that only occasionally and for a short space and yet were uncontrollable The Roman Empire though elective yet gave to the Emperours absolute Soveraignity And on the other hand we see many Kingdoms successive wherein nevertheless the Soveraignity is divided betwixt the King and the Estates so that your ground doth not hold As Grotius de jur belli l. 1. c. 3. § 11. in explication of that distinction aliud esse de re querere aliud de modo habendi doth fully cleare 3. Admitting the Crown of Boheme to be elective which yet you know in the competition betwixt Ferdinand and Frederick was much controverted and that the Estates do indeed share largely of the Soveraignity And further that they were the Authors of this resistance which also you ought to have alledged yet the opposition by them authorized upon the denying and with holding of the Chalice and undertaken upon the common and just grounds of defence considering the participation of power which our Estates before his Majesties restitution did constantly acclaim and oftentimes by themselves exercise this similitude of the cases doth only the more assimilate this instance to that of our last Reformation 4. Although the Hussites being numerous in Bohem and their provocation very injurious and intolerable the success of Zisca their Chieftain did in a little time draw the whole Estates of the Kingdom to appeare on that side yet it is apparent from History that the beginnings of these troubles were so far from being authorized by the Estates that they were rather occasional and as it were tumultuary upon the hindering of some Hussites in the town of Prague to celebrat the Lords Supper with their accustomed solemnities which the Hussites by force resisting it was from this spark that the flame kindling the party became to be headed by Zisca and he and they advanced breaking down Images and dissipating Cloisters until at length he contracted a just Army and strenuously stood to his defence and thereby obtained the concurrence of the Estates against Sigismond then both Emperour and upon Venceslaus his death become King of Boheme Now whether this was not a clear resistance of the people begun at least without the States against their Soveraign upon the account of Religion I remit it to your second thoughts But you say that Comenius gives but a slender character of Zisca and his business extolling him chiefly as a good souldier And I pray Sir what would you have him to say more beside that it is not Comenius his testimony but the practice of the Bohemians which upon your own appeal we are concerned to notice In the next place you tell us That the Iustifiers of the late Bohemian wars never run upon this strain of subjects resisting their Soveraign upon the account of Religion but upon the laws and liberties of that elective Kingdom I intreat you Sir to consider what you say That the injuries provoking to that war were the invasions made upon the Liberties of Religion formerly confirmed by Maximilianus and Rudolphus is notour and manifest Now if in this case they did aggravate the wrong not only from that liberty which is every where due to truth but from these royal concessions thereto superadded certainly this can make no disparity to our prejudice But if you mean that these Resisters had not only law for them as to the making out of the wrongs which they suffered but were in a legal capacity as being the States of the Kingdom to resist the invasions of their Prince I have already told you how much this if it were true would make for and not against us 2. You must consider that the opposition which gave the immediat occasion to the war 1618. and the war thereon ensuing did proceed from and was carried on only by the Religionis Bohemicae socii Ordines and not by the whole Ordines Regni which were partim Pâ—ntificii partim Religionis Bohemicae So that the share which the Estates of the Kingdom had of the Soveraignity in this case doth not assist you I grant that the Ordines Religionis Bohemicae at first prevailing seem thereafter to have attained to the whole power and so to have proceeded to the election of Frederick But the lawfulness of his election is not now the point in question You add Neither were the Protestants too well satisfied with the last Bohemian businesse And it is very like that the briskness of the first assaulâ— upon the King's Counsellers with other miscarriages in the progress of that businesse might possibly offend but can you thence infer that either these defensive wars were not undertaken for Religion or that on this account the Protestants did dislike them As for what you subjoin Yea K. James notwithstanding of his interest in the elected King was no way cordial for it He who desires a true account of King Iames his deportment in this affair how contrary to the inclination of all English Protestants the advice of his best Councellers and the earnest solicitation of Archbishop Abbot he strangely delayed to assist and in effect deserted both his Son in Law and the cause of the protestant Religion in that juncture may finde it at length in Mr. Rushworthâ—s collections But the truth is his Majestie in that particular was so possessed and captivat by a design or rather an humor that then overacted him toward a Spanish match not only in prejudice and to the ruine of his own Daughter and Son in Law his own and Englands honour and interest but contrary to his sounder opinion in â—â—vors of the French protestants necessitate to a resistance that if you had consulted the honour of his memory you had in this matter chosen to be silent Your third instance is adduced by your N. C. In these words But you know there was fighting in Germany upon the account of Religion To which you answere This showes how overly you read History when you bring this as a precedent And truly Sir I do conceive tâ—at the most overly reading may give so full and intire satisfaction as to this point that I exceedingly long to hear how your more accurat perusal will convel the evidence You say when Luther rose the Duke of Saxon moved of God did receive the reformation peaceablie into his principalities c. And what then as to the matter of defence But you adde that in the years 1524. and 1525. There arose a war in Germanie fomented by some troublesome Preachers as saith the Historian who pretended the liberty of the Gospel for their chief quarrel And this war of the Rusticks was again and again condemned by Luther as an execrable rebellion nay opposed and broken even by protestant Princes All the concludency of this passage on your part depends upon the supposition that this war of the Rusticks was by them necessarily ingaged into for defence of themselves and the true Religion against their persecuting Adversaries Which though you be bold enough
threatnings wherewith they are enforced and the suiteable execution ordinarily ensuing I almost marveile that the obvious connexion adequating the guilt and punishment doth not discover unto all this secondarie obligation incumbent to the people in its punished and therefore sinfull omission I know the Soveraignity of the most high the nothingnesse noughtinesse of all flesh in his sight will be alleaged sometime to justify the extent not only of his judgements but also of his threatnings beyond the desert of the formal expresse provocation whereby they are occasioned without the least shadow of unrighteousnesse But that I may forbear lanching forth unto that unsearchable deepth to recurre to these Mysteries when both the strain and reason of the exhortation do lye so faire for the obligaâ—ion pleaded is visibly to enervat the awâ— and dread of the Lords Commandments Do not alledge that to persuade this Subsidiarie call and engagement to Popular Reformations is not only to put tender Consciences upon the rack of a continual scrutinie into publick affaires but to draw them altogether out from the inward and most important duties of Christianitie unto an over-curious search and consequently a sinistrous jealousie of the actions of their Rulers of all practices the most pernicious both to Religion and Peace for as at best these are only the pretensions of men upon the other extreme sunke into themselves and wholly devoted unto their own ease so the very consideration of Mans Politique as well as private capacitie with the many incontroverted precepts and directioâ—s pertaining to it do necessarily hold on t a laudable Mediocrityâ— I have already told you that these exhortations do in the first place oblige every man to procure the trust of his own proper assignement and you cannot be more desirous then I am consentient that private men abstract from officious medling forbear presuming censures and render unto their Rulers with their due obedience all the honour esteem submission charitie and tendernesse that both their high dignitie insuperable infirmities and manifold temptations call for But as these duties have their proper limites in matters secular known and acknowledged by all so I am confident that to hold them illimited in matters of Religion no less privileged and defined by most certain and evident rules is a most manifest inconsequence either of Ignorance or Malice Then indeed is a Kingdom truely happy when all in their several Orbes do observe their proper motions about the same common Centre of the glory of God and good of the Publick without any other communication then that of benigne influences and due assistances and this though without the reach of hope ought not the lesse to be our wish and the patern of our endeavours and therefore in these inevitable jarrings whereunto we are subject the next remedie is certainly in the applications of Charitie first covering as much as is possible then by its gentle means of Intreatie and Counsel curing these disorders that cannot be hid but if the evil proceed to the endangering of the whole and all the more moderate courses become desperate As it were vain in that case to alleage mens visible and felt discoveries to be curiosities and jealousies so the extraordinary and resolute interpositions of the sounder part is assuredly the only probable safety of the Common-wealth To these grounds adduced from the Old Testament for Subjects their fighting for Religion and Popular Reformation I take leave to adde one more from the Apocrypha and that is the Example and Historie of the Maccabees I need not narrate the matter of fact how the King polluted the Sanctuarie and persecuted the poor People of the Jews unto a conformitie with his abominations and how Mattathias first resisted then killed the Kings Commissioner with the whole sequel of these warres all is evident upon record That it exactly quadrates to the case of our Controversie is apparent from the single proposal If you deny it it is your part and I am sure will prove your singular wit to shew a disparitie These ordinarily objected by the men of your opinion are either that Antiochus was not the Jews Lawfull King or that the opposition was made in the Spirit and under the dispensation of the Old Testament and is not approveable by the New As to the first Grotius thinks the contraire so clear from the plain phrase of the Books of the Maccabees wherein Antiochus is frequently termed the King that he addeth no further confirmation If this do not satisfie it may be considered that Antiochus his title to Jurie is not obnoxious to any particular exception which doth not equally implead his right to all his other Dominions for seeing the Land of Judah was first by the Lords gift Ier. 27. 6. 12. 16. 29. 2. Zedekiahs Covenant with Nebuchadnezar ratified and confirmed by the Lord whereby the Kingdome became base Ezek. 17. vers 12. to 22. 3. By right of Conquest upon the revolt Ier. 39. and 4. by Cyrus his restitution restoring the jews to their own Land Religion and Laws but only with a provinciat liberty as Ezek had prophesied and is most apparent from the Books of Ezrah and Nehemiah unquestionably an annexed part of the Babylonish Monarchie Antioc hus his clame to it and his whole Realme is evident by the same Nay though you could prove him an Usurper of the principal Monarchie as you cannot the violence of the first Conquest being by long Prescription and a faire succession wholly purged yet you must remember that that would not alâ—er the condition of the dependent Provinces nor render the Usurpers right as it respecteth them in the least debetable Let not the Law of the Kingdom delivered by Moses demurre your persuasion it excludes indeed a Forrainer from the Peoples free Election but doth no way limite the disposition of Divine Soveraignity As to the second objection made that the resistance of the Maccabees was Old Testamentaire and now antiquate seeing it hath no contingence either with the nature or reason of the things innovate by that change you cannot alledge it without expresse warrant which notwithstanding Grotius his attempt is yet undiscovered What your invention will further adde against this passage I cannot conjecture I know you think it marvellous dealing in your N. C. to tell you of the Law of Nature aud possibly may call it Monstruous for me to use the Apocrypha But not to trifle either with your quiblings or the respect that your Prelatick Church beareth to these Books when I consider that the Historie of these worthies is not only honourably pointed at by the Prophesie of Daniel cap. 11. 32. 33. But also appeares to be with applause commemorat by the Author to the Heb. chap. 11. 33 34. I look upon it as an Argument not more strongly founded in Reason then firmly established by the unite Testimony of both Testaments Here I might take notice of what you say of the New Testament viz. that its
prohibite to Gospel Ministers but the ground of your mistake is that Notwithstanding our Lord hath said of himself and his Ministers that one is your Master and all you are Brethren and fellow-servants among whom an inequality of gifts may well consist with an equality of condition Yet restess and most subtile Ambition for gratiâ—ying its evil lust will even in a plain opposition commanded alleage the affectation and not the thing it self to be discharged and in the low liest state of Service devise superior and inferior degrees The second thing is that though I be â—arre from denying humane infirmities incident to Ministers as well as others and do heartily wish that the of â—nces by them occasioned may be alwayes as the most hurtful to the Gospel most seriously precautioned and regreted Yet I am sure that without regard to our Lords most gracious gifting and most wise ordering of his Ministery for the feeding and ruling of his people to affirme that neverthelesse there is no order of men needs so much to be regulated is a presumptuous and vain imputation against Jesus Christ the Head and King of the Church and his Oeconomie Hath our Lord taken so great paines to Separate Instruct Sanctify and send forth Ministers and promised them so special a presence and assistance for the oversight and conduct of Believers and darre any Christian say that even the order it self for alas I grant the men are but earthen vessels needs more then any other the contrivance of mans invention for its regulation But let none that honoureth Jesus Christ or remembreth the former Beautie Order and Successe of his Ministrie and Courts amongst us be offended this reflection proceeds from the same Spirit that accused our great Master as a Rebell and Usurper and his Apostles as the Troublers and Subverters of the World As to your conclusion when you have disproved the Divine warrant of Presbytrie and shewed both its occasion rise tendencie and proper fruits to be only evil as I have done in the matter of Prelacie then you may equiparat them in the point of abuse but seing the abuse of Presbytrie is only accidental from humane infirmity and that of Prelacie its most native Genius and Product Naâ— seing Presbytrie is indeed the right use of the Churches Government and Prelacie its manifest depravation the maxime which you adduce in its just application doth most clearly say remove the abuse of Prelacie and let the use of Presbyterie be reâ—ained The fourth DIALOGUE Answered SIR since you have said nothing that I have not to my self and I hope to all rational and impartial men satisfyingly answered and seing I can say it in Gods sight that in all the matters hitherto treated I finde in my heart a serious desire to please him in all things and also to comply with his Church and obey the Laws of the Kingdom in what I judge agreeable to his will with as much distrust of my self and charity towards others as humane frailtie doth permit In this perswasion truely and by your own verdict conscientious without either noticing the pitiful shift of a blind conscience which you make your N C. pretend or charging you with that arrogance whereupon you make him weakly to exclaime I shall proceed to consider the grounds which in this place you lay down You say then Private persons have nothing to do with Government submission and not judging is their part I cannot stand to discusse all the ambiguities that may be latent in this General but it is strange 1. That the Government of Gods house â—or that is the point betwixt us should be instituted by him for the Edification and Salvation of private persons and his own Glory as you cannot deny and yet they to have nothing to do with it 2. You say Submission iâ— their dutie And would you have it blind and not rational and conscientious 3. Our Lord hath defined the Government of his Church and did establish the same among us engaging us thereinto by a perpetual Covenant is it then nothing of our concernment But may we breake these sacred tyes and abandone our selves to an implicite compliance with every humane invention I grant that private persons are neither under a righteous constitution to usurpe the part of the Governours nor yet under a sinful unlawfully to solicite and endeavour an alteration but as in the former case both Reason and Religion specially where an Oath hath interveened doth oblige to maintenance so in the latter I am assured that all active owning and approving the thing whereunto we are pressed beyond a providentiall acquiescence is utterly sinful If you require my reasons there is none like your own viz. first because I am perswaded that what ever may be the comparative innocencie of an erring but well-meaning opinion Yet of every Soul who hath seen the Glorious light and work of God in the Lands and engaged himself thereto by solemn Covenant and now of late hath broken these bonds and concurred to change Christs pure Ordinances and set up establish or countenance Prelacie and its wicked Hierarchie God will surely either in this life as we have already seen in the convictions of many or in the last and great Judgement openly require it 2. Because not only perjury manifestly ingredient in the active submission and compliance which you exact hath a plain and direct tendencie to the blotting of the Soul but as the Gospel and all its Ordinances are designed to purify the heart So this of Government so clearly therein appointed and of so necessaire and effectual influence for the conserving of truth edifying of the body of Christ and perfecting of the Saints doth undeniably contribute to the same end And by these two easie rules it is whereby I heartily wish that both you and I and all men may examine our Consciencâ—s In the next place you tell your N. C. That we have no rationall ground to think you wrong in Matters of Religion do you then think that obedience to the Lords Command against swearing falsely and adhering to and owning the Kingdom and Ordinances of Jesus Christ are no Matters of Religion or have you already answered the full and just account that I have given of our differences But supposing there may be error on your side you adde that unless the error be of greater importance then the Communion of Saints is it ought not to unty the bond of the unity of the Catholick Church This is the rule which you gave us before in your first Dialogue and therefore I shall say little to it only if your meaning be that except the conjunction with the erring partie be of greater prejudice then separation upon that account we ought not to unty the unitie of the Church I willingly assent but if there be any other latent sense in your strange weighing the import of error with an article of Faith things quite opposite without all communication of degrees when
these corruptions and superstitious practices whereunto in a convenient compliance with the present course you cunningly endeavour to subjecte us you make you N. C. preface That there is no good to be hoped from you who are so fierce against us and to add with little serious reverence but God be thanked an ill-willed Cow hath short hornes Whence taking the occasion you tell us of your extreme aversion from fierce and violent courses your love to all Christians your pitie of such as you judge mistaken and that you quarrel with no man for his opinion in these lesser matters Which are but the skirts and suburbs of Religion and so forth Sir if Censure were either my Genius or office how easie were it for me to strip both you and your partie of this your sheeps clothing We have heard in the preceeding Dialogues your frequent accusations of Rebellion and Faction your virulent calumnies of the most inhumane unnatural and barbarous Wickedness that can be paralleled your insolent mockeries at fancied mistakes and lastly all that hath preceeded a continual quarrel about these things which you call lesser matters and all this against the generality nay against the whole of the Godly and sober in the Land but especially the Lords faithful and suffering Ministers and yet you have the boldnes to wipe your mouth and make a boast of your singular gentlenes Christian love compassion upon them that are out of the way and tender forbearance toward dissenters in lesser things But I have already medled too far in this concention only as I would not have men mistaken concerning you so for preventing of their mistake of us from your N. C. suggestion I assure you plainly that though any man may affirme without fear of a contradiction that the Prelatick Spirit mingled in the midst of you is irreligious false fierce jealous cruell covetous and proud and in these few years bygone hath less or more appeared in all these evill qualities yet as the seen fury folly and prophanitie of your Bishops and Curates and a secret conviction in all men of the consistencie of true Loyalty with the Countreys just aversion from them may in politick prudence induce our Governours to restrain some what of the rage of that Partie which we are thankfully to acknowledge so it is our Prayer to God that he would lead them on to a full and just consideration of the true causes of all our grievances and to serious repentance and returning unto God who alone with truth can restore unto us true peace and establishment You subjoine here the late King's advice of Moderation to his Son who now reigneth and would forsooth have us to beleeve that his words to express both your opinion and temper and really though I cannot altogether acquit their strain of prejudice nor carrie their designe higher then the ends of Policie yet they contain so much of sound reason and the later part of them viz. take heed that outward circumstances and formalities of Religion devour not all or the best encouragements of Learning Industrie and Pietie is so sadly verified in the present condition of affaires that I cannot but with wonder reflect how such a rational instruction taught to the Author by long and costly experience should at his Majesties return have been so much neglected and even to this day after so visible an accomplishment so little remembred But the use you make of this passage is only to bewray your N. C. childishnesse and shew a little of your own affectation by causing him first to say It seems you are a Latitudinarian and then by your answering that if by latitude be meant charity you glory in it but as I have already demonstrat in the second Dialogue that it is conveniencie more then sincerity which relaxes and dilates your charity and as it is too too evident that it is the love of Peace more then of Truth which doth recommend men to the favour of your good opinion so I would have you to consider that rectitude and not latitude is the measure and character of the wayes of God Nay when I remember our Lord's words Enter ye in at the strait gate for wide is the gate and broad is the way that leadeth to destruction but strait is the gate and narrow is the way that leadeth unto life The fairest gloss whereof your latitude is capable cannot reconcile me to the designation It is therefore in the streightness yea and straitnes of this Rule and in the practice of the new commandement of Love that you may truly glory but only in the Lord The assuming of Names other then that of Christian is but an emptie vanity and that of latitude is so little expressive of pure Christian charity that you see it is the very Gospel-epithet of the broad way of damnation In the next place taking as it appears with this new name of Latitudinarian for all your disowning of it within a few lines preceeding you and your N. C. together playing to others hands compound a prettie garland of praises for your self and complices And where he acknowledgeth That you live very good lives are strong witted People sound against Socinianisme clear and free from Popish errors you add on your part That your principles are neither dangerous nor loose that there are none greater haters of and enemies to Atheisme that you give a rational and convincing account of Christianity to all clear witted men that with a due measure of Charity for Papists and regard to the union of the Catholick Church you disclame all errors and give a most clear and scriptural account of the points debateable and lastly that even where the attributes of Gods soveraignity and goodness seem to interfere by faith you stope the mouth of weak reason Certainly then the men of the latitude are sound and orthodox men nay no doubt but ye are the people and wisdome shal die with you Yet if I might a little search you out I would demand 1. Why you thus distinctly characterize your self under a peculiar name for that you do not understand these Epithets of all your partie nay not of your Bishops and most of your Curates is evident even from the first whereby you assert that you live very good lives which I am certain many of them do not so much as pretend to 2. If the principles of you Latitudinarians be the same that we have set down in the preceeding Dialogues viz. that preaching is not to be termed the Word of God and consequently that Ministers are not his Messengers that the Church and we know not what Church may antiquat and cause to cease the obligation of practices such as the washing of feet and anointing the sick with oil though as punctually and perpetually enjoined in the Scripture as either of the Sacraments that Christs Kingdome is so inward and spiritual that Offices and Officers can no more be thence pleaded for in the Church then the stamping
the Count of Tholouse was a Peer of France and by Hugo Capetus constitution Peers were rather Vassals then Subjects It is answered ne ultra crepidam if Peers be Vassals as they are indeed being such Peers among themselves only and not with the King that therefore they are of all the most strictly oblidged subjects is notour to all that know the fidelity and gratitude which Vassallage doth import so that whatever priviledge their Peerage may give them over their inferiours yet that in order to their Soveraign and Liedge Lord they are in every respect subjects is uncontroverted But why should I spend time on your triflings Admitting that the Waldenses in this war had not so directly and immediatly resisted the King their Soveraign as not being their direct and immediate Persecutor have we therefore no advantage from this passage And are there not many other precedents in the History of that people which do fully and exactly infer our conclusion And as to the first do we not at least finde even in your own concession the Waldenses persecute for Religion standing to their own defence Now if once you allow to Religion the common priviledge of a defensive resistance the main strength of your arguments founded upon a pretended singularity in the cause of Religion as disowning forsooth all resistance and in a special manner astricted to suffering both by Gospell precept and primitive practice is thereby dissolved and removed I may not here insist on this subject But once for all let me demand you may not Religion be defended aswell as other rights and interests If you say it may but neither that nor any other against the invasion and persecution of the King and soveraign Power This is indeed a consequent but so destitute of all reason that as there is scarce a man in the world so stupid or debauched by flattery that will not in some suppositions grant the lawfulness of resistance so the most precious import of Religion and the atrocity of the injuries whereby it useth to be persecute can not but render it the first and most favourable of all excepted cases But if you say it may not then whether is it your meaning that it may not at all be defended either against Superior equall or inferior And certainly the Scripture and also many of the primitive instances abused to prostrate Religion unto tyranny do seem to run in this latitude without insinuating any distinction so that this generality being manifestly absurd doth of necessity evince them to have an other meaning and to be nothing conclusive to your purpose Or do you understand that in this the cause of Religion is singular that though against persecuting inferiors or equals Religion aswell as other rights doth permit defence yet against the Powers over us it is subject to a special restraint Assigne me for this speciality but any colourable pretext cris mihi magnus Apollo That the Gospel precepts Resist not evill Turn your cheek to the smiter Love your enemies c. Have their holy and Christian use of patience and godliness for all manner of injuries from whatsoâ—ever hand And that these other commands of subjection non-resistance honour and obedience to Kings and all in Authority have also their righteous influence of determining in every occasion our due compliance and submission without the least vestige either in all or any of the places of injoining a singular subjection to Powers persecuting for Religion is obviously evident What speciality you will gather from primitive practices the general mistakes that we find in their opinions as we may understand from Ambrose and Augustine condemning private defence even against Robbers ne dum salutem defendit pietatem contaminet may give us a satisfying conjecture From all which we may assuredly conclude that seing Religion doth lay no speciall prohibition of resistanceâ— in order to Superiors upon Subjects by them persecuted and that the above-written passage of the Waldenses doth at least evince that in other cases it hath the common priviledge your inferring of specâ—al consequences in favours of the Powers from abused generalls is but a politick improving of your lies unto base and selfish flattery Now as to other examples that may be found among the Waldenses Pray Sir was this the only passage in all that History which you conceived did favour our cause or was you loth to follow them over the Alpes unto the valleys of Piemont to meet with instances which indeed you have reason to think can only be best answered by concealing them in the obscurities of the places where acted And really this omission is so grosly supine that you must pardon me to think it designed However the History that I referre you to for a full and particular account aswell of the faith stedfastness and simplicicy of these Waldenses in Piemont as of their many and great persecutions by their own Rulers and Princes and their just and frequent oppositions made against them particularly from the year 1540 to the year 1561. And how in the year 1571 they entered into a League of mutual assistance and from that year did undergo many vicissitudes sometimes of peace and quiet then of cruell and barbarous persecutions wherein they testified great constancy and patience and sometimes of necessary defensive resistances wherein they witnessed no less uprightnesse and courage even until the year 1658 wherein the narration terminates is that of the Evangelical Churches in the valleys of Piemont very faithfully and acuratly collected and written by Mr Morland Where I am confident every ingenuous person will finde the case of defence for the cause of Religion against persecuting Rulers so justly stated so tenderly and submissively proceeded into and lastly so singly and moderatly prosecuted and that not only once or twice but often that as he will be thereby greatly confirmed in the righteousness of this practice so he can not but observe the inexcusable omission of your silence The next instance which you undertake to vindicate is that of the Bohemians under Zisca their fighting and resisting when the chalice was denyed them And for answere to this you bid us consider that the Crown of Boheme is elective in which case certainly the States of a Kingdom share more largely of the Soveraign power But 1. You hereby plainly acknowledge that Religion is not indefendible except by meer subjects against their Soveraign So that again we see it is not from the cause of Religion but from the quality of the persons that you foolishly go about to exclude Religion from defence which yet notwithstanding in several excepted cases all inferior to that of persecution is to subjects against their oppressing Princes by all almost allowed 2. That the States of a Kingdom share more largely of the soveraign Power in an elective then in a successive Kingdom hath no proper dependence upon the way of election but is thereto meerly accidental the Dictators in free Rome were elected and
by the Protestant and Popish Cantons with many other letters and declarations is but one evidence and that irrefragable against you What impudence is this then whereinto you are hardened But the Electors of Cullen amd the Palatine both Protestants lay neuters And what then Do we not know how rare a things it is in a time of danger for all concerned to unite even in the most uncontroverted duties Beside the Elector of Cullen was then recently deposed and excommunicate and his people specially his principal Clergie and he at great variance for the Reformation by him intended And the Palatine inclining to favoure in effect aiding the Princes with 400 horse was by the evil success of the war forced to retreat and excuse himselfe Next you adde That the Elector of Brandenburg and Maurice of Saxe armed for the Emperour And I grant That Albertus Ioannes Brandenburgici quanquam erant religionis Ioannes quidem etiam foederis Protestantium tamen quod Caesar non propter Râ—ligionem sed quorundam rebellionis ulciscendae causa belluâ— sucsipi diceret suam illi operam addixisse But as their resting upon Caesar's assertion and promise for the security of Religion was by all the circumstances of that war declared to be but an emptie pretext so Iohn's breach of faith in this his ingagement can as little be denyed as his relation of Son in law to Henrie of Brunswick then detained captive by the Langrave seemes to have been his great motive However it is certain that the Elector of Brâ—ndenburg for whom it is like that in your heedless way you take one of his above mentioned Brothers did stand off neuter endeavouring rather to mediate as the History testifies and we may see by his interposing betwixt the Elector of Saxe and Maurice at the seige of Lipsick As for Maurice his part it was indeed foulest and deservedly condemned by all equal Judges But seeing you can adduce no other argumeâ—ts for your pretended vindication then undeniable wrong and perfidy the truth and righteousness of that defensive war on the Princes their part against the Emperour needeth not my further patrociny And yet As if you had said something to purpose you have the boldness to conclude in these words So you may see what pitiâ—ul Hisâ—orians they are who alledge the precedent of Germany O os durum Who would not Laugh at such excessive confidence above the excuse of all possible ignorance The fourth instance which you go about to cleare is that of Sweden and you say That King Gustavus with the States of that Kingdome did in the Year 1524. peaceably receive the Reformation and who would not wish that Religion and Reformation might have had the same fate every where Neither were there any broils about it till after seventy years that Sigismond King of Polland the Son of their former King and therefore by them acknowledged though a Papist was by force entering the Kingdome resolving to root out the Protestant Religion Whereupon they deposed him no strange thing in the Sweedish History that being before an Elective Crown and but newly then become hereditary and the States still retaining the supreme Authority Sir I must confess that this is a passage whereunto I can make no reply your undertaking was to convince us by undeniable evidence of History of the falshood of that vuâ—gar error That the Reformation was carried on that is maintained as I have before shewed by resistance and here you give us an instance of a Kingdome not only resisting but deposing their King because of his invading of Religion Which in place of a vindication is a full and plain concession For as to what you insinuate that that Crown had been a little before Elective I told you upon the instance of Boheme that though it had been even for the time Elective yet it could not make for you much less when you acknowledge that then for as for your own or the Printers escape referring the change to the Year 1644. I urge it not it was become successive And where you alledge that the States did still retain the Supreme Authority if you understand it otherwayes then according to that power and priviledge which appertains to our Parliaments it is only your own fiction But you subjoyne that If this serve not to vindicat the Sweds at least the Reformation was not introduced by wars among them And pray Sir who of us did ever defend such a practice To introduce and to maintain are things so different that they can not be fairly confounded The last shift you make is That the actions of that state were never looked upon as a precedent to others But if so why then do you mention them and if they be indeed a precedent certainly it is hard to determine whether you be more false in your general assertion anent the establishing of the Reformation or ridiculous in this part of your vindication The fift instance you mention is That Denmark received the Reformation peaceably But seing this hypothese excluds the question controverted anent the maintenance of Religion by armes not casible without the antecedent violence It is evident that it is rather transiently then pertinently by you adduced The sixt instance is tabled by your N. C. thus But you cannot deny there was force used in Helvetia and Geneve Aâ—d to this you answere both in the manner and termes of your accustomed vanity That this shewes what a superficial Reader of History your N. C. is And then you tell us Tâ—at Zurich received the Reformation peaceably but being maligned by the other Cantons and by them injured at the Popes instigation it broke out into a civil war purely defensive upon Zuriches part Likeas the Cantons are not subject to one another but free States only united in a League It is answered that here upon the account of Religion there was force used in Helvetia is clear from your own narration How then do you taxe your N. C. for this allegeance as a superficial Reader of History As for that that it was used by one associat against another and not by subjects against their superior it is only accidental from the condition of these Cantons the other circumstances of that war And seing that neither the Gospel nor Reason do lay any special restraint upon subjects in case of their Superiors intolerable persecution because of Religion as I have already shewed this precedent is no small confirmation of the practices by us maintained 2. I must tell you further that this war on Zuriches part was not so purely defensive as you give it out in asmuch as it is certain from Sleidan 4. and 8. Books that the provoking injuries were for the most part committed upon their citizens without their territories and the first act of hostility by the interclusion of passages was done by these of Zurich so that although their guards were indeed surprised yet dating the war from the hostile interclusion
King 's pretending to an arbitrary and absolute disposal of these previleges thus granted to be an injurious invasion and usurpation Yet in order to the Church and her rights and immunities they are not ashamed to cut off â—o even and just a parallel and deny so evident a consequence in behalf of her righteous liberty But wisdome is justified of her children And how much were it to be wished that at the least the children of light were as wise as the children of this world are in their generation 3. Beside the invasion threatened to the Church in its power of administration and the usurpation from the Church of the power of Government which this Supremacy imports it further attributes to the Prince according to our Parliaments late explication an illimited power in matters of Religion proper and reserved to God alone To enact whatever a man thinketh fit in Ecclesiastick meetings and maâ—â—ers I am certain is that which the Lord did never allow to any meer man under heaven and yet that this power is assumed and how by vertue thereof old unwarrantable superstitions have been retained new rites and ceremonies in Divine Worship devised and Churches turned and overturned according to mens pleasure is sufficiently known without my condescendence And therefore seing the King by vertue of his Supremacy doth not only intermedle by giving his civill sanction and confirmation to the intrinseck powers of the Church by you mentioned as you do allege or by acts imperate as others in contradistinction to elicite acts in these matters doe use to express it but doth lay claime to an absolute power in and over all Church-matters and persons the filly pretense whereby you go about to smooth it is not worthie of any mans notice In the next place you tell us of some explications provided for removing of the scruples which the generality of the words of the oath of Supremacy might suggest And to this it may suffice for answer that seing these explications are certainly confined to England and by no publick Act received or owned among us your allegeance with your childish ground that we have this oath from them is wholly impertinent as to our releifeâ— But seing the setting down of these explications contained in the English act and Articles above cited Which you do counningly omit will not only by comparing therewith the far different practices of the Kings of that Realme discover the inadequatnesse not to say the slightnesse of these sensings in effect meerly devised to palliat an excess in it self nowise justifiable but more fully manifest the strange extravagance both of the practical acceptation and late express interpretation of this Supremacie You may read them as follows the words of the Act in quinto Elizab. Declare her power and Authority to be a soveraignity over all manner of persons borne within the Realme whether they be ecclesiastical or temporal so that no forreigne power hath or ought to have any superiority over them and these of the Articles run thus Art 37. We give not to our Princes the ministring either of Gods Word or of the Sacraments the which thing the injunctions also lately set forth by Elizab our Queen do most plainly testifie but that only prerogative which we see to have been given alwayes to all godly Princes in holy Scriptures by God himselfe that is that they should rule all Estates and degrees committed to their charge by God whether they be Ecclesiastical or Temporal and restrain with the civill sword the stubborne and evill doers These being the termes of these explications what consonancie the medlings of their Princes in imposing rites ceremonies and formes of Worship enjoyning their own dayes and profaning God's commanding what Doctrine Ministers should forbear permitting excomunication in their own name jointly with the Lords and finally by sitting and ruling in the Temple of God as in their own Court do hold therto is obvious to the first reflection Only this I must say that if the Kings of England their Ecclesiastick actings be indeed sufficiently warranted by the foregoing explanations the Author of the late discourse of Ecclesiastick policy who in prosecution of the King's Supremacie doth plainly annexe unto it the Authority of the preisthood and power over the conscience at least the obedience of men in matters of Religion in place of that applause wherwith he is generally received at Court deserves rather to be demeaned as the highest calumniator and depraver of his Majesties government But not to trouble you further with these double English senses viz that pretended by their Acts of Parliament and Articles which I grant to be more sound and such wherewith many godly men have rested satisfied and the other more true received and followed by their Court and Clergie nor yet to insist upon your incomparable and blessed Who now hath mens persons in admiration Bishop Usher his more full interpretation equally redargued by what I have alreadie said Let us consider our Scots most excessive though more ingenuous explanation and although I do apprehend the words of the Oath of Supremacie to be in themselves capable of a sound sense and that by understanding supreme Governour of this Kingdomeâ— not to be a limiting designation but a plain qualification of the nature of the government as being in order to its correlat this Kingdome in it selfe civil and only in this notion to be extended to persons and causes ecclesiastick all difficulties may be salved yet when to the rise and manner of this Supremacie above declared I adde how of late it hath been made the ground of the King his restoring of Bishops and framing their government to an absolute dependence upon himselfe granting of the high Commission appointing the constitution of a National Synod and of other strange acts before touched and especially that as the Act Parl. 1592. expresly and justly limiting this Supremacy was by the first Act 〈◊〉 2. Parl. 1661. Wholly abrogate and made voidâ— so by the first Act of the Par. 1669. The same Supremacie is assâ—rted to that absurd hight as doth import a plain surrender of Conscience and submission of all Matters of Religion for as to civills we are not so rash to his Majesties pleasure in a more absolute manner then ever to this day hath been acclaimed either by Pope or general Council These things I say being weighed I think I may safely conclude that I look upon the Supremacie not only as a civill Papacie but an height of usurpation against our Lord King in Zion whereunto never Christian Prince nor Potentate did heretofore aspire And here your N. C. seconding my assertion tells you that this Supremacie clearly makes way for Erastianisme To which you answer That this is one of our mutinous arts to find out long hard names and affixe them to any thing displeaseth us But passing the childishness of this conceite as if either a long or hard name were more odious then a short in my opinion