Moral objectively obliging to joine our selves to the Lord in a perpetual Covenant that shall not be forgotten Ier. 50. 5. I might easily demonstrate all the Articles of the Covenant to be Morally obliging but they are demonstrate sufficiently above Head. 1. Arg. 11. Therefore they are perpetually binding 8. They are for their Ends National Covenants inviolably obliging which cannot be made void though they should be broken because the ends of them are alwayes to be pursued as is proved above Head. 1. Therefore they are perpetual 9. They are for their formality National Covenants most Solemnly Sworn subscribed by all ranks with uplifted hands with bended knees with solemn invocating the Name of God with solemn preaching prayer praise rendering themselves and the posterity obnoxious to the Curse if they should break it Now the Solemnities of the Oath do aggravate the heinousness of the breach of it as is clear from Ier. 34. 19. Ezek. 17. 18. quoted above the reason is because of their greater deliberation in the action and because of the greater scandal accompanying the violation thereof Hence as they are National Oaths Covenants so solemnized they are National Adiurations under the pain of a National Curse not to break them Nationally Which do make the posterity obnoxious to it as Ioshua adjuring Israel saying Cursed be the man that riseth up and buildeth this City Iericho Iosh. 6. 26. Which was fulfilled many generations after in the dayes of Ahab upon Hiel the Bethelite 1 King. 16. Ult. So the Curse of introducing abjured Prelacy and Popery if it be let in will be impendent on the Nation All National Covenants have a Curse annexed in case of a breach when ever it shall be So in Nehemiahs Covenant they clave to their Brethren entered into a Curse and into an Oath to walk in Gods Law which was given by Moses the Servant of God and to observe do all the Commandments of thâ— Lord our Lord and His Judgements Statutes particularly not to enter into affinity with their Malignant enemies Neh. 10. 29 30. Which certainly did oblige the posterity because the thing was Moral So in our Covenants we are bound to the same things and nothing but these And therefore the posterity is lyable to the Curse of perjurie for the breach thereof 10. They are for their Legality National Laws being Solemnly Ratified by the Parliament and by the King and made the foundation of their Compact with him at his Inauguration whereby they became the fundamental Laws of the Government and among the very Leges regulae regnandi which though they be rescinded by a wicked Law yet make the Rescinders chargable not only of Perjurie in breaking a Covenant but of Treason Tyranny in breaking and altering the Constitution of the Government and render them lyable to the Curse thereof for they cannot rescind that nor escape its vengeance whereof we have a speaking pledge already in that the Rescinder of these Covenants was so terribly rescinded and cut off by the hands of unnatural violence God thereby fulfilling that threatend Judgment of Covenant breakers that he that hath broken His Covenant shall be brought to destruction and bloody deceitful men shall not live out half their dayes Psal. 55. 20. ult So Charles the Second got not leave to live out half the dayes that he projected to himself 11. They are National Engagments of an Hereditary Nature like that of Israel Deut. 29. 14 15. which did oblige not only the present but the absent not only them that stood there that day before the Lord their God but theâ— that were not there that day Grotius de jur â—el Lib. 2. cap. 6. gives these Marks of Hereditary Covenants 1 When the subject is of a permanent Nature and as long as manet idem Corpus therefore as long as Scotland is Scotland whose people in their personal Capacity whose Parliaments in their Parliamentary Capacity whose King in his princely Capacity did all solemnly Sacredly engage in the Covenant it must be real perpetually obliging 2 when there is such a Clause in the Covenant as that it should be perpetual There are many Clauses in the Solemn league to this purpose in Art. 1. are these words that we our posterity after us may as brethren live in faith lâ—ve aâ—d the Lord may delight to dwell in the midst of us in the 5. Art we shall each one of us according to our place interest endeavour that the Kingdoms may remain conjoined in a firme peace union to all posterity 3 when it is such as is made for the good of thâ— Kingdom The Covenant expresses its end for the perpetual good of the Kingdom having before our eyes the Glory of God the advancement of the Kingdom of Christ the honour happiness of the King his posterity and the true publick Liberty Safety Peace of the Kingdoms wherein every ones private condition is included and again it is added for preservation of our selves our Religion from utter ruine destruction All this is a publick National good 4 The matter is Moral about materially binding duties and therefore it must be hereditary and of perpetual obligation 12. Lastly They are National obligations taking on publick duties by way of virtual Representation of the posterity And they that think it irrational that the father should represent involve the family must resolve us how the Religious Civil Covenants of Israel Iudâ—h made in Moses Ioshua's Davids Asa's Ioash's Hezekiahs Iosiahs 〈◊〉 dayes did comprehend bird as well the absent as the preâ—ent their posterity yet unborn as also how the Laws Contracts continually passed by some do take in others not personally consenting yea how comes it to pass that every succeeding generation is â—ound to the Laws and must be obedient to the Kings that they did not make themselves no reason can be given but because they are virtually represented by included in their fathers Now if these Arguments prove our National Covenants to be perpetually binding and cannot be dispensed with theâ— must these posterior Oaths that are made in a diametrical opposition to the Covenants and are condemned by the Covenants be false unlawful Oaths But the first is proved Therefore these Oaths so opposite to condemned by the Covenants are false unlawful That they are opposite to the Covenant will appear in the induction of all of them And that what ever they be imposed by this party they are condemned by the Covenants wherein we are obliged to make no such Transactions with them will appear if we consider these and the like expressions that we shall neither directly nor indirectly suffer our selves to be divided by whatsoever suggestion allurement or terror from this blessed Conjunction nor shall cast in any let or impediment that may stop or hinder any such resolution as
shall be found to conduce for so good ends Which are the Words of the National Covenant clearly condemning Oaths Bonds given to Malignants which are divisive of them that adhere to and Unitive with them that oppose the Covenant and impeditive of resolutions to prosecute the ends thereof So in the Solemn League Covenant Art. 4. We are obliged to oppose all such as make any faction or parties amongst the people contrary to this League Covenant but by these Oaths Bonds such factions are made c. And by Art. 6. we are obliged to assist defend all those that enter into this Covenant contradicted by all the later Oaths Bonds and not to suffer our selves directly or indirectly by whatsoever combination to be divided from this blessed union whether to make defection to the contrary part or to give our selves to a detestable indifferency c. Which we do when we divide our selves from these that refuse these Oaths and makes defection unto the party that impose them And in the Solemn Acknowledgment of sins Engagment to duties We are sworn § 6. to be so far from conniving at complying with or countenancing of Malignancy Injustice c. that we shall not only avoid discountenance these things c. but take an effectual course to punish suppress these evils All which we counteract contradict when we take any of these Oaths or Bonds In the Second place by a Particular induction of the several kinds of these Oaths Bonds the iniquity of each of them will appear and the Complex iniquity of the smoothest of them the Oath of Abjuration compared with every one of them will be manifest And consequently the honesty innocency of Sufferers for Refusing them will be discovered I. The first in order which was a Copy to all the rest was the Declaration ordained to be subscribed by all in publick Charge office or Trust within the Kingdom Wherein they do affirme declare they judge it unlawful to Subjects upon pretence of Reformation or any other pretence whatsoever to enter into Leagues Covenants or take up armes against the King and that all these Gatherings petitions protestations that were used for carrying on of the late troubles were unlawful seditious And particularly that these Oaths the National Covenant and the Salemn League Covenant were and are in themselves unlawful Oaths Here is a Confederacy required against the Lord at which the Heavens might stand astonished an unparalelled breach of the Third Command Which could no more be taken in Truth Righteousness than an Oath renouncing the Bible but it hath this advantage of the rest that it is some what plain And the iniquity legible on its front 1. That it is a renouncing of Solemn Sacred Covenants perpetually binding to Moral indispensable duties the wickedness whereof is evident from what is said above 2. It makes perjurie of the deepest dye the necessary sine qua non qualification of all in publick Office who cannot be presumed capable of administrating Justice when they have avowed themselves perjured perfidious and not to be admitted among heathens let be Christians nor trusted in a matter of ten shillings money according to the Laws of Scotland 3. It renounces the whole Work of Reformation and the way of Carrying it on as a Pretence and trouble unlawful seditious Which if it be a Trouble then the Peace they have taken in renouncing it must be such a Peace as is the plague of God upon the heart filling it with senslessness stupidity in His just Judgement because of the palpable breach of Covenant or such a Peace as is very consistent with the Curse vengeance of God pursuing the quarrel of a broken Covenant 4. It condemns the taking up armes against the King which shall be proven to be duty Head 5. Besides that hereby the most innocent means of seeking the redress of Grievances that Religion Risings Law practice of all Nations allowes is condemned Yet in effect for as monstrous as this Oath is the Complexe of its iniquity is couched in the Oath of Abjuration in which many of these Methods of Combinations Risings Declarations of war against the King and Protestations against his Tyranny which were used in the late Troubles for carrying on the Reformation are abjured in that a Declaration is renounced in so far as it Declares war against the King and asserts it Lawful to kill them that serve him Which yet in many cases in the Covenanted Reformation here renounced were acknowledged practised as Lawful besides that it hath many other breaches of Covenant in it as will be shewed II. The next Net they contrived to catch Consciences was the Oath of Allegiance Supremacy Wherein they that took it for testification of their faithful obedience to their most gracious redoubted Soveraign Charles King of Great Britain do affirme testifie Declare that they acknowledg their said Soveraign only supreme Governour of this Kingdom over all persons in all Causes And that no forreign Prince hath any jurisdiction power or superiority over the same and therefore do utterly renounce all forreign power and shall at their utmost power defend assist maintain his Majs jurisdiction foresaid and never decline his power The iniquity of this Oath is very vast and various 1. It is a Covenant of Allegiance with a King turned Tyrant and enemy to Religion Subverter of the Reformation and overturner of our Laws Liberties and therefore demonstrate to be sinful both from the first General Argument against Oaths and from Head. 2. 2. It cannot be taken in Truth Righteousness or Iudgement beause the words are general very comprehensive and ambiguous capable of diverse senses when he is affirmed to be supreme over all Persons and in all Causes and to be assistest maintained in that jurisdiction Who can be sure in swearing such an Oath but that he may thereby wrong others wrong Parliaments in their Priviledges wrong the Church in her Liberties and which is worse wrong the Lord Jesus Christ who is Supreme alone in some Causes Can an Oath be taken in Truth Righteousness to assist him in all encroachments upon Causes that are not subordinate to him and in invading all those Priviledges of Subjects which are Natural Civil Moral Religious for if he be supreme in all Causes then all these depend upon him be subordinate to him And can it be taken in Iudgement and with a clear mind when it may be debated doubted as it is by some whether the obligation of it is to be considered as circumstantiate specificate to the present Object of it supposing him a Tyrant or in a more abstract notion as it might be tendered in the sense of its first Authors as it was taken in King Iames the 6. his dayes And as they plead for taking the English Oath of Allegiance as it was accepted by the
we cannot expect to have the Lord for a Sanctuary but for a stone of stumbling Isai. 8. 8. 12-14 No Peace obstructing the Gospel or Testimony or abstracting from the duty of the day No Peace tending to sinful security Ier. 8. 11. No Peace leading to slavish stupidity No Peace prompting to preposterous prudence in palliating sin or daubing defections with untempered morter No Peace inconsistent with Truth they must go together Zech. 1. 19. No Peace that may not be followed with Holiness Heb. 12. 14. But it must be so qualified that it be in the Lord in Truth in duty contributing for the good of the Church Psal. 122. 8 9. and the fruit of that Wisdom which is first Pure and then Peaceable Iam. 3. 17. Now all that know the Imposers of these Bonds will acknowledge that is not the Peace they are seeking 3. If we further enquire into their meaning of Living Peaceably and seek a determinate sense of it from their Acts Actings It is plain they mean such a Peaceable Living as gives obedience to their wicked Laws and is a Complyance to their established Courses And it must be such a Peaceable living as is opposite to their sense of Sedition Rebellion Schisme c. Which they interpret every seasonable duty to be And it must be such a Peaceable living as they were presumed not to have been observant of before and what ever it be must be opposite to that with which they were charged as turbulent and so contrary to all the duties of our Covenanted profession as going to meetings withdrawing from the Curats c. Which they interpret not to be Peacable living 4. This is contrary to our Covenants which oblige us to a constant contending with and opposition to them Yet all this is engaged into in the Oath of Abjuration which abjures all war against the King and all doing injury to them that serve him and consequently to Peace living Peaceably with them IV. Of Affinity to this were many other Bonds of Regularity frequently renewed generally imposed and that with unparalelled illegality rigour Sometimes by hosts of Savage Highlanders Sometimes by Circuit-Courts and by Heretors upon their Tenants and with such unheard of involvements that the Master or Heretor was obliged for himself his Wife Children Servants Tenants and all under him to live Orderly Which in some was more bluntly expressed in others more flatly explained that they should keep the Publick Ordinances that is hear the Curats and not go to any Seditious Conventicles so they called the Persecuted Meetings of the Lords people for the Worship of God and in others yet more impudently exacted that they should not harbour intertain or correspond with any that went to these Meetings but discover and assist to the apprehending of them There were several forms of them from time to time some longer some shorter but all of them first last were to the same sense scope And the most favourably worded had much wickedness in them for 1. They are Covenants of Order and coming under the same Rule with themselves which is nothing but their lusts Mischiefs framed into Law not according to the Rule of the Word of God but the iniquious Laws of men 2. They could not be taken in Truth Judgement Righteousness for either they were ambiguous or their plain sense obliged to manifest iniquities to conforme with all their enacted corruptions 3. They are clear breaches of Covenant which obliges to another Kind of Orderlyness and to follow other Rules and take none from them in the Matters of God. 4. They are impossible and absurd obliging Masters to bind for all under them that could neither lye in their power nor in their duty to restrain their Liberty in these Lawful things and to constrain compell their consciences to sin 5. They are unnatural cruel obliging the Takers to partake with them in their persecution of the Godly 6. They were engagments to hear Curats which is proved to be sin Head 1. throughout 7. They were engagments to withdraw from the Meetings of the Lords people proved to be duty Head 4. Yet the Oath of Abjuration is some way equivalent to this in that it obliges the Abjurers to renounce Disorderlyness in their sense and to do no harm to the timeserving Orderly Clergy or Laity serving prosecuting their wicked Orders V. Some other Bonds of that nature and Oaths frequently put to Suffering people when taken Prisoners did require peaceableness Orderlyness in this Style that they should either tacitely or expressly condemn Some Risings in Armes as at Pentland Bothwel c. to be Rebellion against the King and a sin against God engage never to rise in Armes against the King or any commissionate by him upon any pretence whatsoever The iniquity whereof is manifest for 1. This is a Covenant equivalent to a league Offensive Defensive with them obliging never to offend or oppose them not to defend nor rescue our Brethren against from their murdering violence 2. This could not be taken in Truth Judgement Righteousness for who can tell how far that may extend upon any pretence whatsoever this may oblige us to make a stupid surrender of our lives when the King turns so Tyrannical as to send his Cut-throats to demand them or Authorizes his bloody Papists to Massacre us them we must not resist upon this pretence 3. It is contrary to our Covenants that allow Resistance in some cases and oblige to assist defend all that enter under the bond thereof 5. This infers an ouning of the present Authority as the irresistible Ordinance of God and an obligation of living peaceably in subjection under it disproved above To which I shall adde a part of that forecited Letter of Mr Rutherfoords the 63. in number of the third part of his printed Letters which are a clear vindication of the principles practice of our consciencious Sufferers on this point There is a promise real purpose saith he to live peaceably under the Kings Authority But 1 yow do not so answer candidly imgenuously the mind of the Rulers who to your knowledge mean a far other thing by Authority than yow do for yow mean his just Authority his Authority in the Lord in the maintenance of true Religion as in the Covenant confession of faith is expressed from the Word of God they mean his supreme Authority absolute prerogative above Laws as their Acts clear and as their practice is for they refused to such as were unwilling to subscribe their bond to adde Authority in the Lord or just Lawful Authority or Authority as it is expressed in the Covenant but this draught of a petition yeelds the sense meaning to them which they crave 2 That Authority for which they contend is exclusive of the sworn Covenant So that except ye had said ye shall be subject to the Kings Authority in the Lord or
the Declaration it self If again it be a Supposition or Condition and to be interpreted for if so be then all that the Judgement can make of it is that it is uncertain and so the Conscience dare not invoke God as a Witness of that which is uncertain whether it be a Truth or a lie 3. This Oath could not be taken in Righteousness for the matter is not true certainly known Lawful possible weighty necessary useful worthy It is not true that the Declaration imports so far as as it is represented in the Oath of Abjuration Neither is it certainly known but by collating these two together the Contrary will appear Neither is it Lawful if it were true that such assertions were in it to abjure all Declarations of war against the King and to swear it unlawful ever to kill any if he be once in the Kings service in Church State Army or Country Nor is it possible to reduce this Assertory Oath into a promissory one Lawfully as most part of such Oaths may do necessarely imply for when I swear such a thing unlawful it implies my promise by virtue of the same Oath never to practise it But it is not possible as the case stands for a man to bind up himself in every case from all declared war against the King or from killing some imployed in his service what if there be a necessary call to joine in armes with the Lords people for the defence of their Religion lives Liberties against him what if he command a Massacre shall not a man defend himself Nor endeavour to kill none of that murdering Crew because they are in his service Was ever a fool so fettered Nor is it of such weight as to be the occasion of involving the whole Country in perjury or persecution as by that Oath was done Nor was it necessary in this mans time to make all abjure a Declaration out of date when the object of it Charles the Second was dead and no visible party actually in armes to prosecute it Nor was it ever of any use or worth except it were implicitely to gratify their greedy lusting after the blood of Innocents or the blood of silly Souls cheated by their snares by involving them in the same sin of perjury Conscience-debauching false-swearing whereof they themselves are so heinously guilty But let them and such as have taken that Oath and not fled to Christ for a Sanctuary lay to heart the doom of false swearrers the flying roll of the Curse of God shall enter into their house Zech. 5. 4. Love no false Oath for all these are things that I hate saith the Lord Zech. 8. 17. The Lord will be a swift Witness against false swearers Mal. 3. 5. And let them sist their Conscience before the Word and set the Word to the Conscience and these Considerations will have some weight 4. If we consider this Particular Oath it self aud the words of it more narrowlie we shall find a Complication of iniquities in it by examining the sense of them as the Imposers expound them 1. Not only that Declaration but all such in so far as they declare assert such things are here renounced and hereby many honest faithful Declarations are disouned that declare the same things It is indeed pleaded by some that profess to be presbyterians as it was also pretended by some of the pressers of the Oath themselves but in order to pervert cheat the Conscience that here is not required a disouning of the Apologetical Declaration simpliciter but only secundum quid or rather of a pretended one of their supposing in so far as it imports such things But this is frivolous for that pretended one is intended by the Imposers to be the Real Apologetical Declaration which they will have to be disouned and cannot be distinguished from it And though all these Assertions cannot be fastened upon that Apologetical Declaration but it is evident that it is invidiously misrâ—presented yet that same is the pretended one which they require to be abjured in so far as it asserts such things which it does not And if it be secundum quid to be disouned then that must either be secundum that Assertion of killing any c. Which is not to be found in it and so it is not to be disouned at all or it must be secundum the Declaration of war against the King And so that quid or formal reason of disouning it will oblige to disoune all Declarations of war against the King which cannot be disouned Others again Object that it is not required to be disouned formally but only conditionally taking confounding in so far for if so be But to any thinking man it is plain this cannot be a supposition nor yet a simple restriction as they would give it out but an assertion that such things are indeed imported in it for so the Imposers think say And if it might pass current under that notion as a supposition being equivalent to if so be then under that sophistical pretext I might renounce the Covenant or the most indisputed Confession or Declaration that ever was in so far as it contained such things And so this equivocation might elude all Testimonies whatsoever and justify all prevarications 2. This must condemn all defensive wai of subjects against their oppressing Rulers in that a Declaration is abjured in so far as it declares war against the King to press perswade people to which it was usually urged by the Imposers that when a war is declared by Rebells against the King then all the subjects are obliged to disoune the Rebells or else be repute for such themselves And when it was alledged the war was ceased because the Object declared against was ceased Charles the Second being dead otherwise if a man be obliged to give his opinion about a war declared against a King deceased gone then by the same parity of reason he must be obliged to give his opinion of that war of the Lords of the Congregation as they were called against Queen Mary in the begining of the Reformation It was still replyed by them that the Rebellion continued and all were guilty of it that did not abjure that Declaration Whence it is evident they mean that every thing which they call Rebellion must be disouned and consequently all Resistence of Superiors upon any pretence whatsoever as many of their Acts explain it yea and it was plainly told by some of them to some that scrupled to rake the Oath because they said they did not understand it that the meaning was to swear never to rise in armes against the King. Against this it hath been objected by several that this was alwayes denied by Presbyterians that ever they declared war against the King but only for defence of their lives Liberties never agaiâ—st the King expressy purposedly designedly but only against him per accidens when he happened to be the
not Gods Ordinance and there is no hazard of damnation for refusing to obey their unjust commands but rather the hazard of that is in walking willingly after the Commandment when the Statutes of Omri are kept So that what is objected from Eccles. 8. 2-4 I counsell thee to keep the Kings Commandment c. is answered on Head. 2. And is to be unsterstood only of the Lawful commands of Lawful Kings 2. Rebellion is a damnable sin except where the word is taken in a laxe sense as Israel is said to have Rebelled against Rehoboam and Hezekias against Sennacherib which was a good Rebellion and clear duty being taken there for Resistence Revolt In that sense indeed some of our Risings in Armes might be called Rebellions for it is Lawful to Rebel against Tyrants But because the word is usually taken in an evil sense therefore would have been offensive to acknowledge that before the Inquisitors except it had been explained But Rebellion against Lawful Magistrats is a damnable sin exemplarly punished in Korah and his Companâ— who rebelled against Moses and in Shebah and Absalom who rebelled against David for to punish the Just is not good nor to strike Princes for equity Prov. 17. 26. And they that resist shall receive to themselves damnation Rom. 13. 2. So that this Objection brought from this place as if the Apostle were commanding there subjection without Resistence to Nero and such Tyrants as it is very impertinent It is fully answered above Head. 2. Here it will be sufficient to reply 1. He is hereby vindicating Christianity from that reproach of casting off or refusing subjection to all Magistrats as if Christian Liberty had destroyed that Relation or that they were not to be subject to Heathen Magistrats Whereupon he binds this duty of subjection to Magistrats for conscience sake in general And it is very considerable what Buchanan sayes in his book de jure regni that Paul did not write to the Kings themselves because they were not Christians and therefore the more might be born with from them tho they should not understand the duty of Magistrats But imagine that there had been some Christian King who had turned Tyrant and Apostate to the Scandal of Religion what would he have written then Sure if he had been like himself he would have denyed that he should be ouned for a King and would have interdicted all Christians Communion with him and that they should account him no King but such as they were to have no fellowship with according to the Law of the Gospel 2. He speaks of Lawful Rulers here not Tyrants but of all such as are defined qualified here being powers ordained of God terrours to evil works Ministers of God for good Yea but says Prelats and their Malignant Adherents these are only Motives of subjection to all powers not qualifications of the powers I answer they are indeed Motives but such as can be extended to none but to these powers that are so qualified 3. He speaks of Lawful powers indefinitely in the plural number not specifying any Kind or degree of them as if only Kings Emperours were here meant It cannot be proven that the power of the sword is only in them Neither was there a plurality of Kings or Emperours at Rome to be subject to if he meant the Roman Emperour he would have designed him in the singular number All the reasons of the Text aggree to inferiour Judges also for they are Ordained of God they are called Rulers in Scripture and Gods Ministers revengers by Office who judge not for man but for the Lord And inferiour Magistrats also are not to be resisted when doing their duty 1 Pet. 2. 13. yet all will grant when they go beyond their bounds and turns litle Tyrants they may be with-stood 4. He does not speak of Nero concerning whom it cannot be proven that at this time he had the Soveraign power as the learned Mr Prin shewes Or if he had that he was a Tyrant at this time and if he meant him at all it was only as he was obliged to be de jure not as he was de facto All men know and none condemns the fact of the Senate that resisted Nero at length without transgressing this precept Yea I should rather think the Senate is the power that the Apostle applies this Text to if he applied it to any in particular 5. The subjection here required is the same with the honour in the fifth Command whereof this is an exposition and is opposite to the Contraordinatness here condemned Now subjection takes in all the duties we owe to Magistrates and Resistence all the contraries forbidden but unlimited obedience is not here required so neither unlimited subjection 3. We may allow Passive subjection in some cases even to Tyrants when the Lord layes on that yoke and in effect sayes He will have us to lie under it a while as He Commanded the Jewes to be subject to Nebuchadnezzar of which passage adduced to prove subjection to Tyrants Universally Buchanan ubi supra infers that if all Tyrants be to be subjected to because God by His Prephet Commanded His people to be subject to one Tyrant Then it must be likewise concluded that all Tyrants ought to be killed because Ahabs house was Commanded to be destroyed by Iehu But passive subjection when people are not in capacity to resist is necessary I do not say Passive obedience which is a meer Chimaera invented in the brains of such Sycophants as would make the world slaves to Tyrants Whosoever suffereth if he can shun it is an enemy to his oun being for every natural thing must strive to preserve it self against what annoyeth it and also he sins against the order of God Who in vain hath ordained so many Lawful means for preservation of our being if we must suffer it to be destroyed having power to help it 4. We abhor all war of subjects professedly declared against a Lawful King as such all war against Lawful Authority founded upon or designed for maintaining Principles inconsistent with Government or against Policy Piety Yea all war without Authority Yes when all Authority of Magistrates supreme subordinate is perverted and abused contrary to the ends thereof to the oppressing of the people and overturning of their Laws Liberties people must not suspend their Resistence upon the Concurrence of men of Authority and forbear the Duty in case of necessity because they have noâ— the peers or Primores to lead them for if the ground be Lawful the call clear the necessity cogent the capacity probable they that have the Law of Nature the Law of God and the fundamental Laws of the Land on their side cannot want Authority though they may want Parâ—iaments to espouse their quarrel This is cleared above Head. 2. Yet here I shall adde 1. The people have this priviledge of nature to defend themselves and their Rights Liberties as well as
Peers and had it before they erected and constituted Peers or Primores There is no distinction of quality in interests of Nature though ther be in Civil order but self defence is not an act of Civil order In such Interests people must not depend upon the priority of their superiours nor suspend the duties they owe to themselves and their neighbours upon the manuduction of other mens greatness The Law of Nature allowing self defence or the defence of our Brethren against unjust violence addeth no such restriction that it must only be done by the conduct or concurrence of the Primores or Parliaments 2. The people have as great Interest to defend their Religion as the Peers and more because they have more souls to care for than they who are far fewer And to be violented in their Consciences which are as free to them as to the Peers is as unsupportable to them yea both are equally concerned to maintain Truth and rescue their Brethren suffering for it which are the chief grounds of war and if the ground of the defensive war be the same with them and without them what reason can be given making their Resistence in the one case Lawful and not in the other Both are alike obliged to concur and both are equally obnoxious to Gods threatened Judgments for suffering Religion to be ruined and not relieving rescuing Innocents It will be but a poor excuse for people to plead they had no Peers to head them What if both King Nobles turn enemies to Religion as they are at this day shall people do nothing for the defence of it then Many times the Lord hath begun a Work of Reformation by foolish things and hath made the least of the flock to draw them out Ier. 49. 2. and 50. 45. and did not think fit to begin with Nobles but began it when powers Peers were in opposition to it and when He blessed it so at length as to engage the publick Representatives to oune it what was done by private persons before they never condenmed 3. The people are injured without the Nobles therefore they may resist without them if they be able for there can be no Argument adduced to make it unlawful to resist without them which will not equally make it unlawful to do it with them 4. It s true the Primores are obliged beyond others and have Authority more than others to concur but Separately they cannot act as Representatives judicially They have a Magistratical power but limited to their particular Precincts where they have Interest and cannot extend it beyond these bounds And so if they should concur they are still in the capacity of subjects for out of a Parliamentary Capacity they are not Representatives 5. All the power they can have is Cumulative not Privative for deterior conditio Domini per Procurationem fieri non debet Why then shall the Representatives betraying their Trust wrong the Cause of the people whose Trustees they are Nay if it were not Lawful for people to defend their Religion Lives Liberties without the concurrence of Parliaments then their case should be worse with them than without them for they have done it before they had them and so they had better be without them still 6. People may defend themselves against the Tyranny of a Parliament or Primores or Nobles Ergo they may do it without them for if it be Lawful to resist them its Lawful to wave them when they are in a Conspiracy with the King against them 5. We disallow all war without real indeclinable Necessity and great grievous wrongs sustained and do not maintain it is to be declared or undertaken upon supposed Grounds or pretended Causes And so the Question is impertinently stated by our Adversaries Whether or not it be Lawful for Subjects or a party of them when they think themselves injured or to be in a capacity to Resist or Oppose the Supreme power of a Nation For the Question is not if when they think themselves injured they may Resist but when the injuries are real Neither is it every realitie of injuries will justify their Resistence but when their dearest nearest Liberties are invaded especially when such an invasion is made as threatens inâ—luctable subversion of them Next we do not say that a parties esteeming themselves in a Capacity or their being really in a Capacity doth make Resistence a duty except caeteris Paribus they have a Call as well as a Capacity which requires real Necessity and a right to the action and the things contended for to be real legal Rights really illegally encroached upon their Capacity gives them only a Conveniency to go about the duty that is previously Lawful upon a Moral ground No man needs to say who shall be Judge the Magistrate or people For. 1. All who have eyes in their head may judge whether the sun shine or not and all who have common sense may judge in this case For when it comes to a Necessity of Resistence it is to be supposed that the Grievances complained of and sought to be redressed by armes are not hid but manifest it cannot be so with any party only pretending their suffering wrong 2. There is no need of the formality of a Judge in things evident to Natures eye as Grassant Tyranny undermining overturning Religion Liberty must be Nature in the acts of necessitated Resistence in such a case is Judge party Accuser Witness all Neither is it an act of Judgement for people to defend their oun Defence is no act of jurisdiction but a priviledge of Nature Hence these common sayings vim vi repellere omnia jura permittunt And defendere se est juris Naturae Defensio vitae necessaria est a jure Naturali profluit 3. Be Judge who will the Tyrant cannot be Judge in the case for in these Tyrannical Acts that force the people to that Resistence he cannot be acknowledged as King and therefore no Judge for it s supposed the Judge is absent when he is the party that does the wrong And he that does the wrong as such is inferior to the innocent 4. Let God be Judge and all the World taking cognizance of the evidence of their respective Manifesto's of the State of their Cause 6. We condemn Resing to revenge private injuries whereby the Land may be involved in blood for some petty wrongs done to some persons great or small And abhor revengful Usurping of the Magistrats sword to avenge our selves for personal injuries As Davids killing of Saul would have been 1 Sam. 24. 10 12 13. 1 Sam. 26. 9 10. To Object which in this case were very impertinent for it would have been an act of offence in a remote defence if Saul had been immediatly asaulting him it could not be denied to be Lawful and it would have been an act of private revenge for a personal injurie and a sinful preventing of Gods promise of Davids
every soul be subject unto the higher Powers whosoever therefore resisteth the Power resisteth the Ordinance of God as Resistence by Prayer is with that 1 Tim. 2. 1 2. I exhort that Supplications be made for Kings and for all that are in Authority If the Prince be good the one as is unlawful as the other and a sinful resistence of the Ordinance of God to pray against him no less than the other to fight against him Therefore when he becomes a Tyrant destroyer of the Lords Inheritance and an Apostate as I may not pray for him except conditionally but against him as an Enemy of Christ so I may also fight against him as such 2. As Adversaries themselves will grant that Resistence by Prayers tears is more powerful effectual than the other So the Laws of the Land make the one treasonable as well as the other and that deservedly when the Prince is doing his duty but when he turneth Tyrant neither can justly be condemned These things being premitted I shall come shortly to the purpose and endeavour to prove this Truth That it is a necessary duty for a Community whether they have the Concurrence of the Primores Nobles Representatives or not to endeavour in the defence of their Religion Lives Laws Liberties to Resist Repress the Usurpation Tyranny of prevailing Dominators using or abusing their Power for subverting Religion invading the Liberties and overturning the foundamental Laws of their Country Wherein I shall be but short because this Truth is sufficiently confirmed by all the Arguments of the Second Head. Yet I may only hint at many other And prosecute them in this Order First I shall produce some Arguments from the Law of Nature Nations Secondly from the Common practice of all Christian people Thirdly from express Scriptures I. The Arguments of the first Class are very multifarious I shall reduce them to a few as Compendiously as may be and only give the strength of them in a Syllogistical forme without expatiating save where the matters requires 1. The greatest Antagonists of this Truth through the clearness thereof are forced to assert grant such particulars as will by Consequence justify this plea. 1. Barclay contra Monarchum is cited by the Apol. Relat. and Ius Populi asserting that if a King will alienate subject his Kingdom without his Subjects consent or be carried with a hostile mind to the destruction of his people his Kingdom is actually lost and the people may not only Lawfully resist but also depose him Grotius de jure belli lib. 1. cap. 4. asserts the same and adds if he but attempt to do so he may be resisted The Surveyer of Napâ—tali grants the same pag. 23 24. Yea this hath been granted in open Court by the Council of Scotland that in case of the Kings alienating his Kingdoms he may be Resisted Hence 1 If vendition or alienation of Kingdoms or attempts of it do annull a Kings Authority Then an alienation of them from Christ to whom they are devoted by Covenant and selling them to Antichrist as is attempted by this King gives the people a right to Resist him But the former is here conceded Ergo 2 We need say no more to apply the other that carrying a hostile mind to the destruction of the people does forfeit his Kingdom and gives the people right to Resist than that a Papist is alwise known to carry a hostile mind to the destruction of Protestants and all the designs declared these 27 years have been demonstrative efforts of it 2. Dr Ferne acknowledgeth that personal defence is Lawful against the sudden illegal inevitable assaults of the Kings Messengers or of himself in so far as to ward off his blowes or hold his hands As also he alloweth private persons Libertie to deny subsidies tribute to the Prince when he imployeth it to the destruction of the Commonwealth Hence 1 If one man may defend himself against the sudden illegal inevitable assaults of the King or his Messengers Then may many men in defence of their Lives Liberties defend themselves against the surprising Massacres the sudden assaults and much more the devised deliberate assaults of a Tyrants bloody Emissaries which are illegal inevitable as all their furious bloody on-sets have been But the former is here acknowledged Ergo 2 If people may deny subsidies to a King when he employeth it to the destruction of the Commonwealth Then as this justifies the denyal of the Cess imposed for destruction of the Church banishing of the Gospel So this gives them right to Resist him for if he be the power ordained of God not to be resisted then for this Cause tribute must be paid for they are Gods Ministers Rom. 13. 6. and if tribute must not be paid then he is not the power ordained of God and so may be resisted But the former is here allowed Ergo 3. Bodin de Repub. lib. 2. cap. 5. granteth if a King turn Tyrant he may Lawfully at his subjects request be invaded resisted condemned or slain by a foraign Prince Hence if foraign Princes may Lawfully help a people oppressed by their oun Soveraign then people may Resist themselves if they be able and hold in their pains But the former is here granted Ergo The Consequence cannot be denyed for foraigners have no more Power or Authority over another Soveraign then the people have themselves 4. Arnisaeus de Author Princip c. 2. n. 10 granteth that if the Prince proceed extrajudicially without order of Law by violence every private man hath power to resist So the Surveyer of Naphtali ubi supra grants so much of a womans violent resisting attempts against the honour of her chastitie and tending to ensnare her in sin whereof her non-resistence makes her guilty Hence 1 If every extrajudicial violence of a Prince may be Resisted Then also all Contrajudicial violence against Law or reason must be opposed for that is more grievous and all their violences wherein they do not act as Judges must be resisted and that is all together for in none of them they can act as Judges But the former is here granted Ergo 2 If a woman may defend her Chastity against the K. lest her non-resistence make her guilty Oh if all women had been of this mind the Country would not have been pestered so with the Kings bastards Then may a Nation or any part of it Resist a Tyrants attempts upon the honour of their Religion entycing them to fornication with the Mother of harlots lest their non-resistence make them guilty But the former is here yeelded Ergo 5. That same Arnisaeus cap. 4. saith Of the former to wit he who is called a Tyrant in title it is determined by all without any difficultie that he may be Lawfully repulsed or if by force he be gotten into the Throne he may warrantably be thence removed because he hath not any Jot of power which
greatest power be Resisted rather than the Universal Common-wealth suffer hurt But the former is true for that dictates the necessity of the distracted father to be bound by his oun sons lest all the family be hurt Ergo the greatest of men or Kings when destructive to the Common-wealth must be Resisted for he is but one man so but particular nature 6. That which is irrational and reflects upon Providence as puting men in a worse condition then Brutes is absurd and contrary to the Law of Nature But to say that the Brutes have power to defend themselves by resisting what annoyes them and deny this power to men is irrational and reflects upon Providence as puting men in a worse condition than Brutes Therefore it is absurd contrary to the Law of Nature 3. From the Institution of Government I may argue thus That power and Government which is not of God may be Resisted The Tyrants power Government in overturning Laws subverting Religion bringing in Idolatry oppressing Subjects is not of God Ergo it may be Resisted The Major is clear because that is only the reason why he is not to be resisted because the Ordinance of God is not to be resisted Rom. 13. 2. But they that resist a man destroying all the Interests of mankind overturning Laws subverting Religion c. do not resist the Ordinance of God. And if it were not so this would tend irremedilessly to overthrow all Policies and open a gap to all disorder injustice cruelty and would give as great encouragment to Tyrants to do what they lift as thieves would be encouraged if they knew no body would resist them or bring them to punishment 4. From the Original Constitution of Government by men It may be argued thus If people at the first erection of Government acted rationally and did not put themselves in a worse case than before wherein it was Lawful to defend themselves against all injuries but devolved their rights upon the fiduuciary Tutory of such as should remain still in the rank of men that can do wrong who had no power but by their gift consent choice with whom they associated not to their detriment but for their advantage and determined the form of their Government and time of its continuance and in what cases they might recur to their primeve Liberty and settled a succession to have Course not jure hereditario but jure vi legis for good ends Then they did not give away their birth-right of self defence and power of resistence which they had before to withstand the violence injuries oppressions of the men they set over them when they pervert the form and convert it to Tyranny but did retain a power priviledge to resist and revolt from them and repell their violence when they should do violence to the Constitution and pervert the ends thereof But the former is true Ergo The Minor is cleared Head. 2. And the Connexion is confirmed from this if the Estates of a Kingdom give the power to a King it is their oun power in the fountain and if they give it for their oun good they have power to judge when it is used against themselves and for their evil and so power to limit resist the power that they gave 5. From the way manner of erecting Governours by Compact the necessity whereof is proven Head. 2. Many arguments might be deduced I shall reduce them to this form If people must propose Conditions unto Princes to be by them acquiesced in submitted unto at their Admission to the Government which thereupon becomes the fundamental Laws of the Government and Securities for the peoples rights Liberties giving a Law Claim to the people to pursue the Prince in case of faiâ—ing in the main principal thing Covenanted as their oun Covenanted Mandatarius who hath no Ius or Authority of his oun but what he hath from them and no more power but what is contained in the Conditions upon which he undertaketh the Government Then when either an Usurper will come under no such conditions or a Tyrant doth break all these conditions which he once accepted and so become stricto jure no Prince and the people be stricto jure Liberated from subjection to him they may must Defend themselves and their fundamental Rights Priviledges Religion Laws and Resist the Tyanny overturning them But the former is true Ergo The Connexion is clear And the Minor is proved Head. 2. And at length demonstrated and applied to the Government of Charles the Second by Ius Populi cap. 6. See Arg. 4. 5. Head. 2. 6. From the Nature of Magistracy it may be argued thus That power which is properly neither Parental nor Marital nor Masterly Despotick over the Subjects Persons goods but only fiduciary and by way of trust is more to be Resisted than that which is properly so But that power which is properly so that is Parental power and Marital and Masterly may be Resisted in many cases Ergo that power which is not so properly but only fiduciary is more to be Resisted That a Kings power over his subjects is neither Parental nor Marital c. is proven Head. 2. And the Major needs no Probation The Minor is clear by Instances 1. If Children may in case of necessity resist the fury of their father seeking to destroy them then must private subjects Resist the rage Tyranny of Princes seeking to destroy them and what is dearest to them for there is no stricter obligation Moral between King people than between Parents Children nor so strict and between Tyrants people there is none at all But the former cannot be denyed Ergo 2. If Wives may Lawfully defend themselves against the unjust violence of enraged Husbands then must private subjects have power to Resist the furious assaults of enraged Tyrants for there is not so great a tye betwixt them and people as between man wife yea there is none at all But the former is true Ergo 3. If Servants may defend themselves against their Masters then must private subjects defend themselves against a Tyrant or his Emissaries But the former is true Ergo 4. If the Kings power be only fiduciary and by way of Paun which he hath got to keep then when that power is manifestly abused to the hurt of them that entrusted him with it he ought to be Resisted by all whom he undertook to protect But the former is true Ergo the latter 7. From in the Limited power of Princes it may be thus argued If Princes be limited by Laws Contracts and may be resisted by Plea's in Law and have no absolute power to do command what they will but must be limited both by the Laws of God and man and cannot make what Laws they will in prejudice of the peoples Rights nor execute the Laws made according to their pleasure nor conser on others a
Maximus who was come against them with an Army because of their Religion 3. How about the year 342. the Citizens of Alexandria defended Athanasius their Minister against Gregorius the intruded Curate and Syrianus the Emperours Captain who came with great force to put him in 4. How about the year 356. the people of Constantinople did in like manner stand to the defence of Paulus against Constantius the Emperour and killed his Captain Hermogenes And afterwards in great Multitudes they opposed the intrusion of the Heretick Macedonius 5. How when a wicked Edict was sent forth to pull doun the Churches of such as were for the Clause of one Substance the Christians that maintained that Testimony resisted the bands of Souldiers that were procured at the Emperours Command by Macedonius to force the Mantinians to embrace the Arrian Heresie But the Christians at Mantinium kindled with an earnest zeal towards Christian Religion went against the Souldiers with Cheerful minds valiant Courage and made a great slaughter of them 6. How about the year 387. the people of Cesarea did defend Basil their Minister 7. How for fear of the people the Lievtenant of the Emperour Valens durst not execute those 80 Priests who had came to supplicate the Emperour and were commanded to be killed by him 8. How the Inhabitants of Mount Nitria espoused Cyrilâ—s quarrel and assaulted the Lievtenant and forced his Guards to flee 9. How about the year 404. when the Emperour had banished Chrysostome the people flocked together so that the Emperour was necessitated to call him back again from his Exile 10. How the people resisted also the transportation of Ambrose by the command of Valentinian the Emperour And chused rather to lose their lives than to suffer their pastor to be taken away by the Souldiers 11. How the Christians oppressed by Baratanes King of Persia did flee to the Romans to seek their help And Theodosius the Emperour is much praised for the war which he commenced against Chosroes King of Persia upon this inducement that that King sought to ruine exstirpate those Christians in his Dominions that would not renounce the Gospel 3. But when Religion was once imbraced in imbodyed Corporations and established by Law and became a peoples common Interest Liberty in a Capacity to defend it with their lives other Liberties and when it was propagated through the Nations Then the Lord did call for other more Active Testimonies in the preservation defence of it Of which we have many Instances in Histories About the year 894. The Bohemian Christians Resisted Drahomica their Queen who thought to have destroyed them reintroduced Paganisme About the year 1420. they maintained a long defensive war against the Government and the Popes Legats under the managment of their brave Captain Zizca which was further prosecuted after him by the remaining Thaborites And again in this Century anno 1618. They maintained a Defensive war against the Emperour Ferdinand the Second electing and erecting a new King in opposition to him Frederick Palatine of the Rhine in which Cause many received the Crown of Martyrdom and this was also espoused by King Iames the 6. who sent to aid his Son in Law against the Emperour 4. If we look to the Histories of the Waldenses these constant Opposers of Antichrist we will find many Instances of their Resistence About the year 1194. very early while Waldo from whom they had their name was alive they began to defend themselves by Armes after the bloody Edict of Aldephonsus King of Arragon an Edict so like to many of ours emitted this day that as it would seem our Enemies have taken the Copy of it so it were very seemly for the people grieved with such Edicts to imitate the Copy of the Waldenses their practice in opposition to them Anno 1488. they resist by Armes Albert de Capitaneis sent by Pope Innocent the 8. in Pragola Frassaniere and through out Piedmont where for the most part the off-spring of the old Waldenses had their residence where very evidently through many successions of ages they shewed themselves to be the true Successors of their Worthy Progenitors valiant for the Truth That 's a famous Instance of their Resistence in opposing vigorously the Lord of Trinity in that same Piedmont at which time they so solemnly asked their Ministers Whether it were not Lawful to defend themselves against his violence Who answered affirmatively And accordingly they did it with wonderful success at that time and many times thereafter Especially it is notour in the memory of this present age how anno 1655. a vigorous defensive war was prosecuted against the D. Savoy by their Captains Gianavel Iahier c. which was espoused by many Protestant Princes And no further gone than the very last year it is known how they resisted the Armes of the Tyger and the French that helped him and that their Simplicity in trusting Popish promises was their ruine 5. If we look over the Histories of the Albigenses we find many Instances of their Defensive Resisting their Oppressing Superiours About anno 1200. They defended themselves at Beziers and Carcasson against the Popes Legat and his Crossed Souldiers under the Conduct first of the Earle of Beziers and then of the Earle of Foix and Earle Remand of Thoulouse and were helped by the English who then possessed Guienne bordering upon Thoulouse which resistence continued several years Afterwards anno 1226. they maintained a Resistence against the King of France 6. In Spain we find the people of Arragon contesting with Alphonso 3 d. and associating themselves together against him And they tell Pedro 3 d. their King that if he would not contain himself within the limits of the Laws they would pursue him by Armes about anno 1283. As also other Spaniards who rose in Armes several times against Pedro the 1 King of Castile 7. It was this which brought the Cantons of Helvetia into this State of freedom wherein they have continued many years For about the year 1260. they levied war against their oppressing nobles And anno 1308. they joined in Covenant to defend themselves against the house of Austria and anno 1315. they renewed it at Brunna in which at length the rest of the Cantons joined and formed themselves into a Common-wealth 8. If we take a glance of the Germans we will find at the very Commencement of the Reformation as soon as they got the name of Protestants they Resisted the Emperour Charles the fifth The Duke of Saxon the Land Grave of Hesse and the City of Magdâ—burgh with Advice of Lawyers concluded That the Laws of the Empire permitted Resistence of the Emperour in some cases that the times were then so dangerous that the very force of Conscience did lead them to Armes and to make a League to defend themselves though Caesar or any in his name should make war against them for since he attempteth to root out Religion and subvert our
Liberties he giveth us cause enough to resist him with a good conscience The matter standing as it doth we may say they Resist as may be shewed both by Sacred Profane Histories And so they undertooke and stated the war upon the account of Religion Liberty 9. If we but cast an eye over to the Hollanders we will find how much they stand obliged to this practice of Defensive Armes having thereby recovered both Religion Liberty and established themselves into a fiourishing State. We find even in the time of D. de Alva's Persecution they began to defend Haerlem and Valenciennes in Henault and went on till under the conduct of William of Nassaw Prince of Orange they declared the King of Spain to have fallen from the Government of those Countries and so effectually shook off the yoke of Spanish Tyrannie 10. If we go to the French Hugenots we will find many Instances among them and many brave Heroes raised up to maintain the principle and prosecute the practice thereof of older later date The History of the Civil wars of France is stored with their Trophees and the Memories of Condie Coligni will ever be fragrant There were many Resistences there both before since the Parisian Massacre It is sad that the present Protestants there are so far degenerate from the Spirit of their Ancestors 11. The many practices of the Hungarians Resisting the encroachments of the house of Austria prove the same And when Mathias denyed the free exercise of Religion unto the Protestants of Austria they took up Armes in their oun defence and sent a Protestation unto the Estates of Hungarie requiring their Assistence conforme to their League And now this present war there founded upon this plea. 12. The Polonians have often times levied war against their Kings and we are furnished by Clark in his Martyrol with a late Instance of their Resistence against the Soveraign Powers at Lesita in Poland anno 1655. 13. The Danes Swedes have not been wanting for their parts in taking course with their Christierns Kings of that name whom they resisted punished And generally wherever the Reformation was received we find this principle espoused and the practice of it prosecuted Nay there hath been no Nation in the world but it will be found they have either resisted or killed Tyrants 14. The most Deserving Celebrated Monarchs in the world have espoused the quarrel of oppressed Subjects Not only such as Tamerlanc whose observable Saying is noted when he advanced against Bajazet I go sayes he to chastise his Tyrannie and to deliver the afflicted people And Philip Lewis of France who assisted the Barons of England against King Iohn And Charles the Great who upon this ground undertook a war against the Lombards in Italie But even Constantine the Great hath it recorded for his honour that he employed his power force against Lâ—cinius upon no other Motive but because he banished tortur'd destroyed those Christians in his Dominions that would not abandon their Religion And Q. Elizabeth is commended for assisting the Dutch to maintain their Religion by force when they could not enjoy it by favour And King Iames the 6. gave publick aid to the Protestants in Germany Bohemia against the Emperour Against whom also Gustavus Adolphus marched that he might deliver the oppressed Cities from the bondage that Ferdinand had brought them into Yea King Charles the first this mans Father pretended at least to help the Protestants in France at Ree and Rochel And though he himself was avowedly Resisted by the Parliaments of both Ringdoms yet he was forced to Declare in his Acts of Oblivion Pacification The Scots late taking up Armes against him in defence of their Religion Laws Priviledges to be no Treason nor Rebellion See Apol. Relat. Sect. 11. pag. 149. And thô the late Charles the Second condemned all the Risings of the people of Scotland for defence of Religion Liberty and their lives priviledges which his oun Tyrannie forced them into yet he justified the present Revolt of Heathens Mahumetan Subjects from the young King of Bantam in Iava Major in the East Indies who when he got the Government in his hands by his Fathers Resignation killed his subjects and caused them to be killed without any cause which was the reason of their revolt ftom him and defending the Father against the son This defensive war of these Subjects was justied by the said Charles in his sending Amunition c. for their relief These and many moe Instances that might be adduced are sufficient evidences of the Righteousness and Reason of such Resistences when the Greatest of Princes have undertakent he Patrocinie of them III. From Scripture-Proofs I shall but briefly gather some of the many that might be pressed which being put together to me seem impregnable I shall reduce them to these heads 1. I shall aduce some practices of the Lords people frequently reiterated never condemned alwayes approven confirming this Point 2. Some severe Reprehensions for their omission of this duty in the season thereof 3. Some promises both of Spiriting for the duty and of Countenancing it when undertaken 4. Some precepts commanding such Atchievments 5. Some prayers supplicating for them All which put together will make a strong Argument First For practices of this kind there is nothing more common in Scripture Historie 1. I shall begin at the first war that is recorded in the World wherein some loss fell to the Godly at first but afterwards by the virtue valour of their Brethren they were vindicated and the victory recovered with honour Lot his family living in Sodom was taken Prisoner by Chedarlaomer and his Confederates Gen. 14. 12. but Abraham hearing of it armed his trained servants and pursued them to Dan and rescued him vers 14-16 thereby justifying that Rebellion of the Cities of the plain by taking part vindicating the Rebells Hence he that may rescue subjects from the violence of any Tyrannizing Domination by armes may also rise with these subjects to oppose that violence But here is an example of that in Abraham Ergo 2. After the Lords people were possessed of Canaan and forgetting the Lord did enter into affinity with these interdicted Nations some of them were left to prove Israel that the Generations of the Children of Israel might know to teach them war. Iudg. 3. 1 2. And when they did evil in the sight of the Lord He sold them into the hand of Chushan-rishathaim King of Mesopotamia whom they served and were subject to eight years ver 8. but when they cried unto the Lord their Rebellion shaking off that yoke was successful under the Conduct of Othniel ver 10. And after a relapse unto the like defection they became subject to Eglon King of Moab whom they served eighteen years vers 14. but attempting the same remedy by armes under the Conduct of Ehud they recovered their Liberty And after his
or personal injuries it is Murder For the affection intention doth make one and the same action of taking away the life homicide or no homicide as Lex Rex saith Quest. 31. Pag. 338. If a man out of hatred deliberately take away another mans life he is a Murtherer eatenus but if that same man had taken away the others life by the flying off of his axe head he neither hating him before nor intending to hurt him he is no Murtherer by Gods express Law allowing Cities of refuge for the one and not for the other Deut. 4. 42. Deut. 19. 4. c. private revenge is indignity to God whose it is to take vengeance Deut. 32. 35. Rom. 12. 19. Dearly beloved avenge not your selves for vengeance is the Lords For which cause Iacob curses Simeon Levi their Murder of the Schechemites for in their anger they slew a man Gen. 49. 6 7. So David would not put forth his hand against Saul for his oun private personal quarrel So Ioab killed Abner and Absalom Amnon But this doth not make the execution or Judgement out of zeal for God respect to Righteousness love to the Nations Interest and care to preserve the persecuted people of God from imminent destruction upon publick Enemies Incendiaries that are trampling upon all these precious Interests and threatening the utter ruine of them and in a particular manner their destruction who thus prevent them 9. Thô the motive or cause were upon a publick account yet it may be Murder to have a wrong End in it as either to intend simply the destruction of the person on whom they execute Judgement as the end to which all their Action is directed or to make their oun advantage or honour the end of the Action Thus David would not kill Saul because it might have been thought he did it to obtain the Kingdom of which he was rightfull successor And deservedly he punished the Amalekite that brought newes of his killing Saul and Baanah Rechab for their killing Ishbosheth thinking thereby to advance themselves at Davids Court. So also Ioab murdered Amasa to secure himself in the Generals place And Iehu though upon the matter he executed righteous Judgement his end was only himself it is condemned as murder But when the execution of righteous Judgement is both formally intended by the Actors and natively really doth conduce to the Glory of God the preservation of the Remnant threatened to be destroyed by these Murderers the suppressing of impiety doing of Justice turning away wrath and removing of present and preventing of future judgments then it may be duty Naph Pag. 23. Prior edit 10. Thô the end also were not culpable yet it may be Murder to kill Criminals by transgressing the sphere of our vocation and usurping upon the Magistrats sword for he by Office is a Revenger to execute wrath upon him that doth evil Rom. 13. 4. none must make use of the sword of vindictive Justice but he to whom the Lord giveth it therefore they that came to take Christ are condemned threatened for this Math. 26. 52. all they that take the sword shall perish with the sword The God of Order hath assigned to every man his station calling within the bounds whereof he should keep without transgressing by defect or excess let every man abide in the same calling wherein he was called 1 Cor. 7. 20. and study to be quiet and do his oun business 1 Thess. 4. 11. Therefore David would not kill Saul because he would have done it beside his calling And therefore the killing of Ioash and Amon was murder because the Assassines did transgress their vocation But when Notorious Incendiaries do not only transgress their vocation but the Limits of humane societie and turn open enemies to God man destroying the innocent making havock of the Lords heritage and vaunting of their villanies and boasting of their wickedness and thereby bringing wrath upon the Land if such effrontries of insolence should pass unpunished and when there is no Magistrate to do that work of Justice but all in that pâ—ace are airt part with them patrons defenders of them yea no Magistrate that can be acknowledged as a Minister of God to be applied unto in that case it is no a transgression of our vocation nor an Usurpation upon the Magistrats where there is none to endeavour to avert wrath by executing righteous Judgement Otherwise if for fear or suspicion of the accidental hazard of private mens Usurping the Office or doing of the duty of Publick persons every vertuous Action which may be abused shall be utterly neglected Impiety shall quickly gain Universal Empire to the extermination of all goodness Naph Pag. 24. Prior edit To clear this it must be considered that a mans calling is two fold his particular calling whereunto in the ordinary course of things he is regularly confined and his general calling not circumscribed by particular rules which from the common obligation of the end for which all callings are institute in the clear exigence of an extraordinary emergent according to the general rules of righteousness bind to an aggreeable practice Therefore circumstances may sometimes so diversitie Actions that what in the ordinary undisturbed state of things would be accounted an excess of our particular calling an Usurpation in an extraordinary occurrence may become a necessary duty of our general calling 11. Thô it were no Usurpation beyond our calling yet it may be murder to kill any without the Call of God in a case of necessity either in tuteâ—â vitae proximâ or though it be remotâ when the hazard is unavoidable Every thing must have Gods Call in its season to make it duty so also the time of killing Eccles. 3. 3. For want of this David would not kill Saul Lex Rex saith excellently to this Quest. 31. pag. 329 330. David might have killed Saul when he was sleeping and when he cut of the lap of his garment but it was unlawful for him to kill the Lords anointed as it is unlawful to kill a man because he is the image of God Gen. 9. 6. except in case of necessity David having Saul in his hand was in a remote posture of defence the unjust invasion then was not actual nor unavoidable nor a necessary mean in humane prudence for self preservation for King Saul was not in an actual pursuit of the whole Princes Elders Community of Israel Saul did but seek the life of one man David and that not for Religion or a National pretended offence and therefore he could not in conscience put hands on the Lords Anointed but if Saul had actually invaded David for his life David might in that case make use of Goliahs sword for he took not that weapon as a Cypher to boast Saul and rather kill then be killed Thus he By a Call here we do not mean an express or immediate Call from God such as the Prophets