own taking up should not find any cause to refuse obedience I conceive is the meaning of those absolute and unlimited injunctions which the Scripture layes upon Subjects in respect of their Superior powers so then the duty which God hath appointed Subjects to observe towards those that are over them in the places of power is clearly inconsistent with the scrupulositie of this question concerning their Right and Title to Rule Nor should those that are in places of power suffer their titles by meer private Subjects to be questioned for either they should actually suppresse the disputes disquiries of that nature in privat men as not at all belonging to their cognizance or they should prevent it in others who are to be accounted their equals to whom in reason they are accountable of their proceedings for God hath made no men so Supreme as not to be accountable unto others in a reasonable way by some satisfactory declarations or demonstrations of the grounds of their Right to their places of the equity of their proceedings therein Nor lastly can it stand with sound Reason or a good conscience in any privat man to take upon him to be a Judge of that matter to suspend his acts of obedience in things otherwise good lawfull in themselves till his scruples in that kinde be satisfied For first no sound reason will allow any man to take upon him the judicature of rights whereof it is not obvious to him to know the true grounds circumstantially seeing al claims to places amongst men depend upon the concurrences of many circumstances which in the way of justice give to one take away from another a right to the same it is in Gods hand alone to order the incidency of those circumstances between those that have power and the competitors for the same places privat men cannot possibly in their ordinary way wherein they are bound to stand and walk know assuredly the incidencies of these circumstances which change the nature of rights and claimes to places therefore no justice nor reason can allow privat men to be Iudges of things whereof it is not morally possible for them to have a true insight and whereinto they have no calling by God or men to make a speciall inquiry without which they become unreasonably and unconscionably presumptuous if they settle within themselvs or utter towards others any judgement definitively Then in the second place it is a most unconscionable practice in any whom God hath put in the place of subjection and of living in a private station to resist the powers that are over him requiring good and lawfull things onely because he is not satisfied in their right to require those things of him and in their Title to their places as if Superiour Powers that are actually in the posession of places which God hath put in their hands to rule others by and serve the publick with were accountable to every private man concerning their right by which they stand under God in their Charges and as if it were lawfull for men professing Christianity to dispense with matters of duty in themselves commendable and profitable to common edification onely because they will appear opposite for some worldly respects unto those that are over them to whom they owe due respect and submission Now after all this if you say what shall private Christians then make themselves slaves to any that will rule over them without judging rationally who are their lawfull Superiours to whom they owe obedience I say to this no for Christians are the only free men of the world all the rest are slaves to their proper passions lusts opposite interests but he that is subject to the law of liberty doing all by a Rule is truly free and none but he But you will say by what rule then shall he discern who is his superior I answer by a rule agreeable to sense to reason and to conscience Sense will shew him who is actually in profession of all power and places of Government over him and by this he will perceive under whom he doth stand Reason will shew what he who is over him pretends unto whether yea or no his pretences are backed with power to maintain his right against all adversaries therein and whether yea or no the use of that power be limited by law or let wholly to his own will without any law And Conscience will shew that he to whom God hath committed the plenary administration of publick affairs with unconfrontable power is Gods vicegerent over the society of those to whom his administration doth extend it self either by vertue of a contract which makes a law or by vertue of a conquest which is bound to no law but the will of the Conqueror for if the Apostle doth teach us that all soules ought to be subject to the higher powers because there is no power but of God and because the powers that be in place are ordained of God then it will follow that those who are actually supreme and in a plenary possession of power ought to be obeyed as Gods Ordinance for it is not possible that any can attain to the height of power without Gods disposall of it into his hands Here then a Christian rests and freely performs his duty toward him in all things good and lawfull and makes no further inquiry after the rights to titles according to lawes of men because he doth consider that the most high giveth the Kingdomes of men to whomsoever he pleaseth Thus keeping my Spirit from flying out beyond his bounds one way and following the directions of a clear rule another way I prevent this example wherewith you trouble your self without cause and intangle your Conscience against your duty But here again it may be said if this bee the condition of subjects and if their duty toward Superiors is thus circumscribed what way is there left for them to be freed from the unnaturall usurpation of tyrannicall powers I answer there be three ways which God hath left to the reason of men to make use of partly to prevent partly to redresse the tyrannicall usurpations of an over ruling Roman The first is to settle subordinate Officers under him with out whom he cannot act The second is to settle lawes whereby to circumscribe him and their actings and a law making power to whom both he and they are to be accountable And the third is the great and invincible law of necessity whereof every one is so far the judge in his own cause and in his own place as he is moved thereby to venture his life and welfare to observe the dictates thereof by these means subjects without judging of the titles of Superiours may represse the undue usurpation of power in tyrannicall spirits where you may take notice that although you and I as private men ought not to make our selves judges of the rights which superiors pretend to have in to their places yet
that they are not without a judicature over them in those places for the subordinate Officers belonging to a state are bound to judge of the rights of those that are over them both by which they stand in their places of supremacy and by which they proceed in their actings toward subjects least they be made the instruments of Arbitrary power and Tyranny and then also the law-making power which in all Nations resides by the law of Nature in the convention of the Representatives of the whole body of the people whether it be made up of the heads of familes or of chosen Deputies who are intrusted with a delegated power from all the rest doth make or unmake rights in all places and persons within it self as it from time to time doth see cause As for the Law of necessity which begetteth war whereby God is immediately appealed unto by those that pretend to have no Superiors on earth that he may judge of their rights whatsoever his hand doth determine in the event is to be counted the right of those in favour of whom the determination is made by his judgement By these rules then quiet your mind according to your place concerning the right which the present powers have to Rule do not take upon you to define matters whereof you are no competent judge you are made a competent judge only of your own actions which belong to a subject as you are under a visible and uncontroulable power which God hath set over you and your duty is to submit thereunto in all things agreeable to the will of God judging your self that you put no stumbling block or an occasion of offence in any mans way Rom. 14 13 yet I will not say but in the judgement of discretion as you are a member of this Common-wealth and concerned in the publick welfare thereof you may look upon your superiours to see how they pretend to stand that is by what apparent right and with what visible power they possess their places but this you ought not to do so peremptorily as to oblige your conscience as to be suspended upon the observations which you shall happen to make of them and their proceedings as if your private iudgement in such cases should be the Rule by which you ought to walk in point of obedience I say you ought not to set up this judgement of yours so high within your self and over others as to drown the thoughts of all other rules but you ought to limit it as I have said before within the bounds of Christianity and discreet rationallity wherein that I may help you yet a little further Consider soberly with your self what can be answered to this plea which they will alleadge for themselves 1. Whether yea or no the Nationall tye and association by which we were a Common-wealth while we were yet called a Kingdome hath ever been dissolved 2. If it hath not been dissolved what hath kept it entire in the middest of all these shakings was is not a Parliament and the subordination of all Officers throughout the nation under it 3. And if a Parliament is still remaining and all subordinate Officers in places of judicature and execution stand under it throughout the whole nation so that all men may have a legal protection from injuries what is there wanting to a lawfull power and government 4. If nothing be wanting to a legall protection for those that acknowledge the jurisdiction then such as acknowledge it not do put themselves out of that protection and if they resist the power which God hath set over them for the publick good and which is actually fully possest with al the places of publick administration they resist the Ordinance of God and they that resist this Ordinance saith the Apostle shall receive to themselves damnation Rom. 12.2 As for the point of enquiry how these particular men in whose hands the power and government is are come to their present places whether in a legall way or that which you call usurpation it doth not belong to the Conscience of any man who is in a private station to determine peremptorily far lesse upon his determination to suspend his actings towards the publique good Yet if in this also you desire to reflect upon the passages of Right without oblieging your Conscience to stand engaged either way by that which you shall observe I shall further suggest these heads of matters appliable unto the case of those whom you suspect to be usurpers unto your impartiall meditation as a Plea which they do alledge for themselves First Whether yea or no it be any way unjust by the law of Nature among men that are equals to resist force with force Secondly If it be just among equals to resist force with force the second point will be to consider Whether he that invades another mans naturall right or he that defends his own is to be accounted the Usurger Thirdly If he that invades and seeks to deprive another man of his right be the Usurper then he that by resistance is deprived of that whereof he attempted to deprive his neighbour is not wronged by way of usurpation but justly defeated of the power which he did abuse Now they will say that the case was thus first between the King and Parliament if you count them Equals which is the least can be given say they to a Parliament by the Law of Nature and Nations and then afterward between the one party and the other in the Parliament the same case was acted again as between Equals whereupon the City Militia on the one hand and the Army on the other was depending and see on work for action And how far these powers having dashed those that prevailed did think themselves necessitated to settle the safety of the Common-wealth in their own way and what settlement that hath by Gods permission brought forth and upon what ground it now stands I shall not need to represent unto you only the sober consideration of the grounds which the party accused of usurpation doth alleadge for its proceedings are to be thought upon indifferently without prajudicat affectus if you will free your Conscience from a snare And this shall suffice also concerning the first branch of your second doubt but let us now come to the second branch thereof which supposing the power to be usurped doth question how far by taking the Engagement you become accessary to the guilt thereof To this question I shall answer briefly thus That the Engagement being a duty just to be required by the present Powers from their subjects without the performance of which there is no protection due unto them and necessary to be performed by all that will not professe themselves desirous to overthrow the present safety and publique wellfare of the nation it cannot make those that take it accessary to the guilt of those that tender it if any be in them because the performance of a thing good in it self
and just and neceessary for me to do in reference unto others can derive no guilt before God from others of the evill which may be in them upon me All Morall actions are to be counted good or evill lawfull or unlawfull according to the justice of the rule by which they are done and according unto the usefulnesse and conveniency of the imediate and proper end for which they are done and if both these be found in the Agent thereof no guilt can from without be brought upon him by any co-Agents Now the Rule of Justice in this case is That we are bound to shew fidelity unto those of whom we desire protection And that we are bound to be ready to every good work towards those with whom we live which is all that in the present state of this common-wealth is required of us which if we desire not 10 performe we deserve not to have a being in it and if we desire to performe this there can be no cause why we should not professe it or why the profession of our willingnesse to do this should make us guilty of other mens sins As concerning the end for which the Engagement is to be taken it is to obliege all to ented one and the same publique good so far as in the present constitution of affairs it may be advanced and to give the Supreme Power an assurance that we shall not betray it but that we are willing to maintain all good intelligence for publiqe Governments with it notwithstanding the present changes brought upon the Common-wealth Suppose those that have the present Power had without any apprehension of necessary for common safety or danger to their own safety and liberty only for some finister ends usurped the places wherein they are yet by Gods permissions and direction over me they being now therein and finding themselves oblieged by their places to procure peace and unity among the subjects of this Land and to preserve the publique interest for the good of all according to their best understanding if they use any expedient which doth tend thereunto and offer it unto me to concur with them therein with what Conscience can I refuse a concurrence to such an intention If they having done amisse formerly set themselves now to do well can I with any conscience oppose them therein Is it just or pious that because they found no safety in the way by which I would have settled the Common-wealth and have altered it that therefore I should refuse to concur with them henceforth in any other way or at their motion do any thing although it may be found never so usefull and necessary in it self for the good of the Common-wealth If they were guilty one way as you imagine by taking upon them more then they had right to do take heed least you be more guilty another way by refusing to do that which before God and men you are oblieged to do if you are afraid of pertaking of their sin then take heed that you disturb not the publique welfare as much or more by this sin then they did by that If their guilt was by the usurpation of power to dissolve the way of settlement wherein we were take heed lest you obstruct al other ways which henceforth may be taken towards a happy settlement only by the refusall of due subjection unto the power that is now over you because you think your self or your party wrongfully deprived of the power which you had If you strive for power as much as you think they have done then you are more accessary to their usurpation by doing that your self for which you condemn them then by yeelding to any lawfull Engagement for the good of the Common-wealth which they propose unto you Thus while you pretend to avoid a doubtfull guilt of another mans sin least it reflect upon you you contract an undoubted guilt of your own sin by refusing a necessary duty to the Common-wealth The truth is they cannot be said guilty of Usurpation of Power for it was by all the Authority of the Common-wealth that then was both of King and Parliament put into their hands but if their guilt lies any where it is this that they abused their power now you cannot be made accessary to this abuse thereof which is already part if you give not your expresse consent and approbation to that which they did which I am confident they will never urge any man to do who will promise henceforward to be faithfull to the peace and prosperity of this state for some of the council of State themselves would not be ingaged to approve of all proceedings past and yet sit still in councell with them to advance the publick welfare in time to come wherby you may perceive that by this engagement they mean not to draw in others to be accessary to their past proceedings but to know who they are that are faithful in the land wiling to concur in good and lawfull undertakings in due time for this is all that the engagement can rationally be stretcht unto and he that wil not admit of it in this sense makes himself actually lyable to a greater sin then that which he pretends to be afraid to fall into which is a way of proceeding very preposterous and unconscionable of sin for fear of being found sinfull Hitherto I have insisted upon your two first doubts more largely then I did purpose at first therefore in the third and last I shall be more brief for if in the two former you be well satisfied concerning that which is your duty I cannot see how in this last you can be much further scrupled for if your conscience is once throughly convicted of the lawfulnesse and necessitsy of a duty it must cast the events consequences upon the performance of Gods providence and not by the conjecturall appearances of your own apprehensions in the ballance therewith In the third doubt you say the consequence of the engagment seems to tend to the opposition of two things first to exclude the lawfull heir of the crown from his right Secondly to exclude the Lords from sitting in Parliame to which things you say you are preingaged and from which you cannot recede To which I shall offer these considerations to your more deliberate judgement First if those be only seeming inconveniences and the other a certain and undoubted conveniency nay a necessary and a dispensable duty your conscience cannot justly suspend the latter for the formers sake for there is no proportion of obligation in respect of conscience between that which is seeming a and that which is undoubtedly certain we are commanded not to judge according to appearances but to judge righteous judgeme Joh 7.24 by which we must conclude that to follow appearances is not to follow the rules of righteousnesse and consequently that it is not conscionable to act unrighteous or to suspend righteous actings only for appearances of evill and as it is absund