not one of the Parliament shall be put to death unlesse prooved guilty according to Law notwithstanding any Proclamation of them to be Traitors or condemning them to death illegally 3. And thirdly as it cannot be thought but if Saul had further attempted by himselfe or any of his followers to assault Jonathan the people would have actively resisted him and them even with armes in Jonathans defence The second Example is Davids resisting of Saul sc by gathering a band of 600. men and offering to have kept Keilah against Saul but that God told him the Keilites would have betrayed him That he sin'd not in it appeares 1. By his owne pleading his innocence even to God in his Prayers and Psalmes as farr as concern'd the busines between him and Saul 2. Himself after this pleades it to Saul 1 Sam. 24 26. and cals God to witnes that he had not transgrest at all against him 3. God himselfe discharged David from all notorious sinne excepting the matter of Vrijah 1 Kin. 1.5 Now had not his Resistance been lawfull it had been most notorious Rebellion and Treason 4. Fourthly even our Doctor condemns it not and therfore all resistance is not unlawfull much lesse damnable as he often thunders But this Example sticks with him and therfore he makes a four-fold answer 1. Davids guard that he had about him was only to secure his person against the cut-throats of Saul if sent to take away his life Reply But this could not have bin done without killing divers of them if they had assaulted him which had then bin no murther but a just defence and execution of Justice So farr himself grants lawfull 2. But he sayes it was a meer defence without any violence offer'd to Saul Therfore he still gave place as Saul pursued and did no act of hostility to him or any of his Army when they were in his power 1 Sam. 26. Reply He was not strong enough to encounter Saul in the field who had divers thousands 3000 mentioned 1 Sam. â—1 against his 600. Wisdom bids him fly as long as he could rather then fight 2. Conscience forbids him to kill Saul so I grant it doth any Subject though having the King at any such advantage But that he hurt none of his followers 1 Sam. 26. was again an act of wisdome and we need not goe to conscience for a reason of it He had only one man with him Abishai and had he offered to kill any of the Army how soone might this in all likelihood have wakened the rest and so he had endangered his own life to little purpose For he could not in probability have killed many and what had that done to his cause and defence afterward Yet also I hold not that in cold blood one or many that are upon the defensive may lawfully kill sleeping enemies or such waking farther then appears at least in some sort necessary or much advantagious to the defence and prejudiciall to the opposites But if killing as many as David could have kill'd that night himselfe and Abishai would have given hopes of ending Sauls pursuit of him and have made peace I doubt not but he would and might have done it as well as keep Keilah against him But this intent of Davids is denied For 3. The Doctor saith It is only an uncertaine supposition not fit to ground conscience in this great point of resistance Repl The Text declares it as certainly as may be unlesse it had said so in undeniable termes For 1. David contents not himselfe to aske God whether Saul would come down but what the Keilites would doe To what end that but that he meant to stay if they would stand to him 2. When God answers him only about Sauls comming he askes the second time which shewes clearly his mind ran upon staying there 3. When God told him they would betray him the Text then saith he and his men went whether they could goe which shewes they were now disappointed of their purposes and hopes of staying there and must now shift for themselves where they could When none of this will elude this example of Davids resistance the Dr. adds a fourth Answer which will strike it dead 4. To this and all other demeanours of David in his standing out against Saul We say his example was extraordinary for he was designed and annointed by the Lord to succeed Saul therfore he might use an extraordinary way for safe-guarding his person Repl But in these few words there seeme to be many errours and inconvenient expressions Doth he not imitate those that to illude Davids reason why he durst not kill Saul Say Saul was extraordinarily annointed and designed King by God and so upon him violent hands might not be laid but this holds not for other Kings elective or successive by humane Laws I do not for my part thinke their shift sufficient but beleeve it utterly unlawfull even because this is asserted by David in reference to the office of Saul as I believe being written for our learning to teach us how to carry our selvs towards all soveraign Princes But I say if he wil elude Davids act of resistance he encourages them including his forbearance Let him consider it 2. Is not what he speaks of a successour dangerous to his own Position for if Davids right of succession authorized him at all to resist may not a successor plead the like authority if in danger which yet he will not grant unles he mean to overthrow his own assertion 3. It seemes to me a strange way of answering Scripture examples unles upon stronger necessity then any thing the Doctor hath alleadged as will appeare by the scanning of all his Arguments and Texts against resistance that such a thing was extraordinary when no such thing can be gathered out of the Text. I know many men have this faculty of interpreting who yet will not suffer it against their owne assertions but with me except in undoubted failings or duties The ancient Rule holds good Praxiâ— sanctorum est interpres Praeceptorum David did thus against Sauls violence therfore this is not contrary to but an Interpretation of the honour due by the 5 t. Commandement 4. It is so farr from being good which the Doctor saith that contrarily Davids Unction ought rather to have strengthned his faith not to have used a way of defence which in another had been by the Doctors saying rebellious and damnable What a disparagement is this to Faith and even to Gods Honour that his annointed shall be safeguarded for so long together only by a way which in all others is abominable Credat Judaeus non ego Davids Faith then and Gods Honour in his preservation proves the meanes both lawfull and ordinary And if so then much more is it lawfull for many persons and most of all for a State-Representative in this manner to defend themselves and resist A third Example alleadged by the Doctor is the Priests resisting the
againe it can never be rationally conceived the people have given away such a naturall liberty such a necessary power for their common safety Unlesse it can be proved that they have done so The proofe then before the Barre of indifferency of judgement and unpartiall conscience will lie on the Doctors part not ours Fourthly But he saith the representative Body cannot meet but by the will of the Prince and is dissoluble at his pleasure REPL. 2. It hath been so de facto multo but whether it bee altogether so de jure may justly be questioned upon these grounds First for their meeting when the Prince is an Infant or if a prisoner in enemies hands and so cannot give out a legall Warrant for their meeting or if distracted hath not the State power to meet in Parliament for their common safety and the Princes too They have met in the infancy or minority of Kings and made Lawes as in Edw. the 6. time and not by the meere power of the Protectour for the Nobility after put him out his head was cut off afterward by a Law made while he was Protectour It was then and could be nothing else but the inherent power of State to meet so in cases of necessity Yet I beleeve there is no written Law for this but the generall Maxim of Salus Populi suprema lex And this will extend to the case of Tyranny as fully as any of the former if not more Withall did not the Lords in Richard the 2 nds time call a Parliament without the King wherein they had their grievances redressed and this afterward was confirmed in the first of Hen. the 4 th Secondly then for their dissolving It hath indeed beene very much practised by our two last Kings But our Histories so farre as I remember quare whether Hen. 3. did not dissolve some Parliaments in discontent mention not any such thing as a Parliament dissolved in displeasure or against the desire of the Houses But as they meet very frequently oft-times every yeare somtimes oftner so that in the space of a hundred yeares there are counted above a 100. Parliaments So they sate till they had ended the Princes and their owne businesses which went much together and so it never came to a matter of examination or discontent the delay of calling them to meet or the too timely dissolution of Parliaments Parliaments were not wont to bee so odious or dreadfull to Princes as within these forty yeares they have been By whose default they have been so since let the encrochments upon Magna Charta and the Subjects liberties direct any to judge 2. But further for both these First the Parliament averres that there are Lawes that there should be a Parliament every yeare and so they have abated of their Right rather then gained upon the King by the Act of the Trienniall Parliament 2. And for the dissolution I have heard some wisemen affirme that by Law it cannot be dissolved while there are any Petitions of grievances or such matters of importance depending and unfinished Whereunto may be added most justly that in ordinary times Countrey Gentlemen and Noblemen and in a manner the whole body of the Parliament would be as sick of a long Parliament and continuall attendance as the King could wish and would petition rather then be tyed so by the legge for a dissolution or at least a Prorogation And it 's well enough knowne that even this Parliament after the Act of Continuation past were as weary of sitting as need to be desired till the Rebellion in Ireland seconded by the growing evills at home put new spirits into them and forced them to that diligence of attendance and unwearied labours so many as have taken the common good to heart as no Age or Story can parallel here or in any other Kingdome or Nation Thirdly beyond all this I appeale againe to the Kings Answer to the 19. Prepositions formerly mention'd and aske whether if the King have absolute power to forbeare calling them at his will and to dissolve them at his pleasure it be not a meere nothing that hee saith the House of Commons have power to impeach his owne Followers and Favorites who have broken the Lawes even by surreptitiously gotten commands from the King and that the Lords have power to judge and punish and are an excellent skreene between the King and the people to assist each against any incroachings of the other and by just Iudgements to preserve the Law which ought to be the rule of every one of the three and that the Power legally placed in both Houses is more then sufficient to prevent and restraine the power of Tyranny What serves all this for when his Favourites will keepe him from calling a Parliament perhaps all his dayes unlesse unlook'd for neceâ—sity force him to it We haoe â—eene our selves about 13. yeares without one and had there not beene conceived hopes that there would have beene Money given against the Scots it had not been then called as it was Againe what serves the calling them when the same Favourites being questioned shall counsell a dissolution We have knowne that too even three times in this Kings Reigne and no other dissolution but on these grounds And the last was within three weekes because they would not in all hast and contrary to all former Presidents and Priviledges give mony against the Scots and embroyle the two Kingdomes in a perpetuall Warre not having had one grievance redressed And in the case of a Prince bent or seduced to subvert Religion Lawes and Liberties which is the Doctors Case propounded It is undoubted he will if he can dissolve them as soone as they offer but to punish any of his Favourites and so to crosse the designe unlesse he dare not of which anon because therefore I believe the King in that Answer hath not ascribed more then right to the Parliament It will follow that in right specially in such case they ought not to be dissolved And that if by force they should be or should not have been called at all the People have right to meet together when and where they can in a Parliamentary manner or otherwise to such end as to defend themselves and one another from tyranny and the designed subversion of Religion Lawes and Liberties as hath beene often said Fourthly but for the present condition of our Kingdome and Parliament I must professe that as I admire the providence of God in the Act passed for the continuation of this Parliament so I doe for the forementioned expressions of the King in that answer Which laid together may to any understanding men wholly decide this first Question betweene the Doctor and us in point of Legality in our Kingdome if there were nothing else said or to be said that supposing such a designe to subvert Religion Lawes and Liberties This Parliament hath if no other had or could have being dissoluble at pleasure compleat power and Authority to
Estates and in any two of them or all the 3. together is given and is to be used ad Edificationem ad Salutem non ad destructionem for the common good and safety not ruine For in that it is Null and voyd in all reason and equity But the Doctor saith Must the King only trust and not be trusted Must he not alwayes have his security against the other which cannot be but by power of denying REâ—L 1. But he forgets that the Question by himselfe stated is when the Prince will not discharge his trust and more then soâ— is bent or seduced to subvert Religion Lawes and Liberties Then it is sencelesse to trust him till 〈◊〉 shewâ—s another a better mind and it is most ridiculous to allow him in this case a pâ—wer of denying safety for that is to allow him a power of subverting all 2. But when the â—u is as now it â—s made in Hypothesi whether the Prince or the two Houses do mean wâ—ll or ill and who doth or doth not discharge their trust and who doth or doth not intend the subversion of Religion Lawes and Liberties who can be Judge betweene them or who can amongst men decide the difference but the Body of the People Exercising their understanding and consciences to judge who is in the right by all that hath been said and done on both sides formerly and of late and so their power and strength too to defend the right side and resist the wrong-doers And these whether the Doctor or any under Heaven will or no must have and will have the Power of denying or granting meanes for their owne and others safety and securiâ—y The Doctors reproaches against the Parliament I passe Only where he sayes Conscience might demand for its satisfaction Why should 100. in the House of Commons see more then 300 or 20. in the House of Lords more then 60. that are of a different judgement and withdrawne REPL. Satisfaction may well be given First by saying it is evident the major part of the House of Commons when they were most full were all that way that 100. are now though that be a slander for but a while since there were 300. there The King a yeare agoe in â—anu last commanded all that were in the Countrey to come up which certainly most of them did Yet no Votes but this way they goe now onely things were not then at the â—eighth they now are 2. If yet the Major part were of another judgement they would certainly come and vote and end the businesse The House hath often called the absent and punisht some for it certainly they knew then there were not enough against them of their Members to over-vote them 3. They that are wilfully absent are offenders against the Law and the common good and so are not to be trusted or thought to have wisedome to see things right how many soever they may pretend to be For also 40 being the legall number for the House of Commons to vote any thing It is against all Rules of Politick Bodies that the absence of others there being thâ— Legall Number present should hinder or discredit any Vote or Act of the Legall Body One judge of Assize two Commissioners or Arbitrators and the like suffice for any Businesse and though still the greater number the more honour and comfort yet a legall number must and will ever suffice 5 As for the Lords who pretend their absence forced by reason of Tumults First this by an Almanack as the Doctor speaks elsewhere may be confuted the greatest part of those that came and after withdrew stayed a considerable time after the Tumults till the King was gotten to Yorke and begun to call them away And if his calling them away or their withdrawing themselves shall have power to make the votes or judgement of a part that are yet resident there as the Dâ— hath learned to call them Null or not to be regarded then have the King or such a number of Lords and Commons even out of the Parliament-House power to disanull a Law even the Law for the not dissolving of this Parliament without an Act for it which must passe all the 3. Estates both Houses and the King and in which each have their power of Denying And this alone what ever might be pretended against other Parliaments makes the legall Votes of the two Houses the full judgement and Authority of the whole representative Body of the Kingdome how few soever be present or how many so ever be absent and upon what pretence soever 2. But withall if I were Confessour or Chaplaine to any of those Lords that have withdrawne themselves and upon pretetence of the Tumult deny to returne I would make bold to aske them this Qu. in their eares for their consciences satisfactoin as well as mine owne which City and Countrey rung of them and which produced such and so many Petitions for the setling of the Militia and helping Ireland and outing the Bishops and Popish Lords out of the House of Peeres whether their refusing to concurre in the reliefe of Ireland and in securing the Kingdome even in petitioning the King for the settling of the Militia which yet the King after acknowledged necessary to be setled were not the true and only cause of those tumults that were And if so where was their judgement to see the means of safety or their conscience to provide for it And then whether their owne guilt did not more send or drive them away then any violence of the Tumults Which tumults yet I approve not nor ever did But if God so punished those that would not discharge the trust it is easier to answer that question why so many remaining should see more that is better then thrice so many if so many dissenting and withdrawne As for the Doctors preferring Monarchy before Aristocracy hee shall not have me for his Adversary who thank God I am borne and live and hope to dye under a Monarchy though not absolute as the Doctors Position would make him when he listed though the Doctor wisely disclaimes any such intention But for his reasons why a King should seâ—e better then the Major part of both the Houses because he sees even with their eyes though dissenting from them and hath other Councel besides and that he hath many reasons to perswade him to consent to their free and unanimous Votes All this is most unreasonable as the Question is now stated of a Prince bent to subvert Religion Laws and Liberties for we are still upon that generall supposition in this Section for whatever they see he will be sure as farre as he sees his owne strength to consent to nothing that shall hinder his designe And therefore to plead his power of denying or his wisdome in this case is to yeeld him all power to bee a Tyrant Which after all the Dr. will yet prove he hath so farre as he may not be resisted in it by the inconveniences
and then came in that manner to the House of Commons to demand those five And whereas the Doctor saith the King is bound by Oath to maintaine the Government and Revenue as by Law they are establish't REPL. 1. He discovers a secret to us which we understood not before All men stood amazed at the late Oath to this effect for the government and among other Arguments against it not a few considerable men of the Ministry and Gentry before the Parliament lookt at it as an injury to the King and opposite to our Oaths of Allegiance and Supremacie and so the Parliament did in effect vote it because it urged men to sweare never to consent to alter the Government which yet the King and State might possibly judge fit to be altered But we never thought that the King was supposed bound by his Oath to it already and much lesse that all Kings in succession would be bound as now the Doctor teaches us by their Oathes to maintaine it as it is by Law establisht This it seems they presumed upon and so thought to have made all sure by swearing all the Ministery and Universities and Masters of Arts and Schoolemasters and Physitians who would have had influence enough into the whole Kingdome within awhile But God laught at this Project turned it upon the Head of the Projectours and all the Party as appeares this Day And so I am perswaded He will doe all their Present endeavours of Warre to recover themselves 2. But in good earnest doth the Doctor or any else thinke the King bound by Oath to maintain Bishops still in England though he hath consented to take them away in Scotland to prevent War even though he hazard the ruine of the Kingdome by a Civill Warre and notwithstanding any inconveniences represented to him by the complaints of his People and the wisedome of his Parliament and his owne too Or doth his Oath bind him to any more then to maintaine them so long as they are establisht by Law as he sweares to maintaine all his other Subjects in their Rights and yet an Act of Parliament may alter many things in mens Rights Are not all Rights of Church and State which are not properly jure divino compromitted to the Parliament the three Estates King Lords Commons every time they meet And may they not alter and change this or that so farre as it is humane and establisht but by the Lawes of the Land The Kings Oath then binds not him and his Parliament from taking away Bishops if they judge them not jure divino and their continuance to be prejudiciall to the State and Church and so of Revenues the same may be said 3. And if the Dr. will not admit this Answere but still contend the King did sweare to maintaine them at his Coronation as they were then by Law established Is not the King beholding to him for charging him with Perjury as in effect hee doth since it is evident that by taking away the high Commission Court and their power in their Courts of imposing Oathes and Penalties and after that their Votes in Parl. hee hath not maintain'd them as they were by Law establisht when he tooke the Oath How the Doctor will answer this I know not sure I am if any Minister having taken the Oath never to consent to alter the Government as it now stands establisht had offered to petition such a taking away of their governing power he should quickly have beene accursed as a perjured person and accordingly so dealt with It remaines then that the King onely swore to maintaine them according to Law while they should stand by Law and not to bind himselfe from any Law-making though to take them away in case it should appeare to be for the good of Church and State And if this be not made good that their taking away will be so let us all fight for them But if it be woe to those men that hazard the King and two of his Kingdomes England and Ireland once more as before they would two yeares one after another have hazarded England and Scotland to maintaine Episcopall greatnesse and Authority 4. What degree of Reformation or any thing like to the Primitive Bishops did they ever offer to be reduced unto which might have contented Parliament and People both if ever propounded in earnest to have asked no more Or what cure for any effectuall Reformation have any of them or their Party ever shewed since the Parliament met to have rendred it any way hopefull that they would bee good instruments hereafter 5. If therfore after all warnings they will needs put the King still on as it appeares even by the Doctors words to fight for their maintenance Let them remember Mr. Brightmans Propheticall Interpretation of the spewing out of the Laodicean Angell And though a vomiting somtimes makes a mans heart sick and ready to dye yet where he hath strength of Nature it comes up at last and proves happy cure Which in this case if it be Christs act as it much seemes to be will not faile to bee fulfilled to our comfort at last how weake soever it bring us first I conclude this then that as Physick is upon the defensive so much more the endeavour to cast up the humour which unprovoked or but a little stirred endangers the Bodies health by Inflamations the like So the late voting down the Bâ—s was meerly defensive and the War so much as it is to maintaine them themselves are and ever were upon the offensive and offenders in and the Parliament not at all Now for the managing of the resistance the Doctor offers to examine whether it hath beene so void of Hostility as that defensive way they pretend to should bee Let us examine it with him Here he contends 1. that the Defendant should be of answerable demeanour to David defending himselfe against Saul REP. But he may be pleased to consider that as all that handle the difference betweene an offensive War and a defensive do rationally maintain that he that is outragiously injuried as David in his Embassadors 2 Sam. â—0 Or dangerously threatned is but on the defensive though he be actually â—n Armes first through diligence and some advantages perhaps so a man keeps himselfe within the bounds of a defence though he actually offend him that does or that would assault him and even though he begin first So David did in the former case invading the Ammonites Country and yet he was properly defensive So a man on the high way if a Robber should assault him if he could prevent his blow and strike first it were but in his owne defence but much more to strike againe and kill if he cannot otherwise defend himselfe which yet is the highest degree of offence betweene party and party Ob. But David still withdrew and having taken the Kings speare and cruse he restored them without demand Rep. True but I have formerly given the reason why he ever
both and then let Conscience exercise charity as it will answer to GOD to it selfe to all it's Fellow English men and Christians and even to the whole World Thus in generall now we must examine some particulars The Dr. names 4 grounds of feares and jealousie with which the people have been possessed All which he first rejects with a gentle comparing of the Parliamont who hath set them forth to the Devill the Arch-accuser This is his charity In stead of rataliating I will onely say the Lord forgive thee His first ground is Reports of Forraign Power to be brought in This he saith was given out before the setting up of the MILITIA to keepe the People amused the easier to draw them into such a posture of defence as was pretended and they are all discovered by time to have been vaine REPL. 1. why will he perpetually forget that the King himself granted the Militia necessary to be setled 2 It was not meerely Forraigne Forces to bee brought in but Papists and Delinquents rising at home that was insinuated a cause of the desire to have the Kingdom put in a posture of defence 3. Who knows not of the billeting of many thousands of Irish upon us even during the fitting of a former Parliament The Project of Germane Horse in the Dukes time is it quite forgotten The Earle of Staffords Councell not only to bring in his Irish Army consisting most of Papists wherewith to reduce this Kingdome was it not proved by the Oath of a Privy Counsellor present and confirmed by his own Notes taken at the time and did not the rest of the advise then given by that Politician that the King being now deserted by his Parliament might doe any act of power Quaere the words in his charge amount to Counselling the bringing in of any forces from any place And why must all intelligences after these prevented bee counted vaine 4. For is all suspition vaine because the thing suspected comes not to passe when mean are used to prevent it Is all preventing Physicke Vaine Is all feare of Pyrates in a Sea voyage vaine if none assault a well man'd and provided Ship Was not such a Navy being secured in safe hands as would under God have made great Forraign Forces repent their comming against the Kingdomee competent reason why those that did mean to come if they might have had no resistance on the Sea now thought it too hot a service 5. But besides the Navy they had no Landing place Hull being contrary to the Court-expectation and attempt as was Noted before secured by the Parliament and so might well be the more discouraged 6. Which is the more considerable because no sooner had they got a Port-Town namely Newcastle but though no Forraign Forces came who could not be so soon ready yet Forraign Ammunition came not a little and Forces of our Country-men who served in Forraign Countries and money too from Forraigne Princes or People And what more is comming if our unhappinesse continue till the Spring who can be secure But for this if it prove so the Dr. hath a defence ready All Christian Kings he saith cannot but thinke themselves concerned in the cause and it will be as just for the King to use them against subjects now in arms as it was unjust in the Barons to call in the French against their naturall King REPL. 1. The Dr. bestirres himself to make the King strong to maintain the Prelacy among other things as himself hath told us before in the former Section he said that they that assist him doe it according to their Allegiance So that he intends that all his Subjects are bound by their Allegiance to assist him and fight against the Parliament even though their Consciences judge them to intend the conservation of Religion Laws and liberties and his followers to intend their subversion And here hee calls all Christian Kings iâ— as themselves concerned in the Cause 2. When the Rochellers took Arms according to their Priviledges and Edicts of the Kingdome to defend themselves And our Protestant or Popish Councellors got 8. Ships to be sent to assist the King of France against them and in the Low-Country they did the like too what will the Dr. say were all the Christian Princes concerned to assist against the Rochellers If hee doe the very souldiers and marriners that went into Ships shall rise up in judgment against him who when they knew what they went for utterly refused to fight against their Religion and so the greatest part of them were set a Shore againe and the rest went on their voyage and did the mischief to help beat the Rochell Fleet and give the King possession of the Haven so as he afterward with the help of the King of Spaine so still Princes are concerned against the Protestant made a Barricado so strong as when a Fleet from hence after re-Voyage attempted to relieve Rochell by Sea being then actually besieged by Land it could not be done 3. What will the Dr. say to that Voyage to Rey and that to releeve Rochell when it proved too late Why was not the King still concerned to helpe the King of France or was he 4 Will it be Just for the King to use Forraign Forces when to the understanding of Common Readers hee hath utterly disclaimed it in more then one Declaration 5 What Counsell would an Enemy to the King and Kingdome that hath read Stories and ours in speciall as the Dr. seemes to have done give but the using of Forraign Forces was not the Kingdome Conquered by this very meanes by the Saxons when King Vorteger was in debate with his Lords and People call'd them in to assist him Did not the Turkes so come into Europe and oft the like hath hapened 6. He counts it damnable to resist for defence meerly much more then as the Barons in K. Iohns time to call in a Stranger to make him King if then to call in other Kings to assist against the Parliament be as just as that was unjust it is a high vertue though to the utter endangering of the whole Kingdom whose Counsellour surely it were pity the Dr. should ever be who hath no more judgment or more Conscience or charity toward the publique good then to advise and commend such a practise 2. Next he propounds the Queens Religion as a matter which is urged to cause feares and jelousies Of which he saith It is no new cause REPL. 1. It is true to the great grief of all that truly love Religion or wish well to her Majestie but had others wish't it otherwise as the Dr. speakes for himselfe who have had accesse unto her She had not bin told by a great man in the Church in the worst season that could be when it is said shee had some Pangs about Her Religion and asked of it that Shee might well be saved in her Religion Or if any give no credit to this passage yet it is notorious
or Priest or Jesuit according to his place even sentence of death if he could not avoidâ— it Onely with two cautions 1. That he should be as favourable as was possible 2. That he should give timely Intelligence of any severe sentence Let now charity judge what circumspection almost can suffice against such a generation of Men Or what jealousie can be too much of them that still professe this treacherous Religion And yet all this notwithstanding at last to have even professed Papists taken in against the Parliament Can this be without a designe in them that have counselled the King to it Was it not in a prudent fore-sight that they should be cal'd and admitted to helpe that the Papists have no where been plundered by the Kings Army though others have who held not with the Parliament 8. As for Ziba David knew not his treachery at the first and his lyes had so blasted honest-hearted Mephibosheth that it appeares David did scarcely beleeve his apology for himselfe Otherwise what ever may now be said of his credulous charity to Ziba to the prejudice of one that was not present to answer for himselfe it was none of Davids good deeds to be imitated to recompence a flattering Sycophant that had brought him a present in a hard time indeed with so large a share in Mephibosheths estate When by the Law of God he was to dye for his false accusation of Treason as Mephibosheth had deserved death had it been true But now our Papists are knowne to be Enemies to the Parliament as was said before and some of their Party in the Country sticke not to say that the Parliaments Intentions of rigour against them already shewed by the executing of so many Priests and Jesuites Men of tender consciences is one part of the Court-quarrell against them They are more like Doeg then Ziba who first accused the Priests and then readily undertooke the execution of a most cruell sentence and executed it with all cruelty But Psal 52. Reades their doome And Psal 54.4 Sutes the Ziphims too those of Davids owne Tribe that came and discovered him to Saul 1 Sa. 23.26 once and againe and so incensed him afresh against him Though Saul blesses them 1 Sa. 23.21 as his speciall good subjects that had compassion of him Conscience must now judge whether the Papists being favoured were any cause of the resistance now made or only the resistance now â—â—de was the cause that they were admitted to helpe the King in his distresse 9. But for the D â— to honour them with the Title of good subjects preferring them before the Parliament and so great a part of the Kingdome as visibly adhere to them is one of the highest reproaches that ever was belcht out against them enough for a Jesuite or a Pope to have said But the Dr. how ever he pretend modesty oft-times and respect to the Parliament stabbs them as desperately as any enemy could doe now and then While he seemes also resolved to justifie all that hath been done against them else he would have been silent in this peece and the next that followes about Ireland 10. In the meane time because he upbraids with a scandall that this resistance brings on our Religion which saith he would not be easily wiped of were it to stand or fall by the doctrines of this giddy age I must needs make bold to tell him that he forgets himselfe strangely and the Doctrines and practises of our Religion when he can scarce name that Country where there are any Protestants that have not taken Armes to defend Laws and Liberties and with them Religion even though not before allowed by Laws Sweden Germany France The low Countries Bohemiah Scotland And did not Q. Elizabeth of blessed memory assist them in France Holland and Scotland and K. James Holland and at least owned the cause of the French though he only sent Ambassadours and K. Charles did send to aide Rochel as I noted before and ownes the Prince of Orange sufficiently who yet is Rebell Generall against the K. of Spain if our Parliaments resistance be Rebellion Indeed we in England are the last and above all other Nations have been by the Court Doctors within this 40 Yeares much prepared to suffer any thing rather then resist Yet Bishop Bilson in the Queens time was suffered to averre that the States of a Kingdome might resist vide But it now above all other times greeves that we offer to doe what all others have done before us upon a great deale lesse Authority considering our Parliament continued by Act and its power granted by the King as I have noted before against all delinquents For if they could have subdued and swallowed us up the other Protestants in other Countreyes would much more easily have been devoured 4. The last Allegation is concerning the businesses of Ireland Of which because the Dr. saith the King hath written enough he had done wisely to have written nothing but that word Though I have not yet been so happy who would be glad to see it to meet with any Answer to the last Peece of the House of Commons which reckons so many particulars of wrong done to that poore Kingdomâ— Therefore till I meete with that I must needs tell the Dr. he saith not enough to cleare the businesse nor the Kings Councellours in that businesse For whereas his whole defence is â—in a word that the Kings necessity made it lawfull to make use of any thing intended for their releefe which he parallels by the Necessity that excused the Scots comming in hither To this divers things may and must be replyed 1. The Scots are no parallell for this carriage toward Ireland Their coming what ever the Dr. affirmes brought no such great detriment to the Inhabitants there if you except their professed enemies Papists and Prelates as the poore Souldiers and other Protestants of Ireland have suffered by the actions done concerning them 2. The King and Parliament have justified by Act of Parliament their coming as necessitated Yet they were proclaimed Traitours againe and againe and it was counted necessary to make War against them one yeare and a second as now against the Parliament The necessity then that is now pretended by the Kings party wants a great deale of the justification that the Scots have had before all the world specially remembring all that was noted before of the doings of the Kings followers before ever the Parliament did any thing but Petition 3. Which necessity by them pretended if it appeare a necessity by themselves made will it not make their actions concerning Ireland more horrid and proclaime the designe to be more rooted 4. But it must by no means be forgotten what hath been pretended for Ireland to which these actions are most contrary 1. When the King rode Northward and the Parliament more then once represented that it would greatly prejudice Ireland The King protested still it should not but he would be as
by Reassuming as I said before a taking of the whole power from him to themselves but onely for the particular Case in hazard and for the present necessity And now to begin with what he first mentions the Derivation of power I must tell him that he forges what he before complained of in others that they confounded the power it selfe with the person and the Qualification I am sure he doth so here if ever man did Hee before granted the Person and Qualification from men and then they approved of God and more then that no man pleads to be derived nor more to be forfeited plead not for so much nor he Paâ—liament neither But only the Qualification for he particular Case of danger and till that danger may be sufficiâ—ntly secured Yet here now at first to oppose the Forfeiture but of this particular which is only in question now before us he denies the power to be from the People and appeales to what he hath cleared which is onely by his owne saying but not altogether as hath beene shewed that the Power it selfe is from God But for all that if no more can be said against the persons forfeiting his reigning Power and specially in the Qualifications of it even for ever it may undoubtedly be forfeited and so re-assumed all of it which is more then I say Secondly but he will prove that though the People have this Power absolutely which himselfe hath more then once granted of the Designation of the Person and Qualification yet could they not have right to take it away REPL. The King will have no cause to thank him for his undertaking as well because he doth it not with any great strength as also because hee hath hereby provoked men to dispute even this Case which no way needed since the Parliament never pretended to this Right in generall but rather disclaimed it First he saith Many things which are altogether in our disposing before we part with them are not afterward in our power to recall REPL. True but some things are and that both if conditions be not observed and even at our owne pleasure A King makes some Officers for terme of life others quamdin se bene gesserint others aâ—â— ante bene placite To the latter hee may send a Writ of Ease at his pleasure and every day it s in his power to recall their Authority To the second their offices are sure without power of recalling till they are legally convicted of misbehaviour To the third as long as they live their Authority is firme and no power of recalling it wholly Yet even such may bee hindred from some Administrations by Accusations by and apparency of Crimes making it unfit for them to be trusted in the particular We imagine not the People to have power to recall that Regall Authority at their pleasure we argue not that they have power to recall it wholly upon any Case of Mal-administration All that we plead for is power to administer a part of it upon necessity which he will not administer for good but rather for evill And there are not many things that were altogether ours and in our disposing before we part with them but are still so farre ours as to use them againe in our necessity for that turne at least though there are some Secondly But he will prove this to be one of those that are not after in our power to recall especially saith he such in which there redounds to God an interest by the Donation as in things devoted though after they come to be abused REPL. 1. Grant this true in referrence to the Power of recalling them wholly which yet is not universally true as will appeare straight yet may there be power enough to administer so much as is of necessity A Wife is tyed to her Husband by the Covenant of God so called Prov. 2. by the Ordinance of God more ancient and no lesse strong then that of Politick Government She cannot recall wholly her Husbands Authority over her though shee was once altogether at her disposing to choose or another or none to be her head All the goods of the Family are his in Law and not here but by his leave and order Yet for her necessity she may by the Law of God and conscience administer so much of the goods as is fit and secure her Person from his violence by absence though that ordinarily be against the Law of Marriage and the end of it or any other meanes of nccessary defence But secondly it is not altogether true that there is no power or recalling any thing devoted to God Hezekiah took off the gold from the Doores of the Temple and the Pillars which he had overlaid and all the silver in the house of the Lord to pay the King of Assyria his demanded Ransome 2. Kings 18.14 15 16. If the Doctor will not owne this Act of Hezekiah I am sure he will that of David taking the hallowed Bread which was not for any by Gods Law to eate but onely the Priests This was devoted to God and not so much as abused and by him assigned to a speciall use yet from that diverted and lawfully without question And now I appeale to all Consciences Whether the necessity of saving a Kingdome from the subversion of Religion Lawes and Liberties be not greater then Davids necessitie was And if I will have mercy and not sacrifice did justifie Davids act will it not theirs who in a necessity use or administer the power of the Militia or Armes which ordinarily is only to be admieistred by the King Neither will Abimelech the Priests consenting to David alter the Case for it was devoted to God and but in necessity he might not have consented nor David accepted Necessity then recalled that particular Bread through devoted So necessity may recall this parcell of power in question Thus the Doctors ground failes him for our Case yet 3. see what he adds so although it were as they would have it that they give the power and God approves himselfe oft hath said and cannot deny but they give the Person his power and if they take it from his person yet they may leave it to his Heire but wee argue not for so much yet because the Lords hand and his oyle also is upon the Person elected to the Crowne and then he is the Lords Annointed and the Minister of God those hands of the People which were used in lifting him up to the Crowne may not againe be lift up against him either to take the Crowne from his head or the Sword out of his hand this true inform'd Conscience will not dare to doe REPL. 1. Is not Gods hand upon a Judge Is not hee the Minister of God Is not a King bound to God and to his People to appoint Judges who may lesse be spared in their Power then the Monarch himselfe for what is his Power when an Infant Is not the Kingdome then administred
withdrew Pag. I need not repeat it And as for the cruse and speare he tooke them not away for feare of being hurt by them as now Ammunitions and other provisions but as the Dr. well sayes to shew Abners neglect and his own integrity and therfore when they had done him that service he restored them without demand But the Parl. cannot fly from place to place like David they must keep at Westminster or dissolve themselves and they have offered to restore that which they took to prevent their own and the Kingdomes being mischefed by it so that security might have been obtained for time to come witnesse the Petition sent by the E. of Holland and others to Beverley while Hull was besieged In a word there hath been nothing done in this kind of all that the Dr. reckons up which meer necessity hath not forced and most of those things must have beene done by David if he had kept Keilah against Saul as he desired and meant to have done 2 And whereas the Dr. further urges that the Kings loyall and peaceable Subjects are assaulted despoiled of their Armes goods estates their persons imprisoned because they would according to their allegiance assist him in this extremity or would not contrary to their conscience joyne with them against him Rep. This concerns two sorts of persons and for both though somwhat differently the satisfaction to this allegation depends upon the justice of the defence it selfe For 1. if the Parl. do justly take up Arms then without all doubt however the Dr. talks of an implicit faith they may seize upon the arms goods estates persons of those that actually under what pretence soever assist against them Though if their defence be not just then all this is confessedly a multiplication of injustice but if they may fight with the Army that opposes them they may disarm c. those that strengthen the army with monys c. 2. as for those that only wold not contrary to their conscience joyn with them against him I have 2. things to say 1. If any of these have in former times any way promoted illegall commands and practises it is much to be doubted they can bring but slender proof of their forbearing to joyn with the Parl. out of conscience There is nothing more easie then to pretend conscience in all controverted points But hee deserves not to be beleeved in his pretence that hath been but even now and much more if he be still a violatour of rules of conscience in other respects It is wel known how tender they have been of other mens consciences in needless Ceremonies in illegall Innovations in prophane violations of the Lords Sabbath and the 4th Com. who now cry conscience to save their mony or to weaken the Parl. 2. If any be really conscientious in the point yeâ— upon the necessity of a just defâ—nce the Parl. may as well secure their persons and specially their Armes and levy some monies upon them as in a common danger of a forrain enemy trenches may be digged on a mans Land or Forts built evâ—n against his will and in a fire breaking violently out the next house may be pâ—l'd downe to save a towne or many more houses Though it is also true that such ought to have recompence afterward when al the danger is over and so I doubt not but all truely consciencious shall have in due time When it shall appeare they only forbeare out of conscience and did no acts of malignancy withall nor spoke malignantly against the Parliament and their just proceedings The Modesty of some of many that have suffered a great deale worse within these few yeares then the Parliament makes their most Malignant Prisoner suffer may sufficiently shew what a Conscientious refusall signifies if it be no more but so And if the Parliam have nothing more to Answer for then rigour against such the Dr. will hardly prove they have transgressed the bounds of a lawfull defence His reproaches therfore in the close of this Sect. I let passe and come at last to his 7. last Sect. wherunto if as good a reply can be made as to the former I shall not much doubt the Sentence of Conscience of any one who is unengaged or unpartial in the whole Question between us SECT 7. WE are now come to the Tendrest Peece of all the Rest and how confidently so ever the Dr. charges the Parliament and all that cleave to them with Rendring the King odious c. and saith it concernes them so to doe yet it shall appeare by what I have to reply to him in this Section how little delight I have to make the King Odious and that the Parliament also hath and doth as much as lay in them to put off all Imputations from the King and charge them as the Law doth upon his Councellors Judges Followers and Favourites Here 1. let me remember him that whereas in other Kingdomes some Favourites when they have seen their Prince endangered have rather taken his actions upon themselves then cast theirs on him and been content to Sacrifice themselves rather for his safety then expose him to shield themselves It hath been the continuall practise of the plotters against our Religion and Liberties to Entitle the King to all their Illegallities and Oppressions There can scarce that Grievance be named if we except the Ship-money which was devolved upon the Judges and yet it is well knowne how they were tampered with in the Kings Name which they have not Fraudulently gotten the King to own as his Act and this is their constant practise to this day who then hath laboured to make the King Odious or whom did it concerne but they that so far as the people would finde fault with any thing they should be forced in a sort to finde fault with the King and this also helped to Charme all Tongues and tie down all hands till they provoked the Scots beyond all degrees of sufferance to come in with an Army and demand security in and by an English Parl. aswell as one in Scotland 2. Next whereas the Dr. upbraids the Parliament and People That it seemes they are men that would be loath to suffer for their Religion they are so ready to fly to Armes to secure themselves Repl. 1. It ill becomes a pretender to and Disputer for Conscience to speake this Language that hath lived to see how many sufferings though not resisting to blood striving against sinne many even of the Parliament but specially of the Ministery and people have yeelded to within 16. or 18. yeares and never thought of flying to Armes but rather of flying out of their Native Country as thousands have done Unlesse the Dr. will undertake to justifie all that was Imposed upon mens Consciences all this while And if he will do so he shall save many Consciences a labour to judge with what a Conscience hee Writes 2. Doth he thinke that they could be so simple as