the same in specie so must it have the same manner and way of expression as namely by our beleeving him by having an high esteeme of him by our obedience to his will by our manner of addresse unto his presence by our unfeigned and constant love unto his person and by our endeavouring to rejoyce and glad his spirit for by these particulars we doe expresse our honour and reverence of heart unto the Lord. 1. We honour God when we doe beleeve him yea then most of all as Luther sayes for thereby we give him the glory of all his attributes nor doe we ever more disparage the Majestie of God then when we make him a lyer like unto our selves in not giving credit unto his sayings those who would neither beleeve nor speake one word of truth themselves did most of all dishonour our Saviour when they voiced him to be a deceiver and a false speaker so no greater dishonour can men offer to their Prince then not to take his word unlesse withall to labour that others might not Surely it is a part not onely of good manners but also of that reverence and duty which a Subject owes unto his Soveraigne to credit and beleeve him before any other in the world especially upon his Protestations But indeed the more like unto Christ a Prince is in meeknesse mercy truth sweetnesse of disposition and desire of doing good the more of Christ's enterteinment shall he meet withall in this world 2. We honour God by having an high esteeme of his Majestie and by manifesting the same in termes accordingly to his praise upon all occasions and after this sort must we testifie our honour to the King we must have an high and pious conceit of him speaking of him alwaies as good and praying for him not as evill To make mention in prayer of a Christian Prince as if he were an Infidel or an enemy to goodnesse is rather to calumniate and vilifie him to slander and disgrace him then to shew reverence and honour to him it is rather the way to insinuate a tediousnesse of him and to worke an odium against him in the hearts of men then a venerable esteeme of him When Saint Paul required it as a thing good and acceptable in the sight of God to pray supplicate 2 Tim. 2. and give thankes for Kings and commends it as a meane whereby to live a quiet and peaceable life in all godlinesse and honesty I beleeve he did not intend such kinde of prayers as should leave a misconceit of Kings in the mindes of their people no I beleeve such prayers have beene the seeds of these our present troubles they have prejudiced our peace and quiet and provoked but little to the practice of true godlinesse and honesty the Lord in his good time touch the spirits of the seeds-men 3. We expresse our honour and feare to God by our full and perfect obedience to his will and word so must we to our Soveraigne by our obedience to his Person and Lawes preferring none but God before him the first in Authority must alwaies command our first obedience God that gives Authority to the King is therefore the greatest and so to be first obeyed the King gives Authority to all inferiour Magistrates and therefore is greater then all they both divisim conjunctim and so before them to be preferr'd in our submission unto should they command any thing contrary to his will If it be said but suppose the inferiour Magistrate commands according to the Kings Law which is his revealed will then 't is lawfull not onely to disobey his person but also to make resistance I answer This objection shall be dealt withall anon onely for the present I say this God is not honoured by being resisted no more surely is the King Moreover Authority is rather rooted in the Prince then in his Law for as he gives beeing to the inferiour Magistrate so he doth to the Law it selfe making it authorizable Et propter quod aliquid est tale illud est magis tale He is greater therefore then his Law not to be resisted for the sake of that which may be evidenced farther thus if when the Prince commands any thing contrary to the revealed will of God who hath given him his power he is not to be resisted though not to be obeyed then much lesse when he commands any thing contrary to his owne Law to which himselfe hath given power Christian Religion hath hitherto taught that the Prince his will must alway be done of us or on us of us when 't is according to or not against the Word of God on us when contrary to the same we must one way or other submit to Authority to the penalty if not to the command nor doe I conceive how I disobey the Law of the Land by submitting to the penalty annexed in obeying the will of the Prince seeing I must honour his person by my obedience 4. We doe manifest our reverence to God by our manner of addresse into his presence we doe not use to carry our Petitions to God with our hands upon our swords nor goe to him with threats and armes to have our requests granted neither must we in that fashion repaire unto our Soveraigne nor doe we use to thinke to make God yeild unto us by fore reporting of him that he meanes to doe so and so that we might force him for his credit sake to doe the contrary but we goe to him with selfe-denying hearts and words confessing his goodnesse and our owne unworthinesse intreating him to take advantage of our necessities to manifest his owne free grace and to cause his owne glory to appeare and after such a manner and with such termes must we goe unto our King the humble way is Gods way which he will make successefull 5. We honour God by our unfeigned and constant love unto him and for his sake to those that love him or that he loves which is expressed by our speaking good of him and them and not by endeavouring his or their disgrace and ruine And so must we also shew our honour to our Prince by our love which must be unfeigned and constant both to him and his in all conditions we must be willing rather to suffer for his and their sakes then to countenance any evill against either Indeed our love to our King will be thus natured if it be rightly grounded namely on Gods command and because he is our Soveraigne for though indeed we are to pray that a Prince may alwayes be as eminent in grace and goodnesse above others as he is in dignity yet if he be not we must remember that we owe him the highest honour as he is the Lords Anointed and appointed of God to be our Governour God who hath deserved from us to be obeyed hath commanded us to honour and love our King Indeed a Christian is Homo per se and hath a foundation for his duty
possible live peaceably with all men which the Doctrine of resistance doth manifestly contradict if there be another course to be taken as undoubtedly there is according as I shall shew anon nor will I much mind you of those places where he propounds prayer for and obedience unto not resistance of 1 Tim 2.1 2. Tit. 3.1 Princes and Kings to be the necessary and onely way to live Godly and honestly quietly and peaceably nor yet of that saying ye have not yet resisted unto bloud Heb. 12.4 which not onely the Apostle himselfe but also David Dixon of Scotland and all the godly learned expositors do interpret to be a passive resistance of evill by suffering our owne bloud to be shed after Christs Example in the former verses not an active resistance thereof by shedding the bloud of others I say I will not insist upon these or any other Scriptures of like nature because it will be answered as it hath been already that those places concerne private Christians not a Parliament or publicke State as if a Parliament or publicke State were not bound to do all that is possible to live peaceably as if the members thereof were not chose on purpose to procure the peace of all to settle godlinesse honesty religion and quiet in a Nation as if the Parliament men were no Christians as if by being advanced to that Honour they were exempted from the rules of Christianity or could in their wisedomes devise wayes to promote peace and godlinesse better then those which Gods Spirit hath propounded such language therefore as I conceive how frequent soever is not to the dignity of that High Assembly but as I said before I will not meddle with the power of a Parliament nor do I desire to heare or know any thing of that Court but what is pious and Honourable But the first Scripture which I will alleadge shall be that which some because they cannot evade do scoffingly call our great place viz. Rom. 13.1 2. Let every soule be subject to the Higher power for there is no power but of God the powers that be are ordained of God whosoever therefore resisteth the power resisteth the Ordinance of God and they that resist shall receive to themselves damnation I first demand what is meant by higher power in this place * Author of the Pamphlet called the glorious name of God the Lord of Hosts pag◠113. one answers mee That Authority which God and man hath put upon a man I demand againe is it onely naked Authority so put without any relation to the man on whom put that must be subjected unto and not resisted He answers yes for 't is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which signifies power in the abstract or the power of the Law and not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a more concrete word which may implie also the power of the Person I confesse 't is somewhat difficult to mee to have such an abstrusive apprehension of Authority yet because 't is so Magisterially affirmed I will not resist the higher Spirit though I cannot upon such an ipse dixit beleeve the full and true sense of the text to be The power of the man may not be resisted but the man that hath the power may for I would aske this question why may the man that hath the power be resisted I confesse the answer is ready in respect of his illegall will and wayes why in that respect is it because Authority thereby is abused or misapplied it should seem no for 't is professed in the same page that Power and Authority though abused is not to be resisted where then doth the Burre sticke is Authority subjected solely in the Kings Law and no whit in his Person though put upon him both by God and man or is Authority it selfe the subject and the person exercising the same a bare accident unto that beeing in it only more separably as pride and folly are in Homine so it may appeare in the same place for saies that Rabbi if one that is in Authority command out of his owne will and not by Law I resist no power no Authority at all if I neither actively nor passively obey no I do not so much as resist abused Authority for why it must be beleived as his fathers the Jesuits teach that the Prince by his disordered will or dissent from Law hath quite lost his Authority and is become like another man and so though Hee be resisted yet Authority is not for that 's fled from Him But by the way if Authority be wholly subjected in the Law who placed it there our great new master yeildeth the Law-makers who it seemes are too indiscreetly prodigall of their Authority to give it all away to their Lawes and keepe none of it to themselves nor can have any save what it pleaseth the Law to returne unto them His words are these if those who have power to make Lawes shall make sinfull Lawes and so give Authority to any to force obedience we say here there must be either flying or passive obedience no resistance whence we may conjecture that those who have power to make Lawes are some Persons in Authority and that those Persons have a possibility in them to make sinfull Lawes as well as good and when they have made those sinfull Lawes they can give power to any to force obedience unto them and those Officers so inabled with power must not be resisted for the sinfull Lawes sake but if hee that made this sinfull Law shall command out of his owne will a thing lesse sinfull then what perhaps the sinfull Law requires He may be resisted and yet no Authority resisted by the resister because no authority abused by the Commander he having uncloathed himselfe thereof to adorne and strengthen his sinfull Law to make that more venerable then himselfe and lesse resistible If this be the mans understanding of the case let us see how by this his Doctrine he must understand the text by Higher powers according to this is meant Humane Lawes and ordinances which are the bounds and bridles of restraint to Kings as well as to other men let every soule the Prince himselfe not excepted be subject unto these and take heed of resisting them for though they be evill yet submission either active or passive must be yeilded to them for the establishment of iniquity by a Law doth make it altogether unopposeable this must be the meaning of the Apostle in this Expounders sense but every faith cannot swallow this construction of Higher powers to be onely Humane Lawes for as he said rightly they may be evill and are ordained by men whereas the Apostle tells us that the powers which he meanes are ordained of God and therefore must needs be all good for God hath nothing to do with the stoole of wickednesse I confesse my selfe lost in that teachers Meanders I am even earth'd in Burrowes and need some faithfull Jeremy to direct mee out of
build the House of God even as themselves pleased they did not neglect that worke and fall to argue and dispute about the Kings authority or to set things in a combustion to greive the Kings spirit but they set themselves to their proper businesse and blessed God for their King Ezra 7.27 Blessed be the Lord God of our fathers which hath put such a thing as this into the Kings heart to beautifie the House of the Lord which is in Hierusalem which was indeed the way to continue the Kings heart still towards them O that this wise generation were but acquainted with such piety But I returne If it be objected as 't is often in Pulpits alleadged that the people in building that Temple in Nehemiah's time Nehem. 4. did worke with their swords and speares and bowes and so did defend themselves against their enemies I answer it is true but they had the Kings leave so to doe the King was on their side Nehemiah was strengthened by the Kings speciall authority so that not they but those that opposed them were the resisters of the King 'T is worth your noting also in the sixth place how the Jewes in Mordecay's time Esther 3.10 being destined to death to please the lust of proud Haman yet because that wicked Decree was countenanced with the Kings authority his Privy Seale the Iewes durst not resist for the safeguard of their lifes and all they had they did not plead that the King was seduced by ill counsell to destroy their whole Nation as they had cause and therefore by the Law of nature they must stand upon their owne defence no the people of the Lord were not acquainted with any such devices they prayed put their trust in their God who never failed them and he brought it so to passe that against the day came Esther 8.11 they had the Kings leave and authority to draw their swords in their owne defence which else they durst never have done as is plainly evident in the story 2 Sam. 9.1 Truly Sir those phrases of Scripture When Kings goe forth to Warre and What King going forth to Warre against another King do plainly speak to my conscience Luke 14.31 that the power of wageing War either offensive or defensive is onely in and from the King who alone is inabled of God to warrant men in such a way wherein whosoever goeth without the Kings approbation is not allowed of God and if so then sure the Lord will never say Well done good and faithfull servants to them that goe in that way against the Kings command yea and against his Person But Sir I will not weary your Spirit with the quotation of too many Scriptures of this nature contradicting resistance I shall onely therefore remember you of two more and then conclude this particular also one is Act. 23. you cannot deny Act. 23.3 4. but when Ananias commanded Paul to be smitten it was a command contrary to Law for the Text doth so affirme it hee had no ground but his owne will to offer that violence and yet how doth the Apostle checke himselfe for his but ignorantly speaking an unbeseeming word against him and alleadgeth Scripture against himselfe it is written thou shalt not speake evill of the ruler of the people and if that word Ruler did comprehend Ananias I am sure it includes the King and if not an unbeseeming word to such a one then sure not a resisting action against a King which is farre more unbeseeming if you say Saint Paul was a private man but what is his example to a publicke State or Parliament I answer a publicke State consists of private men besides the Title of volunteer which they that walke in this way of resistance are called by doth speake to my apprehension that the Parliament doth not command any to run upon their owne damnation Rom. 13.2 by going this way but leaves it to every one 's owne free will and so in effect all resisters are but private men and without offence be it spoken I thinke Saint Pauls example in a matter of this nature should be more prevalent with a Christian then the very command it selfe if such a thing were of a whole Parliament Lastly let the example of our Master and Saviour Jesus Christ never be forgotten by us who when apprehended in the Garden would not suffer Peter to use his sword in defence of him against authority but told him Hee that smit with the sword against that should perish by the sword of that and yet if you well consider it I beleeve you will confesse that that authority was rather guided by Will then Law in that particular action nay and our Saviour addes too that he was strong enough to have defended himselfe had it beene lawfull for he could have had twelve Legions of Angels with a word speaking yea the whole course of the proceedings against our Saviour was illegall for what Law was there ever that an innocent person should be delivered to the will of his accusers to be crucified yet the text sayes of Pilate Joh. 19.16 that Tradidit Jesum voluntati eorum it was mouth and malice onely that prevailed yet our Saviour made no resistance it cannot be said that he was then onely as a private man for sure at that time he was of all that ever was the most publike person also if it be said but his case was particular I answer true but our Saviour did not sinne in the manageing of it as for ought I see he must have done if he had omitted any thing that had beene lawfull and necessary and such if we will beleeve it is defensive resistance against the personall and illegall commands of a Governour Besides I doe not see how Christ can be freed from the imputation of unfaithfulnesse if this doctrine of resistance be so lawfull and necessary a thing for the preservation of a Christian Church and State the matter being of such grand importance that he did not leave some expresse and plaine warrant for it No no Christ was faithfull in all things righteousnesse and peace truth and love humility and obedience met all in him let his wayes onely be acknowledged safe and good and ours confessed to be dangerous and ungodly Thus good Sir you have my Scriptures against resistance from which with many others of like nature I doe conclude That to the Prince his personall command as well as to his legall I must yeild mine active obedience if not against the revealed will of God or else submit with patience to the penalty that shall according to pleasure be inflicted or lastly I may flie for mine owne safety if I have not a sufficient measure of suffering grace And I doe conclude that by Gods Word resistance is utterly unlawfull in this case and that no man from thence can have a sufficient ground for his conscience to go in such a way And now Sir I could
Conscience as they will answer the contrary unto God to assist him I believe also that the Authority of a King or supreme Governour is the naturall and essentiall investment of his Person though it extend where his Person is not even all over his dominions yet in him 't is radicated is as unseperable from him as his life is who ever aimes at the one aimes also at the other is the voice both of reason Law and story I do conceive that though the distinction holds good of inferiour Governours that they may be considered as men as magistrates yet not so of the supreme who comes to his Authority by inheritance Hee ought not to be considered of in any notion severed from that of King Sauls Person was Gods anointed In others their Authority is onely sacred and addes veneration to their Persons and is separable from them the man may live when his Authority is extinguished but the very Person of a King in regard of royall birth or unction and of immediate dependance upon God is sacred as well as his Authority and doth adde veneration unto that as well as that to him indeed they adde honour to each other and are inseperable they live and dye together they are of Gods conjunction whereas other Authority is of mans and though man may sever what himselfe hath joyned yet what God hath joyned no man must sever Hence I believe that as hee who resists the Authority of an inferior magistrate resists the King so hee that resists the Authority yea or the Person of a Prince or supreme magistrate resists God not onely his Power intrusted to him but also his wisedome in making and ordaining of him in fastning or bestowing the Authority upon him And as hee that resists the King in his Officers shall from the King receive punishment Pro. 17.11 a cruell messenger shall be sent unto him so they that resist God in the King His Minister Rom. 13. shall receive to themselves damnation either temporall from the hand of him that is resisted unto whom God will deliver them up Pro. 20.26 to scatter and to bring the wheele over or from some other in his place 2 King 14.5 as the Kings Son slew those that slew his father or else eternall if they scape here for Solomon sayth hee that provoketh a King to anger Pro. 20.2 sinneth against his owne Soule God doubtlesse will maintaine the Act of his owne wisedome their devise shall be onely mischeivous to themselves that seek to pull him downe whom God hath exalted Ps 62 4. therefore Solomon well Pro. 30.31.32 against a King there is no rising namely without the confusion and ruine of the risers to prevent which he gives his advise in the next words if thou hast done foolishly in lifting up thy self acknowledge it if thou hast thought evill lay thine hand upon thy mouth Private mens Injuries may be washed off with teares but wrongs done to Princes in regard of God his neare and speciall interest are hardly wiped off but with bloud who ever saies David lifted up his hand against Gods Anointed 1 Sam. 26.9 and was guiltlesse as if he had said can any one out of any story name me a man whom vengeance in such a case hath not alwayes followed I do believe that Military strength and outward wealth are the Sect. 6 nerves and sinews of Authority for by these feare and reverence is procured to that and love to the Princes person in all those who are not able to see God in the face of Majestie of which sort there are too many therefore to take away or with-hold these is to endeavour the weakening of the Kings Authority and to bring the same together with his person into contempt and his life it selfe into danger surely if a King be appointed of God to be the Supreame in Authority it is the Subjects duty to manifest their approbation of Gods will and their obedience to their Prince in yeilding to him the superiority over themselves in such matters true feare of God will make men honour him whom God honoureth and faith in God to trust him whom God trusteth The Hearts of Subjects I beleeve next to the Arme of God are the strength of the Princes strength and the wealth of his wealth and therefore to rob him of these is the greatest theft it is to rend from him his Honour his Reverence his Authority and what ever God hath invested him withall and this is often done by publishing and aggravating his humane infirmities Psal 35.11 but most commonly by laying to his charge things whereof he is not guilty When Absolom and Achitophel went about their horrid Treason they cast Iniquity upon the King they found none upon him but they laid some on Psal 55.3 2 Sam. 15. that so his Subjects might hate him as themselves did and joyne with them against him this I beleeve hath alwayes proved a sinne of a purple dye and is a blasphemy against God as well as against the King for he that speakes evill of the King speaks evill of Gods Law which commands the contrary and so of God himselfe A King is the light of his Israell Act. 23.5 the Sunne of his Kingdome Jam. 4.11 and true Religion which is a light too obscures not that light the Locusts that came out of the Pit were they that darkened the Sunne this condition better becomes Jesuites such as Sanders and Parsons were then Protestants Rev. 9.2 3. A Prince is the breath of his peoples nostrils and his honour is the breath whereby himselfe lives and whosoever have indeavoured to stop or infect this breath have gone about to murder all the Subjects as might be evidenced by examples what ever pretences at first were the issue in the end hath beene the Land was an Acheldama Surely I beleeve that Piety and Allegeance doth instruct a loyall Subject to prize his Soveraignes good name before his owne yea to be glad and joyfull of an occasion even to drowne his owne credit in his Princes service to advance him Scripture teacheth to deny our selves to Honour our King Samuel at Sauls request when he had told him that God had rejected him and so knew him to be actually under Gods displeasure and thereupon was himselfe departing from him in anger yet was content to turne againe 1 Sam. 15.30 to honour him before the people to put all respect that possibly he could upon him as he was a King I beleeve a true religious Subject dares not entertaine an evill thought of his Soveraigne nor beleeve evill of him he dares not conceipt meanly or slightly of the Lords Anointed that place of Scripture doth much awe him Eccles 10.20 Curse not the King in thy heart the word in the originall being disrespect not disesteeme not a disrespectfull thought of a King is an accursed thought and who so harboureth such a thought shall not
the King be greater then his Law we may for as was shewed before the greater first must be obeyed but the King is greater for he hath a more immediate dependance upon God then his Law hath He is the fountaine of that and not that of him He is the Lawgiver as the Scripture stiles him the Sanedrim or great Councell of Elders may prepare or fit the matter of the Law Gen. 49.10 but the King gives the forme or beeing to it he sets the stampe upon it and so makes it authorizeable whence 't is called the Kings Law And as he gives a beeing unto so he may dispense with his owne Law or with a Subject for the breach thereof but the Law hath not that power over the King therefore the King is above his Law Truly I cannot apprehend how the Princes Will is more resistable then his Law unlesse it were proved to be subordinate thereunto reason sayes that rather his Law is subordinate to his Will being that his Will makes his Law and not this his Will The Kings Person from which sure his Will is not excluded as hath beene granted is Solutus Legibus freed from his owne Lawes scil from their coactive power and is Obligatus tantùm vinculo pietatis bound onely in conscience to have respect unto them as they are or may be rules for better direction and for the breach of conscience onely even we to God onely are accountable and therefore sure the King by us in such a case is not resistable 2. If to obey the King be Gods ordinance and to obey the Law be but the ordinance of man then to obey the King in the first place is but our duty 1 Pet. 2.7 but this is evident Gods word which is unalterable sayes Honour the King whereas 't is onely an humane constitution which is revokeable and perhaps to morrow that sayes obey such or such an Order which is contrary to the Kings minde now whether it be our duty to obey God or man Act. 4.19 judge you Ob. But you say that that Scripture Honour or obey the King and such like doe meane onely the Kings Law or his Authority Answ I answer that I finde not Scripture making any such restriction of the Subjects obedience onely to the Kings Law or allowing any seperation of his Authority from his Person the Scripture commands obedience to the King and the terme King may include both his Will and Law if not his Will rather as being an essentiall of his Person when both doe not agree indeed if the Kings will contradict Gods will 't is better to obey God then him and so 't is if his Law contradicts the Law of God Ob. But you say further that Gods Word doth onely in this case tye the conscience to obey the Legall commands of the King for when good Lawes are once established then comes Gods Word in and requires our obedience to them and not before Answ I answer If I did beleeve Gods will were subordinate to the Peoples appetite in the choice of a King that he onely submitted as some are pleased to speake to their Election with his consent and approbation I might haply be induced also to be of that opinion concerning His word but as my judgement is I neither can nor dare conceive so meanely of Gods Word as to thinke it in this case onely subservient to the precepts of men to account it no more then a bare Copula betweene humane Lawes and mens consciences when as rather it is or ought to be the foundation of and guide unto both I doe finde and feele that Gods Word tyes my conscience to obey every one of the Kings commands that are not against piety yea his Personall as well as his Legall and those first in case of difference nor doe I for my part obey the Kings Law because it is established or because of its knowne penalty annexed nor yet the King himselfe because he rules according to his Law these are not my grounds of obedience but I obey the Kings Law because I obey the Kings and I obey the King because I obey God I obey the King and his Law because of God and his Law which I hold to be the best obedience and that of a Christian man when the feare of the Master makes the Scholler obey his precept it is better then when the feare of the precept makes him obey his Master so when the reverend and loving regard of the Prince makes us obey his Law 't is better then when feare of the Law makes us obey the Prince Ob. But you say to obey the Prince his Personall Command against His Legall is to obey him against himselfe Answ So as I thinke is to obey his Legall Command against his Personall for I take his Person to be himselfe But we must remember that the dispute is not about obedience to the one rather then unto the other but about active and violent resistance against the one in behalfe of the other which I believe is unlawfull against either because the Kings Authourity goes with both you deny the lawfulnesse of resistance against the Legall Commands although ungodly because established for here say you comes in passive obedience And shall I hold resistance lawfull against the Personall though not impious it must be then earatione because Personall truly Sir I dare not those Scriptures Honour the King and whoever resisteth shall receive damnation do forbid me Besides if it be unlawfull by violence to resist Kings or to defend our selves by Armes against them when they command contrary to Gods Lawe my reason cannot reach how it agrees with Christianity to lift up the hand against them when they command onely against their owne sure mans Lawes ought not to be dearer to us then Gods nor our owne wealth more precious then Gods truth Ob. But shall we preferre the Prince his passion before his reason Reason goes with his Law but passion with his will Answ This hath been answered in part already only I adde these particulars 1. The Prince his Personall commands do not alway presuppose passion nor are attended with it if they did yet the Apostle saies we must be Subject Rom. 13.5 for feare of wrath which not onely may but usually doth proceed from passion 2. Yeelding pacifieth wrath allayeth passion removes the cloud that darkens reason whereas grievous words and much more violent actions do stirre up and increase anger Prov. 15.1 Prov. 20.2 and who so provoketh a King thereunto saies Solomon sinneth against his owne soule Ec. 10.4 3. It is the advice of the wise that if the Spirit of the Ruler rise up against thee leave not thy place that is modesté te in statione tua teneto nec rebellato saies Tremelius keep thy selfe modestly in thy station and do not Rebell against him He forsakes his place saies Cartwright qui animum ex accept á injuriâ abalienatum gerens obsequium
Clergy suppressed and all learning as Popish and prophane discountenanced and every man be he weaver pedler or cobler should have free leave in publicke to shew his gifts is the King bound to establish and defend such a Law must he breake that part of his oath which is to preserve the present established Clergy and Church of God to the uttermost of his power and when God shall call him to an account for it will it be sufficient for him to answer as Aaron did Moses the people would have it so I believe not But though the vulgus be somewhat unreasonable yet we wil not conceive them so bold as to urge the King by any new Law to breake any part of his oath or Covenant because they seeme so carefull he should keepe it and find such fault with the imaginary breach thereof I will therefore instance in another case Suppose the vulgus should for the present thinke it just that all whom the King loves or that love him should be counted malignants and be liable to plundering and should choose to have a Law made that whomsoeyer the King casts his favour upon unlesse approved of by themselves and whosoever shall speake in the Kings behalfe should presently forfeit all their estate unto the said vulgus unto whom it shall be lawfull before any publicke triall to seize upon the said Delinquents lands cut downe his woods and timber trees and make spoile of all or if a Minister shall dare to preach obedience to the King when he sees his people run into all waies of disloyalty he should forfeit all his profits ipso facto and be forced to weare the brand of a malignant yea of a very Cavaleir a marke as bad as a Popish San bennet untill he recant such his detestable errours and preach more approveable Doctrine Is the King bound by his Oath to establish and defend such a Law surely no therefore people are much deceived in their interpretation of that clause if there be any such in the Kings Oath But his Sacred Majestie in one of his Declarations doth fully declare the true meaning of it and to that onely I do referre you Onely this I would have you remember that the vulgus do commonly goe in the broad way which Scripture saies is not the best Mat. 7.13 Company you know is the strongest argument to prevaile with the many therefore Moses well follow not a multitude to do evill Ex. 23.2 inferring thereby that for the most part they go in a way of evill doing and so of ill choosing 2 Sam. 15. Mat. 27.20 2â— as when they forsook David to follow Absolom and Achitophel nay when they chose Barrabbas and would have an order to crucify Jesus indeed 't is true some factious Priests with some Scribes and Pharisees that were gracious with them did perswade and teach them to make that sinfull choice but their weaknesse did appear in their being so perswaded and the Common people still are apt to be seduced thrust by such means into the worst waies Bellua multorum capitum you know one cals them they are apt to be led they know not whither to say they know not what to cry they know not wherefore as that example shewes Acts 19.32 Act. 19.32 therefore nothing of that nature which was alleadged but may be supposed of the vulgus perhaps experience also could say somewhat to the matter if she might as safely use her tongue as she may her eyes and eares Ob. But though the vulgus or Common people may not haply on their owne heads resist the King or call him to an account yet the Parliament may the great Court of the Kingdome Answ What a Parliament may do I will not determine Onely this I hope as a man desiring information I may say I do not see how the Parliament taken in a compleat and perfect sense conjoint together of head and members scilicet of King Nobles and Commons can be said to resist the King or to call him to an account for that himselfe is the principall or cheife part thereof nor if wee take it in an incompleate or imperfect acceptation for the minor or inferiour part as divided from the King and the major part of his Peers do I see how properly I am sure not kindly the head can be resisted by the lower members I see not how such a part hath power to do more then the Prince himselfe can do scilicet dispence with oathes inable men without offence to God to breake those his Lawes wherein he commands Honour to the King and forbids resistance nor how such members may do that for which they were not chosen scilicet arme us that chose them against him that gave us power to choose and them to sit nor how that they themselves as Parliament men have Authority to oppose him whom as private men they have sworn to obey and whom God in his owne stead hath set over them they are but the representations of us our Images and how they can pull downe the Image and representation of God I cannot see But this I know and wil be bold to say as a minister of Jesus Christ that a Parliament take it in either sense though it may do what private men may not do yet it must not do what a Christian ought not to do I beleeve that the Members of that Honourable Court are Christian men that their duty is in the midst of their State Affaires to remember their relation to Christ and to do nothing contradicting the same for it will be no sufficient excuse when he shall come to judge both quicke and dead and charge any of them for breaking his Law to say I did it as J was a Parliament man and not as I was a Christian for if the Parliament man be punished for his faults I beleeve as a private man hee will feele the smart thereof and so I conclude this particular with my dayly prayer Lord give to every member of that Honourable Court now Assembled a full measure of thy grace that they may be willing and ready to comply with his Sacred Majestie their Gracious Sovereigne and thine Anointed in all those wayes that tend to thy Glory and the peace of this Church and Commonwealth Amen Sect. 13 â—criptures eviâ—encing the unâ—wfulnesse of â—ch resistance Now reverend Sir I have answered all your objections that I can remember and come to your request which was to shew some Scriptures oppugning this resistance Sir I know it rests onely on their part who forsake the old way to produce Scriptures for their new but because you know 't is easier to overthrow that which you are upon then to maintaine it you are pleased to put what you conceive is lesse difficult upon mee which I accept both willingly and thankefully Rom. 12.18 I will not insist upon that precept of the Apostle So much as in you lyeth if it be
these darke and crypticke Cavernes and I finde him in Gods booke bidding mee looke about and aske for the old way which is the good way the old exposition is the best which is this Jer. 6.16 By every soule is to be understood every man with all that belongs unto him and by Higher power is meant not onely the power it selfe but also the person excerciseing the same for as 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifies the power so 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 notes the person yea the superiority of the person and gives the power the denomination of Higher so that we must not only be subject to the Power because a power but also to the same because an Higher power in which respect every inferiour not only soule but also power must be subject to that power which is higher then it selfe And the King being the supreame person under God hath therefore in these his Dominions the Highest power and may be call'd without any great impropriety of speech as he is Gods immediate deputy on earth the Highest power If any * The Author of the Pamphlet called the Glorious name of God c. pag. 122. 1. Peter ◠enemy of Regall Authority shall object and say though the King indeed be supreame the Apostle Peter speakes it too plainely to be denied yet in the same place the King is made an ordinance of man and therefore to be limited by man Calvin on the place answers Dicitur humana ordinatio non quòd Humanitùs inventa fuerit sed quòd propria Hominum est degesta ordinata vivendi ratio 't is call'd an humane ordination not because 't is mans invention but because ordained of God for the good and conservation of men or because executed by man and about the government of mankind But Sir I returne to your selfe that this which I have given is the true meaning of that place to the Romanes the text it selfe doth evidence for what is called the Higher power in the first verse is call'd the ruler and the Minister of God v. 3. which imply the person as well as the Authority now saies the Apostle this Higher power must not be resisted viz. by any kinde of resistance and his reason is strong for to resist saies he is malum culpae who ever resisteth the power resisteth the ordinance of God and 't is malum poenae too they that resist shall receive to themselves Damnation for si bonus nutritor est tuus saies Augustine si malus tentator tuus est if the ruler be good receive thy nourishment from him with obedience if he be evill receive thy triall by him with patience and so you have my first Script against resistance My second shall be Eccles 8.2 3 4 5. verses Solomon was a wise man and the counsells of such are good I counsell thee saies he ut os Regis observes as the Hebrew hath it that thou observe the mouth of the King Eccels 8 2. c. and that in regard of the oath of God i. e. that oath of Alleageance or subjection which in the name of God with his approbation Subiects have allwaies taken unto their Soveraignes and whereunto God is a witnesse and whereof if broken he will be a severe punisher Be not hasty to go out of his sight that is saies Tremelius ne ab obsequio illius te subducito animo perturbato withdraw not thy selfe from his alleagiance in a discontentednesse of spirit stand not in an evill thing scilicet in perturbatione rebellione quae tibi malum allatura esset in thy sullennesse and rebellion which will bring mischeife upon thee for hee doth what ever pleaseth him it is not thy will and pleasure but the will and pleasure of the Prince that must be done Kings have long hands to reach those that resist them and God doth inable them to have their Will upon such treacherous and disobedient Subiects as will not willingly submit unto it Yea where the word of a King is there is power as to breake the heart of a good Subject into duty Confregit David viros suis verbis 1 Sam. 24.7 sayes the text David brake his men with his words so to blast the conspiracies and to confound the spirits of those that be rebellious for indeed Gods wrath awakened by the breach of oath attends the Kings word to accomplish the same upon resisters And hence is that of Solomon in one place against a King there is no rising up Prov. 30.31 and in another He that provoketh a King to anger by opposing his word Prov. 20.2 or any other way sinneth against his owne soule therefore however for a season the word of a King like that of God be resisted sleighted and contemned yet it shall appeare in the end againe to be a word of power Who may say unto him what doest thou i. e. none hath power to call a King to account save God alone no man hath authority to gainsay him sayes Elihu in Job Is it fit to say to a King thou art wicked Job 34.18 or to Princes ye are ungodly it seemes it was not in those dayes Who so keepeth the Commandement shall feele no evill thing that is the command of God in the first place and then for the oath of Gods sake the command of the King be it dictum or scriptum not contradicting that of God qui rebellaverit ori tuo moriatur said the people to Joshua their Captaine Josh 1.18 Whosoever doth rebell against thy commandement and will not hearken to the words of thy mouth in all that thou commandest he shall be put to death but on the other side He that keepeth the same shall feele no evill thing Sir this is my second Scripture and as I conceive 't is suteable to our present case against resisting the personall will and word of the King More precepts I could give but because examples are most regarded in these dayes I will remember you of some of them In the third place therefore be pleased to thinke of the children of Israel in the land of Egypt and of the manner of their deliverance by the hand of Moses and Aaron It must be confess'd that Pharaoh was a wicked King exercised great tyranny over Gods people then under his subjection and was condemned by Gods expresse word yet being lawfull Magistrate over the Country Moses did not arme the Israelites against him though they were able to make their part good as appeares by their number being six hundred thousand men Exod. 12.37 and Pharaohs confession that they were more and mightier then he and his Egyptians Exod. 1.9 but Continent sese observant Pharaonem obedienter as one sayes they conteined themselves and beseeched him obediently Exod. 2.12 Yea it should seeme that Moses himselfe at first had a fancie that this deliverance should be by way of resistance when hee slew the Egyptian Act. 7.25 for as
fame and credit to my sufferings as well as mine owne Innocency and their malice is the more observed with wonder at their successe and favour with some Members in the House of Commons because some six weekes before they complained of me to them divers of these my persecuting neighbours whereof the debauched Drunkard was one had convented me before the Justice of peace for omitting the Crosse and Surplice urging the worthy Gentleman to his admiration to inflict the penalty of the statute upon mee for the same when as notwithstanding at that time in other places to other persons they did raile upon mee for using the Common prayer booke at all which soone after they rent in peeces And lastly another reason of this my usage hath beene alleadged by a Member of the House to be this The King saies he turnes out those Ministers that be for the Parliament and we must provide for them and how should we so do but by turning out those that be for the King but I beleeve His worship was misinformed of His Majesty for unto that day I cannot yet heare though I have inquired that the King had sequestred any living or turned any Minister out perhaps some whose Consciences accused them for preaching treason and sedition did run away when His Majesties forces approached and in pity to the peoples soules so forsaken some might be appointed by His Majesty to preach unto them But such wrongs upon such grounds unto the Kings Subjects that are peaceable and loyall will make men see and beleeve what hath beene foretold them by their Soveraigne and to further that worke had I another Living I hope I should be content to loose it And now my Christian Brethren and friends you have heard also the reasons of my trouble persecution judge in your secret thoughts betweene mee and my enemies I hope I never gave occasion of scandall to the godly wise I am ready to give an account of my whole faith I tooke occasion from a conference with Master Marshall to publish my judgement in the case for which I suffer that I might give satisfaction to you all and that you might see I have some reason for my dissent from him and some others of my brethren I dedicate it as to him in particular so to you all in generall from whose hands I begge foure things 1. That you would not thinke the worse of that High and Honourable Court of Parliament for any of my sufferings nor interpret that any word in these succeeding Sections is intended against the same I have professed before it and so I do now to you and to the world that next to Christ and the King I judge my selfe bound in duty to endeavour the honour of it I neither do nor dare in conscience attribute the wrong that hath beene done mee to the major part of that part which is now sitting onely this I say some particular members who as men being seduced by ill Counsell have beene the Instruments of my unkind neighbours thus to abuse mee whose sinne God pardon and whose hearts God in mercy turne 2. That you would beare in mind that this publication of my faith judgement in the case is the Consequent of my troubles indeed occasioned by them for I have suffered and therefore do I speake this I request to the end you might be witnesses for me if afterward out of these following lines somewhat should be picked wrested and alleaged as the cause of my sufferings for I observe that 't is the custome of these times by doing wrong to urge men to complaine and then from their expressions to get some colour for their former evill doing against them when my selfe did first appeare before the Committee my charge was onely of a Sermon preached the Lords day after I had beene voted a Delinquent 3. That you would not thinke my present flight to be a relinquishing of the cause I never balked to appear upon the least intimations untill now that power was put into the hands of my raging Enemies which for ought I know was to kill mee indeed it was threatned before as was evidenced upon oath before a Justice that I should be cut off as not being fitting to live whereupon I went to that Member who was the Cheife instrument of my trouble and desired of him that I might be brought rather to suffer for this cleare truth of God in publicke as the Martyrs in Queene Maries dayes did which I hoped God would enable me to endure that I might glorify him by my death then be murdered in private as I was threatned he indeed made a tush at mee and said there was but one man that had said it But I am by Gods grace of the same minde still when ever I may in publicke give testimony to this truth of God I will not keepe in secret 4. My Christian friends I desire of you in the last place that I may not fare the worse at your hands because I have fared so ill at the hands of others the world's custome is to judge of men according to it's owne usage of them though Christ was more afflicted then other men The Apostle tels us that to you is given not onely to beleeve but also to suffer and if God gives suffering grace he will surely send afflictions for the exercise of it indeed the times are evill but we must not say so seculo premimur gravi quo scelera regnant the world goes ill when sin reigneth but remember non est ad astra mollis è terris via through many tribulations we must go to Heaven invisa nunquam imperia retinentur diu this world will not last alwaies egrediemur tandem we shall be freed from all our sorrowes at the last the merits of Christ will make amends for all and in the meane time if the example of these my sufferings may any way be serviceable unto you my Christian friends I shall rejoice the more in them I am not mine owne I am Christs nay I am yours by Christs appointment who hath ordained his poore Minister blessed be his name not onely to preach the crosse of Christ unto you but also to carry it before you I beg all your prayers for strength from him to whom I commend all you even to our onely wise and omnipotent God who will turne all things in the end to our everlasting good to whom be praise and glory for ever Amen Your Brother and friend in Christ Jesus E. S. March 28. 1643. THE SVMME OF THE SEVERALL SECTIONS 1. THe King being the Supreme Magistrate hath immediate dependance upon God to whom onely he is accountable Pag. 2 2. The Title of the Lords Annointed is proper and peculiar to the King p. 4 3. Royall Birth is equivalent with Royall Vnction and speakes the best Title to a Kingdome p. 6 4. The Precedency and Priviledge of Monarchy p. 7 5. Authority is a sacred thing and essentiall to the
God who hast made me King and art above me hast authority to Judge me Pro. 24.21 for which reason The King in scripture is commanded to feare God only and none else whereas all other men are bidden to feare God and the King because they are liable to answer unto both if they doe evill the Preacher sayes Eccl. 8.4 no man may so much as say to a King what doest thou indeed reason sayes if equalls have not any power over each other much lesse have inferiours over their superiours from whom they receive all their Authority and strength A King is not servus populi the peoples servant no more then the Minister of the Gospell is their dog what ever the dialect of some is in these dayes of Liberty but a King is Minister Dei Rom. 13.4 and what hath any to do to Judge anothers servant Rom. 14.4 saith the Lord David surely was in the right when some moved him against King Saul no sayes he He is the Lords Annoynted to whom only it doth belong 1. Sam. 26.9.10 and not to me or any else to meddle with him the Lord shall smite him for who besides can do it and be guiltlesse It is the Kings Honour to have immediate dependance upon God 't is a part of his prerogative royall above other men and surely they are no freinds to the Kings Honour or to that high prerogative which God hath given him who would make him but equall with the Common sort The Hebrews say their High Preist both judged and was judged Defence of Eccles Disc bare witnesse and had witnesse borne against him but so had not their King nor was he judged of any man And the inconformist ministers in Queene Elizabeths dayes did acknowledge as much priviledge to be due to the Kings of England as ever was given to the Kings of Israell SECT II. The title of the Lords Anointed is proper and peculiar onely to the KING I do also beleeve that in regard of this immediate dependance the Title of the Lords Annoynted doth belong only unto Kings to Christ in the first place who is Rex Regum and then to them who are Kings under him 1. Ioh. 2.27 And though all sincere professors have received an annoynting from the Holy one yet I beleeve there is a difference inter Christos Christianos inter unctos Christi Christos Domini for though others were uncti yet I find not in scripture that Honourable title of Christus Domini conferred upon any save only Princes nor do I thinke they had it from that Ceremony of powring oyle upon them for before that was in use Abraham Isaak and Jacob were so called who were Patriarchs or Princes in their families or generations Ps 105.15 Gen. 23.6 Act. 2.29 which 2 names we know are both of one signification a Patriarch is a cheife father in government and so is a Prince Abraham is called a Prince and David a Patriarch But that Title was given to such for their eminency above others because of Gods designation of them to supremacy Es 45.1 and therefore it went also afterward without the Ceremony as well as with it Cyrus was Gods Annoynted and so is Carolus And I doe beleeve that royall unction must be acknowledged to give Princes an exemption from all harme or wrong who must in this respect be looked upon by all men as sacred persons David in his lamentation for Saul speakes as if his enemies ought to have had respect unto him in the battaile because he was anoynted with oyle and in the same Chapter the Amalikite a stranger was put to death because he had dared though desired by himselfe to rid him of his life 2. Sam. 1.21 because he was the Lords Annoynted And the Psalmist sayes that for Abraham and Isaacks sake God himselfe reproved Kings scilicit Pharaoh King of Egypt Ps 105.15 and Abimelech King of Gerar saying touch not mine Annoynted teaching thereby that such great respect is to be given by all the world to this High and Holy order of Kings that they must not be injured by their fellow Kings and if not by them then surely not by their own Subjects who have taken the oath of Allegiance unto them if they do them the least wrong either in word or deed God will reprove them after another fashion then he did Pharaoh and Abimeleck For in that Kings have obtained from God a more excellent name then other men it shews that they are of all others the most excellent persons God hath not said unto others at any time you are mine Anointed with mine holy Oile have I anointed you fit ye at my right hand and rule the Nations in my stead but to Kings he hath Others as was said are his Sancti but these are his Christi and that is more as the apple of his eye they must not be so much as touched for hurt either with hand or tongue or pen for touch the Anointed and ye touch the Lord they have not despised thee onely but mee they have despised saies God to his Vicegerent 1. Sam. 8.7 SECT III. Royall birth is equivalent with Royall unction and speakes the best Title to a Kingdome I do beleeve also that Royall Birth in those Kings that come to their Kingdomes by Inheritance is equivalent every way with Royall unction it speakes the same thing as truly and as loud which is onely a right title by Gods appointment without usurpation and royall unction spake no more this was the language of Royall birth of old as well as now for after the first of a Family had beene anointed to note Gods choyce unction was no more used in that family Bishop Andrews unlesse there arose a strife about the Kingdome as betweene Solomon and Adonijah Joash and Athaliah the eldest sonne of the Predecessour was afterward the Chosen of the Lord His Birthright spake the Lords Appointment as plainely as his forefathers unction had done and invested him with the title of the Lords Annointed as wee may see in Iosiah and Hezekiah and the other Kings of Iudah And I do beleeve that the Prince who is once possessed of a Kingdome coming to him by Inheritance can never by any upon any occasion be dispossessed thereof againe without Horrible impiety Sacriledge and Injustice in the Instruments Royall unction was an indeleble Character of old 2. Sam. 1.14 it could never more be wiped off where it was once powred on this was apparent in Saul who remained the Lords Anointed to his last gaspe David himselfe confessed it who durst not take the right of Government actually upon him while Saul lived although he had it in reversion being already anointed thereunto and had received the spirit thereof Now Royall Birth-right being the same in sense with Royall unction it followes that he who is truly borne unto a Kingdome is in like fort the Lords anoynted for ever according to right
subducit aut etiam aliquid in principem molitur that being alienated in affection from his Prince withdraweth his obedience doth endeavour somewhat against him by way of resistance Ob. But to what purpose then are Lawes established if the Kings will be above them or must be obeyed in the first place Answ Lawes are established to instruct the Subjects in their duty not to rule the King they are the Kings will in scriptis his revealed or written will and therefore 't is supposeable that his personall will may yet at least be coordinate with them and so no more resistible then they for we must remember still the question is about resistance But for the matter of obedience let me adde further the Lex or Law is one thing and Ius or right may be another it may be supra legem and on the Kings side when his will commands contrá in such a case even Conscience it selfe requires us to preferre the dictate of his will in our obedience There was among the Romanes a power called potestas regia which was absolute and above the Lawes still reteined in that Common Wealth after the enacting of that festivall called Regifugium for the banishment of their Kings and it was inherent to the Person of the supreme magistrate that was pro tempore for those wise men though they were great lovers of that which they called Liberty yet they conceived that if the chiefe Authority were restrained within the streights of Lawes it could not be exercised to the publike utility and therefore since all Lawes were to be interpreted pro ratione locorum temporum ac personarum with respect to place time and person and many things fell out which might render the Law evill that was in it selfe good they thought it fit in all doubtfull cases to repaire ad Dictaturae Ius to the Personall direction of a chiefe Magistrate called the Dictator et quod Dictatori ut res postulabat fuit temporarium Imperatori et Regi oportet esse ut sit perpetuum what was to him temporary is to a setled King perpetuall the State of the Kingdome so requireing Ob. But suppose Ius or Right be on the Lawes side and the Kings will be to violate that as well as the Law Answ I answer that notwithstanding a King should do so yet I do not conceive it lawfull for Christian Subjects to resist him by force of arms In the Jewish Politicks we know that were made by Moses was couched not onely Law but even Right it selfe yet when Samuel foretold the people of the conditions of their King and mentions such acts of His will as might be reckoned among such kinde of violations he did not grant them any warrant or countenance for resistance when the King should take away their Sons and Daughters to serve his lust and will their servants and feilds to dispose of according to his pleasure 1 Sam. 8.18 Samuel doth not say thereupon and you shall fight it out in that day against your King But and you shall cry out in that day because of your King and to whom shall they cry to the people or to one another no but even unto the Lord saies the Text who gave the King and who alone is above the King and who sometimes permits a King for the peoples sins to do such things Indeed reason saies that God onely whose servant the King is hath power over him and to him onely we must repaire if we have any businesse concerning him Pro. 21.1 to which parpose the Spirit saies the Kings heart is in Gods hand who turneth it as himselfe willeth all mens hearts we know are in Gods hand too but the Kings heart is said to be there in a speciall manner to teach that our duty is to use Gods helpe onely when we would have the Kings heart turned to us if we neglect God in such a case and addresse our selves unto the people stir up them to rage and be tumultuous wee shall rather drive the King further from us then draw him nearer to us no way or hand can or shall incline the Kings heart but the way or Hand of God Nehemiah went to God when he would have the Kings Heart inclined to him and his request and so did Mordecay and Hester when they desired the like favour from the King These are Reverend Sir the objections as I remember that were expressed or involved in your discourse which according to my weak power and my Conscience I have thus answered and do conclude that I cannot see how it is lawfull to resist the Kings Personall commands in the behalfe of his Legall when opposite I do conceive that rather then so his Personall if not against the Commands of God are to be obeyed nor can I apprehend how a man in such a case can properly be said to breake any Law that obeyeth the Commands of the Law-maker Sect. 10 I now come unto your Scriptures which were alleadged to prove the lawfulnesse of resistance They are not precepts any of them yet for points of practice in matters of far lesse moment precepts are necessary and I must confesse I thinke it strange that a businesse of such high concernmentâ—â—s resisting a King by force of Armes should be in action among Christians and not one direct command of God to bottome it upon Ob. Yea but if the Examples be pregnant and nothing in Gods word contradicting they being many may be as valid as a precept Yes haply in some cases though whether in such a one as this I question but are these such nothing lesse they are rather blinde and unlikely suppositions and so thread-bare with often use for want of better change that for this purpose almost to every eye they seeme worthlesse The first is that of the peoples resisting Saul in the behalfe of Jonathan 1 Sam. 14.45 But how did they resist the words of the Text are these The people said unto Saul who had made a rash vow shall Jonathan die who hath wrought so great salvation in Israel God forbid as the Lord liveth there shall not one haire of his head fall to the ground for he hath wrought with God this day so the people rescued Jonathan that he died not Here we see are onely Reasons and Arguments such as might become prayers here is no intimation of Armes or violent resistance as therefore Saint Peter might be said to be rescued out of prison by the prayers of the Church or Nabal and his family from slaughter by the prayers of Abigail so was Jonathan out of danger by the prayers of the people And that is the judgement of Divines Junius Borrhaius Psiander whom Willet alleadgeth in this case and Gregory as I finde him quoted And reason sayes that Saul might easily be intreated by his Subjects without any violent resistance on their parts to breake a rash and unlawfull vow to save the life of his eldest sonne whom he loved who was
a people before there was a King he was ordained for their good and therefore is to serve them Answ So Esau was Iacobs elder Brother yet the elder was appointed to serve the younger and the whole world that great Kingdome was made before man yet made for his sake to serve him not he to serve that indeed a King is no more ordained for the peoples good then they are for his good they are each ordained for other good and both for Gods glory which is most advanced by peace and union so that 't is not Salus populi alone but 't is Salus Regis et populi that is suprema Lex and so highly to be regarded nor doth Salus populi consist in resisting or suppressing the King What saies Pilate the Heathen to them that called themselves Gods people shall I crucify your King q. d. what an unnaturall and unreasonable thing is it for Subjects to goe about to ruinate their own King if they had answered O 't is to save our selves Pilate would have laught them to scorne although indeed perhaps when people go about any such businesse 't is to save some of themselves whose black merits do make them suspicious of the Kings mercy but should they prevaile the effect would shew that the safety of the enemies would never countervaile to the Commonwealth the Kings dammage Some there be that thinke Salus populi to consist in Liberty and Liâ— qerty as they conceive is for every man to do what is right in his owne eyes be of what Religion he please commit Idolatrie and Adultery rob plunder and take away the goods of others be both his owne Carver and his owne Judge and thus it was of old when there was no King in Israel ergo But Sir though some upon a taste of this kinde of Liberty which hath of late been permitted to them cry out O these be the blessed dayes these be the happy times yet you and I cannot but conceive that they are the beginning of sorrowes wil end in bitternesse we know this Liberty is every way destructive and rather Beast-like then Humane whereas this should be Christian which consists cheifly parendo Gods service is a perfect freedome and there was a King set up in Israel to remedy those abuses And thus Sir you see that I doe not apprehend from your reasons or arguments any necessity of such resistance in the case Now concerning the Oath or Covenant which the King takes or makes at his Coronation how that doth countenance a defensive resistance Sect. 12 on the Subjects part if the Prince shall make a breach thereof we shall a little consider First Sir let me minde you of what you yeilded namely that the King is King before his Coronation indeed his Crowne is but a note or ensigne of his Kingly dignity he hath a right unto and is in actuall possession of his Inheritance given him of God before he makes his Covenant on the Coronation day which cannot therefore be supposed to be conditionall with the people nor be thought that he by it from them receives his office with a quandiu bene se gesserit so that of necessity he must forfeit his power unto them if he breakes his promise We read that supreme Princes in ancient times as they were free from Lawes so from Oathes the Romane Empire was not wont to sweare unto the Senate or to the people but they both did take an Oath to him Those Oathes Covenants the Scripture mentions in the Story of the Kings of Iudah were not made or taken by the King if we marke them but by the people to their King or by the King and people together unto the Lord after some generall defection from his worship and service no this custome of a Kings swearing is the Infant of later times it was borne ad faciendum fidem peoples distrust was the parent of it evill suspicion as being for the most part the root of Rebellion was ever counted ominous and therefore to prevent a sinister opinion of a new King it was thought meet by such Princes upon their solemne Coronation day to enter into a visible Covenant with God in the presence of their people And I beleive the custome 's good as a meane by Gods grace to keepe a Prince his will within the bounds of Conscience but in that it was not so ab initio it plainly shewes that a Kings entrance into his Government doth no whit depend upon his Covenant nor doth this Covenant at all diminish his supremacy or derogate from the absolutenesse of his Power no if it were made unto his people as it is not I do not see how of necessity it must make him any way liable to their subjection God himself was pleased ad faciendam fidem to swear to Abraham and to David yet did hee not thereby any way make himselfe their inferiour But indeed the Kings Oath and Covenant is onely unto God 't is His Oath of Allegiance to the Lord and in effect to this purpose that he will discharge the trust imposed upon him by the God of Heaven and earth of whom he holds his Kingdome and this is made visibly in the presence of the people that they might not distrust the faithfulnesse or integrity of that Person to whom is committed by him who knowes all hearts so great a Power And sure as 't is a heavy sinne in a Prince to falsify his Covenant with the Majestie of Heaven so 't is no small sinne in Subjects to distrust a Prince his fidelity upon slight grounds or to expose him by any means to the generall suspicions of his people But now Sir what warrant have the Subjects from hence for their resistance if the King breakes his Oath to God is not God able to revenge his owne cause hath hee not alwayes done it observe stories and see if you can name one example of any King though never so great that brake Covenant with God whom God hath not remembred and is his arme shortned or is not his Justice still the same Ob. O yes say some we have a warrant to helpe the Lord against the mighty Meroz was cursed because she did not Answ Meroz indeed was cursed with a bitter curse and did deserve it because she came not to helpe her King her Captain or supreme Judge whom God had set over her on whose side the Lord was against his Enemies that rose up or went out against him that were so many and so mighty but she is not cursed because she did not resist her owne Governour The breach of our Oath of Alleagiance unto the King is onely an offence against the King and to be punished by him and not by any of his Subjects without his Authority nay if any breake promise and Covenant with one of us our selves onely can justly accuse him and shall we not allow God the same Priviledge by what Authority therefore do you this thing call
Stephen tells us he knew then that God had appointed him for that service but that errour cost him 40 yeares exile in the Wildernesse and when God imployed him he directed him to goe in another way namely in all humility to repaire unto the King and demand a dismission at his hands we cannot but suppose that God could have made them able had there beene fewer of them with their owne swords to make their owne way and by his command could have made it lawfull so to have done but this other course which God would have them take did in the effect more aggravate Pharaohs obstinacy and illustrate the Religion of Gods people and was more to the magnifying of Gods glory In the fourth place let me minde you of that in the first of Samuel cap. 8. the 9 and following verses God having a purpose to give Israel a King doth order so in his wisedome that they should make sute for him themselves whereupon he takes occasion by his Prophet in that place to forewarne them of some intolerable qualities that might fall to be in some of their Kings and thereby doth timely prepare them to obedience and patience under them if we marke there is as great injustice and tyranny foretold as could be imagined their sonnes daughters and servants should be taken from them those that were noble and free borne should be made slaves and put to servile offices their lands and goods should be extorted from them and diverted to his owne and his Courtiers private use and commodity which were as great breaches of the Lawes of the Common-wealth as any could be made yet no resistance in the case is countenanced but countermanded rather the onely course prescribed is vers 18. You shall cry unto the Lord in that day as if he had said be as weary as you will or as you have cause yet you shall not have leave to shake off the yoake which God through your importunity hath layed upon you it shall not be lawfull for you to resist or oppose by force these personall and unjust courses of your King but you shall onely cry unto God as you cryed for a King so shall you cry under a King and till ease and helpe comes unto you this way you must submit to the highest extremities that his illegall will shall impose upon you It is to be remembred that this was at the first erection of a King among Gods people and all Scripture being written for our Learning doublesse this is chronicled in Gods booke for the instruction of all Subjects that should acknowledge and feare the Lord in after times And most fitly also for the good of posterity did Gods providence and spirit strengthen this prescription by recording the example of Davids carriage toward that their first King for as Saul discovered in part the described manners of such a King as Samuel had spoke of so David discovered the prescribed conditions of such a Subject as God approves off It is well knowne how unjustly and illegally he was persecuted by Saul and how he avoyded his fury onely by flying from place to place he did not hunt the King the King hunted him He in all his streights did cry to God and trusted in his providence and he lost nothing by it God wrought for him better then he could have done for himselfe and did him more good then e're his owne resistance could have done him 't is worthy our speciall remembrance how God provided for his escape in the wildernesse of Maon when he was so encircled about with Saul and his men that of necessity he must be killed if he did not stand upon his owne defence 1 Sam. 23.27 but God would not suffer a good Subject to have a hand in so sinfull a businesse or to leave so evill an example to after-times and therefore his providence sends a messenger to tell Saul that the Philistims had invaded his Land whereby he was on the sudden forced to be gone and so David was delivered 1 Sam. 29. Likewise at another time when David was in as great a streight namely when he should have gone out with Achish against Saul the Lord did also deliver him Achish had allowed him Ziglag to dwell in for David durst not in conscience possesse himselfe of any Citie in Israel without the Kings leave much lesse hold it against his will and therefore that he might not offend he fled the Kingdome and God gave him favour in the eyes of Achish an enemy to Israel and David could not tell how in gratitude to deny Achish to goe out with him against their common enemy and therefore fained a willingnesse but doubtlesse in his spirit he cryed unto the Lord for his helpe that he might not be forced to lift up his hand against his Soveraigne whereupon the Lord moved the Princes of the Philistims to dislike of his being there so that he and his men were dismissed thus is the Lord ready at hand to helpe those good Subjects in their streights that walke in the wayes of loyalty and God is still the same 1 Sam. 15. I could here minde you of Samuels behaviour when he had from the Lord pronounced Sauls rejection how he went home and prayed and wept for him did not stirre up the people to rebell against him he did not forget as some of us doe his owne doctrine of passive obedience 1 Sam. 8. which formerly he had preached unto them I could also remember you of Elias his carriage towards Ahab an unjust man one that had sold himselfe to worke wickednesse that Prophet had as good credit with the people as any Preacher in these dayes hath to have perswaded them to resist his illegall commands had it beene lawfull for him to have imployed it that way but he onely saved himselfe by flight from his cruelty and so by his example taught others to doe But the fifth speciall place which I desire you to observe is the story in the booke of Ezra Ezra 1.1 c. Cyrus you know had made a Decree and the Lawes of the Medes and Persians were unalterable concerning the building of the Temple at Jerusalem which worke the adversaries of the Jewes hindered and obtained a Letter from King Artaxerxes one of Cyrus his successors to command the Jewes to cease Ezra 4.21 unto which Ezra 6.3 though onely the personall command of the King and contrary to a written and unalterable Law the people of God submitted did not stand upon their owne defence pleading the Decree of Cyrus or the goodnesse of the worke the building of Gods owne House Ezra 4.24 but sayes the Text The worke ceased untill the second yeare of Darius King of Persia when as they had new leave to proceed in the same And by the way 't is worthy to be observed for the better practice of this age when the King had given them authority and put it into their hands to
stand or no by making an assault against the Royall foundation and the Noble pillars that did support the building and then the Commission to kill slay and destroy all that raised or conducted forces against those who went with the same the King himselfe not being excepted though it might easily be apprehended that He and his faithfull Nobles would be constrained to gather strength to defend themselves did speak such plaine English to my apprehension that when the Chaire-man of the Committee threatned to make such a report of me to the House as should prove little to mine ease unlesse I would goe home and preach to promote that businesse I durst not feare his threats to offend my conscience for I durst not be so unnaturall to my deare Country as to helpe forward its destruction nor indeed so injurious to my unkinde neighbours as to spurre them on to their owne hurt whereunto already they are every way too forward the Lord amend them Pretences move not me as they doe other men when actions speake a contrary language the Pharisees in our Saviours time pretended they were for God and Antichrist now pretends he is for Christ and the Rebels in Ireland pretend they are for the King sed quid verba audiam cum facta videam I must not winke that I may not see Esau may be discovered by his hands and ye shall know them by their fruits sayes our Saviour there is I confesse but one meane under mercy beside the Justice of the Kings cause which gives me hope that God may yet suspend to destroy us utterly and that is the course that hath beene taken of late in casting so many good Ministers and Christians of all sorts both noble and of low degree into prison the best place for prayer and the best meanes to provoke thereto the God of mercy inlarge all their hearts in the duty and stirre their bowels Gainsaying reason 9. This way is against reason for 't is unreasonable to proceed in that path wherein we see all others have perished before us who that hath viewed in Sleidans Commentaries the Story of the Anabaptists at Munster that can deny the proceedings of this generation to be like theirs they pretended the cause of God and against the superstition in Churches and of Church-men as also strange lights and revelations they endeavoured at the ruine of their Governours and Magistrates and they had some Preachers of eminent note for gifts and abilities as Bernard Rotman and others that were assisters in the businesse but did they prevaile and prosper in the end nothing lesse much mischeife indeed they did and much bloud they shed of the best men but the strife did end in their owne destruction So who that hath observed in the French story the waies and doings of them that call'd themselves the Holy League in the daies of their Henry the 3d. but must needs say that the practice of some Associatours in this our nation against their Soveraigne doth most notably in many particulars go parrallell with them 't is said that the Preachers tongues who were for that Holy League did further their affaires more then their souldiers swords and that in those daies it was more feared to speake evill of a Page of such or such a Nobleman who was a Leaguer then of the King himselfe what ever respect was pretended to him Massac of France in the life of Hen. 3. Pag. 164. The intent of the Leaguers saies the Historian was to incroach upon the King and to leave him nothing but a vaine shadow of Royall Authority under the conduction and direction of their Tyranny and as a Bridge to passe to this point they indeavoured to make all his actions odious and intolerable by their false charges and imputations and in another place they were altogether against peace stirring up the poeple to oppose the Kings desires thereto and the edict thereof Pag. 8. But they pretended they were for God for the Honour and increase of Religion the utter extirpation of Heresy to preserve the estate and crowne of the King and to maintaine the rights and priviledges of the Subject yet they swore obedience and service to the Generall that should be appointed over their fellowship ingageing their lives Honours and estates to adhere unto him and all that would not assent to the Association should be persecuted as Enemies to God rebels to the State and perturbatours of the publicke good in which number were also reckoned those that fell from it Let mee alleadge the Historians Expostulation with the Leaguers concerning their Pretences and doings What thinke you to doe O you Leaguers for God for the faith Pag. 8. and 9. for the King you undertake Armes for God who desires nothing but peace you publish Rebellion he commands obedience you trouble the rest and quietnesse of a Christian King God willeth us to endure at the hand of a Prince although he be a Pagan you do it for God whose name you call upon and deny the power you do it for God who detests your actions and knowes your thoughts you do it for God that will confound all those that breed confusion among his people you undertake wars for religion and nothing hinders that more then wars you fight for Holinesse and yet you authorize blasphemies plant Atheisme impiety and despiseing of Devotion in all places you march under pretence of the Churches cause and yet spoile the Clergy and destroy the Churches c. You say 't is for the King if it be where are his Commissions if for his service where are his Commandements if for him why do you it without him if for his obedience wherfore do you adhere to the head of the League can you serve two Masters and be bound by one oath to two Contraries c. Know you not that all bearing of Armes is treason without the Kings Authority that the Subjects cannot make any league without the Prince c and againe Pardon mee I beseech you saies he Noble Princes Prelates Lords and Gentlemen if I tell you that this fortresse which you build will be your overthrow this fire you Kindle will burne your selves these Knives you forge will be tempered in your owne entrailes and that thereby you will leave neither of your selves nor your League but a most pitifull and shamefull memory c. Pag. 170. Sir I write but the Historians words which I leave to your owne thoughts concluding them with his relation of the Lord de Mandelot a Noble Personage of those times that it was to his great comfort upon his death-bed that he had never subscribed to that falsely stiled Holy League but died constant in his religion and the service of his King and I am confident that all those Noble Lords and Gentlemen among us who in that are like him shall when they die partake of his comforts in their Consciences but those on the other side though they may helpe to butcher
Kings Person p. 9 6. The Subjects duty and the Soveraignes Excellency p. 10 7. Inward Honour is due to the King and how the same is to be expressed p. 16 8. The question about resisting the Kings Person stated and opened p. 22 9. The lawfulnesse of resisting the Kings personall will by force of Armes disavowed p. 25 10. Scripture examples for it answered p. 30 11. Arguments from Reason answered p. 34 12. Objection from the Kings Oath answered p. 41 13. Scriptures alleadged to evidence the unlawfulnesse of this resistance p. 48 14. Particular Reasons why the Authors Conscience cannot permit him to concurre with some of his Brethren in the way of resistance p. 61 15. This way of Resistance shewed to be 1. Against the way of God p. 66 2. Destructive to the whole Law of God p. 67 3. Inconsistent with the spirit of the Gospell p. 71 4. Contradictive to the perpetuall practice of Christianity p. 72 5. Opposite to the Calling of Ministers p. 74 6. Adverse to common Prudence p. 75 7. Dissentive from the rule of Humanity p. 76 8. Contrary to nature it selfe p. 77 9. Gain-saying Reason p. 78 10. Against the Oath of Allegeance and late Protestation p. 83 84 Reader By reason of the Authors absence some of these Sections are not so plainly noted as the rest wherefore for your better information of the summe of each and where they begin have recourse to this Table Faults escaped in some Copies PAg. 9. lin 21. for yet reade yea◠p. 14. l. 1. r. more l. 15. r. rather makes p. 15 l. 4. r. hinder l. 21. for these r those p. 16. l. 13. r. the Lord will not l. 25. r. thousands p. 21. l. 35. dele and now Sir p. 22. l. 1. r. you discerne l. 3. for at r. out l. 34. for or r. and. p. 23. l. 6. r. contraria l. 14. r. proper l 17. for divers r. armes p. 24. l. 20. r. by Subjects p. 30. l. 9. r. purpose p. 31. l. 19. r. Osiander p. 35. l. 12. r. which p. 39. l. 19. r. singulatim l. 36. r. thee p. 40. l. 34. for this r. our p. 41. l. 16. for Empire r. Emperour p. 48. l. 29. for his r. this p. 89. l. 16. r. will of my c. TO MY REVEREND FRIEND AND BROTHER Mr STEPHEN MARSHALL THe God of all Wisedome Grace and Peace for Christs sake direct all our spirits ever to promote and do that onely which tendeth to the advancement of his owne glory and the tranquillity of this Church and State Amen SIR THe distance of place betwixt us causeth mee to reply by writing unto those things that were urged at our last meeting which at that time I rather heard then answered and now I do professe in the sight of that great God who knowes all hearts and must one day judge us that I desire to maintain no opinion as mine but as I conceive it to be a divine truth I am ready to deny my selfe in forsaking what I hold if at length such arguments as the weight of the cause requires can be produced against it out of Gods booke which is the onely bridle to my conscience In the first place I begge leave of your patience to declare my judgement or if you please my faith in the case I will plainely sincerely and fully expresse it with the grounds thereof then I will answer your Objections and discover how Scripture to my apprehension doth fairely lead mee out of that Labirinth wherein perhaps you thought mee left intangled and lastly I will give some reasons why my conscience disrelisheth that other way wherein diverse of my reverend and well regarded brethren walke SECT I. The KING hath immediate dependance upon God and to him onely is accountable Wherefore my good friends be you pleased to know that I do beleeve what ever the fancy of this Age is that next to Gods Sacred word and worship Kings and Kingdomes are things of the most high and reverend regard in this world with great humility therefore to be thought upon and discoursed of For as Scripture above all other writings so Kings above all other persons have an immediate dependance upon God Dan. 2.21 they are of his sole making He removeth and setteth up Kings And Kingdomes are of his owne disposing Dan. 4.25 The most High ruleth in the Kingdome of men and gives it to whomsoever he will Rom 13.1 And although it is most true that all the powers that be are ordained of God Joh. 19.11 and there is no power but what is given from above for as by him Kings Reigne so also by him Princes rule and Nobles yea all the Iudges of the earth Prov. 8.15 16. yet I beleeve all inferiour powers under the King are from God more remotely namely mediante Rege by the mediation of the supreme even as the lesser Starres have their light from God by the mediation of the Sunne they are the Kings delegates ordained and sent by him saies the Apostle who is sent by God 1 Pet. 2.14 and is under God the chiefe à Deo secundus post quem primus saith Tertullian And hence the Throne of the King is called the Throne of God wherein the King judgeth for God in Gods stead 1. Chro. 29.23.24 but the seat of the inferiour Magistrates is called the Kings seat where they sit and judge for him And hence too the King or supreme hath his Patent immediately from God He is Rex Dei gratiâ and his title is Gode Deputy or the Minister of God Rom. 13.4 but the Inferiour Magistrates have their Patents from the King they are Magistratus Regis gratiâ and are intituled the Kings Ministers or the Kings Iudges And as the man is said to be the Image of God and the woman to be the Image of the man upon whom she hath dependance 1. Cor. 11.7 so the King is the Image of God and inferiour powers in regard of their dependance upon him are the Images of the King they in their places represent Him as Hee in his place represents God and they no otherwise represent God then as they represent the King The King is to them as Moses was to Aaron and the other Judges Ex. 4.16 the mouth of God and they are the mouth of the King unto the people as Aaron and those others were the mouth of Moses Ex. 18.22 And as the Kings duty is to preferre Gods will before his owne so their duty is to preferre the Kings will before their owne when it contradicteth not the will of God revealed in his words And hence I gather that none can call Soveraigne Princes to an account if they transgresse but only God whose immediate stewards they are solum Deum quem habent Authorem habent quoque judicem therefore David well tibi tibi soli peccavi against thee Ps 51.4 thee only have sinned that is thou only O