delivered from such madnes and yet this libeller sayes that the king praying to be delivered from the Tumults prayeth to be delivered from the people and blasphemously concludes God save the people from such intercessours And we cannot beleive that God is in his thoughts whose mouth soe often abuseth his name Vpon the Bill for TRIENNIALL PARLIAMENTS and for setling this c. HE sayes the Bill for Trienniall Parliaments was a good Bill and the other for setling this at that time very expedient And this he sayes in the Kings owne words was noe more then what the world was full confirmed he might in Iustice reason honour and conscience graunt them for to that end he affirmes to have done it This man hath a confirmed enmitie against truth cannot make a right recitall The Kings words are that the world might be fully confirmed in my purposes at first to contribute what in Iustice reason honour and conscience I could to the happy succes of this Parliament I willingly past the Bill for Trienniall Parliaments The greatenes of the trust which his Majest put vpon the people by passing that Bill was a strong Argument that he would deny nothing which in Justice reason honour and conscience he might graunt not that the world was confirmed he might graunt that Bill in reason honour and conscience in respect of the matter of it for a greate part of the world was of opinion he might with better reason have denyed it had not his desire to shew his purposes of contributing what he could to the happy successe of the Parliament moved him And they might be confirmed thereby of his purposes to deny nothing which in Justice reason honour and conscience he could contribute to the happy successe of the Parliament It is the Kings manner to make vertues of his necessities and that neither prayse nor thankes are due to him for these beneficiall Acts. It cannot be expected that Rebells will retaine gratitude that have cast of loyaltie but let vs looke on his reasons and the first is that this first Bill graunts much lesse then two former statutes yet in force by Edw. the 3. that a Parliament should be called every yeare or oftner if neede were Either the libeller is vaine in producing this instance or in commending the Bill that gave much lesse then two former lawes in force and he must make the Parliament very inconsiderate that would soe much Importune a law soe farr short of what former lawes had enacted His ancient law booke called the mirror and his late Treatise that Parliaments by our old lawes were to be twice a yeare at London carry as litle Authoritie as cleerenes what those Parliaments were they mention but neither the statutes nor law bookes did ever affirme the right of calling Parliaments in any other then the King or that he might not deferr the calling of them if he saw cause and these statutes were made to declare the subjects dutie to attend the King in his Parliament once a yeare or oftner if neede were and there was noe reason why oftner should have been inserted into the law if any obligation were intended thereby vpon the King And its contrary vnto the writt whereby Parliaments are called that the time of Parliaments should be defined for it is recited to be an Act of Councell to call a Parliament which needed not if it were necessary at a prefixed time The second Bill he sayes was soe necessary that nothing in the power of man more seemed to be the stay of all things from ruine then that Act. We are sure that nothing did more confirme the designes of the Traytours nor hasten that ruine of the Kingdome they have wrought then that Act. All men descerne the fraudulent artifices vsed to gaine that Bill by pretending publique debts which seditious faction had contracted and intended to encrease for the carrying on of their Rebellion and his Majest in graunting that Bill hoped to take of those occasions of it the Reports which they cast out among the people of his vnwillingnes to rayse money for discharge of the Armyes These charges were occasioned by the Kings ill stewardshipp but the world satisfied it was from a trayterous conspiracie of the guides of this Rebellion He alleadges his needeles raysing of two Armies to withstand the Scotts which noe man but a profest Rebell can soe call for should he have raysed noe Army but left all to the mercy of the invader next he had beggerd both himselfe the publique When by this libellers owne confession the King had received noe supplies from the publique for raysing those Armies and these shameles Traytours blush not to talke of the Kings beggering of the people when the greate plentie his Government had enriched them with is soe visible in those vast leavies which the Rebells have since made vpon them The King left vs vpon the score of his needy Enemies If they had not been too much friends to the traytours of England there had been noe score to them for all men know whatever they received from England was by the contrivance of the Trayterous faction in Parliament to accomplish their ends To disengage him greate summs were borrowed Which its well knowne was not to disengage the King but to advance the designes of the Traytours who dealt vnder hand with some of the Scotts to protract the Treatie that the charges might be encreast The errours of his Government had brought the Kingdomes to such extreames as were incapable of recovery without the absolute continuance of this Parliament They never did one act after that Bill but in order to the Kingdomes confusion and all men saw there were noe extreames to be recovered at the time of passing that Bill but the returne of the Scotts and the disbanding the faction in Parliament and the only recovery had been by setting an end to the Parliament which they that made it their propertie could not endure The King past these Acts vnwillingly It cannot be doubted but the King foresaw the danger of both and the libeller might have seene in the first section of this Chapter that his Maj was not without doubt that what he intended for a remedy might prove a disease beyound all remedy and though to avoyde a Civill warr he made some concessions in hope to bring the people to see their owne good which might turne to his and their greater mischeife if by them ill applyed yet his Majest deserves prayse and thankes for such Acts of grace and the necessitie which this libeller soe impudently vrges to take of his Majest just thankes was the danger of a Civill warr which his Majest sought by these Act to prevent and might have entred into with lesse hazard before the passing of these Bills then after The libeller only encreases the infamy of the Rebells ingratitude and his owne impudence by obtruding necessities to take of the Kings grace in passing those Bills and it had not the
private ends and ambition At first noe man lesse beloved noe man more generally condemned then was the King from the time that it became his Custome to breake Parliaments at home and cyther willfully or weakely betray protestants abroade to the beginninge of those combustions He would prove the people inconstant who doubts it there hath been proofe enough of it in their wretched levitie tossed to and fro by these Rebells Bene facere male audire Regium est will not be denyed by Iconoclastes to be a knowne truth and that it is the common lot of good Princes to be misreported That his late Majest suffered by the privy whispes of ambitious seducers to the credulous vulgar is easily graunted but it was their ingratitude not his merit and the Authors lesse beloved and more generally condemned is a supposition voyde of truth as the Act it selfe was voyde of dutie the causes he would have to be his Custome in breaking Parliaments and betraying Protestants Let vs examine what ground there was for this aversion from the King vpon either of theis There were in the time of King James men that made ill vse of Parliaments and insteede of amending what was amisse strived to make the people beleive things were out of order which they felt not and to create discontents at the Government This caused the breach of some Parliaments in that Kings time his late Majest finding the people possest with great jealosies of his match with spaine greate desires to breake the peace with that nation in order to the recovery of the Palatinate became the instrument of setling a right vnderstandinge betweene the King and his Parliament in the 21. th Yeare of his Raigne Then was the Treatie of the match and peace broken the session of Parliament concluded to the greate joy of the people and with their greate professions of affection to his late Majest for soe happy a worke King James was noe sooner dead and his late Majest by the Councell of the Parliament engaged in a dangerous warr but the seditious contrivers that had pretended such Zeale for the regaininge of the Palatinate cast about how they might ruine his Majest by that vndertaking and in his first Parliament without respect to their owne promises his Majest merit from them in procuringe their desires or the publique necesisities ingratefully withdrew their assistance from him and spread abroade rumours against his Government and when he called a Parliament the private annimosities personall thirst of revenge in some men were entertained in the house of Commons to exclude the consideration of the pressing necessities of his Majest affaires and forreigne agents had their fingers with these leaders in Parliament to divert all supplies from his Majest that both Protestants and all other his allies might be disappointed and which by that meanes was effected It s well knowne with what industrie difficultie his Majest in the middest of his necessities advanct releife to the Protestants and if they were betrayed the Treason must lie on the Parliaments credulitie to those vnderminers that forsooke their King in the prosecution of that worke To betray Protestants theis Traytours know signifies much to the people therefore they make it a reproach to their King against the knowne evidence of the fact and all sense and though they hipocritically pretend affection to the Protestant Religion the world knowes they doe not asmuch as give it a toleration for the Protestants doe not account Iohn of Leidon and the mad men of Munsters Protestants there is noe Religion but theirs now current in England This Author sees the cleerenes of the proofe against their malitious allegations of betraying Protestants and therefore descends a little in his termes and sayes either wilfully or weakely Could he betray them by impotencie of force or Councell that a new found Treason that the minde intends not but it s too much respect to such an absurd Calumnie to give it an answeare He goes on all men inveighed against him all men except Court vassalls opposed him and his Tyranicall proceedings Inveighinge against the King was vnknowne in England before such Monsters as this Author were hatcht by Rebellion and made their words accord with their Actions when their lying and hipocrisie could noe longer serve turne Before this time malecontents muttered their censures of Government and people that beleived them thought it their sin and shame to inveigh against their King Though discontents were nourisht among many few or none were soe impudent to inveigh There is noe Courtier whose observance to his Prince or his flatterie of him can binde him to like vassallage as he is that serves Rebells by false and impudent detractions of Rulers Noe slave soe base as he that wil be hired to murther the fame and honour of others There are some Courtiers among his new Masters whose falshood to their true Master and base observance of the Traytours to him entitles them to the worst of vassallage This Author goes an ill way to prove Tyranicall proceedings when he sayes they were soe opposed It s strange a Tyrant should suffer himselfe to be opposed and how were those Tyranicall proceedings opposed he will say by disputes in Courts of Justice was this Tyrany to admit contestations in ordinary Courts There was never time wherein there were not questions of right betweene King and subject is it Tyrany in a Prince to be a partie in a Proces And doth this Author hold malicious reports and rumours notes of disgrace vpon King or any other Magistrate good Princes lives confute detractours and though the people for a time may be deluded they will come to know a good King in his losse Rebellious humours are an Epidemicall pestilence whose violence cannot continue This full Parliament was at first vnanimous in their dislike and protestation against his evill Government This hath not the least colour of truth and as there was never time wherien somethinge was not to be amended soe in the beginninge of this Parliament there were things of that nature but not such as laid Cryme vpon his Majest Government nor did the Parliament judge soe but all corruptions of Courts Errours of Councell ill successes of Actions are charged by this Author as his Majest ill Government and every judgment of Parliament in a particular case made a protestation against it This Author cannot but know that the most vnamimous protestation that ever the Parliament made was to defend the Kings person honour and Estate and they that made this protestation could not be vnanimous in protesting against his evill Government nor in destroying both him and it They protested to defend the lawes of the land one of which they declared to be that the King could doe noe wrong and that if they should say his late Majest did they should speake against the law the affection of their owne hearts Can this Author finde any roome heere for an vnanimous protestation of the
eyther to be absent or silent But what good man had not rather want any thing the most desired for the publique good then attaine it by such vnlawfull and irreligious meanes which is sayes the libeller had not rather sit still and let his Contrey be Tyranized then like men demaund their rights and liberties And that is the people ought when they thinke fit to Rebell against their Governours and say their lawes are deceitefull and their Government Tyranicall This is the artificiallest peice of finenes to perswade men to be slaves that the Court could have invented Is it not Scripture that we may not doe evill that good may come of it And what other thing doth the King say or this libeller make the artificialest finenes of the Court Traytours perswade men that they demaund their right while they seeke only to oppresse the right of all men by a lawles vsurpation and noe man can doubt but such as Rebell will make pretences and not spare the lawes of God by prophane interpretations nor the Actions of their Rulers by false representations The morall of this lesson would better serve the teacher and it is the libellers sense What good man had not rather want a boundles and arbitrary power and those fine flowers of the Crowne called Prerogatives then for them to vse force and perpetuall vexation to his faithfull subjects nay to wade for them through blood and Civill warr And have not these Rebells waded through blood and Civill warr to place theise Prerogatives flowers of the Crowne vpon themselves and continue force and perpetuall vexation vpon the people of England to set vp a boundles arbitrary power The Kings just Prerogatives and flowers of his Crowne were of absolute necessitie for his peoples safetie they could be a vexation to noe faithfull subjects This libeller hath inherited Cains lurce a restles motion and discord within himselfe that heere talkes of faithfull subjects and by and by will allow none to be subjects nor faithfull but the King is their officer and noe oaths binde them to him The King sayes who were the cheife Demagogues to send for those Tumults some alive are not ignorant he sayes the King cannot coine English as he could money t is beleived this wording was above his knowne stile and ortography and accuses the whole composure to be conscious of some other author And this learned observation vpon the word Demagogue deserves the Laurell Why is demagogue amore hob goblin word then Pedagogue And why should the one be above the kings knowne stile ortography more then the other And why may not the king make an English word current as well as another There are very many whose knowne stile and ortography is beneath the Kings that could have transcribed Demagogue out of many English Authors without offending against ortography If these Demagogues were men of reputation with the rabble it adds not to their reputation with knowing men nor lessens the guilt nor danger of those tumults but rather made them more mischeivous the baser sort of people have such most in reputation as are neerest to their owne condition being strangers to vertue and true worth The King sayes complaints were made yet noe redresse could be obtained To this he returnes the Parliaments complaint of danger and that it cheered them to see some store of their friends and in the Roman not pettifogging sense their Clients soe neere about them Though he sometimes vse the names of Justice and Patriotts and love of Countrey yet he affects nothing more nor prayses any thing soe much as seditious contrivances and exploits and to defend the Tumults while he would deny there were any and the seditious Gracchy Catilnie and other conspiratours against the Roman Senate shal be commended for what were these Clients in the Roman sense but a powerfull number of such persons as were readie to fire the state at the commaund of their Patron The Senate never made vse of such Clients but the power of private men by them became the ruine of that stare and he hath given himselfe a full answeare why the Parliament complained not of the Tumults when he boasts that they were cheered to see them The Parliament and people demaunded Iustice for those assaults if not murthers meaning those pretended brawles at the Courtgate If any had demaunded Justice they might have had it for what should hinder the procedings of noe Court were shutt but by the Rebells And it is not Poeticall fury but Bedlam distraction so compare the hurts done in a fray ptrovoked by an vnruly rabble to the sheddinge of the blood of Nabaoth and the murther of the king to the revenge of Nabaoths blood Their choise of the place for that execrable Act before the kings Pallace gate is only an evidence of the pride and malice of their hearts and of their selfe condemning consciences that contrived Circumstances to disguise their crueltie with a counterfaite of Justice The king complaines that he found noe declarations of the Bishopps could take place against the Tumults To this he askes was that worth his considering that foolish and selfe vndoing declaration of twelue Cypher Bishopps who were immediately appeacht of Treason for that audacious declaring Surely it was worth the considering in reguard of the Justice of the declaration and the Injustice towards those Bishopps and there can hardly be produced a more impudent Act by an assembly of men that would allow tumults to offer violence to their members and charge their members for complaining of the injury with Treason And as they proceeded without shame or truth soe they make it their mirth that they could by such a ridiculous meanes effect soe greate a villanie That declaration which he calls foolish and self vndoing will stand a perpetuall Monument of the vertue and courage of these Bishopps and the infamy of those Cipher Lords that committed them And if the Bishopps were pulled by their Rocheâ—â—s as he admitts was not this a just cause in feare in his Majest And doth this pulling by the Rochetts amount to nothing but petitioning This libeller sayes the Bishopps deserved another kinde of pulling And noe doubt he would have justified their murther in the streetes aswell as the Kings since and that must not have been the blood of Nabaoth He would inferr that the King had noe cause of feare because he came the next day after his going to the house of Commons into the Citie without a guard The King beleived at that time the Citie was not soe totally debaucht but that he might finde some that would guard him against the disloyaltie of others and those humble demeanours which he mentions are well knowne to be most insolent provocations of base people and though at that time the infection was not soe venemous as it grew afterwards yet the king found disloyaltie very apparent Though the King might have feared in reguard of his owne guiltines yet he knew the
Queene with Crymes fot assisting her husband they wil be assured that not feare of Delinquencie but their barbarous crueltie might more alienate her disadvantage Religion Them who accused her he sayes well enough knowne to be the Parliament the King censures for men yet to seeke their Religion whether doctrine discipline or good manners And soe doth the whole world whatever name the Libeller give such men who are well enough knowne to be a Trayterous faction The name of true English Protestants is a meere schismaticall name And why Are there not severall confessions in the Protestant Churches doe they hold one another Schismatickes for that reason How often hath this Libeller named the best reformed Churches is not that as much a name of schisme he is ignorant in the nature of schisme though he be soe well practised in it and its strange he would observe a Schismaticall name from the title of a nation and not from his title of Independencie that produceth as many titles and distinctions as there be Parishes or Parlours The King ascribes rudenes and barbaritie worse then Indian to the English Parliament To the Libellers Parliament he very well may He sayes the King ascribes all vertues to his wife vndervaluing the greate Councell of his Kingdome in comparison of one woman And not only he but all good men abominate that wicked Councell which vsed such rudenes and barbaritie towards her and from hence the Libeller tells vs there are examples of mischeife vnder vxorious Magistrates and Feminine vsurpation And must Magistrates therefore have noe wives or noe affections to them And the examples of feminine vsurpation are more frequent in Republican Tribunes then Monarchs The king sayes her tarrying heere he could not thinke safe among them who were shaking hands with Allegiance to lay faster hold on Religion The Libeller sayes that he taxes them of a dutie rather then a Cryme it being just to obey God rather then man And is periury and the breach of Alleagiance obedience to God and doe men obey God that breake on Commaundement vpon pretence to keepe another The Scripture tells vs he that breakes one Commaundement is guiltie of all but these are they that say they love God and yet hate their brother hate and kill their King Gods vicegerent The libeller sayes it was the fault of their courage that they had not quite shaken of what they slood shaking hands with It s like their conscience and Religion were not the cause they did not but the Libeller was not of their Councell for the time required they should keepe their maske longer He is offended at the Kings prayer that the disloyaltie of his protestant subjects may not be a hindrance to her love of the true Religion and sayes that he never prayes that the dissolutenes of his Court the Scandalls of his Clergie vnsoundnes of his owne judgment Lukewarmenes of his life letter of compliance to the Pope permitting his nuntio heere may not be found farr greater hindrances All these put togeather are farr short of the scandall of the disloyaltie of his subjects The Court dissolutenes is made a common place of scandall not veritie in respect of the application there being not such excesses in his Majest Court that deserved a speciall observation and the restraint of dissolutenes was more observable then the Cryme As to the scandalls of his Clergie though we must beleive that offences wil come yet the scandall of the present disloyaltie was more offensive to those of different Religion then any disorders in Civil conversation and the injustice of the Rebells towards the Clergie hath shewed the vntruth of the scandalls that were cast vpon them though their malice traduced persecuted them their proofes could not convict them of the scandall supposed His Majest owne judgment cannot be overcast by a Rebells malice and his examplary life cannot be stained by a Libellers pen. His letter to the Pope was noe complaince nor could it give offence to protestant or hope to Papist these Rebells that comply with Turkes and infidells least of all thinke it a compliance The Libeller well knowes there was noe nuntio in England and if the King should have denyed the Queene the exercise of her Religion whereto he was bound by the Articles vpon the match he had given greater scandall by breaking the Articles then by permitting her the repaire of persons in matters of her Religion But sayes the Libeller they must not sit still that is not Rebell and see their Religion snatcht away But they have Rebelled to snatch away Religion He sayes It s knowne that her Religion wrought more vpon him then his vpon her and his favouring of Papists and hatred of Puritans made men suspect shee had perverted him Noe doubt suspitions were industriously raysed and carrefully nourisht against the King though they beleived them not that made vse of them The King was not bound to destroy all Papists and could not deny them the protection of a King he had just reason to suspect those bloody Puritans whose inclinations he descerned to that wickednes they have since avowed From his suppositions he ascends to his exclamations What is it that the blindenes of hipocrisie dare not doe It dares pray and thinke to hide that from the eyes of God which it cannot from the open view of men We finde this very frequent in this Author and in this very Period that in contempt of God men charges the King with Crymes he not only knew false but which are soe knowne vnto the whole word and conclude against his owne narrations and others view Vpon his repulse AT HULL and the fate of the HOTHAMS HE makes an introduction that Hull was the Magazine of Armes which the king had bought with money illegally extorted from his subjects He thinkes that if goods be ill gotten its lawfull for him and his Sectaries to rob him that possesses them els to what vse is it mentioned with what money the King bought these Armes But had the king noe meanes to procure Armes but by illegall exaction sure that will conduce litle to the Apollogy of this breaker that Calumniates the King soe much for seeking meanes from his subjects for publique safetie Next he sayes these Armes were bought to be vsed in a causeles and most vnjust Civill warr against Scotland What was the warr in Scotland to Hothams taking of Hull or seizing the Magazine when the warr was ended Rayling will neither make the warr vnjust nor the mention of it heere any way extenuate the vsurpation but shewes the barrennes of his matter by his repeated insignificant falshoods The Queene he sayes was gone to Holland to sett to sale the Crowne Iewells a Cryme heeretofore counted Treasonable in Kings It s like such a Treason as he makes to buy a Magazine of Armes to resist an invader he should have done well to have told when this heeretofore was It s likely they that held it
falsification will not sticke to slander thoughts and offer conjectures for convertions such as were most zealous in his Majest cause had a sobrietie vnblemishable by a Traytours malice and were not only free from druken distemper but brutish insolence and brazen impudence which the Rebells rather affect then repent of And is there not a just cause that the consciences of many should grow suspitious and corrected by the pretentions of the misnamed Parliament now proved false and vnintended What 's become of their making a glorious King lawes of the land priviledges of Parliament Doth not every man see they are all in the dirt among the Libellers Ceremonies But they never pretended to establish his Throne without our Libertie and Religion nor Religion without the word of God nor to judge of lawes by their being established but to establish them by their being Good and necessary They never pretended that his throne was inconsistent with libertie or Religion nor to judge of lawes otherwise then by being established But who must be the Dictatours the Parliament which is crumbled into a close Committee and state Counsell or any rabble that shall say this or that law is not good and therefore to be repealed though established he ought to have concluded that they never pretended priviledge of Parliament further then the subterranean junto or the Tumults should judge necessary To pray and not to governe is for a Monke not a King But is prayer inconsistent with Government Those men will accuse the King for being a Christian and have as litle love to prayer as obedience a monke will better governe then such a man pray who is constant to malice falshood and this man that sayes to governe by Parliament justifies his Rebellion to take away Kinglie Government His legislative Parliament and oppressed lawes cannot be admitted where other answeare is wanting but the Libeller hath long since thrust the force of them out of doores by his many prevarications confining them all in the Cabinet of his owne braine which must determine whether they be good and necessary He is constant to Iohn of Leidens principles that must take away other mens goods for doubt of ill vsing them and because the King sayes he feared the temptation of an absolute Conquest therefore it was pious and friendly in the Parliament to resist him Their pietie and friendshipp were much alike and the Libellers Riligion might come in for a share It s very probable that this warr had never been if the Act for continuance of the Parliament had not been consented to by the King and that Act might stopp the mouth of any reasonable man from saying there was such a power in the two houses as the Libeller dreames of that desired that Act from the King and it was never heard in our story that ever Parliaments made warr against Kings as Tyrants or otherwise for how could they make awarr that neither could nor ever did pretēd to sit longer then their King pleased the immodestie ingratitude of the present Rebells have farr exceeded the worst Examples He is obstinate to his principles and feares to attribute any thing to the Kings concessions or denyall and had he graunted lesse in all probabilitie himselfe and the Kingdome had suffred lesse It cannot be doubted but the Libeller will invert whatever the King sayes and it is a greate adventure that he sayes the sins of their lives not seldome fought against them and wee have greate cause to beleive their prosperitie did noe lesse that continue hardned in soe execrable a cause The King sayes he desires not any man should be further subject to him then all of vs should be subject to God And this Mountebanke holds this a sacriledge worse then Bishopps lands for he sayes he desires asmuch subjection as is due to God and so desires noe lesse then to be a god And is subjection to Princes in the Lord subjection to them as God And doth the King desire otherwise that would have them noe otherwise obey him then that they might obey God renouncing all obedience that consists not with obeying God but sale worke must be slight and the Libeller would not exceede his hire The Rebells desiring the Kings acquittall of them for the blood of the warr confirmes their guilt not their innocence Though God impute not to any man the blood shedd in a just cause in respect of the ground and reason of doing it yet there may be temptations vnto naturall infirmitie in acting a just cause and the King was not without a sense of such danger therefore the Libeller wretchedly beggs an argument of his guilt from his prayer not to have blood imputed to him Vpon the REFORMATION Of the Times NOveltie and perturbation are justly condemned not only by Christians but morall men and it is a noveltie taken vp only by Sectaries that would confine all Religion to their owne frensy and reject the vniversall consent of all times and places and not only boasting of the truth of their owne delusions but obtruding them vpon the world threatning fire and sword to gainsayers and yet they will pretend the example of our Saviours publishing his gospell and pretend like reason for their fanaticke conceites as for his divine revelations and miraculous Testimonies and because reformation may be necessary therefore they conclude it must be as often as these that are carried about with every winde of doctrine shall thinke fitt they would reduce Christianitie to a cloud without water tossed to fro with the breath of private opinion The first reformers in the time of Pope Adrian pretended not a reformation of the vniversall Church and a rejection of whatever was received by the primitive as those men now neither did they presume to enforce others to their perswasion and though noveltie and perturbation were objected to them yet they still deprecated that guilt and it is a most vnchristian and prophane disposition to desregard lawes established and Religion setled vpon presumption of private opinions and these of men neither learned discreete nor honest There is greate difference betweene a clamour and an vndeniable truth and we may not thinke that popular compliance dissolution of all order and Government in the Church schisme vndecencies confusions sacrilegious invasions contempt of the Clergy and their Leiturgie and diminution of Princes are lesse odious because Papists objected them or that any pretended reformation introduced by these detestable practices can be acted or approved by Christians All men are wittnes that the present Sectaries are guiltie of all these The former reformers did not give occasion for such aspersions that desired only the libertie of their owne consciences from the practice and beleife of errours newly enjoyned and anciently rejected in the Church or els followed the orderly reformations which Princes and states authorised in their owne Dominiōs but these new reformers obtrude their dictates vpon all the world and will dispose of all Kingdomes with
troubles yet the rigour of the English Rebells drew on that necessitie and the Kings comming to the Scotts might worke if there were any remainders of loyaltie to devide those who were only joyned by an vnlawfull and dissembled confederacie and it had not been an Act of malice but prudence to resolve vpon such an hope for friends they could not be that are contemned for an hireling Army paid not in Scotch come but English silver jeered with their Brotherly assistance and monthly pay and a right vnderstanding of the disaffection to the English Rebells towards them might recall them to their dutie to the king and withdraw them from their disloyall combination The scotts needed not armies to defend their libertie consciences which were never invaded the charges were not out of charity to them but for the necessitie of those who sent for the scotch assistāce he il pretēds a cause for the scotts mistrust of the king in that case where a ground of suspitiō could not be imagined judges others by his own obduratiō that loyaltie once broken is rather tempted to a finall shipwracke then preserved by an opportunitie to recover it Providence doubtles is never cousened but deceivers though they falsifie their faith to others must expect that as their falshood was permitted soe it will receive its detection and demeritts The man thinkes much that their profest loyaltie who fought against their King should be called a riddle and as it was a very darke one to generall vnderstanding soe if they had preserved the Kings person being in their power they had given some solution doing what they said of their loyaltie not what their former Actions imported And doth not the Libeller say its ridiculous that they whose profest loyaltie led them to direct armes against the Kings person should thinke him violated by theit murther of him which he calls Justice who vnderstands not that so necessitous may be the state of Princes that their greatest danger may be in their supposed safetie and their safetie in their supposed danger But he would have that the only way for the Kings preservation was to sacrifise his reason honour conscience not to have run such hazards though his Majest left his force he resolved not to leave his conscience and change an outward for an intestine warr and Rebells desist not from their violence whether he strive or yeilde If he contend he is bloody if he yeilde he is wily if he offer reason he is obstinate If he acknowledge he is guilty and thus the players of a Rebell game having irrecoverably lost honour conscience play on still to gaine power increase guilt The words of a King are full of power by the law and that law is not like the Nazarites locke of sampson but an anointing they have from God which is inseperable though Rebells like the faithles harlot cut of his force and Armies yet the right of his power is inseperable and if these Traytours had looked to precept or Example they might have found that a Kings word had power and their persons reverence without respect to the merit of their Actions David pretended not that Saul had not authoritie of law when he persecuted him without a cause when Sauls life was in his power The King appeales not vnto Libellers and common pasquills to judge of his reason such ' as are offended at the name or estimation of reason are likely to have a small part in it Monuments of his reason appeare as thinly in his Actions and writting as could be expected from the meanest parts bred vp in the middest of soe many wayes extarordinary to know something Surely the Monuments of the Libellers irrationall assertions appeare very thicke in this whole discourse and men may be amazed at his folly that makes him run into soe many absurdities to avoyde the confession of truth how often hath he objected to the King that his breeding could not enable him to judge of matters and heere would advance his breeding to abase his parts but such as reade the Kings booke and his will see Monuments enough of his Majest reason and the Libellers absurditie and impudence The Kings deliberations touching his leaving Oxford though mature yet foreseene to be of doubtfull event and therefore vainely observed by the Libeller to contradict his prayer Though I know not what to doe yet mine eyes are towards thee Wicked men contemne Princes and God causeth them to wander in the wildernes where their is noe way The punishments vpon Princes are most frequent for the wickednes of the people whereby they come to confusion and have many rulers but it was a willfull falsification of the Libellers to cite a Text as spoken of Princes that was altogeather applyed to the people Psalme 107. Vpon the SCOTTS Delivering the KING to the ENGLISH THis objecting of selling the King by the Scotts is soe fowle an infamy as befists none to vindicate but themselves In the meane time the Libeller thinkes he may say with the high Priests to Judas confessing his sin of betraying our saviour what is that to vs and he would have the infamy only rest on the seller none on the buyer and its like will as he professes disagree with the King to the worlds end and will out babble all law truth and reason that such as fought to change the Government destroy the lawes fought for them and he may babble to the worlds end and not be beleived against the evidence of the fact and that miror before his face wherein he sees all that acted which he denies renders him not only a denyer of principles but common sense the Traytours decree of non addresses was what they ever intended though they had not a confidence to act it presently and from that example of disloyaltie the Libeller others made a change of principles to sute with such monstrous productions It s probable the Libeller would be ever answearing fruiteles repetitions for his answeares are noe other and yet he thinkes himselfe not liable to censure for his stall repetition in the lines before of the kings being vnalterable in his will would have been our Lord averse from Parliament and reformation If the Libeller retained any estimation of Davids heart he would not soe often have reproached the vse of Davids words And we have good reason to beleive that he that suffred Davids troubles was supported with a measure of Davids spirit while his persecuters exercised on him the malice of Davids Enemies And were not this Libeller possessed with an evil spirit he would not borrow matter of sport from stealing Davids spirit nor reproach and slander from Pamelaes prayer which may be vsed more warrantably then reproved but he is drawne very dry that make such vse of a scoffe Vpon the DENYING him the attendance of his CHAPPLAINES A Chapplaine is a thing diminitive and inconsiderable And the man would be ignorantly witty vppon
for decision of controversies but it s a sorry inference that Counsellours in his affaires should have power over his person As the Parliaments right is circumscribed by lawes in regarde of the subject soe it cannot be imagined absolute over the King By what the Libeller hath said he might well conclude that kings are oblidged to doe justice but that the people or particular persons may judge their king by any law divine or humane he hath not offred a colour soe barren is he in an Argument which he calls over copious Who should better vnderstand their owne lawes and when they are transgresed then they who are governed by them and whose consent at first made them Certenly he might very wel have answeared himselfe that they which governed by such lawes and whose consent at first made them better vnderstand them and when they are transgressed then they that are governed and it is a course very agreable to these mens confusion that the suiter should teach the judge The Libeller askes who have more right to take knowledge of things done within a free nation then they within themselves And surely they will not be free long from destroying one another where that 's the libertie for there wil be as many Transgressours and as many lawes as there are opinions He goes about to answeare the taking the oath of Alleagiance and supreamacy And to this his answeare is very ready that these oaths were to his person invested with his Authoritie and his Authoritie was by the people given him conditionally vnder law and oath And if his Authoritie had been conditionall their oaths could not be absolute as they are This guift and condition they imagine were engraven in Seths Pillars and they have been long enquiringe for a Cabballisticke Rabbyn to finde out the Characters How the kings hereditary succession is become a conditionall guift must have better evidence then Aphorismes of confusion never law contained either the guift or condition nor was there ever such impudence before theis Traytours that avowed because they swore faith to their kings person invested with his Authoritie they might take away his Authoritie and not breake their oath And it were a prophane oath aswell as vaine that should be voyde at the will of the taker The kings oath added nothing to his right being only an obligation of his conscience noe condition annexed to his right and if he never tooke the oath his subjects obedience is noe whit diminished and a king by inheritance needes not admittance the death of his predecessour puts him in possession this is the knowne law of England The Couquerour tooke on oath at his Crowninge and other times that made noe condition to his Government There is not only reason but absolute necessitie for the avoyding of confusion ruine of mankinde that the subject be bound to the king though the kinge faile in his dutie for the destruction of Government is more sinfull and inconvenient to humane societie then any evill that can come by a kings misgovernment He proceedes to answeare objections touchinge the Covenant wherein we shall not much insist but to detect the shifts of Malefactours to elude the evidence of truth They were accused by the King and his partie to pretend libertie and reformation but to have noe other end then to make themselves greate and to destroy his person and Authoritie for which reason sayes the Libeller they added the third Article to preserve the Kings person and Authoritie in defence of Religion priviledge of Parliament and liberties of the Kingdome And to shew with what ingenuitie he dealt in seeking to avoyde that just accusation the Libeller tells vs that they added that cause for a shew only and they intended not to preserve the Kings person further then it might consist with their opinions touchinge Reformation extirpatinge of Prelacy preservinge liberties of Parliament and Kingdome and in this very clause they called the world to be wittnes with their consciences of their loyaltie and yet made the preservation of their Kings person and Authoritie arbitrary by their owne opinions and while this Libeller would have their Rebellion a defensive warr he forbeares not to tell the world that they resolved the Kings destruction to attaine their ends The sixth Article gives asmuch preservation and defence to all that enter into the league as to him And it seemes more for they have dealt with none of them as with him and he sayes if the Covenant were made absolute without respect to these superiour things it was an vnlawfull vow and not to be kept It is agreed that vnlawfull vowes are not to be made nor kept but it is an vnlawfull vow to destroy the Kinge in order to his supposed ends yet they feare not to vow the destruction of any that oppose them though the honour and innocence of the persons were without the reach of lawes and they will exempt neither callings nor integritie from their lawles Injustice and that appeared by his glosse vpon the fourth Article of the Covenant to bring persons offending to tryall and condigne punishment all that should be found guiltie of such Crymes and delinquencies whereof the King by his letters and proofes afterward was found guiltie in what they thought him at the taking of the Covenant to be over ruled only by evill Counsellours And had not he avowed all that ever his letters conteyned in his former declarations and hath the Libeller forgotten that the imputation of Crymes to evill Counsellours was but a Ceremony and are not his foregoinge words that their ends reformation and extirpatinge Prelacy were to be preferred before the preservation of the Kings person and authoritie This last age hath produced a generation that pretend they doe God service when they scorne all his lawes and Religion and hold forth their execrable villanies to the world as gratefull and well pleasinge sacrifices to God and make ostentations of their perjuries and Blaspheamies as services to him The nullities and vsurpation of those Monster judges that made themselves cut-throates of the King needed not the Kings exceptions to avoyde their illegallitie being soe apparent what the King did or said to of them wil remaine to his honour and the Libellers infamy that glories in the misfortunes of Princes sayinge it was learnt from his graund-mother It s a sad fate to haue his Enemies both accusers parties and Iudges The Libeller sayes what malefactour might not pleade the like if his Crymes have made all men his Enemies But there were hardly ever such malefactours vnles they who tooke vpon them to judge the Kinge He that is an Enemy before judgment cannot be a judge of the Cryme and he that is an Enemy to a Malefactour vncondemned is not fit to condemne him and such as are Enemies to Government and are common destroyers cannot be judges That they of the powder plot might have pleaded the same when their judges knew not their persons nor their
Parliament against the Kings ill Government And yet these were made long after the beginninge of the Parliament but they that have noe conscience of speaking truth have noe shame to be convinced of falshood But when they who sought themselves and not the publique began to doubt that all of them could not by one and the same way attaine to their ambitious purposes then was the King or his name at least as a fit propertie first made vse of his doings made the best of and by degrees justified He is very industrious to finde out causes why soe many would not be Traytours why could he not fall into the consideration of the oaths of Alleagiance supremacie that all members of Parliament take at their entrance why could he not thinke on the protestation themselves contrived to defend the King how did he forget the Commaunds of obedience from God If himselfe and his Masters had not preferred their ambitious ends before their dutie to God or man if they had not thought all oaths and vowes of noe obligation against their ends they would never have attributed other mens desertion of their courses to proceede from ambitious ends Could men that saw these Traytours making such oaths and protestations of loyaltie with a resolution to breake them run without remorse with them Could any that retained any sparke of Religion or morall honestie concurr with such persons in their lewde courses But all could not attaine their ambitious ends by the same way What way by destroying the King wee are sure some have attained their ambitious ends that way And doth this Author thinke that any men had higher ends of ambition then they that now have attained theirs if he doe he hath very few of his minde how ever there was a way to ambitious ends but it was not wide enough for all and who had these ambitious ends they that tooke the way or they that left it They that had obligations of honour and conscience for their wayes are vncharitably charged with ambitious ends and they that brake the bounds of dutie and oaths to attaine their ends are sottishly pretended to seeke the publique How the Kings name and office hath been made a propertie and all dutie and oaths to him a Ceremony by the Traytours is knowne to the world They have not spared any thing Religious or Civill They have made a propertie of the very name of God of fasts of thankesgiving of prayers of preaching They have made a propertie of Justice of Delinquents evill Councellours how often have they made the lords house a propertie calling it the Kings hereditary Councell how often of loyaltie And how frequently in this very libell doth he make a propertie of the name of Parliament All men see there hath been nothing reall with them but their ambition and crueltie Which begate him such a partie as after many wiles and struglings with his inward feares imboldened him at length to set vp his standard against the Parliament After many Messages to the Traytours that possest both houses of Parliament After many offers to relinquish his just rights to take away all jealosies and feares of his power which were then pretended After many Remostrances of the Calamities that attend Civill distractions After the vndutiful rejections of al his motions for peace After the discovery of the vnsatiable ambition and blood thirstie malice of the prevailing partie After the violation of all priviledges of Parliament After the compulsion of the better part of both houses to desert them After the seizing of his Majest forts and Navy and assuminge the Militia After the longest and most provokt patience that ever King reteined his Majest set vp his standard against those Rebells that tooke the name of Parliament But Iconoclastes remember you have heere vpbraided feares to the King when you come to deny he had any What wiles were vsed to seduce the people what jealosies ridiculous feares were blowne vp to disorder them is yet fresh in Memory and he well observes the Kings standard at length set vp for there was just cause to have done it long before and much disadvantage to his Majest by the delay When as before that time all his adherents consistinge most of dissolute swordmen and suburb roysters hardly amounted to the making vp of one ragged Regiment strong enough to assault the vnarmed house of Commons What time doth he meane the setting vp of the standard If his Majest had sooner declared a gainst the Traytours he had not wanted a greater Regiment And if he had intended to assault the house of Commons those he had with him were enough to have done it though those that then sate had been armed otherwise those members would not have been absent when he eame For the qualitie of the Kings adherents as he Phrases it the persons that then waited on him were for the most part of better qualitie then their Rebell Generall whome now they adore It was the art of one of the guides of this Treason at that time to stile such as were about the King Cavileers as a name vnagreeable to the prickeard Puritan whose supersilious demurenes made wry faces at such a name it being the Custome of false Traytours to lay claime to those behaviours that may hide their inward wolvish disposition and defame others to get reputation to themselves and thence suburb Roysters and dissolute swordmen became names for such as followed the King to add terrour to the citizens of London who have found more pride crueltie robbery among their schismaticall pretenders to pietie then any such danger as was threatned them from such as followed the King Though this breaker would destroy the reason and sense of his readers yet its impossible by such incoherent Arguments as he produceth Can he hope any man will beleive him that such as followed the King at that time to the lower house were all that tooke offence at the proceedings in Parliament and that none els were resolved to aslist the King against the inivries offred him That were too vnreasonable considering the Actions both then and succeedinge and because he had not endeavoured to get more strength therefore he could not But if the number of them that had a right vnderstanding of the Kings affaires were very small doth it follow that the contrary was the better because numerous The Author refutes it himselfe in his next words and surely the Argument is more strong against the cause he maintaines that the people that at first followed them have now left them then the motions of the people carryed by rumours against their King in the beginning were of any Tyrany or ill Government in him for a people are easier stirred vp to follow an evill cause then reduced after they have begun and the qualitie number of such persons who have lost their lives and fortunes in maintaning the Kings cause in regard of Estate honour and integritie in Comparison of such
deepe engagements to his Allies abroade the supplies the then Parliament gave him were two Subsidies he then desired an addition only of fortie thousand pound which was refused him If any man shall say now that the King called not that Parliament of his owne inclination because he was discontented to be so dealt with by them knowing men will hardly beleive him such men as are justly displeased with factions in Parliament might truly affect them when they are rightly disposed and this Sentence which Iconoclastes holds so inauspicious imports not that which his false Augurie Prognosticates for though his Majest received provocations and causes of dislike from severall Parliaments it followes not that he could have no intention to call one when there was a probabilitie of removing the causes of former disorders which his Majest expresses in his ensuing discourse The inclination of a Prince is best knowne by those next about him or by the current of his Actions These neerest this King were Courtiers and Prelates and it was their Continuall exercise to dispute and preach against them For the Actions of others Iconoclastes would thinke them a weake proofe of his intentions though the persons were very neere him and though there were preaching and disputes against the proceedings of some Parliaments it s no proofe of the Kings intentions nor theirs that vsed them against the right vse of Parliaments and the proceedings of some Parliaments might give just occasion to men to say the King they hoped would have no more neede of them and it is a very greate happinesse of any state not to neede them the necessitie of them proceeding from want and danger and there was a time when people held Parliaments a burthen to hem and those in Parliament claimed it that they were not bound to attend the Parliament above fortie dayes and our owne stories tells vs of an indoctum Parliamentum and insanum Parliamentum And doth Iconoclastes thinke that all such as were out of love with such Parlaments had no affection to any This was he sajes but the Coppy which his Parasites had industriously taken from his owne words and Actions who never called a Parliament but to supply his necessities Such as have observed the inclinations of persons neere his Majest finde non greater Parasites then such as proved Traytours to him and Parasites are not wanting to other powers as wel as Kings for we finde by this Author what men will do to please their Masters eyther by offitiousnes to their persons or the performance of villanie against others This Author spends his mouth in vaine following his common place of Parasites and Courtiers when the Actions he mentions are so farr from reflecting vpon his Majest as they leave the blemish vpon the Relatour That his Majest had necessities when he called a Parliament is knowne to all the causes of them but that he was ready all wayes to heare and redresse the just greivances of his people could never yet be contradicted by the experience in any Parliament al though the Author say having Supplied these he suddenly and nominiousty dissolved it without redressing any one greivance of the people But if the Parliaments never presented to him on greivance to be redressed which he denyed where lies the ignominie It seemes the Author takes not the petition of right to be of that nature for that was graunted by the King and that concession of his was then judged as greate an Act to the redresse of greivances as ever King of England graunted his people His Majest summoned three Parliaments before the short Parliament at the beginning of these troubles and in non of these were there any greivances presented by the Parliament to the King to be redressed but that petition of right vnles a Remonstrance against the Duke of Buckingham be reckned in that number and if the people had just greivances to be redressed they had just cause of complaint against those Conventions and of late repentance for their credulitie that depended so much on them that so little regarded their Sufferings If we looke vpon the length of time wherein these Parliaments sate wee shal finde sessions concluded diverse good lawes made in the like space of time in the Raignes of former Kings and whoever lookes to the journalls of the houses in these Parliaments of his late Majest or whoever was present in them must confesse that those that governed in the lower house minded nothing lesse then the redresse of greivances or making of lawes which were formally talked of to entertaine time while private annimosities and personall revenges were made the sole busines of importance in the space of fower moneths no one greivance was prepared to be presented to his Majest and Iconoclastes heapes vp vntruths without respect to the apparence of their detection for this first Parliament was so far from being suddenly dissolved after the King was supplyed that the greate Plague not permitting them to sit longer at west minster his Majest adiourned them to Oxford and in another Parliament after the supply given him there was a second meeting which might have had a longer continuance if it had insisted on the redresse of greivances but whence takes he the occasion to say Ignominiously dissolved Where was the Ignominie Had not his Majest a legall right to do it And if the houses would not agree in the redresse of greivances and supply of the necessities of the Kingdome their continuance would prove ignominious not their dissolving Sometimes chusing rather to misse of his subsidies or to rayse them by illegall courses then that the people should not still misse of their hopes to be releived by Parliaments Iconoclastes in his Preface talked of laying parallel actions to words and heere he vses words of actions that never were for among those Parliaments of his late Majest where can he finde a number to make vp his Sometimes vsing a language as if the King had called as many Parliaments as he had raigned yeares And where can he finde that the King chose to misse his subsidies that the people should not be releived by Parliaments Two of the Parliaments are already mentioned In the third where he had non he was so farr from chusing to misse of his subsidies if he might have had them that his reiterated Messages to the then house of Commons to prepare their greivances that he might apply just remedies to them sufficiently prove that nothing was wanting of his part to have received the subsidies and releived the people It s well knowne that his Majest had at that time a warr with Spaine and France and that nothing but inevitable necessitie on his part could have made him decline the obtaining of subsidies from that Parliament And after the house of Commons had declared that they would supply him in such a way and in so ample a measure as should make him safe at home and feared abroade they agreed vpon the number
of subsidies but voted that the Bill should not come into the house till their greivances were answeared His Majest sent them there vpon severall Messages to hasten them to present the greivances which nothing wrought on them but without any reason after long expectatiō they denyed to have the bil of subsidies brought into the house It s wel known that no Kingdome had lesse greivances then that of England vnder his late Majest And the people were perswaded into an opinion of greivances not by sence of Suffering but the disputes of Pragmaticall Incendiaries and they would have rested quiet had they not been seduced by such Craftsmen and there is no on thing that this breaker can name for a greivance which his Masters that now Lord it do not encrease The first he broke of at his coming to the Crowne for no other cause then to protect the Duke of Buckingham against them who had accused him besides other hainous Crymes of no lesse then poysoning the deceased King his Father This Author takes himselfe not concerned in speaking Truth for the publike Records of the Kingdome and some late declarations of the pretended Parliament would have held his hand from this false assertion if he had valued Truth at the rate of perusing them for the Duke of Buckingham was not at all accused by the first Parliament of the King nor in any Parliament for poysoning the deceased King He might have found that in the second Parliament of the King Among other Articles against the Duke of Buckingham he was accused for a Transcendent Presumption and of dangerous consequence touching Phisicke applyed to the deceased King but the malice of such as hated the Duke of Duckingham did not extend to an accusation of poysoning the deceased King yet the venome of Treason in this Author makes him madd and say that a fact of presumption and of dangerous consequence was a poysoning If such were the wisedome of a house of Parliament to call poysoning of a King a presumption of dangerous consequence neither King nor people neede be troubled to want their Councell This is the first instance though not the first falshood of Iconoclastes but to the matter of what he sajes in that second Parliament wherein in Duke of Buckingham was accused his Majest by Message to the lower house told them he was well pleased they should proceede against the Duke of Buckingham they did accordingly give vp their Articles to the Lords the Duke of Buckingham made his answeare which was sent down to the Commons who being vnable to reply to it such as then swayed the house contrary to the Councell of a greate number of the most experienced amongst them resolved to hinder al proceedings and necessitate the King to a Dissolution of the Parliament This is no secret the journall bookes of that house sufficiently evince it Still the latter breaking was with more affront and indignitie put vpon the house and her worthyest members then the former This appeares not by his subsequent reason but if this breaker had thought either the dissolving of Parliaments or indignitie and affront to members and offence why does he take on him the defence of those that have Ignominiously excluded the whole house of Lords and so many of the Commons and among them some whome he termes the worthiest persons in the Parliament he speakes of but his reasons and narrations are of the same stuffe And if any man compare the affronts and indiginties offered his Majest by some persons in parliament and his proceedings against them he will judge that their provacations exceeded his passion and their owne sufferings In so much that in the fifth yeare of his Raigne in a Proclamation he seemes offended at the very Rumour of a Parliament divulg'd among the people as if he had taken it for a kinde of slander that men should thinke him that way exorable much lesse inclined What strawes this man pickes vp If the King did seeme offended at a factious Rumour doth it follow that he held it a Scandall to act that which was Rumoured Because a King doth forbid Rumours of his intended Actions doth he not therefore intend them And must his Councells be the subject of common Rumour It is a factious practice to spreade a Rumour of a parliament before the King please to declare it and tends to the precipitation of his Councells by sedition But as his premisses are he seemes so his conclusions are as if and men may aswell beleive him on his bare word as such inferences he appearing inexorable to speake Truth or forbeare slander And forbidds it as a presumption to prescribe him any time for Parliaments that is to say eyther by perswasion or petition or so much as the reporting of such a Rumour for other manner of Prescribing was at that time not suspected His Majest therein forbad no more then the law forbidds and accounts it a presumption to Prescribe him any time for Parliaments But such as have destroyed King and Parliament would have it esteemed strange that they should not prescribe what they lift and the breaker that would have the King Prescribed will allow non to Prescribe his now masters His explanation signifies nothing for doth he thinke that the King ought to be petitioned or perswaded by every on that will or that the spreading of a Rumour is a fit meanes to induce him to call a Parliament He endeavours to defame the King for restrayning popular licence and Sedition and when he seekes to confirme the Tyranny of his Masters he reproaches the people with Levitie and violence And the wayes of Prescribing by him mentioned were vnorderly and by him particularised as Plausible not sound other manner of Prescribing was then not Suspected he intends the force of a scotts Army and though he commend that way of Prescribing and attribute the calling of the Parliament to it and accuse the King for resisting it yet he will charge the King with beginning the warr By which feirce Edict the people forbidden to complaine as well as forced to suffer began from thence foorth to despaire of Parliaments The people have now greater cause to dispaire of Parliaments then ever they had in the time of his late Majest for if these men prevaile they are sure never to have more for they professe to introduce a new form of Government which hath nothing of the Parliament of England however the people by seditious practices or false apprehensions despaired of Parliaments that proves nothing of his Majest inclination or aversenes to Parliaments How an edict can be called feirce where no punishment of the breach of it appeares to be denounced nor any severitie ensuing it cannot be imagined but it s well knowne what Titles this Author wil give to any of his Majest Actions respecting only the reproachfullnes of the Termes nor their proportion or congruitie to what they are applyed and whoever lookes on the time while Parliaments were intermitted the
though experience hath confirmed that if a greate part of the people of England had not followed them with a more blinde and obstinate beleife then ever Romish laitie did their Pope they could never have been ridden and jaded as now they are And Iconoclastes could never presume the beleife of his extravagant assertions if he thought not his readers of worse then naturall sottishnes to be abused for while they lye groveling vnder the Tyrany of their present oppressours and lament the losse of their happines vnder the Kingly Government this man will perswade them out of their sense and memory While in the judgment of wisemen by laying the foundation of his defence on the avouchment of that which is so manifestly vntrue he hath given a worse foyle to his own cause then when his whole forces were at any time overthrowne Surely there wisemē shewed as little reason in judging an assertion as knowledge in military affaires that made by comparison of this period to the defeat of an army If his Maj have given so greate a foyle to his cause by the first period of his booke whence comes the danger that Iconoclastes would prevent Was this first period vnintelligible without his comment and what is it to the Kings cause whether he called the Parliament of his owne choice or not It s very likely his wife men heere are the same with his wel principled men he mentioned els where their principles or impiety being the same with his their judgment is as corrupt as their conscience and as farr from wisedome as the libeller from modestie and if any had such a judgment they might soone finde their errour which all others descerne and such a judgment were a greater foyle to their wisedome then to his Majest cause They therefore who thinke such greate service done to the Kings affaires in publishing this booke will finde themselves in the end mistaken of sense right minde or but any mediocritie of knowledge and remembrance hath not quite forsaken men They will finde themselves no whit mistaken if sense right minde and mediocritie of knowledge and remenbrance have not quite forsaken men but the libeller will finde himselfe very much mistaken if he expect that his sense shal be so received against apparent truth as to give a greater foyle then the defeate of Arimes and vnderstanding must have left the world where the Author of such a comparison findes credit He comes now to prosecute his Majest discourse in pursucance of that period and first to what his Majest affirmes of Parliaments to have allwayes thought the right way of them most safe to his Crowne and best pleasing to his people he sayes we felt from his Actions what he thought of Parliaments or of pleasing his people The people feele now that which makes them confesse that they had just cause by what they felt from his Majest Actions to be well pleased with them to beleive what he affirmes heere to be his judgment of Parliaments and if any people were pleased with the ill way of Parliaments they have seene their errour by the evill consequents and now thinke the right way of them only most safe for the Crowne them and that nothing but ruine to the Kingdome can be expected from disorderly Parliaments He goes on to that which his Majest adds that the cause of forbearing to Conveene Parliaments was the sparkes which some mens distempers there studied to kindle To this the libeller sayes they were not temperd to his temper for it neither was the law nor Rule by which all other tempers were to be tryed but they were chosen for fittest men in their Counties to quench those distempers which his inordinate doings had inflamed Is the choice in Counties the law and rule whereby tempers are to be tryed And would the libeller have it beleived that all such as are chosen in the Counties are of better temper then the King If choice be the law of temper why doth he justifie those men which have affronted scorn'd and punished such as have been chosen by the Counties If all are so well temperds why are some so ill handled and excluded And if there may be distempers as he must confesse in despight of impudence why was it not a just reason of his Majest forebearance if he found it We know what fires small sparkes kindle in greate Assemblies and we have felt the flame of them like the sudden eruption of burning Mountaines when all was quiet and there were men that studyed to turne the Parliament into confusion having not the temper to quench but to enflame Were these men that were of the two Parliaments in the first yeare of his Majest Raigne The first called within two moneths after he begun the second within twelue chosen to allay those distempers which his inordinate doings had inflamed what were these inordinate doings that could inflame so suddenly We neede not argue this Authors credit from one vntruth but he would obtaine some credit if one entire truth could be found in him If that were his refusing to conveene till those men had been quallified to his will wee may easily conjecture what hope there was of Parliaments had not feare and his insatiate povertie in the middest of his excessive wealth constrained him His Majest might with reason exspect that many who through errour had caused distempers might returne to a right minde seeing his temper and their little reason to desire such Parliaments as make it their whole worke to divide the peoples affections from the King and follow the Councells of such as are malecontents for want of preferment and if men had been quallified to his Majest will Parliaments would have had happier successe and the people pleased with their agreement that now groane vnder the miseries of their division But whence his insatiate povertie in the middest of his excessive wealth should constraine him is not vnderstood wants and wealth are inconsistent This libeller hath greate povertie of sense in the middest of his excessive expressions He goes an ill way to prove that the King was so vninclined to Parliaments and that povertie compelled him if he had wealth certainly that would have kept him from hazarding a course so disliked He shal be rich and poore that some may contemne his povertie others may grudge his wealth The King hoped by his Freedome and their moderation to prevent misvnderstandings To this sayes Iconoclastes wherefore not by their Freedome and his moderation The Champion cannot fuffer a King to passe without signifying to him that there is no difference betweene King and subject The King had resolved to vse Freedome in his concessions and hoped they would vse moderation in their demaunds This man would have him say that they should vse Freedome in their demaunds he would vse moderation in his concessions hath he not made it a proper speech Will his wise and well principled men thinke him a fit Champion to breake
all men see that in all places of Government much is left Arbitrary to the Governour and it was evident to the world that the Earle of strafford did nothing in an Arbitrary manner without President of his Predecessours and the Judges in Courts of equitie might be aswell made Cryminall for proceeding in an Arbitrary manner as he That he had endeavoured to subvert fundamentall lawes was a supposition not a fact and if the Image breaker looke over the Articles where with he was charged at his Tryall he will finde nothing of such a Cryme To subvert Parliaments and incense the King against them was not as much as vrged against him as his Tryall that Article being declined by his accusers in regard of knowne falshood and that the Earle of strafford advised the King to call the former Parliament That he had endeavoured to make histolitie betweene England and scotland was a legend devised for vulgar temper not rationall consideration for both Kingdomes being vnder one King they must be Rebells in either Kingdome that make warr against one another without him and what dreamer can fancy that any Minister of state that were affected to the Kings designes as this libeller supposes the Earle of strafford to be would stirr vp hostilitie betweene the nations They have not yet adventured to charge the Earle of strafford with stirring vp the scotch hostilitie and if he endeavoured to resist them is that to make hostolitie be tweene the nations It hath been the practice of these Rebells to stile men incendiaries and malignants that opposed their Rebellion and such evill Counsellours that advised any course to prevent their attemps and the following confusion but though this vaine delusion were cast abroade among the people it was never offred as a charge against the Earle That he had councelled the King to call over that Irish Army of Papists which be had ounningly raysed to reduce England as appeared by good Testimony then present at the consultation is vnseasonably remembred by the libeller after those Rebells whome he serves have severall times drawne in forraigne Armies into England reduced the nation to serve an vsurped power set vp an Arbitrary Government subverted the fundamentall lawes and destroyed both King and Parliament It may astonish Knowing men to reade this Author objecting Capitall offences to the Earle of strafford and numbring vp for instance the same Actions himselfe desends soe as it cannot be an humane errour but hellish-fury that hurles him into such mad contradictions and its worth the observing that to this particular he adds as appeared by good Testimony then present at the consultation well Knowing that the Testimony was not only single but subject to most just and apparent exception in regard of knowne enmitie and former prevarication in severall examinations vpon oath and it no way helpes a false Testimonie that he knew the truth or that he was present at a fact whereof he makes an vntrue relation and if the Earle of strafford had councelled the King to make vse of the Jrish Army in either Kingdome in case of Rebellion how comes that to be an offence though that was not the truth that he spake of England nor the Army raysed against England and is it a commendable cunning to rayse an Army against a Rebellion His reference to 28 Articles directs vs how to know that he trusts on number more then weight and those Articles remaine a Testimonie to posteritie of the ridiculous pretences which effected such mischeife He sayth the Commons by farr the greater number-cast him and yet is so absurdly impudent to charge the King with singularitie of conscience and alledge presently a part of the lower-house of the same opinion The Lords he sayth after they had been satisfied in a full discourse by the Kings solicitour and the opinions of many Iudges delivered in their house agreed likewise to the sentence of Treason Those Lords that condemned the Earle of strafford might be satisfied by terrour of the Tumults and their owne corrupt passions never by law nor reason It s well knowne that the Lords and Commons were assaulted and threatned by the vnruly rabble of the Citie and Suburbs if they condemned him not they had not freedome in their coming or going to the house or sitting there There was no one judge that gave his opinion for the sentence against him and the Sollicitours discourse was very strong against the present Rebells wholy impertinent to the case of the Earle of strafford and shewed his owne deceite and the sottishnes of them that relyed on what they vnderstood not Diverse lords for sooke the house having not libertie to be present soe farr were the lords from being satisfied That which he calls a sentence of Treason was an act of power it being a Bill to take away his life but an exception of all men els from being proceeded against for the same matters in ordinary Justice and this very Action soe scandalous in it selfe and soe greivous to many that consented to it must be dreft out with a shamelesse commendation to accuse the King for his repentance of a fact which soe much afflicted him That the people vniversally cryed for justice is noe wonder if we consider former examples and the had a President in the people of the Iewes that cryed Crucifie If we beleive this libeller telling vs how light and violent they are in their motions or if we looke vpon the acts of a powerfull faction then prevayling with them that could easily make them cry what was put in their mouth we may easily judge the injustice of their cry and their ignorance of the cause and a sober author would have hated to borrow an Argument of Justice from popular outcryes which are the most evident proofe of injustice and oppression of innocence He sayes none were his friends but Courtiers and Clergimen the worst at that time and most corrupted sort of men Court ladies not the best of women His fer friends and many Enemies render the proceedings against him more then suspected and men may easily beleive that in such a condition furie was the accuser and malice and cowardise the judge The confining his friends to Court and Church is the effect of the libellers engagement of schisme and Rebellion who holds such loyaltie and affection to the King and conscientious reverence to the Church for the markes of greate offenders If multitude of Ennemies be a Testimony of guilt the best men will become the worst of sinners But having noe friends as he sayes it adds much to the right of his cause that soe many who were neither Courtiers nor Clergymen nor any way obliged by him or the Court should in discharge of their conscienc declare their dissent to that bloody law though they were thereby objected to popular fury His impertinent rayling at Courtiers and Clergymen argues his malice not Cryme in them His mention of Court ladies was for want of matter and their activitie
Treason in Kings to have sold Jewells of the Crowne would have made it some Cryme to have bought Jewells for the Crowne and it is noe Treason now to sell the Crowne Jewells and all by his cut throate crew The Parliament was not ignorant to what intent these summs were raysed their owne actions told all the world they were necessary to be raysed The Kings refusing to settle the military power in trustie hands vpon their petitions and doubting he would possesse himselfe of Hull they were necessitated by the turbulence and danger of the times of their owne authoritie to putt the Kingdome into a posture of defence and to send Sr. Iohn Hotham to take Hull into his possession How many lewde lyes have they sent abroade into the world that the King made warr vpon them and it was the Libellers owne pretence in the beginning of the last Chapter now plainly tells they seized Hull because they suspected the King intended it and because he would not settle the militia as they desired If he had no power over the Militia why did they petition him If the Parliament be his superiour why did they petition at all Doe superiours petition inferiours But what was that turbulence danger of the Kingdome was there any more then what themselves had made by rumours and Tumults and is not the seizing of a fort an Act of warr The King had attempted the same before And was that any cause for them because the King sends to his Castles or forts must they therefore take them from him And he sayes letters of the Lord Digby were intercepted wishing the King to retire to some safe place And therefore these Rebells would provide he should be safe in noe place The King offred to goe in person into Ireland and that he would Arme his guard from his Magazine of Hull The Parliament he sayes foreseeing the kings drift petition him that they might have leave to remove the Magazine of Hull to the Tower of London Soe carefull they were to have the Rebellion in Ireland proceede that they desired his Majest to forbeare his going into Ireland out of consideration of danger to his person when as they intended to destroy him at home and the true cause was that they would deteine theis Armes to make warr against him if he would not submitt to be deposed and to keepe the money given for Ireland to drive on the warr heere The King afterward going to Hull required the Governour to deliver him the Towne whereof the Governour humbly desired to be excused till be could send to the Parliament It seemes the libeller would not have that a denyall The King proclaimed Hotham Traytour before the Towne walls And noe man dobuted but he was soe The King gave order to stopp all passages betweene him and the Parliament And had he not reason to prevent supplies and intelligences to a Traytour Yet sayes the Libeller he demaunded Iustice as vpon a Traytour vsing a strange iniquitie to require Iustice vpon him whome he had debarred from his apparence Traytours must be apprehended before their apparence and it was a strange iniquitie in them that would not apprehend a Traytour as in Justice they ought but a most execrable impietie in such as pretend Justice to cleere a malefactour without hearing both parties as the libeller sayes the Parliament did Sr. Iohn Hotham for he sayes the Parliament noe sooner vnderstood what had passed they declare Sr. Iohn Hotham had done noe more then was his dutie They meant noe doubt his dutie to them as fellow Traytours not to his king and soveraigne That this proves that to be false which is heere affirmed by the King that his greatest Enemies had scarce confidence enough to abett or owne it And such as knew the manner of their proceedings at that time know the truth of what the King affirmes and though the necessitie of their engagement made them owne it yet there were very few or none that esteemed it an act of Justice in them but of Policie for their owne securitie The king sayes it affected him more with sorrow for others then anger for himselfe nor did the affront trouble him soe much as their sin The libeller sayes there is vse of this booke to shew vs what a deluded thing the creature is which is called the vulgar who will believe such vaine glories as these And surely we cannot believe any creature soe deluded as those for whose capacitie the libeller writes that makes the deluded vulgar judges of lawes and kings yet heere spurnes it as a despised creature The strangenes of beleife that he imagines as that the King proclaimed him Traytour without due proces of law If he could have told what the due proces of law was no doubt he would If a theife or murtherer be taken in the Act or escape must there not be a proclamation for his apprehension If Traytours be in Armes against their King is it choler or rashnes to proclaime them Traytours The King had lately been convinced of his illegallitie with the five members He was injuriously denyed Justice against them which produced the second insolence of Hotham The Kings relation declares his anger to be incensed as he had but doth it follow from thence that he was not more sorry for others then angry May not a fathers sorrow for his sons disobedience exceede his anger and may not a King desire the punishment of a Malefactour because he pitties his person greives for the ill consequence of his offence Yet this trifling Libeller would inferr that the king could not be more sorry then angry because his words testifie impatience of delay till Hotham be punished It s a strange operation of sorrow that stirred him soe vehemently to have Hotham punished and not to have him repent But this exception is more strange that a man may not be vehement for the punishment of one for whose offence he is greived and there may be just cause of sorrow for an Act which the repentance of the Actour cannott remedy He knowes well how litle his Majest was likely to worke vpon Hotham at that time obstinate but it was a necessitie vpon his Majest to endeavour that he should be proceeded against injustice There hath not been observed in the King a sorrow for his owne sins nor for such sins of others as cannot be supposed a direct injury to himselfe This man will not have the Kings sorrow for his sins observed nor acknowledged wee have seene his malicious detractions of the Kings sorrow for his consent to the death of the Earle of Strafford and it cannot be expected from such men that they will give Testimony to any truth that deny all evidence of it The Kings labour to have the sinner only punished wil be called revenge And why They pretended justice not revenge that after cut of Sr. John Hothams head May not a King doe justice without revenge The jnjustice in abettinge protecting Sr.
the King to breake this oath If Sectaries say the calling is vnlawful against the judgment of the vniversall Church must the king believe this thinke himselfe absolved of his oath The King never doubted that his oath could not binde him to sin but he was assured that it was a sin to breake his oath when it was no sin to keepe it and while his conscience was not informed of any vnlawfulnes in the matter of his oath his sin must be the more hainous to act against his oath aswell as his knowledge The Libeller talkes of lawes of God and truth of the Gospell But his schismaticall fancies must over rule lawes and oath though the German Emperours or other Kings had noe cause to leavy warrs vpon Protestant subjects vnder colour of a blinde and literall observance to an oath it had been a wickednes in their subjects to make a warr on them to compell them to breake that oath It is not to be imagined if what shal be established come in question but that the Parliament should oversway the King and not the King the Parliament Neither can it be imagined that he which is to be overswayed by the Parliament is a King By all law and reason that which the Parliament will not is noe more established in this Kingdome neither is the king bound to vphold it as a thing established Certainly lawes are very vainely said to be made by the King if he have no voyce in the making of them and if they may be vnestablished without him and it was a wickednes aswell as weakenes to binde him to vphold lawes and to governe his people justly that had not soe much as voyce in the making of their lawes that was bound to governe by wicked lawes if the Parliament would have them such Imaginary powers cannot consist with Religion law nor reason in the Government of England The King sayes had he gratified he thinkes their Antiepisconall faction with his consent and sacrifised the Church Government and Revenues to the fury of their Covetuousnes they would then have found noe colourable necessitie of raysing an Army The Libeller to this sayes It was the fury of his owne hatred to the professours of the true Religion which incited him to persecute them with the sword of warr when whipps pillories exiles and imprisonments were not thought sufficient It s certen such a generation of Traytours as have persecuted the King with a warr justly merited to be whipt out of all Kingdomes and while this Libeller frequently sports at the Kings necessities he is not ashamed presently to call the warr voluntary on his part If the Kings fury incited him to a warr he would not soe often have sought peace nor been denyed peace without the sacrifice of the Church But the Libeller sayes to colour this warr the King cannot finde wherewith all but that stale pretence of Charles the fifth and other Popish Kings that the Protestants had only an intent to lay hands on the Church Revenues The King neede not a colour for making a warr whereto necessitie enforced him It is apparent that the sectaries in England intended to devoure these Revenues and have effected it and they professe to seeke it by the sword because they could not have it otherwise But the Libeller sayes it was never in the thoughts of the Parliament till exhausted by warr their necessitie seized on that for the Commonwealth which the Luxury of the Prelates had abused to Common mischeife They neede not have been exhausted if reason Justice or Religion could have contented them They will make a warr and robb and steale from other men to maintaine it Did not their pretended necessitie come from their warr to take away Episcopacy and is not the necessitie of their owne making to get these Revenues What if goods dedicated to Gods service were abused to luxury were there none els in the Kingdome soe abused Must they make choise of the Patrimony of the Church for a sacrifice to their Covetuousnes that they may spare their private That the King consented to the vnlording of Bishopps at Canterbury the cheife seate of their pride for God would have it soe And can he tax the King for his allusions vpon the fate of Hotham and obserring the course of Gods judgments and himselfe make such an observation from the Kings passing the Bill at Canterbury May it not be an aggravation of the offence in passing the Bill there rather then a punishment vpon those that were wronged by it but Canterbury had not relation to their peace in Parliament but in Church and therefore his scene is mislayed The King sayes his consent to that Bill of putting Bishopps out of the house of Peeres was from his firme perswasion of their contentednes to suffer a present diminution of their rights The Libeller from hence argues the pure mockery of a Royall assent to delude for the present May not sober times revoke what distempered madnes had necessitated and had not the King just cause to thinke that after times would see the obliqutie of that Bill The Libellers consequence is that we may hence perceive the wisedome and integritie of those votes which voted his consessions at the Isle of weight for grounds of a lasting peace And why might they not be soe though some of them might not be thought fitt to last long And that by the judgment of both King and houses But what were they that voted were they not the Libellers Parliament in whose behalfe he hath soe often expressed his anger for the Kings disesteeme of them and calling them a faction and now will have neither wisedome nor integritie in them He sayes from the kings professing the continuance of his judgment touching Episcopacy there is a faire justification of the Parliament who notwithstanding his obstinate minde omitted not meanes and patience to have gained him They omitted not reproach and violence but other meanes or patience they vsed not and the Libeller hath contrived a conviction of his Parliament that their not gaining his consent to their demaunds was the cause of their warr which he hold justified by the Kings continued aversion The King sayes a greate shew of delinquents was made which were but consequences of his and others withdrawing or defence This sayes the Libeller is a prettie shift to mince the name of a delinquent into a necessary consequent It is injustice to make the name of delinquent a propertice and snare for innocence It s plaine that the faction would have all that adheared not to them or left them delinquents and if such an extension be not minced the law it selfe will be whose Rules will not define delinquents but the observation of them become delinquencie He sayes a Traytour is the consequent of his Treason and a Rebell of his Rebellion And such are certainly delinquents but for saking their societie is not a Cryme to denominate a delinquent and such only were by the faction called
of the world that have beene as farr above others in Wisedome as they have beene in power Wee have lived to see that sore evill which the Scripture by the pen of a King and the wisest of men complained of to see Princes on foote Servants on horsebacke when the Licentious insolence of the meanest tramples vpon the Soveraigntie of the highest and the basest of the people revile their King He saies for their sakes that have not more Seriously considered Kings then in the gawdy name of Majestie and admired them their doings as if they breathed not the same breath with other men he will for it seemes he saies a Challenge both of him and his partie take vp the gantlet though a Kings in the behalfe of libertie and the common wealth Loyaltie hath no friends that so admire Princes as if they breathed not common breath of nature they wel know who hath said of Kings I have said you are Gods the guilt of their sin that disobey or revile thē yet non are ignorant that their breath is in their nosthrils that they shall dye as others They that are best instructed most considerate give most reverence to Kings They vnderstand that Princes have greater promises of wisedome frō God greater meanes to attaine it then others that by obeying them humane societie is maintained though they breath the same breath with them When Saul was made King of Israel there were wicked men that said how shall this man save us contemning his Authoritie because he was taken from among them selves in our dayes there is a Confluence of all the Rebellious inclinations that troubled the world pride of base people and disdaine of all Authoritie Because Kings are men must they not therefore Rule Must Gods vicegerents be despysed because they are men And because we know Kings to be men must wee beleive that seditious slanderers are more then men which are carryed as naturall brute Beasts The Archangell disputing with the Devill durst not bring against him a rayling accusation and such as take vp Rayling accusations against Princes partake of the wickednes of the evill and hate the holynes of the blessed Angell When the woman told David he was as an Angell of God did shee thinke he breathed not the same breath with others This Author by pretending to rectifie an errour that never was of admiring kings as if they breathed not the common breath of men would perswade men to scorne despise kings and Rebell against the king of kings God himselfe who wil be called king and to style that Title a gaudy name expresseth rather a scoffing Atheist then a profest Christian Ambitious Rebells that sow the seedes of disaffection to their king among the people begin with a plausible trueth that kings are men that they may erre that they may be wicked thence they come to application of particular Actions of their king represented as deceitefully as falshood can frame to the vnwary hearers because it may be so therefore in their logicke it must be so and experience it selfe hath made apparent how few or none admire Kings as if they breathed not the common breath of men and how many forgett their dutie to them that in Scripture are called Gods the prevalence of corrupt nature is so farr above reason that men are sooner infatuated by the plausible discourses of ambitious aspirers to beleive absurdities making way for Rebellion then mistaken of the nature of Kings by their sacred Title or dignitie for wee have seene men seduced to beleive they might make warr against the King so as they said it was aganist his evill Councellours and for King and Parliament that because the two houses sate by the Kings authoritie therefore him selfe had none That they made warr in their owne defence against the King and yet said they fought for King and Parlament and contrary to the knowledge of the whole world traduced his Majest Government which was the time if ever when his three Kingdomes attained the height of honour strength and wealth above their neighbours As the Arts of those seedes-men of sathan were jnspired by their Master to the ruine of mankinde so how farr they have effected it in his Majest three kingdomes by this logicke of the Devill all men are wittnesses All boundaries of right and wrong broken downe and any wickednes acted by authoritie that serves to secure the Tyranicall power will of the Rebell Masters What flouds of Christian blood what starving pininge to death of poore Captives have our dayes been wittnes of in England what jmpudent pretences of justice for publique Murthers scenes of Iudicature and theaters of slaughter honour and vertue prostituted to the Common Executioner so as the miseries of former times were but an Epitome of those numerous evills that have been brought vpon his Majest Dominions in these few yeares the facts would seeme incredible in after ages did not such as this Author undauntedly boast of the insolencies they have committed no historie yeilding on example of the like whether we reguard the impudence crueltie insolence and hipocrisie of the contrivers deceite imposture profannes of preachers or credulitie and precipitation of the vulgar The author might have done well to shew why his Majest booke seemed a Challenge it provokes no answeare nor handles any thing by way of controversie but his very devotions and instructions to his son seeme a Challenge Evidence of worth in the sufferer torments the persecutour and they cannot rest while the vertues live though the bodies are laid in the dust by their wicked hands But he wil take vp the gantlet that no man threw downe though a Kings He lately said Kings were puny Antagomists and no honour to begotten by writing against them and now he will take vp the gantlet though a Kings it seemes he reckons it a condescention to stoope to take vp a Kings gantlet those todes that thus swell wil breake with their owne venom This Authors pen shewes what libertie he loves to endure no justice towards the living or Charitie to the dead and to breake those fetters of modestie and truth wherein a Christians libertie consists Those pests of Government allwayes talke of libertie but it s only a licence to exercise their own inperious Tyrany over the people and when fire breakes out of the bramble to consume the Cedars nothing can be expected but insolence and crueltie wee have seene the libertie vnder the Rebells in England which is to rayle and Rebell against the King and destroy such as are loyall He saies its the drift of a factious and defeated partie to make the same advantage of his booke as before of his name authoritie and intend not so much the defence of his former Actions as promoting future designes Those whome he calls a defeated partie in so great contempt are never the neerer a faction for the successe that confessed Rebells have gained over
them Though Armyes have been defeated a good cause can never and though he would have his Trayterous faction beleive them that followed the king a defeated partie yet it seemes by his jealosie him selfe doth not Tyrants cannot sleepe while lawfull heires survive and the guilt of their consciences and vsurped power make their Enemies as terrible after they have lost Armyes as before When Rebells prevaile they declaime against Treason and in contempt of God and their consciences reproach such with their Crymes that most oppose them in their first Actions they made vse of the Kings name and authoritie their declarations cannot be retracted wherein they profest to be for King and Parliament that they fought not against the king but his evil councell The Cryme of fighting against the king was a Treason so knowne that shame as well as feare would have lessened their partie had they not made vse of the kings name pretended his authoritie and vnles they thinke that their assertions of apparent vntruths will have the same power over the reasons of men as their Armes have gotten over their persons they would not patch vp discourses with such incongruities objecting that the kings partie vsed his name and authoritie which vndoudtedly they had and which those men professe to destroy and which had been vseles to any had it not been the acknowledged power of the kingdome and a confessed Cryme to oppose it and which those Traytours would never have pretended had not the evidence of its right been so apparent nor have destroyed after so much vse of it had they not exceeded all former Traytours as farr as he did his Predecessours of whom the spirit of God saies there was none like him that sold himselfe to worke wickednes It s the drift of the Rebell partie to confirme and continue their power by the same Arts they have gained it deny justice to the memory of his Majest as before obedience to his Government Those whose power hath been gottē by the peoples credulitie would willingly deprive them of reason whereby they might see their errour which is the cause that the Rebells having misted many into the present mischeyfe by Calumnies of insufficiencie in his Majest and disaffection to the established Religion account any proofe published to the contrary the plot of a faction against their Rebell Common-wealth and although their often accesses to him and debates with him during his restraint and the observation of his devotion gave such proofe of both as diverse of their followers were vndeceived both in him and the cause they had prosecuted yet this they would have an effect of faction any relation of his Maj afflictions a designe His Maj actions neede no defence the Rebells impious actions against him are incapable of any this Author hath some reason to coniecture that all mention of the sufferings of his late Maj tends to the ruine of the Rebell power True narrations of the horrid Actions of Traytours though they recount the greatenes glory of theyr triumphs sting them with an expectation of vengeance destruction of their power There are a great number that since they have seene that booke thinke it had been agreat losse to the world if it had perished yet they are farr from designe by it and if it were published with any designe it was an innocent one to publish what a murthered King had left written of himselfe for the reason of his Actions and cleering of mistakes The designe is now the third time to corrupt the people to the dishonour of the present Government retarde a generall peace so needeful to this afflicted nation They cannot say any were corrupted that followed their King vnles the lawes their legall oaths and Scripture it selfe corrupted them for theis were the guides they followed and the Rebells may rest assured that if there were not these bonds vpon the loyall English humane Treatises though never so excellent would little move them to the losse of life and fortunes For the dishonour of that which he calls the present Government themselves have written enough though the King and his partie were silent Their power was gotten by often repeated propositions protestations of affection and loyaltie to his late Majest which they never meant to performe many false pretences to the people to defend the King and estabilshed lawes and Religion breach of oaths murther of the King and of theis nothing can be denyed by themselves and there is nothing can be said of any to dishonour beyound swearing and fore swearing Treason and Murther And can they thinke their peace is retarded by the Kings partie when themselves have so often sworne by the name af God in hipocrisie to deceive made Religion the Maske of sacriledge and murther and pretend pittie to the afflicted nation while they afflict it continue the same wickednes where by they brought the miserie vpon it They may be sure though they destroy the King and his partie God will raise them Enemies they thinke not of and prepare destroyers they feare not It s a Good deede he sajes to the living by remembring men of the truth of what they know to he misaffirmed to keepe them from entring into warr But it is wickednes to oppose truth and offer that to be beleived by men which they know to be false If this Author would remember men only of truth he would finde no adversary and if his partie would act accordingly there would be no neede of a new warr for then they would restore King and lawes but this Author by falsifying of Actions att corrupting of principles endeavours to draw men into a state of Rebellion against God and their King and make the warr endles the people helpeles and his pretended Charitie is more odious then the Hipocrites Almes this respecting only selfe glory that of this Author a snare to destroy others As to moment of soliditie he sayes in the booke it selfe stuft with nought els but the Common grounds of Tyranny and Poperie suguered a little over or any neede of answearing in respect of stayed and well principled men I take it on me as a worke assigned rather then by me chosen or affected He would have it thought there was no moment of soliditie because he hath none in this Iconoclastes stuft full of the common grounds of Rebellion confusion which are only of Moment to the support of vsurpation the measure of his well principeld men to whome a rayling libell is more convincing then a Logicall Argument That the booke is stuft with nought els but grounds of Tyrany and Popery when the most part of his exceptions comprehended not those heads is an Hiperbole vnbefitting any but such as had sacrificed shame and conscience to a wicked cause If the publishing of his Majest booke as he sajes conteyning nothing but grounds of Tyrany and Popery were a designe of his partie surely it must concurre with the Authors ends for
in an apparent inequallitie and subjection both in the state Civill Ecclesiasticall And this broode of Sectaries have heeretofore complained that the doctrines were traduced as opposite to Monarchy And neither Libertie nor equallitie is sought for to the people but to betray them to the power of these deceivers who are growne to that impudence to pretend doctrines of confusion and Rebellion to be the true Religion The Church as ancient prophesies foretold should dissolve all their power Dominion Few sects professing Christ have appeared more Turkish then these present of England they fancie an earthly Kingdome for the Church as Mahomett his Paradise and then that themselves are the true Church and shall have Dominion ever all and avow their intention to destroy all Kings and whoever submitt not to them But certenly Kings vnderstood not any such prophesies nor feared such pretenders who make prophesies to agree with their owne wicked Actions and ambitions desires His first instance is in Pharaohs oppressing of the Israelites And doth he beleive that Pharaoh knew their doctrines or prophesies the man might have learnt more from the Text that being strangers they might over power him and thence grew his persecution not from the libellers imaginary doctrine He makes a strange leape that passes by all stories els and would prove his position by his owne authoritie and expects that his libell against the King shall make good his position that Kings ever feared and hated the true Church a strong way of disputing to prove that kings hated and feared the true Church because the King did soe and to prove the King did soe because kings did soe this is a stout Champion There neede no answeare to his bawling of the kings suspition of men most Religioâ—s for time hath tryed that they were Rebellious and wicked Traytours vnder the Masque of Religion He could not vse violence as Pharaoh did and therefore chuses a more misticall way of Antichristian fraude and like Balak to hire against a nation of Prophetts other esteemed Prophetts and to meare out the Church by a false Ecclasiasticall Policie The Summe is to supresse Sectaries and prevent Traytours is this Ecclesiasticall Policie but where is this Misterie of Kings hating the true Church is there noe true Church of God where there is Government And what proportion hath this supposition of his to the kings proceedings Did he erect Bishopps or was there any Religion established or publiquely profest which he opposed but only false and hipocriticall factionists which outwardly professing the established Religion sought for gaine and pride secretly to draw disciples after them to the disturbance subversion of the Church There needes not any thing be said to his rayling his corruption being apparent by objecting it to the calling of Bishopps and hates it for the remedy against schisme which the Church had by them The King bestowed livings according to the law and the Policie was not his but the ancient constitution of the Church and this Monster that reproaches the retaining any thing in Leiturgie or Government practised by the ancient Church is not ashamed to charge the king with breach of Canons and the ancient practice of the Church in conferring Ecclesiasticall dignities and the peoples right in Elections was never pretended in England and justly and anciently forbidden in the Church neither doe any Canons in force support that pretence That influence which the king sayes is necessarie for the Prince to have vpon Churchmen noe man that beleives the Scripture will thinke vnfitt but how can the Libeller make good that the many Emperours and Kings that imbraced the Christian Religion hated and feared it for soe they must by his grounds And how can he conclude from Pagans hatred to Religion that it was only from their kings when as the stories are soe plentifull in setting downe the madd rage of the multitude the truth is seditious innovatours know that their hopes and strength lie to seduce the silly people and that it is the interest of governours to prevent their lewde endeavours and thence proceede their declamations against Rulers and their proclamations of Libertie and that which they cal the Bishopps Tyrany is only their office to take away schisme and schisme is the way to Rebellion The Libellers judgment touching callings founded on Scripture reformation or graces of the Bishopps and others is of the same authoritie as the determinations of Traytours touching loyaltie and heretickes touching sound doctrine and his end never agrees with his beginning but in rayling and incongruitie for but now he made it the Kings Policie to hire the Bishopps now it is the Bishopps Policie to worke that perswasion in the King of noe Bishopp noe King the man well knowes that noe Bishopp noe king was the perswasion of King James who found it true by his owne experience without the helpe of Bishopps and vet soe sottish doth this Libeller presume his readers that makes the dependence which Bishopps have only of the king the cause of such perswasions yet in their owne subtill sense they were of another minde how theÌ„ could their dependence be a cause of their perswasion or was their sense subtill and grossely mistaken Thus those blattering devills that in the beginning of the Parliament charged the Bishopps to be Antimonarchicall thereby to conceale their malice against the king now make it their Cryme to favour Monarchy He hath found a very strong proofe as he would have it out of the Historie of the Councell of Trent that Bishopps are most potent when Princes are weakest that argues not their dependence vpon Princes nor that aversion to Bishopps is not aversion to Princes it was spoken of Bishopps depending on the Pope not on Princes and such Clergy men as have their dependence on Pope or people wil never wish that the king should be potent to master their dependencie From this the King sett himselfe to the removall of those men whose doctrine he feared would be the vndoing of Monarchy And needed he the Councells of Bishopps to provide for his safetie against such men And is that the evill interest of Tyrany and Episcopacie to prevent the designes of Traytours Who were Traytours if they were not that would vndoe Monarchy The doctrine and designes of the schismatickes are heereby apparent to be against Monarchy and yet the prevention of such conspiracies is the Tyrany and the corrupt Councells of Bishopps which the hipocrites cry out on Noe temporall law could touch the innocencie of their lives And had they innocency that plotted the vndoing of Monarchy vnder which they lived and could not the law touch it Their disobedience to lawes was a Cryme inconsistent with innocence and must necessarily be punished by the lawes they disobey and that which he calls persecution of their consciences and laying scandalls before them was only the requiring of their obedience to Acts of Parliament whose authoritie he soe frequently cryes vp and the
inflicting of just penalties on their bodies and Estates according to the lawes was the dutie of the Magistrate to whome the execution of them belonged although the indulgence they found from his Majest in mitigating the penalties of law was a greate cause of their insolence and that Calamitie they have brought vpon the kingdome and if the lives of these men be sought into their pride impudence calumnie lying perjurie covetuousnes and crueltie declare their lives farr from innocent The man now breakes out into a thankesgiving for the successes of their Rebellion and though these hipocrites despise the thought of a Church and have noe Communion with any Church ancient or moderne yet the resistance of them is warr against the Church Noe Papist could speake more scandalously against reformation then that Episcopacie was the constant practice of all Christian Churches till of late yeares Tumult pride faction and covetuousnes invented new modells vnder the Title of Christ Government It neede not be observed againe how the Libeller is affected to the reformation that despises all but his owne Babell and Tumults factions pride and covetuousnes the causes of some new modells touches not soe many as he supposes there being soe many of the reformed Churches that receive not these new modells but whoever they be that obtrude them as Christs Government Scepter and Religion they will be marked with the same names that are heere mentioned by the greatest number if not all of the reformed Churches The Apostles were not properly Bishopps next Bishopps were not Successours of Apostles in the function of Apostleshipp If the Apostles were not properly Bishopps he should have told how they were improperly Bishopps for by his caution properly he admits they were someway Bishopps and the Bishopps therein their Successours though not in that part of the Apostleshipp which concerned speciall guifts and the Testimonie of Christs conversation on earth whereof they were eye wittnesses If they were Apostles they could not be precisely Bishopps and why not precisely if Bishopps They could not be Apostles his reason is because that of Apostle was vniversall extraordinary and immediate the other ordinary fixed and particular charge and inspection The calling of the seventie disciples was vniversall extraordinarie and immediate and yet they were noe Apostles and because callings were at first extraordinary must not they whose office it was to provide Successours to themselves and others in the Church of God ordaine others into their functions and is it an Argument that because when the Church was gathered men had particular care of certaine Churches therefore they were not of the same calling with others that preceeded them in gathering these Churches and the latitude of territorie in the exercise of a mans calling doth not make difference in the function It is against reason and Charitie to suppose an ignorance and deviation of the ancient Church taught by the Apostles in a point that destroyed the calling of such as were to reproach the gospell and the suddennesse is not imaginable in the introduction of Prelacy vnles by Apostolicall constitution in regard of the vniversalitie and the Author cannot name any manifest corruption so sudden and vniversall after the Apostles though he pretend many The Ecclesiasticall Historie proves it cleerely to be false that noe example since the first age for 1500 yeares can be produced of any setled Church wherein were many Ministers and congregations which had some Bishopps over them And his proofe is out of Sozomen who he sayes wrote above 1200 yeares agoe and his Testimony that in the Churches of Cyprus and Arabia they had Bishopps in every village what then he sayes what could these be more then Presbiters Yes they were Bishopps for doth any man doubt that Bishopps and Presbiters were not distinct in Sozomens time who soe frequently mentions it and the Libeller complaines of the corruption of introducing them in the ages foregoing there are many Councells before Sozomen which were vniversally received and in them subordinate of Presbiter to Bishopp is the vndeniable practice of the Church and the quantitie or quallitie of Townes or Territories wherein Bishopps were placed noe way proves the lessening of their order neither can it be collected because Bishopps were in small villages that therefore they were noe other then Presbiters but heerein the Libeller shewes his malicious oppsition to truth in abusing Sozomen who having said that Churches had several customes instances that though there were many Citties in Scithia there was one Bishopp only over all and in other Countreyes Bishopps were in villages not every village he might aswell conclude noe Presbiters in Scithia as none but Presbiters in Arabia and Cyprus The same Author tells the like of other nations and that Episcopall Churches did not condemne them Wherefore should they condemne them It s like they would if they had taken vpon them to exercise the calling of Bishopps being but Presbiters for that was long before condemned by the Canons He makes a large leape from sozomen to fower hundred yeares agoe and the he sayes many westerne Churches in France Piedmont and Bohemia admitted not of Episcopacy among them and yet the doctrine and practice of these Churches published by themselves is that they had Bishopps continue them stil this the libeller might see in their own bookes If we might beleive what Papists have written of the Waldenses he findes in a booke written 400 yeares since that those Churches in Piedmont held the same doctrine since the time that Constantine with his mischeivous donations poysened Thus the exploded forgery of constantines donation is made authenticke to reproach the Church Sylvester and the whole Church This is the Schismaticall Charitie to the first Christian Emperour and the whole Church but the man might have remembred that Bishopps by his owne confession were long before the time of Constantine and if we beleive the waldenses themselves they had Bishopps in their Churches who held the same doctrine and Government and the antiquitie of the waldenses proves that they had Bishopps otherwise they had beē condemned by the ancient Church as Aerius was for if there had been any Churches differing from vniversal practice in the time of Constantine it is not imaginable that they had been vnobserved wee finde noe mention of their dissent but from the Papacie and that long after The famous Testimonie of St. Jerome whereto he referrs the rest is farr from declaring openly that Bishopp and Presbiter are the same thing but the contrary is manifest in him for what proofe can there be drawne from saint Jerome that Bishopps Presbiters were the same thing who saies that befor schisme by instigatiō of the devil entred into the Church that one said I am of Paul another of Apollo another of cephas al things were governed by the common counsel of the Presbiters and who will thinke that there were no distinct orders because things were governed by the