Selected quad for the lemma: cause_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
cause_n	england_n	king_n	lord_n	4,602	5	4.1139	3	true

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A52047	A plea for defensive armes, or, A copy of a letter written by Mr. Stephen Marshall to a friend of his in the city, for the necessary vindication of himself and his ministerie, against that altogether groundlesse, most unjust and ungodly aspersion cast upon him by certain malignants in the city, and lately printed at Oxford, in their Mendacium aulicum, otherwise called, Mercurius Aulicus, and sent abroad into other nations to his perpetual infamie in which letter the accusation is fully answered, and together with that, the lawfulnesse of the Parliaments taking up defensive arms is briefly and learnedly asserted and demonstrated, texts of Scripture cleared, all objections to the contrary answered, to the full satisfaction of all those that desire to have their consciences informed in this great controversie.; Plea for defensive armes	Marshall, Stephen, 1594?-1655.	1643 (1643)	Wing M768; ESTC R15835	25,154	32

Princes and States by their aides of men and money their distressed and oppressed Brethren and Neighbours in the like case and now in our own sight both the King and States have acquitted the Scots as having done nothing in their late defence but what became good subjects And what the judgment of this Nation was in the time of popery is plain enough by their practice in their usuall taking of Armes and not leaving till they had compelled their Princes to ratifie their Priviledges and Charters which through ill Counsellors they had infringed And observeable it is that because the Bishops and Clergie of those times saw the Princes go about to take down their pride they were ever the most forward to justifie the proceeding of the State and I suspect in case the Tables were turned and we had a King endeavouring to take down the Bishops to take away Pluralites Non-residents c. And a Parliament seeking to maintain them the world would hear another Divinitie from many of them who now cry out that all our defence is damnable But lest I might be thought not to have vveighed the Scripture and reasons of both sides equally I vvill give you a further account vvhat my thoughts vvere and are concerning the Scriptures usually pleaded against this resistance and the reasons deduced from them The strongest hold they pretend to is built upon Romans 13. 1. c. 1. Peter 2. 13 14. vvhere vve are enjoyned subjection to the Higher Powers especially to the King as Supreme and all know that Nero the then supreme Governour was no better then a Tyrant Answ. First it is observable that this objection and almost all the rest taken out of the Scripture make the case of all Subjects in all Kingdomes to be alike that although as I touched before there are hardly two Kingdomes in the world but do differ in Lavves Customes and Constitutions bounding the Kings authority and the Subjects obedience yet if any of these would change the bounds of his authoritie for instance If the King of Denmarke or Sweden or Polonia vvould invade the libertie of his Subjects and make himselfe as absolute not onely as the King of England but as the King of France or Spaine or the great Turke this argument tyes all their Subjects from resisting let any man shew an out-gate for the Subjects of the one vvhich vvill not let out others and for my part I vvill yeeld the cause If they say these Kings took their Crowns upon those termes and the Subjects indented to have liberty of resistance in such cases then they grant that vvhere the Laws of the Kingdome allovv a liberty of resistance resistance may be used notvvithstanding these texts which is as much as vve plead for If any people have covenanted in no case to resist let them seek another answer in the mean time these Texts tie not those from resisting by their own answer who have not tyed themselves Secondly I appeal to their own judgements whether these Texts forbid all forcible resistance Suppose a Prince in his rage should go about to kill himself or run some innocent man thorow with his sword might no man take the sword out of his hand and if it be lawfull for a private man to dis-arme him of the weapons wherewith he would kill one may not the State take such weapons out of his or the hands of his Instruments wherewith they go about to destroy all Thirdly both Texts lay the same charge for subjection to inferiour Magistrates who likewise have their authoritie from God though under the Superiour As our Saviour said to Pilate who was buta Deputy thou couldst have no {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} no power at all against me if it were not given thee from above And may no resistance be made against the unjust violence of inferiour Officers if there may it is sufficient sure I am the Texts have not one word to allow the one and prohibite the other Fourthly what one syllable in either of these Texts so much as looks towards the forbidding of a people to resist Tyrannie but onely that we resist not the Magistrates in the rightfull exercise of their authority given them by God the Texts speak not of their persons but of their power not of their dictates but of their legall commands no more of Kings than of an higher power in an Aristocracie or Democracie binding all persons to subject themselves to that Power and Authoritie which in the severall places vvhere they live is the highest or supreme power Object But Nero was a Tyrant Answ. Not in his five first years nor secondly vvas he a Tyrant in all things he had authoritie to rule according to Law that was not his Tyrannie his Tyrannie was what he usurped contrary to the Law nor thirdly vvere all his under-officers Tyrants many of them could say with Festus Acts 25. It is not the manner of the Romanes to deliver any man to die before that hee which is accused have the accusers face to face and have leave to answer for himself and vvould accordingly dismisse them if they had done nothing worthie of death or of bonds Object 2. But doth not the thirteenth Chapter of the Romanes plainly binde up mens hands from resisting the supreme Power Answ. By the Supreme power must be meant that power which by the originall and fundamentall Constitution of any people and Nation hath authoritie to make Laws which shall binde the whole Nation to dispose of the estates and lives of any person or persons for the good of the Nation to judge every person and persons in the Nation determinatively and conclusively so as from that judgement there is no appealing that power it self being subject to the judgement and authoritie of none but God and Aristotle makes three distinct Branches of this power 1. The power of making and repealing Lawes a Legislative power 2. The power of making War and Peace of imposing Customes and Tributes 3. The power of judging Causes and Crimes ultimately and decisively where these three meet and make their residence whether in one person as in absolute Monarchs or in many as in mixed Monarchies or Aristocracies or in the body of the people as in the ancient Romane government there is the highest power which every soul is forbidden to resist But now what ever be the higher power in England most certain it is that the Kings absolute or illegall will is not the highest power that hath neither power to make Laws nor repeale Laws that hath not power to acquit or condemne nor may men appeal from the Kings lawfull judgement Seat to the Kings absolute will but his legall will in the highest Court or the King and Parliament may make Lawes or repeal Lawes may engage the whole Nation in a War and command both the Bodies and Purses of men unto the service is the highest Court of Judicature to which all my appeal and from which none may

appeal and consequently against which there is no resistance So that if men would read this Text of the thirteenth to the Romans in plain English it amounts directly to thus much Let every soul in England be subject to King and Parliament for they are the higher powers ordained unto you of God whosoever therefore resisteth King and Parliament resisteth the Ordinance of God and they that resist shal receive to themselves damnation I would desire no other Text but this to confound the great Chaplains and Champions of the Antiparliamentary cause or to strike terrour into their Loynes if their long conversing with God-dammee's hath not drawn such a Kawl over their hearts that to them damnation is ridiculous Object 3. But doth not Saint Peter say expresly the King is Supreme 1 Pet. 2. 12. Answ. 1. It may as well be translated Superiour as Supreme the same word in the 13 of the Romans is translated Superiour higher not highest 2. It is plain the Apostle is not there constituting Governments but giving direction to people to obey the Government they lived under and the Text hath as much strength to enforce subjection to Aristocracy as to Monarchy If the people of Pontus Asia Cappadocia Bithynia were under an absolute Monarchy as sometimes they were being petty Kingdoms crumbled out of the great Monarchy of Alexander and it may be did retain yet the same forme of Government if not of their own yet as lately received from the Romans all that can be enforced from thence is That the Apostle names the Kings of those particular Countries to be such as they were and commands subjection to them but no wayes tyes other kingdoms to be like unto them Object 4. But we in England by our oaths do acknowledge the King to be Supreme Answ. 1. We willingly grant Him to be Supreme to judge all persons in all causes according to His Lawes and the established Orders of the Kingdom but not at or by His absolute will or pleasure 2. Whoever considers the title scope and words both of the Oath and the Act of Parliament that enjoynes it will easily see that both the Act and Oath were intended in opposition to that Supremacie which the Pope sometimes challenged and usurped in this Kingdome of England and no more And this to be the true intent and meaning of it appears more fully by that explication or limitation of the Oath made the next Parliament 5. Eliz. Wherein it is declared That that Oath made 1. Eliz. shall be taken and expounded in such form as it is set forth in an admonition added to the Queens Injunctions published Anno 1. of Her Raign viz. To confesse or acknowledge in Her Her Heirs and Successors no other Authority then that which was challenged and lately used by King Henry the eighth and Edward the sixth And by this time you may see how little offensive these two so much boasted Texts are to our defensive Arms Object Other places of Scriptures the adversaries seeme not much to confide in therefore I will passe them over the more briefly yet let us a little consider of them Matth. 26. 52. They that take the sword shall perish with the sword Where Christ seems to rebuke Peter for using defensive arms against the officers that came with a pretext of authority to apprehend Christ Answ. 1. This is not a reproof of the sword taken for just defence but of the sword taken for unjust oppression and a comfort to those that are oppressed by it for Origen Theophylact Titus Euthimius interpret the meaning to be That Christ doth not rebuke Peter for using defensive Arms but to let Peter know that he need not snatch Gods Work out of his hand for God would in due time punish those with the sword that came thus with the sword against him and that these words are a Prophesie of the punishment which the Roman sword should enact of the bloudy Jewish Nation according with the like expression Revel. 13. 10. He that kills with the sword must be killed with the sword here is the patience and faith of the Saints that is This may comfort the Saints in their persecutions that God will take vengeance for them But secondly Suppose it was a reproof of Peters using the sword then the plain meaning is to condemn Peters rashnesse who drew his sword and never staid to know his Masters minde whether he should strike or not and so reproves those who rashly unlawfully or doubtingly use the sword Adde this That now was the hour come of Christs suffering and not of his Apostles fighting wherein Christ would not be rescued no not by twelve Legions of Angels much lesse then by the sword of man Therefore he saith to Peter Put up thy sword c. But intended not that it should alwayes be unlawfull for his people to use the sword in their just defence against unjust violence for then he would never have commanded them but a little before that he that hath two Coats let him sell one and buy a sword Object Eccles. 8. 2. c. I counsell thee to keep the Kings Commandment c. He doth whatever he pleaseth c. Where the word of a King is there is power and who may say to him What dost thou Answ. 1. No man can understand it literally in all things as if every commandment of the King must be kept as if no actions of the King might be scanned nor reproved by any man as the Canonists say of the Pope That if he lead thousands to hel none may say Why dost thou so Surely if Saul command to murder the Lords Priests that commandment need not be kept If David lie with his neighbours wife Nathan may say Why dost thou so If Ahab murder Naboth and swallow his inheritance worship Baal persecute and kill the Prophets of the Lord Elijah may reprove him notwithstanding this Text Who can say unto him what dost thou Secondly The Text plainly enough interprets it self Keep the Kings commandment according to the oath of God stand not in an evil thing against him he hath power to do whatever he will Si scelus patraveris effugere non poteris If you commit evil you cannot escape punishment where the word of a King is there is power viz. to punish them that do evil and none to call him to account for doing it and who can say unto him What dost thou Object Another text is Proverb 8. 15. By me Kings reigne c. Whence they plead that because Kings and Princes receive their authority only from God and the people at the utmost only designe the Person but give him none of his power therefore they may in no case take away his power from him Answ. 1. It saith no more of Kings then of Nobles Senators and all other Judges of the earth for it follows By me Princes rule and Nobles even all the Judges of the Earth Secondly Although no such thing is in the Text

that the people give no power to the Magistrate yet we will suppose it to be true what then will follow more then this That although they may not take from the Magistrate that power which God hath given him yet they may defend themselves against such unjust violences as God never gave the Magistrate power to commit A woman hath power to designe the person of her husband to her self but the authoritie of a husband is from God now though the wife may not take away the husbands just authority she may defend her self against oppression and injury Object Some alledge Gods judgement upon the two hundred and fifty Princes Numb. 16. Answ. They were Rebels against their lawfull Governours ruling exactly according to the expresse will of God And may all those perish with them who will plead for such as they are Object Others alledge 1 Sam. 8. 11. where the people are let to understand how they shal be oppressed by their Kings yet for all that have no just cause of resistance for they shall have no other remedy left them but preces lachrimae crying to the Lord Vers. 8. Answ. But saith the Text so Let us read the words a little and you shall cry out in that day Because of the King which you have chosen and the Lord shall not hear in that day Is this to say they have no just cause of resistance nor no remedy left but complaining Indeed if the Holy Ghost had said You shal not resist nor fight for your liberties c. there had been some shew of reason for such a deduction as some would extort from them but yet even then Why might not the words have been a prediction of the curse of God upon the people giving them up to such a base degenerate ignoble spirit that they shall have no heart to stand up in the defence of their liberties and lives rather then a prohibition of such resistance The Lord foretels the people Ezek. 24. 21. of calamitous times in which he tels them Verse 24. That they should not mourn or weep Will any man interpret this as if God made it unlawful for them to mourn or to weep or was it not rather a prediction of their stupidity of spirit when they should pine away under these calamities so Jere. 27. God said they should put their necks under the yoke of the Kings of Babylon Will any man thence gather That other People are bound to put their necks under the yoke of a forraign enemy invading them In one vvord the plain meaning is That this People should dearly rue it for casting off the form of Government which God had chosen for them and vvhen they should mourn under their ovvn choice God vvould not take the yoke from off their necks and so it is a threatning of a judgement not an imposition of a duty Object But David durst not lift up his hand against the Lords Anointed though he did tyrannically persecute him yea though it vvere sometimes in his povver to have killed him Answ. No man pleads that any David should kill the Lords Anointed yet he may defend himself against his unjust violence as David here did Object But if they may not kill him vvho can be secured That in a battell as at Keynton field his bullet may not hit the Lords Anointed Answ. Is this their fault vvho have so often petitioned his Majestie to vvithdraw himself from such dangerous vvayes as both the Parliament and his Excellencie hath done if their petitions vvould have been received or rather theirs who the vvorse Subjects they and the more accursed they have led Him into these unnaturall Warres and do in a manner inforce His presence in them Did they bear that affection to His Majestie as they pretend They vvould vvith Davids men Swear Thou shalt no more go out with us to battell lest thou quench the light of Israel 2. Sam. 21. 17. We have heard much of the Cavaliers svvearing but I never yet heard that one of them had the honestie to swear this Nay they are vvronged in reports if some of them have not sworn the contrarie Object But David vvould not fight against him Answ. Indeed he never did fight against him because his numbers never vvere considerable till tovvards the last but he vvould have fortified the Citie of Keilah against him And it had been a strange madnesse to have had 600. men vvith him if his conscience would have suffered him to have done nothing but flee sure one might more easily be hid then 600. But there is a plain text assuring us that David and his men vvoud have done more then run up and dovvn if occasion had served 1 Chron. 12. 16. and so forvvard When divers of the children of Judah and Benjamin came to joyne with him David vvent out to meet them and said If ye be come to help me c. But if ye come to betray me to my enemies I being innocent the God of our fathers look upon it and rebuke it Now mark their answer the spirit came upon Amasa the chief Captain and he said Thine are we David and of thy side peace be to thee and peace to thy helpers then David received them and made them Captains of the band Can any man imagine their meaning vvas to run up and dovvn the Countries vvith him if they vvere able to cope vvith any number that Saul should bring or send against them especially adding this to it That they fell to him from the severall Tribes day by day till his host was like an host of God Now by these mens argument if Davids host had been fourtie thousand and Saul come against him but with five or six hundred they must all have fled from him and not have put it to a battell Credat Judaeus Appella non ego Object But the Fathers of the Primitive times knew no defence but preces lachrymae in all their unjust sufferings Answ. 1. It follows not because they knew it not therefore we cannot know it there might be speciall reasons of Gods dispensations towards them 2. Their Liberties and Religion were not established by Law and this was the cause saith Abbot Bishop of Salisbury why the Christians in the Primitive times before their Religion was established by Law caedebantur non caedebant would rather be killed then kill But after the times of Constantine when Religion was established they shook off the yoke of persecution from the Church caedebant non caedebantur they did kill rather then be killed 3. Where did any of the Fathers ever oppose this opinion and condemn this practice that is declaring it unlawfull especially for a representative body to defend themselves against the unjust violence of their mis-led Princes I beleeve if any such testimonies were to be found the Parliament should have heard of them before this time 4. We want not examples of such defence in the Primitive times when once Religion was establisht

Churches of England I must acknowledge this made me to think that the Parliament had just cause to be jealous of great danger But when His Majesty returned from Scotland discharged the guard which the Parliament had set for their own safety and an other denied except under the charge of the Queens Chamberlain and His Majesty himself entertained divers Captaines as a super-numerary guard at Whitehall went to the House of Commons after that manner to demand the five members to be delivered unto Him The Earle of Newcastle now General of the Armie of Papists in the North sent to Hull attempting to seize it and the Magazine there his Majestie according to the Lord Digbies letters retiring from the Parliament to a place of strength and the Queen going beyond Sea to raise a partie there I must have shut my eyes if I had not seen danger and thousands of thousands would have thought the Parliament altogether senslesse if they had not importuned his Majesty as they did to settle the Militia all former settlings of it by Commissions of Lievtenancy being confessedly void His Majestie refusing this in that manner as they thought necessary for security they voted the putting of it into the hands of persons whom they thought the State might confide in though alas many of them since have discovered to us how vaine is our hope in man And secured the Town of Hull and the Magazine there soon after this his Majesty in the north seised New-Castle and under the name of a guard begun to raise an army all this was done before the Parliament voted that his Majesty seduced by wicked councell c. And when his Majesties Army was more encreased he then declared that he was resolved by strength to recover Hull and the Magazine and to suppresse the Militia After this indeed the Parliament began to make vigorous preparations by their propositions for Plate Money Horse c. This being the true progresse and state of the businesse I saw clearly all along the Kingdome and Parliament were in danger that it was therefore necessary to have the Militia and Navie in safe hands which His Majesty also acknowledged That he refused to settle it for a time in the way they conceived necessary and that by the judgement of both Houses when they were full they had power by the fundamentall Laws of the Kingdome to settle it especially for a time upon His Majesties refusall That His Majesty raised force and declared it was to suppresse the Militia and recover Hull and the Magazine is as clear and made pregnant preparations both at home and beyond the Seas And the civill Lawyers say that pregnant preparations are the beginning of a War The onely Question remaining was whether the Parliament did justly in ordering the Militia and securing the Magazine and Navy in a confessed time of danger upon such his Majesties refusall What the Kings power and perogative and what the Parliaments power was for securing the Militia in time of danger according to the Laws of England was out of my profession and in great part above my skill But certainly unlesse I vvas bound rather to beleeve the Votes of the Papists and other Delinquents about his Majesty vvho hitherto had prevailed to bring upon us all the miseries that vve have laine under then the Votes and Judgements of the highest Court of Judicature in England which so far as I have heard was never by Common Law or Statute Law presumed to be guilty of or charged with the overthrow of the Kings prerogative or the Lawes and Liberties of the Subjects untill now and who have given us so much evidence of their wisdome watchfulnesse and faithfulnesse I vvas bound to be concluded under their Testimony and so consequently that His Majesty was seduced c. And surely if men vvho serve upon Justice betvveen Prince and People party and party in matters of Life or State may rest in the resolution of the learned Judges that this or that is law vvhen themselves knovv it not vvell might I rest in the judgement and resolution of that Court which is the Judge of all the Judicatures in the Land And in case I were unsatisfied to whom should I appeale in whose judgement I might more safely rest especially when I savv their Vote agreeable to that which is the supreme Law of all Nations namely that publick safety is the highest and deepest Law and that it is requisite that every State have a povver in time of danger to preserve it self from ruine and no Lavv of England more knovvne then that the Parliament is the highest Court from vvhence there is no appeal This satisfaction I had then and since by the Declarations and Remonstrances of the Parliament concerning these Military matters and by other Books lately published it is most apparent that they have not usurped upon His Majesties prerogative but what they have done is agreeable to the practice of former Parliaments In putting the Militia Forts and Navy into safe hands in these times of danger And that it vvas therefore lavvfull for them yea necessary to take up these Defensive Armes and consequently to call in for supply from all such vvho should share with them in the benefit of preservation and to disable such from hurting them who were contrary minded I spend no time to answer the Objections that some make that His Majesty could not tarry at London with safety of His Person that the Lords and Commons that are vvith Him were driven away by popular Tumults and could not enjoy freedome of their Votes c. Because I thinke these things are now beleeved by none but such as would beleeve no good of the Parliament though one should rise from the dead again Thus Sir you have a just account of the grounds that first induced me to owne this Cause you desire to know whether I see not yet reason to repent of what I have done I confesse I never undertooke any thing but I saw cause to repent of my miscarriage through the corruption which cleaves to me and great cause I have to bewaile my many failings in this great Worke but for the Worke it self I as solemnely professe I never saw cause to repent of my appearing in it the Cause is a right cause the Cause of God my call to it a cleare call and though the Work prove harder and longer then at first it was thought yet the Cause is far clearer then at the first The work indeed is harder then I expected for whoever could have beleeved he should have seen in England so many Lords and Commons even after their solemne Protestation to defend the Priviledge of Parliament and their owne Vote that His Majesty seduced by wicked councell intended War against the Parliament so shamefully to betray the trust committed to them so many of the Protestant Profession joyning with an army of Papists under pretence of maintaining the Protestant Religion against a Protestant Parliament to fight

A PLEA FOR DEFENSIVE ARMES OR A Copy of a Letter written by Mr STEPHEN MARSHALL To a friend of his in the City for the necessary vindication of himself and his Ministerie against that altogether groundlesse most unjust and ungodly aspersion cast upon him by certain Malignants in the City and lately printed at Oxford in their Mendacium Aulicum otherwise called Mercurius Aulicus and sent abroad into other Nations to his perpetual infamie In which Letter the accusation is fully answered And together with that the lawfulnesse of the Parliaments taking up Defensive Arms is briefly and learnedly asserted and demonstrated Texts of Scripture cleared all Objections to the contrary answered to the full satisfaction of all those that desire to have their consciences informed in this great Controversie HOSEA 4. 1 2 3. 1. Hear the word of the Lord ye Children of Israel for the Lord hath a controversie with the inhabitants of the Land because there is no truth nor mercy nor knowledge of God in the Land 2. By swearing and lying and killing and stealing and whoring they break out and bloud toucheth bloud 3. Therefore shall the Land mourn c. LONDON Printed for Samuel Gellibrand at the Brazen Serpent in Pauls Church-yard 1643. SIR YOur Letters brought not the first tidings of the continuance and encrease of those strange reports concerning me they filled the City even while I was there and I perceive pursue mee into the Countrey it is a lying spirit which God hath permitted to haunt me for my triall as it hath done others of his servants before me You know what a book Bolsec wrote of the life and death of M. Calvin Beza lived to write a confutation of a book written of his renouncing his Religion and turning Papist And concerning Luther the Priests had long reported that he had his call from the Devill and to confirm it filled Italy with a rumour of his death and that at his death he was carried away by the Devill soul and body which they good soules divulged not to discredite the man but in gloriam Iesu Christi to the glory of Christ and comfort of the godly The like usage my self have lately met with in some degree for being afflicted with a deep cold and distillation from my head upon my lungs and some feverish distempers my learned loving and carefull Physitian finding that the too importune visits of my many loving friends occasioned too much speech and thereby too much expence of spirits advised me to remove to the house of my Noble Lord of Warwick where I should have more ayre and lesse company hereupon a report was immediatly spread about the City that I was distracted and in my rage constantly cried out I was damned for appearing in and adhering to the Parliament and Kingdome in this defensive Warre which when I first heard I looked upon as a calumnie invented by some simple adversary though malicious enough to my person and ministery who finding it the readiest way to reproach me betook himself to this But afterwards observing how studiously it was maintained how laboriously propagated how banded from Court to City from City to Countrey from England to forraign parts Mercurius Aulicus printed it and a great Officer of State having sent it into other Kingdomes with his Letters assuring the truth of it and that not nine dayes no not a month did allay it I then perceived the plot was not so much to disgrace me for alas who am I that they should trouble themselves so much about me but through me to wound the Cause in which my poore labours have been engaged This rumour it seemes yet lives and as your letter confirmes encreases from my going down into the Countrey they have taken occasion not only to report me distracted but dead yea that I died crying out of my appearing in this Cause and this is so confidently reported by some that it is almost as confidently beleeved by others even thousands you say which makes you earnestly to presse me to write unto you whether I have not at least changed my former judgement about our defensive armes and this not as you professed to satisfie your self but that you might have something under my own hand to shew for the satisfaction of others Sir your ancient love to me and present desires to vindicate me from these aspersions but especially your care that the publick Cause might not suffer do all command me to be your servant in this thing I know it will satisfie you that I solemnly protest unto you that in all these fourteen weeks keeping in I never had an houres sicknesse nor lost a nights sleep nor had any distemper in my head nor saw any cause of sorrow for my adhering to the Parliaments cause but esteem it a great honour and mercy from God that he should move his Excellency my Lord to require my service in this great expedition and that I have even therefore exactly followed the Doctors prescriptions out of an earnest desire to be fitted for my work that I might returne to my most honoured Lord being fully resolved if God say Amen to it never to give it over untill either there be an end of that work or an end of my dayes This I think will satisfie you and it is possibly as much as you desire for the satisfaction of others to have this under my hand Take this concerning the cause and concerning the report spread of me what Luther said of those above mentioned concerning himselfe fateor testor hâc meâ manu c. I professe and testifie under my hand that I entertained this fiction of my distraction and death laetaque mente hilari vultu very chearfully But since your love hath compelled me to put pen to paper I shall compell you to read the largest letter that ever I wrote being resolved to give you a full account both of my ground and warrant of entring upon my office and how far I am from changing my judgement upon the present view of things When his Excellency vouchsafed to require my service for God knows I offered not my self in this great work there were but two questions besides my care to walk aright in my Ministry for my conscience to be resolved in First whether upon supposall of the truth of the Parliament votes viz. That his Majestie seduced by wicked Councell did levie warre against the Parliament the Scripture did warrant them to take up defensive Arms Secondly Whether the Parliament was not mis-informed about such his Majesties purpose and practice The first is a meere question in Divinity viz. Whether a people especially the representative body of a State may after all humble Remonstrances defend themselves against the unlawfull violence of the Supream Magistrate or his Instruments Endeavouring and that in matters of great moment to deprive them of their lawfull Liberties The second is a question meerly of matter of fact For the first Before the