or Priest or Jesuit according to his place even sentence of death if he could not avoidâ— it Onely with two cautions 1. That he should be as favourable as was possible 2. That he should give timely Intelligence of any severe sentence Let now charity judge what circumspection almost can suffice against such a generation of Men Or what jealousie can be too much of them that still professe this treacherous Religion And yet all this notwithstanding at last to have even professed Papists taken in against the Parliament Can this be without a designe in them that have counselled the King to it Was it not in a prudent fore-sight that they should be cal'd and admitted to helpe that the Papists have no where been plundered by the Kings Army though others have who held not with the Parliament 8. As for Ziba David knew not his treachery at the first and his lyes had so blasted honest-hearted Mephibosheth that it appeares David did scarcely beleeve his apology for himselfe Otherwise what ever may now be said of his credulous charity to Ziba to the prejudice of one that was not present to answer for himselfe it was none of Davids good deeds to be imitated to recompence a flattering Sycophant that had brought him a present in a hard time indeed with so large a share in Mephibosheths estate When by the Law of God he was to dye for his false accusation of Treason as Mephibosheth had deserved death had it been true But now our Papists are knowne to be Enemies to the Parliament as was said before and some of their Party in the Country sticke not to say that the Parliaments Intentions of rigour against them already shewed by the executing of so many Priests and Jesuites Men of tender consciences is one part of the Court-quarrell against them They are more like Doeg then Ziba who first accused the Priests and then readily undertooke the execution of a most cruell sentence and executed it with all cruelty But Psal 52. Reades their doome And Psal 54.4 Sutes the Ziphims too those of Davids owne Tribe that came and discovered him to Saul 1 Sa. 23.26 once and againe and so incensed him afresh against him Though Saul blesses them 1 Sa. 23.21 as his speciall good subjects that had compassion of him Conscience must now judge whether the Papists being favoured were any cause of the resistance now made or only the resistance now â—â—de was the cause that they were admitted to helpe the King in his distresse 9. But for the D â— to honour them with the Title of good subjects preferring them before the Parliament and so great a part of the Kingdome as visibly adhere to them is one of the highest reproaches that ever was belcht out against them enough for a Jesuite or a Pope to have said But the Dr. how ever he pretend modesty oft-times and respect to the Parliament stabbs them as desperately as any enemy could doe now and then While he seemes also resolved to justifie all that hath been done against them else he would have been silent in this peece and the next that followes about Ireland 10. In the meane time because he upbraids with a scandall that this resistance brings on our Religion which saith he would not be easily wiped of were it to stand or fall by the doctrines of this giddy age I must needs make bold to tell him that he forgets himselfe strangely and the Doctrines and practises of our Religion when he can scarce name that Country where there are any Protestants that have not taken Armes to defend Laws and Liberties and with them Religion even though not before allowed by Laws Sweden Germany France The low Countries Bohemiah Scotland And did not Q. Elizabeth of blessed memory assist them in France Holland and Scotland and K. James Holland and at least owned the cause of the French though he only sent Ambassadours and K. Charles did send to aide Rochel as I noted before and ownes the Prince of Orange sufficiently who yet is Rebell Generall against the K. of Spain if our Parliaments resistance be Rebellion Indeed we in England are the last and above all other Nations have been by the Court Doctors within this 40 Yeares much prepared to suffer any thing rather then resist Yet Bishop Bilson in the Queens time was suffered to averre that the States of a Kingdome might resist vide But it now above all other times greeves that we offer to doe what all others have done before us upon a great deale lesse Authority considering our Parliament continued by Act and its power granted by the King as I have noted before against all delinquents For if they could have subdued and swallowed us up the other Protestants in other Countreyes would much more easily have been devoured 4. The last Allegation is concerning the businesses of Ireland Of which because the Dr. saith the King hath written enough he had done wisely to have written nothing but that word Though I have not yet been so happy who would be glad to see it to meet with any Answer to the last Peece of the House of Commons which reckons so many particulars of wrong done to that poore Kingdomâ— Therefore till I meete with that I must needs tell the Dr. he saith not enough to cleare the businesse nor the Kings Councellours in that businesse For whereas his whole defence is â—in a word that the Kings necessity made it lawfull to make use of any thing intended for their releefe which he parallels by the Necessity that excused the Scots comming in hither To this divers things may and must be replyed 1. The Scots are no parallell for this carriage toward Ireland Their coming what ever the Dr. affirmes brought no such great detriment to the Inhabitants there if you except their professed enemies Papists and Prelates as the poore Souldiers and other Protestants of Ireland have suffered by the actions done concerning them 2. The King and Parliament have justified by Act of Parliament their coming as necessitated Yet they were proclaimed Traitours againe and againe and it was counted necessary to make War against them one yeare and a second as now against the Parliament The necessity then that is now pretended by the Kings party wants a great deale of the justification that the Scots have had before all the world specially remembring all that was noted before of the doings of the Kings followers before ever the Parliament did any thing but Petition 3. Which necessity by them pretended if it appeare a necessity by themselves made will it not make their actions concerning Ireland more horrid and proclaime the designe to be more rooted 4. But it must by no means be forgotten what hath been pretended for Ireland to which these actions are most contrary 1. When the King rode Northward and the Parliament more then once represented that it would greatly prejudice Ireland The King protested still it should not but he would be as
both and then let Conscience exercise charity as it will answer to GOD to it selfe to all it's Fellow English men and Christians and even to the whole World Thus in generall now we must examine some particulars The Dr. names 4 grounds of feares and jealousie with which the people have been possessed All which he first rejects with a gentle comparing of the Parliamont who hath set them forth to the Devill the Arch-accuser This is his charity In stead of rataliating I will onely say the Lord forgive thee His first ground is Reports of Forraign Power to be brought in This he saith was given out before the setting up of the MILITIA to keepe the People amused the easier to draw them into such a posture of defence as was pretended and they are all discovered by time to have been vaine REPL. 1. why will he perpetually forget that the King himself granted the Militia necessary to be setled 2 It was not meerely Forraigne Forces to bee brought in but Papists and Delinquents rising at home that was insinuated a cause of the desire to have the Kingdom put in a posture of defence 3. Who knows not of the billeting of many thousands of Irish upon us even during the fitting of a former Parliament The Project of Germane Horse in the Dukes time is it quite forgotten The Earle of Staffords Councell not only to bring in his Irish Army consisting most of Papists wherewith to reduce this Kingdome was it not proved by the Oath of a Privy Counsellor present and confirmed by his own Notes taken at the time and did not the rest of the advise then given by that Politician that the King being now deserted by his Parliament might doe any act of power Quaere the words in his charge amount to Counselling the bringing in of any forces from any place And why must all intelligences after these prevented bee counted vaine 4. For is all suspition vaine because the thing suspected comes not to passe when mean are used to prevent it Is all preventing Physicke Vaine Is all feare of Pyrates in a Sea voyage vaine if none assault a well man'd and provided Ship Was not such a Navy being secured in safe hands as would under God have made great Forraign Forces repent their comming against the Kingdomee competent reason why those that did mean to come if they might have had no resistance on the Sea now thought it too hot a service 5. But besides the Navy they had no Landing place Hull being contrary to the Court-expectation and attempt as was Noted before secured by the Parliament and so might well be the more discouraged 6. Which is the more considerable because no sooner had they got a Port-Town namely Newcastle but though no Forraign Forces came who could not be so soon ready yet Forraign Ammunition came not a little and Forces of our Country-men who served in Forraign Countries and money too from Forraigne Princes or People And what more is comming if our unhappinesse continue till the Spring who can be secure But for this if it prove so the Dr. hath a defence ready All Christian Kings he saith cannot but thinke themselves concerned in the cause and it will be as just for the King to use them against subjects now in arms as it was unjust in the Barons to call in the French against their naturall King REPL. 1. The Dr. bestirres himself to make the King strong to maintain the Prelacy among other things as himself hath told us before in the former Section he said that they that assist him doe it according to their Allegiance So that he intends that all his Subjects are bound by their Allegiance to assist him and fight against the Parliament even though their Consciences judge them to intend the conservation of Religion Laws and liberties and his followers to intend their subversion And here hee calls all Christian Kings iâ— as themselves concerned in the Cause 2. When the Rochellers took Arms according to their Priviledges and Edicts of the Kingdome to defend themselves And our Protestant or Popish Councellors got 8. Ships to be sent to assist the King of France against them and in the Low-Country they did the like too what will the Dr. say were all the Christian Princes concerned to assist against the Rochellers If hee doe the very souldiers and marriners that went into Ships shall rise up in judgment against him who when they knew what they went for utterly refused to fight against their Religion and so the greatest part of them were set a Shore againe and the rest went on their voyage and did the mischief to help beat the Rochell Fleet and give the King possession of the Haven so as he afterward with the help of the King of Spaine so still Princes are concerned against the Protestant made a Barricado so strong as when a Fleet from hence after re-Voyage attempted to relieve Rochell by Sea being then actually besieged by Land it could not be done 3. What will the Dr. say to that Voyage to Rey and that to releeve Rochell when it proved too late Why was not the King still concerned to helpe the King of France or was he 4 Will it be Just for the King to use Forraign Forces when to the understanding of Common Readers hee hath utterly disclaimed it in more then one Declaration 5 What Counsell would an Enemy to the King and Kingdome that hath read Stories and ours in speciall as the Dr. seemes to have done give but the using of Forraign Forces was not the Kingdome Conquered by this very meanes by the Saxons when King Vorteger was in debate with his Lords and People call'd them in to assist him Did not the Turkes so come into Europe and oft the like hath hapened 6. He counts it damnable to resist for defence meerly much more then as the Barons in K. Iohns time to call in a Stranger to make him King if then to call in other Kings to assist against the Parliament be as just as that was unjust it is a high vertue though to the utter endangering of the whole Kingdom whose Counsellour surely it were pity the Dr. should ever be who hath no more judgment or more Conscience or charity toward the publique good then to advise and commend such a practise 2. Next he propounds the Queens Religion as a matter which is urged to cause feares and jelousies Of which he saith It is no new cause REPL. 1. It is true to the great grief of all that truly love Religion or wish well to her Majestie but had others wish't it otherwise as the Dr. speakes for himselfe who have had accesse unto her She had not bin told by a great man in the Church in the worst season that could be when it is said shee had some Pangs about Her Religion and asked of it that Shee might well be saved in her Religion Or if any give no credit to this passage yet it is notorious
whether it be lawfull to resist the officers or souldiers of the King he being besides them and animating them with his commands to doe violence I will suppose for the present the Kings person is and shall be safe notwithstanding the resistance or that els the resistance must be forborne I onely aske whether his followers commanded by him standing by to doe murthers and rapes may be resisted with armes or not 4. If he will say that in all these cases resistance may be made so the Kings Person may be safe 1. The King may thanke him for the care of his Person but his Power and Authority is as much impugned by this as by many that plead for the defence now actually under-taken 2. The Cavaliers and Followers of the King will thanke him never a whit For they may all be knocked on the head or starved and yet the Kings Person be safe And they would soon desert the cause if this were beleeved or would be rooted-out if this were generally practised and that is all the Defendants desire who honour the Kings Person and authority as much as the Doctor or any of his fellows not to say more how ever they resist his Cavaliers 5. If he will deny resistance where the King is present because there his commands are certainly knowne to be his which may be doubted of in remote Countries Then 1. So should it have been exprest for cleare understanding and not coucht in uncertainty 2. Then all these Cavaliers are justly resisted where the King is not present which againe if it were believed and practised would soone end the businesse For even in the next Parish to the King they might be resisted though not where he appeares and speakes 3. What if it be doubted whether the King be not forced by threatnings and feare of his life to command so and so Kings have been prisoners and have commanded so and by wise and good Subjects Castles and Townes have bin kept by force of Armes against such as they bad to assault it if not yeelded Our Law supposes The King can doe no wrong yet supposes wrong may be done in his name by his followers If he then command a notoriously wicked thing The Law will suppose him forced or the like And then resistance shall be as well lawfull as if he were absent Or even necessary to rescue him out of such wicked hands 4. What if it be doubted whether a King be bewitched by sorceries There have bin such things of old and the Devills power doth not seeme to be lessned now 5. What if it be doubted whether the King be distracted A thing that hath befallen Kings as well as meane men Are subjects bound from resisting the commands of a bewitched or distracted Person to the ruine of Religion Lawes and liberties still preserving his person safe 6. Suppose it be certaine he is not forced nor bewitched nor distracted Yet doing as bad as any forced bewitched or distracted person can possibly doe by commanding such tyrannicall Acts what reason can be imagined why such a command should tie subjects hands from resisting his followers offering to act his tyranny more then if he were forced bewitched or distracted Is the liberty of his body and mind from those violences an enslaving of his people to his lawlesse lusts of crueltie and mischiefe 6. If he say further that even his officers or souldiers if they have his Seale or warrant may not be resisted in the remotest Country Then besides the former inconveniences these are to be added 1. Any that come among ignorant common people may abuse them at their pleasure if they will but pretend the Kings Seale or Warrant It hath bin counterfeited for Briefes How ordinary would it be if it might not be resisted How would malicious men murther with it Robbers spoyle with it and who could remedy it 2. By this meanes any that had a designe to depose the King and usurpe the Kingdome might by a counterfeit Seale and Warrant kill all the Kings faithfullest Subjects and strengthen so himselfe and his party as the King should after have no power to save himselfe Lawes observed will secure sufficiently from this And liberty to resist illegall violences will appeare to be necessary to the Kings safety as well as the Subjects Kings have seldome or never bin murthered or deposed where Lawes have bin preserved in their vigour But often where illegall violences have had place Let this also not be forgotten 7. Well but thus the case I suppose is understood if not by the Doctor yet by the generall of those that take the Kings part against the Parliament that neither the King in Person nor any of his officers or souldiers that have commission from him may be resisted because that were to resist the King which say they all the Apostle forbids and threatens Rom. 13.2 But here again I blame the Doctors negligent handling of that place upon divers considerations further 1. Without doubt the first verse is to be regarded as being the foundation of the second as appeares by the word Therefore Yet that he hath greatly neglected Perhaps for feare the scanning of it would doe him an ill turne as I shall by and by endeavour to shew by comparing the subjection commanded with the resistance forbidden 2. In the first verse he doth very ill to reade alwayes except once by chance as I thinke higher power for higher powers and so never to tell us whether the other powers who are higher in relation to the common-people though inferiour in relation to the supreme S. Peters governours may be resisted or not even with Arms. Perhaps this fraudulently also 3. In the second verse he is very carelesse to tell us whether resistance which is three times in English but there are two Greeke words the first being different from the second and third signifie all kind of opposition though without Armes to the higher and supreme power at least but then much more with Arms Or whether it only signifie resisting with Armes and no other there forbidden and made damnable Yet this a needfull Question for a conscience to be resolved in and more ordinarily then about resisting And so would well have become the Doctors learning and pretended care of Conscience and even regard of Authority to have discoursed upon But since he hath not vouchsafed to doe any of these I shall take the paines to doe it for him and for the conscientious Readers as well as I can 1. The first verse begins 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Let every soule be subject to the higher Powers Here are two questions 1. What is meant by being subject 2. What by higher Powers By being subject is meant yeelding obedience either active or at least passive that is doing or forbearing acccording to command or submitting to suffering when one do's otherwise It cannot be denied but both these are parts of subjection and that so much is commanded by the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉
that Subjects may not resist a Prince who is bent to subvert Religion Lawes and Liberties The Apostles Reasons against Resisters are 1. For Rulers are not a terrour to good workes but to evill Now is this a reason why I may not resist such a Tyrant Who can be more a terrour to good workes and not to evill then he that is bent to subvert Religion Lawes and Liberties Ergo of such a Resistance of a tyrant the Apostle speakes not But of Resistance of that Ruler who go's altogether according to Lawes and Liberties which is justly punishable with Damnation without Gainsaying 2. A second Reason or enforcement of the Apostles argument against Resistance is Wilt thou then not be afraid of the power Doe that which is good and thou shalt have praise of the same Now doth this argue a Tyrant is not to be resisted Is there no cause of feare of him while a man do's that which is good that is bent to subvert Religion Lawes and Liberties Or shall a man have praise in doing good of such a Tyrant Therefore is not a Tyrant that power which may not be resisted But he that stands to the Lawes and Rules according to them Damnation is just against those that resist him without question 3. Thirdly The Apostle proceeds vers 4. For he is the Minister of God to thee for good and so not to be resisted without resisting the Ordinance of God and so incurring damnation But is this true of a Tyrant bent to subvert Religion Laws and Liberties Is he the Minister of God to thee for good Or the Minister of his owne lusts rather for evill Resistance of such an one then is not the Resistance the Apostle forbids but of one who is the conservatour of Religion for he and he only is the Minister of God to thee for good and worthy is he of Damnation that resists such an one 4. The Apostle adds If thou doe that which is evill feare for he beareth not the Sword in vaine For he is the Minister of God a Revenger to execute wrath upon him that doth evill Is this man a Tyrant bent to subvert Religion Lawes and Liberties or most directly opposite to Tyranny A Tyrant secures those that do evil so they will joyn with him and serve him in his Tyranny from feare And he beares the Sword not only in vaine in reference to any good end intended by Gods ordinance but altogether contrary to it and is so farr from being the Minister of God that he is as before a Minister of his owne lusts to shelter those that doe evill and to pursue with all wrath and revenge him that doth good and will not be a slave to his lawles designes and desires Still then of such a Tyrant S. Paul argues not that he may not be resisted but him that he describes which is a just Governour and so upon no terms to be resisted 5. Upon all this the Apostle resumes Wherefore you must of necessity be subject not only for wrath but also for Conscience sake What rules of conscience before laid inferr'd now by the word wherefore urge such an Asinine or stupid suâ—ject as to be subject even passively and not to resist one that is bent to subvert Religion Lawes and Liberties when all that went before speake expresly of another power and Rulers of another temper A man then for feare of wrath not being able to make good his Resistance may yeeld such passive subjection but sure conscience at least not in this place urges him not to it 6. Yet the Apostle goes-on For this cause also pay you Tribute for they are Gods Ministers continually attending on this very thing For what cause Because they may attempt to subvert Religion Laws and Liberties Doe we pay Tribute for this cause that they plunder and change Lawes c. Or that they may defend them Also upon what thing are they thus Gods Ministers to attend continually Is it to subvert Lawes c. Or to preserve them The Apostle then speakes not of a Tyrant but a just ruling Prince and pitty but he should be damn'd that resists him 7. Finally he concludes this matter with saying Render to all their due By what Law of God or man may a Tyrant subvert Religion Laws and Liberties or even be let alone in so doing I am sure the Apostle hath not exprest any such thing hitherto It is Ergo but the Doctours mistake though I confesse it hath beene many wise and good mens before him that the Apostle forbids resisting such a Tyrant which as I said above all his Reasons go rather quite contrary unto as describing the Power and Ruler that is to be subjected to and not resisted altogether crosse to Tyranny and his Interpretation and Assertion is altogether crosse to the Apostles Having set the understanding of the maine Text right I come now to those examples that are alleadged to proove That it is lawfull to resist in some cases 1. The example of the peoples resisting Sauls illegall and tyrannicall attempt to have put Jonathan to death without cause If this were lawfull in them in a particular mans case against whom also there was some seemig cause How much more to resist one that is bent to subvert Religion Laws and Liberties and so to take away the life of many at his own pleasure To this is answered not that it was unlawfull in the people to make this resistance which yet if he deny not he plainly yeelds his cause in his first Proposition and Rom. 13.2 forbids not all Resistance but only that the people drew not into Armes themselves but being there at Sauls command did by a loving violence and importunity hinder the execution of a particular and passionate unlawfull command To this I reply 1. If it were lawfull now what hinders but they might have come together to prevent such a mischiefe as Jonathans unjust Death Sure Saul called them not together to resist himselfe in any thing Neither did his calling them together to fight against the Philistines authorize them to fight against him if it were not lawfull of it selfe Our King call'd the Parliament together yet he allowes not them to resist upon that pretence though they are undeniably not the great Councell only but the great Court of Judicature in the Kingdome This peece then of his Answer is nothing but words and pretence 2. As for his loving violence and importunity wherewith he would blanch their Resistance Grant they shewed a love to Saul because Jonathan was Sauls sonne But had Saul counted him his Enemy as he did David afterward It would have sounded harsh violence and out-ragious enough and it was plainly a great deale beyond a loving violence For Saul swore his death and they swore his life that not a haire of him should c. This was Resistance then with an Oath as it were to make Saul forsworne After this Example then our people may sweare an Association that
Kings attempt upon their office and Gods worship 2 Chron. 26. And after thrusting him out of the Temple when God had smitten him with Leprosie for it I for my part put no great weight on the former But their thrusting him out of the Temple is somewhat towards a hinderance even by force of a Prince if he persist to violate Gods undoubted ordinances as it had been to have staid in the Temple being leprous added to the sinne of his going in at all and presumption to offer Incense But such a case is hardly supposable among us Only I adde that I wonder the Doctor offers to say God by smiting him with Leprosie discharged him of his Kingdome The Story implyes no such thing but only that he dwelt in a severall house and Jotham his sonne judged the people of the Land The Law allowed not any to come neare to such or touch them and what they touched without being uncleane therfore he could not sit in publike Judicature but his sonne did it for him yet for all that he remained King till his death and probably did give out divers Orders which might be done by means of those that must needs minister to him But if the Doctor say right may not an untoward Inference be made that if a King should attempt to violate Gods ordinance and worship in any thing and God should visibly strike him with some loathsome Judgement this should discharge him of his Kingdome which is more then ever the Parliament said or so much as thought as they call God to witnesse A fourth Example is Elisha's shutting the doore against the Kings Messenger that came to take away his head This example the Doctor saith speakes little Reply But as little as it speakes it forces him to speake that which if he will stand to I doe not much doubt but I shall make any unpartiall man perhaps even the Doctor himselfe to say his cause is lost in reference to his first Proposition Heare his own words Let us thence take occasion to say that personall defence is lawfull against the sudden and illegall attempts of such even of the King himselfe thus farre to ward his blows to hold his hands and the like I Reply 1. Then is not all resistance unlawfull and damnable if against suddain he may much more against deliberate intended illegall violence And his distinction of personall defence c. will not satisfie conscience by his owne words in the beginning of this Section If Ro. 13.2 be to be interpreted his way because every distinction and limit of any place in Scripture must have it's ground in Scripture What ground hath this in Scripture in his way either here or elswhere specially when he will not allow the Parliament to beleeve any intention to take away any of their heads notwithstanding all words and preparations against them without the spirit of Elisha But heare him further Not to endanger his Person this nor return blows this is not lawfull he saith Reply I am not willing to oppose him in these Assertions though the case may be so hard as a man must loose his life if he will meerly defend himselfe and in no sort offend But specially a woman must loose her chastity in which case and principally the latter let the Doctor answer what is to be done and whether no blows may be returned But that the Princes person may not be willingly assaulted the speech of David forenoted is that which concludes me and not at all the Dâ—â—argument He saith the whole common-wealth is concern'd in his person and that a particular nature will yeeld to the universall Rep. But he argues fallaciously the whole is concern'd somewhat in the Princes person but not so as that it perishes if he die or be kil'd Which is often and no harme no visible chang but that he is missing Wheras the yeelding of a particular nature to the universal is to keep that from dissolution perishing as the Naturalists say no otherwise But that which follows is yet better Thus he objects for us against himself if this be drawn from personall Defence to the publike resistance now used as they usually make the Argument thus If the body naturall then the body politicke may defend it selfe If a private person much more the whole State may and they do but shut up the way against the King that comes to destroy his Parliament and take away their heads then he answers two things 1. As the naturall body defends it self against an outward force but strives not by a schisme or contention within it self So may the body politick against an outward power but not as now by one part of it set against the head and another part of the same body for that tends to the dissolution of the Whole Rep But by his leave he abuses the similitude between a naturall and a politick body and perverts the state both of the Question and the example in hand and withall runs into more absurdities then one in his own way as I shall now shew him 1. The naturall body can do nothing but by the guidance of the head that is of the soul residing in the head and imploying the sences and faculties placed in the head to that purpose But a body politicke is a company of reasonable men whose actions may be divided from their politick head and yet be rationall and regular and when the particular politicke head is distracted or while an Infant it can and doth order it self within him and so it doth and must doe when the politick head is bent to subvert Religion Lawes and Liberties because the subversion of these and not the opposition or resisting of those that would subvert them would be the dissolution of the whole But so would not be the very death of the politicke head though as I said before it is unlawfull to attempt it Whereas the death of the naturall head is certainly the dissolution of the whole naturall body 2. As the naturall body may defend it selfe against outward force so against the malignity of any disease or paine in any member of the body even resient in the very head and so the hand may pull out a tooth even for the painfullnesse of it though seated in the head and perhaps one eye for some disease thereby to save the other and lance and cut the flesh and even cut-off a limme legg and arme to stopp a Gangrene yet is this no making of a schisme or unnaturall contention within it selfe 3. He hath granted it to single persons but denies it to the whole body or a considerable part together Reply Then belike if six or twenty or a hundred single persons be assaulted illegally by a like number of single persons suppose in their severall houses in the same Towne they may shut the doores and defend themselves and even any of them hold the very Kings hand and ward his blowes But if they happen to be all in
Realm and that he is in all causes and over all persons supreame Repl. But some Lawyers will tell him That the Oath of Supremacy is either only against forraigne powers and namely the Pope having to doe here or against all particular persons having authority above the King within the Realme But that with all Law-books intimate a superiority in curia Comitum Baronum c. which is the two Houses of Parliament And secondly That he is supreame not to judge all persons and causes at his pleasure but as assisted according to Lawes with his Counsell and Judges and specially his great Councell and chiefe Judicature during their sitting the two Houses of Parliament His Supremacy then still appeares limited by and according to Law 3 But hee adds This is also acknowledgedged by the Petition of the two Houses addressed unto his Majesty wherein they stile themselves his Loyall Subjects Repl. True and right but still this is to be understood to be Subject according to Lawes and for the good of King and Kingdome neither of which is promoted or preserved by a restraint of a defensive Resistance of tyranny which restraint the Doctor so contends for Adde here what must elsewhere be further urged That the King himselfe in his answer to the 19 Propositions acknowledges that the two Houses have legall power more then sufficient to prevent or restraine Tyranny Which I would faine have any man shew me how it can bee done but by taking up Armes and then I will yeeld him the cause That all Armes taken up are unlawfull But till then the King hath granted the cause legall and just against the Doctors first maine Proposition and all his Arguments His next ground is That in the Text of the Apostle all persons under the higher Power are expressely forbidden to resist for Whosoever in the second verse must be as large as every soule in the first verse and the resistance forbidden here concrnes all upon whom the subjection is injoyned there or else we could not make these universals good against the Papists exempting the Pope and Clergy from subjection Repl. 1. He still runnes on in his errour to limit the higher power to the supreame But secondly I grant him that all other powers under the supreame are forbidden to resist in the Apostles sence A Constable Justice Major Sheriffe Judge of Assize nor the very Houses of Parliament may not resist the authority of the King commanding according to Lawes But yet it remaines to be prooved that they may not resist his violence when he is bent to subvert Lawes and Liberties and Religion and all Or the violence of his followers even though doing it by his warrant or in his presence Also because he doth so much insist upon the phrase of higher power let me put him a case A wicked Robber that hath committed twenty most bloudy murthers one after another in cold bloud is led away after legall condemnation by the Sheriffe to be put to death Suppose a King would come with armed souldiers and offer to take him violently and by force out of the hand of Justice Who resists damnably now that power which is the Ordinance of God and to whom the Sword is committed The Sheriffe and his men that resist the violence or the Kings followers or even himselfe that resist the due Execution of Justice Let him study on it and give an Answer at his leisure 3. He proceeds In those dayes there was a standing and continuall great Senate which not long before had the supreme power in the Roman State and might challenge more by the fundamentals of that State then our great Councell I thinke will or can But now the Emperour being supreame as S. Peter cals him or the higher power as S. Paul here there is no power of resistance left to any that are under him by the Apostle Thus for the persons that should resist all are forbidden Now consider the cause Rep. 1. Doubtlesse Saint Paul wrote not to the Roman Senate nor Saint Peter neither And if the Doctor will proove it unlawfull for them to resist he must proove it from the Law of nature or at least from some ancient Law of the old Testament given to the Ancestours of the Roman Senate Or else shew how this could concerne them who never heard any thing of it For any thing then â—e saith it was lawfull for the Roman Senate and the Heathen Subjects to resist though not for Christians 2. If he or any for him shall say that it suffices for his cause that it was forbidden to Christians and accordingly is now Rep. 2. If you reply that supposing it not forbidden to Heathens No more was it to Christians before S. Paul and S. Peter wrote And if so then belike as was formerly toucht the Apostles laid a yoake upon the necks of Christians worse then all the Jewish ceremonies which the Gentiles were ever freed from For whereas before the Romans might resist their tyrannous Emperours now by becoming Christians their hands must be tyed to have all their throats cut even though the whole Senate were Christians at one Neroes pleasure He that wisht that all Rome had but one neck that he might strike it off at a blow had done wisely to have endeavoured to have made them all Christians and then he and his Guard with him or his Army might by this Doctrine have struck off all their heads or runne them all through one after another as fast as they could deale blowes and so he should have his will in their destruction though there must have beene a little more paines taken about it Surely Christ who came to purchase liberty to his people never meant to enslave them to tyrants above all others of Man-kind The Doctor must goe prove resistance unlawfull from some other grounds of natures law or the ancient lawes of Scripture or else this Text of S. Paul will appeare to have another interpretation even that which hath beene given before in the explication of the Text and inference from it Thirdly I will not therefore trouble my selfe to compare the Authority of the Roman Senate with our Parliament much lesse argue for that power which they had lost about a 100 Yeares before S. Paul writ It suffices he hath not disproved at all their present power of resisting tyranny when S. Paul wrote and that by the same argument I have disproved that S. Paul forbids Christians to take any such power to themselves 4. But he adds was there ever more cause of resistance then in those dayes Were not the Kings then not only conceived to be enclined so and so but even actually were enemies to Religion had overthrown Laws and liberties Rep. If it had been before demonstratively proved that resisting the power or higher power did properly signifie taking Armes against the Supreame when he plays the tyrant This fourth step were a just illustration and confirmation of it But now he only beggs the
Vniverse To apply this in a word the safetie of the whole is the undoubted generaâ— Fundamentall of all States and so of the particular Lawes toward this and among them of the Kings being intrusted with the Militia But it is not limited by this particulaâ— Lâ—w which in case of necessitie when the Prince cannot or will not discharge â—is Tâ—ust for the safety of the whole must in Reason needs give way to the Fundamentall the safetie of the Whole and so quo ad hoc for so much and so long till this necessiâ—y ceases falls into other hand those that are next entrusted or rather then faile to the whole communitie it selfe But to câ—me to the fundamentall by him instanced in power originally in and from the People and this to be reassumed when the King intrusted will not discharge his Trust Concerning which let it be remembâ—ed that there seemes to lie a caâ—umniating Fallacy in two of these phâ—ases First in thaâ— of not discharging the Trust which here sounds as if it might be but some ordinary Omissiâ—n of Câ—re whereas the State of the Qâ—estâ— by himselfe layde is such a not discharging the Trust as proceeds from his being bent of himsâ—lfe or seduced by others which is all one for the danger and so necessity of using what power may be for resistance to subvert Religion Lawes and Liberties In this case only Power of resistance is here pleaded for not in others And indeed the very phrase of Power of Resistance observed can beare no other Construction For it Imports a violence offered a danger presented which needs to be resisted not a sleight or ordinary failing to discharge a Trust But his phrase of re-assuming the power seemes more to sound a taking away all Power henceforth from the Prince which the Parliament nor those that have rationally pleaded their Cause never mention but with Protestation to detest the thought And I for my part wholy disclaime the pleading for any such reassuming of Power by the People or Parliament I onely maintaine a Right to use so much of it and so long as is of necessitie of the safety of the whole Of which now let us argue wheâ—her this Government of ours cannot as rhe Doctor sayes be built upon this fundamentall but confusion and Anarchy be raised He makes his discourse upon two particulars as it must be first of the Originall of power Secondly of the Power of reassuming it In the first I will not tye my selfe to the phrases of the Observatour or any else but examine the Drâ— Assertion and proofes by what Scripture and religious Reason declares aboue it To cleare which I will propound a briefe Schema of the maine things considerarable in Government which in the prosecution of the discourse I shall make use of more then once I say that in Government foure things are considerable 1. The Nature Authority of Commanding to doe â—orbeare by making Lawes calling for obedience to them Constraint to obedience by punishment Verball Reall 2. The end Chief GODS Glory Good of the Whole Society Secondary speciall Comfort of the Governours 3. The Efficient Supreame GOD. Subordinate Man 1. By Nature Parents 2. By Accident in which is considerable 1. The moving Cause the will or consent of the Parties be Governed which is either Altogether free and by Châ—ise partly forced by Occasion oâ— Violence 2. The persons Governing 1. In a Family Husband Mr. Mrs. 2. In a State one Monarch Many in Aristocracy of Chiefe Men. Democracy of people Soveraignty Subordinately Officers 4. The Extent Absolute Limited For Commands Constraints the Kind Degree He that hath not all these in his Eye I meane not in this Forme or Phrase but in sense shal never discern cleerly nor discourse rationally of this subiect of government our Dr. though he once occasionally mention the Peoples good as an End upon which Rulers ought to attend Yet he speakes so little oâ— it as it had need be a little more rememembred then it is and Gods glorie also which is the chiefest End of all But indeede the thought and mention of those Ends much would be too crosse to his purpose and therefore hee is wise in his Generation as I may say if without offence to forbeare it Therefore on the other side I must make bold to tell him that though the physicall end of things may be silenced or sleighted in a Discourse or Definition Yeâ— in moâ—all things such as Governmâ—nâ— the End at least the chief End is a necessary ingredient of both Dâ—finition and discourse and an Essentiall part of it if a man will consider it as he ought practically Let me therefore adde iâ— to his Definition oâ— Description of Power or Government and then it will râ—â— tâ—â—s It is a sufficiency of authority for Command and Coerciâ—n in the Governing of a People for Gods glory and the good of the Society And all the lawfull Power hath this Effect in part even Hâ—athen Authority redouâ—â—s to Gods Glory as the conservatour oâ— Mankind and effects also the Civill good of the Common-wealth Now the Dr. saith this power it selfe not naming the end is to be distinguisht from the designing of the person to beare that Power and the qualification of that power this I grant him and accepting his grant of the two latter being from men and after their consent ratified by Gods permissive Approbation I defiâ—â— a little to examine how farre that may be granted him which he earnestly contends for that the Power it selfe is from God and what may be inferred from thence for him or us His meaning is that All Men are as he saith bound to set up and live under Government This being the Ordiâ—ance and Appointment of God unto men as they are Reasonable Creatures If he meane this of Parentall Government That is set up to their hands by God in Nature as long as the Parents and Children live together and bind the Children to live with their Parents and under them till either necessity drive them away or their Parents dismisse them But â—f he meane this of Politicall Government of a People of many Families as it is pâ—aâ—â—e he doth and must if he will speake ad rem then I cannot absolutely grant it him neither will his text or Reasons prove it My Reasons of Denyall are first that all Mankind whose Parents are dead and were not by them while they lived Subjected to a Government are naturally free so not bound to part with that free some as even a Monarch doth part with much freedome when he takes the Rule unlâ—sse they see a necessitie or at least a great advantage for Gods Honour and their owne and others Good which is not alwayes to be found in setting up a politick Government 2. Wherein I am confirmed by the consideration of the three great Patriarkes Abraham Isaac and Iacob who while they lived in Canaan were not within any government but onely Domesticall and neither did
doe all they doe that so they may prevent and restraine the designed tyranny Fiftly Yet I have one thing more to alleadge supposing the power of calling and dissolving wholly in the King ordinarily yet there may be such power in them so long as they doe sit to command Armes to bee rais'd for the suppressing of any Delinquents maintaining themselves with Armes even under the colour of the Kings Authority which I thus make good If there be any such kind of Power in the very Judges in their Courts at Westminster for the whole Kingdome and in their severall Circuits for the Shires they sit in although themselves are made Judges at the Kings will meerly and put out ordinarily at his pleasure and they can neither keepe Assizes at any time nor keep any Terme any where but when and so long as the King pleases to give Commission if I say there be such a power in the Judges and even in one of them then much more in the whole Parliament which is unquestionably and undoubtedly the highest Judicature in the Kingdome and hath most power during their sitting Now that such a kinde of power is in the Judges I appeale to experience in the case following A private man hath a suite with the King about Land or House and the like The King hath possession and some Officer or Tenant of his holds it for the King The Judges having heard the Cause give Sentence for the Subject adjudge him to have the possession delivered him by the Kings Tenant or Officer he refuses and armes himselfe to keep possession still Upon this after due summons and processe of law a Writ of Rebelliâ—n shall goe out against the Officer of the Kings even though he should pretend to keepe possession still by a command and warrant from the King and the Sheriffe shall be commanded to raise Armes even the whole posse Comitatus if need be to expell this Officer of the Kings and bring him to condigne punishment from resisting the Kings auâ—hority in his Lawes Here now is raising Armes by the Kings legall Authority against the Kings Title and the Kings Officer notwithstanding any pretended authority from the Kings personall command and that Officer haâ—h a Writ of Rebellion sent against him and shall bee punisht by Law for offering to resist the Law upon any pretence Aâ—ke the Lawyers whether in sense â—his be not the Law and ordinarily practised save that the King doth not command the contrary but whether that would hinder Law or not The Parliament then may in the case of necessity raise Armes against the Kings personall Command for the generall safety and keeping possession which is more necessary then the hope of regaining of the Houses Lands Goods Liberties Lives Religion and all And this by the Kings legall Authority and the resisters of this are the Rebells in the Lawes account and not the Instruments so imployed Legally though with Armes by the Parliament If the Doctor now or any for him will retort upon me as he thinks what I said before that if this be granted a King intending Tyranny will not call a Parliament or if he have called it he will straight dissolve it as soone as they attempt any thing against his mind REPL. I reply he will doe so indeed if hee can perswade the people by the Doctors Divinity or Law to endure him and his followers to take away their Goods and doe what else he list and they for want of a Parliament called or sitting dare not defend themselves at all But if hee find that they believe no such Doctrine but without dispute of Law or Consciences resolve rustically not to be robbed of their goods at pleasure or used like meere slaves but that they will defend themselves and somwhat they begin to doe and beat away or kill some that come to take their goods away in such illâ—gall manner he may then be glad to call a Parliament to quiet the People who perhaps also may begin to mutiny by troopes and be willing to sacrifice perhaps some of his Followers unto them as â—mpâ—oâ— and Dudley were in the beginning of H. the 8. though they proceeded with colour of the penall Lawes and even to provide for his owne Maintenance as 〈◊〉 â— In such a case some against his will cal'd a Parliament Anno of his Reigne And that it may be he will not he dares not hearken to those that would perswade him to dissolve it because then hee should bring all confusion besides want upon himselfe againe which was Hen. the Thirds Case Anno. Therefore I conclude that the Parliament as I said before may have this power and upon advantage of the Kings necessities and Peoples not enduring oppression be able to exercise it even though they meet not but at the Kings will and are dissoluble at his pleasure And so I have said enough of this Section except onely that I must note that in the close of it he either thinks those he hath to doe with Parliament and all grosse fooles or else he shewes himselfe extreamly simple in reckoning up the remedies of Tyrranny though he love not to use so harsh a word but we must when hee hath stated the Case for us of a Prince bent or seduced to subvert Religion Lawes and Liberties The denying of subsidies and ayd c. If hee meane in Parliament such a Prince never meanes to call any If out of Parliament this is the grievance that he takes it against Law by Ship-moneys and Monopolies and Imposts and any way and if they deny it themselves are fetcht up by the Pursevants and put in prison and for not executing such illegall commands Fined at pleasure halfe or all their Estates and perhaps starved in prison or little better Kept so close that they fall sicke and dye Nay if the Prince proceed to command his Souldiers or Officers to kill without delay any â—hat shall deny Subsidie or Ayd though never so illegall Hath not then the Doctor propounded a goodly remedy of Tyranny to deny him Subsidy and Ayd As if to quench a house a fire hee should send for a paire of Bellowes to blow a coole breath Let him now consider whether hee uttered those words in scorne or in policie and with what science or skill in common Reason not to say in Politicks and so with how truely an informed conscience he deales justly between the King and the People We have yet some further strength of his reason to examine in the next Section Of which now SECT V. IN this Section hee propounds this Reason as alleadged for the peoples Power that else the State should not have meanes for its owne safety when c. REPLY This Reason we acknowledge ours and considering what a State is a Body composed of many thousands who by themselves or their Ancecestors set up a King over them for their safety and good this Reason is as much Reason as any thing can be betweene Man
and Man Nor shall the Dr. bee ever able to speake Reason in Opposition to it himselfe grants straight way that salus Populi in a good Sence is suprema Lex And when a People neither seekes nor desires any thing of hurt to their Prince but onely safety to themselves It is good in no sence if not in this to allow I say more command a State that hath any considerable strength to doe it to defend it selfe and so procure its owne safety even by resisting if need be by force of Armes And though he jâ—ere at the Plea of necessity when as he saith Right and just will not defend a thing Yet if himselfe were assaulted on the high way by one that offered to kill him and in his house in the Night by Robbers would he say that either out of the case of Necessity he a private mâ—n or any Sâ—rvants of his might in right or justice kill another man or that Necessity would not be a sufficient Plea if in that Case any did kill such a Theef or Robber not onely before men but God also The Law among us allowes the Plea of se defendendo in such Cases And Gods Law expressely Against one that breaks a house in the night though not in the day as not admitting them a necessitie to kill the thiefe as the Text there plainely implies As for his saying Every thing must be honest which is Sparâ—ae utile imagined to conduce to the proposed End REPLY This is but a second calumny of which his Treatise is full every where neither profit nor Imagination is admitted or urged in this case but necessity apparent or judged imminent by Rules of prudence which commands endeavour of prevention of extreme evills such as the ruine of a States safety even by care and Power before hand as well as when it lies gasping under the pressure Counsell in prevention is indeed better then help out of trouble For by that lesse trouble is suffered and lesse offence acted in the defence But these are but the Drs flourishes for he will now stabbe this reason to the heart with diverse contrary Reasons against all the plea of Necessity of safety The first is that this among others is one of the many Weapons sharpned for Resistance at the Philistims Forge the Romish Schooles Reply First himselfe will not allow this to be reproach to him or his fellowes in any of their positions nor thinke it sufficient to make an Argument be rejected because the Romonists have either used it or abused it Secondly but he is deceived in paralelling the Cases They pleade for the Popes Power of curbing or deposing Kings in case of Heresie because else the Church hath not meanes for the maintenance oâ— the Catholicke Faith and its owne safety Reply The Argument is not good his Church is not a Civill State but the good of it is mainly spirituall and to be preserved by such spirituall meanes as GOD hath appointed who both instituted and constituted it himselfe and left not to it the ordering of its owne safety or good But our case is of a Civill State whose good is Civill and naturall and is to be preserved by civill and naturall meanes and so by Armes in case of danger even from its owne Prince bent or seduced to ruine it The Dr. himselfe straightwayes grants the State hath meanes of preservation such as the Law hath prescribed If he can shew us any true meanes in the case stated by him but this power of resistance I yield him the cause If not he doth but abuse his Readers Consciencâ—s to blind them with words which are of no validity But I have shewed him before and must againe remember him that in our Parliament State by the Kings owne acknowledgement hath such Power by Law to punish even the Kings followers and Favourites as is more then sufficient to prevent or restraine Tyranny We aske no more for our safety But when they will resist the Parliament by Armes It hath no way to punish them or defend the State but by Armes Which therefore it may lawfully take up Secondly the Dr. addes If every state hath such Meanes to provide for its safety what meanes of safety had the Christian Religion in and after the Apostles Times Or the People then enslaved what meanes had they for their Liberties Tertullian in his Apologie saith the Christians had number and Force sufficient to withstand but they had no Warrant And the Apostle forbids them and all other under the higher Power to resist Reply This example of the Christians not resisting is counted a Capitall Argument we shall see what strength it hath First it is brought in this place for the Christians were neither a civill State of which the present Reason proceeds nor neere to the greater number in the The State They had the Lawes which is in some Sence the State against them and so they ever had beene and the greater part of the body of the Estate by farre were opposite even in Tertullians Time Though therefore the Church being properly onely a spirituall State have not of necessity civill meanes to provide for the outward safety of Christians yet a Civill State whether of Heathens or Christians may have and hath which is by taking Armes in case of necessity as before But the Dr. saith the Apostle forbids them and all under the Higher power to resist Reply I suppose what I have formerly said on this place Rom. 13.2 may and will satisfie most Readers for that place But the Drs. importunity forces me to repeate part of it here and apply it to the case of Christians even then and much more now And so I make bold to tell the Dr. that he doth most miserably wrest the Apostles words in this case of all others which to demonstrate I say to demonstrate I appeale to the context after and before and let all Christians and Consciences or even reasonable Men Iudge whether the Drs. Interpretation be not most absurd Thus the Dr. interprets v. 2. Whosoever shall take up Armes to resist Nero persecuting the Christian Religion resists the Ordinance of GOD Rebells against GOD in resisting the higher Power ordained by GOD and if hee kill any man in such resistance he commits murther incurres damnation for so doing This is the Drs. Sence plainely and his words here and there are fully so much Now marke St. Pauls Reason v. 3. and make Sence of it or Religion much lesse of it if you can to this purpose First for Rulers are not a terrour to good workes but to evill Nero is the Ruler here meant persecuting Nero Let the Dr. now tell me or any for him Is not persecution a Terrour to the Workes that are persecuted and then is Christianity a good worke or not Nero persecutes that and is a Terrour to that but so he is not to good Workes Then belike Christianity is not a good Workâ— Will St. Paul speak thus or doth
tell shewed the Kings hand for to have had Hull and the Magazine delivered up to him And all this before the setling of the Militia by an Ordinance or Sir Iohn Hothams taking in Forces to keep Hull safe Let Conscience now judge whether all this gave not just occasion for a preparation for Defence and of a long time after this nothing more was done the Militia setled in very â—ew Countries till the Kings proceedings hath further warned them â—o stand upon their guard in other places besides London It is true the King for a time had nothing but Proclamations and Declarations to oppose them But after he was once gone Northward and the Qu. beyond Sea what did hee ever doe or say but in opposition to them and while his Declarations renounced all thoughts of Warre notes were sent over into Holland for Armes and a beginning of an Army raised at Yorke under the name of a Guard When first the Houses having petitioned the Removing the Magazine at Hull to London Upon a counter-Petition of a very few Gentlemen of Yorkshire pretending the name of the whole County that it might be kept cleare still the King goes instantly to Hull and demands entrance intending as he declares to the Parliament after that he meant so to doe to take possession of the Towne and Magazine and dispose of it and being denyed proclaimes Sir Iohn Hotham Traitor without any processe of Law or sending first to the House to know if they would owne it and after demands justice so peremptorily as to deny before hand all other businesses but that of Ireland and how well that was done we must remember anon and then was the Army raised under Colour of a Guard the Yorkshire men not comming in readily enough to make it appeare a great Army And all this before ever it was declared by the Houses that the King seduced by wicked Councell intended to make war against his Parliament and so before ever they set out the Propositions for Money Plate Horses and therefore certainly before any one man was listed In all which the event hath shewed that they were rather in wisdome too slow then in conscience too quick in their Preparations for defence Remembring also that as soone as the Ship Providence was come to them a provdence indeed to discover what was before intended the Siege was straight â—aid to Huâ— and the Declarations then spoke another Language then common men understood them to speake before For after all the Lords present with the King had subscribâ—d about Iune 16. that they saw in the pretented Guard c. no intention of Warre against the Parliament within few dayes the King tels them that if to seeke to recover Hull and the Magazine then at London and suppresse the Militia in all which the Parliament was engaged as much as could be were to make Warre against the Parliament he ever meant to doe these things and had ever declared so though I beleeve none that beleeved him did or could so understand Let Conscience now judge who began first As touching the cause of these Armes the Doctor would perswade us that it is for somthing which the King hath right to Deny To evince which he first affirmes that it cannot be for Religion or Priviledges and ancient Rights and Liberties for these the King doth not deny REPL. But now sufficient verball promises with such actions done as were noted even now are to secure Religion or the State Conscience must judge and it may a little the better when we come to consider them againe in the proper place for them for here they outrunne their season like Abortives in the next Section Secondly he saith it must then be for denying the Militia the disposing offices of State and such like also the government of the Church and the revenue of it and for not denying his power of denying in Parliament REPL. 1. For the Militia I referre to what hath beene said how just reason the Parliament had to petition the securing it and after to settle it as in case of necessity by Ordinance Of which their Declarations have given more full account 2. For disposing Offices of State it was never desired till the difference was very farre advanced and Hull attempted and Sir Iohn Hotham proclaimed Traitour and the Army raised at Yorke called a Guard And so onely desired as a Security after such a breach and no way a cause of the breach Thirdly For the Kings power of denying it was never in question betweene him and them till the Militia was absolutely and peremptorily denyed And in all their Declarations they never take it away but contrarily in the defence of that May 26. they grant that though the King be bound by Oath and care of his people not to deny any Bill for generall safety and good for in ordinary matters they yeeld he may deny Yet if he doe deny it is no Law without him Onely in case of the common safety they say the two Houses may doe what is necessary and it binds the Subjects for that necessity though he doe deny The denyall then of the Militia only in the case of necessity with other things noted before forced them to doe what they did toward Armes and not any difference about a power of deniall in generall 4. For the government and Revenue of the Church I beleeve indeed it was a part of the cause of taking Armes but not on the Parliaments part the major part of whom in either House never till very lately declared nor shewed any purpose of taking either away quite but only reforming which the Doctor saith his Majesty is alway ready to agree as may appeare even by the great agitations for so long in the House of Commons of the Bill against Episcopacy root and branch and at last it was wholly laid aside which shewes the major part never owned it as their delight Else they would first have absolutely concluded the destructive part and then consulted what to have in the roome Bâ—t to consult first for Successours was Pacuvius his Policy to preserve the Senatours of Capua though he made shew to condemne them all And had the Commons past the Bill against them yet did the Lords never shew any such intendment who were not easily wonne to take away their Votes till their Protestation against both Houses in their absence helped to perswade them to it It can then no way appeare to Conscience that ever the Parliament had thoughts of Armes to obtaine their taking away But I am verily perswaded by all I could ever heare from the Episcopall Party that their feare of this made them who had still enough of the Kings eare and heart urge the King to many Actions which have helped the Warre forward Among the rest I cannot but note one not a weeke passed betweene the 12. Bishops for their Protestation before the King first accused of high Treason the L. Kimbolâ—on and the other five
not to foresee that their very flying to Armes was and would be a great suffering and might prove if God should defeat them the meanes of extreame suffering A people so taught so enured to Passive obedience and no way enured to Warre could not be supposed willing or forward to engage themselves their purses or much lesse their Persons against the Name of their King and each day since the first Necessity hath continually sounded this out so that they had no reason to be forward to fly to Armes 3. By what I said on the former Section and added with the Petition by the E. of Holland even now mentioned It appeares they did not fly to Armes but fly from it as far as they could and durst 3. Wheras the Dr. often in this Section in the beginning middle and end insists mainly upon the breach of Charity in suspecting the King upon Remote feare and meere Jealousies causelesse Jealousies c. Repl. This may sufficiently be satisfied both in the behalfe of the Parliament and then of the People that adhere to them joyntly and singly For the Parliament and people both joyntly This may justly be said 1. The Dr. mistakes it is not simply a Jealousie of the King but rather of the Kings Councellors and Followers who find so much favour with him as they and others did before the Parliament against the Scots and us both and Ireland too witnesse all their heavy complaints against the Great Favourite Strafford that they are able to put him from time to time upon these Actions which his goodnesse of it selfe rightly informed and councelled would abhorre and hath so often declared against and yet Actions againe have discredited those declarations as the Memory of those that have been awake cannot forget both Referring to Religion and Liberties and the Parliament Remonstrances do amply set out besids other Books If therfore Security be once obtained against such persons I am perswaded the King will be no more suspected and in the meane time it must be a strange Charity that can chuse but suspect them 2. Where the danger is of much importance both for Greatnesse of Mischiefe and Inevitablenesse according to Man if not timely prevented Charity to ourselves and others will not onely allow but commend and even command to suspect and accordingly prevent such dangers by suspecting Persons and Actions which in lesser matters they would and might and should venture to trust Fire neere straw or Gunpowder is to be suspected more then neere hard wood Hedge-breakers and breakers of Houses are not equally to be suspected Religion Laws and Liberties are precious things and may be sooner lost then recovered And his Charity hath drunk of the water of Lethe that forgets these were lately attempted and endangered The Kings own Declarations acknowledge Laws and Liberties have been broken And how since the E. of Straffoâ—ds death all the old Projectors are become Converts is too hard a morsell for Charity to swallow when it must hazard such deare things to many of the same Persons againe Specially seeing still what they have done since the first sitting of the Parliam toward their old Projects as hath been partly noted already and somewhat more must be said by and by Next for the Parliament alone They are the great Councell of the Kingdome the publique Watch-men the Highest Court of Judicature it concerns them therfore to exercise their Charity for the safety of those that have trusted them Charity towards Attempters against a City is none of the Vertues of a Watchman nor toward Attempters of dangerous Treasons against a King and Kingdome the Vertue of a Judge Were they onely to loose their own Liberties or Lives their Charity might venture much further then now it may when they must Answer for Religion Laws and Liberties and so Lives and Consciences of a whole Kingdome of 2 Kingdomes England and Ireland as formerly of England and Scotland if not rather then and still of all 3. in a degree Who would not Curse their Charity detest their Folly if by their Credulity all this should be betrayed and ruined If Rhetorick needed in this cause no Subject could deserve it better then to cry down such a pernitious Charity as this would prove if they should be deceived with credulity And then for the People alone have they not a charity to exercise toward the Parliament as well as toward the Kings Followers whom have they trusted to be publike Watchmen the one or the other Whom hath the law trusted to be the great Councell and chief Judges the one or the other Who hath pleaded for their Liberties the one or the other 12. Subsidies were demanded with intent thereby to engage us in a bloody War against Scotland in the Parliament of Aprill 1640. Onely for taking away of Ship-money But this Parliament hath proved it so illegall and other things more that it was taken away without any cost at all by way of Exchange and many other happy Lawes hath the â—arliament passed and obtained for us But what one thing did the Kings former Counsellors move him to offer to his people by way of prevention for State or Religion in a whole yeer together To whom then must the People exercise their charity Must they condemn their watchmen as scaring them needlessely with Old Enemies discredit the law that saith No dishonourable thing ought to be thought of such a great Councell such a high Judicature And that when they more then ever any Parliament before give account to all men of all their Actions and the grounds of them Well shall that People deserve a ruine that believe Old Wolves rather then their faithfull Dogs then their Councell of Shepheards That shall thinke themselves bound to be charitable to those that have attempted their ruine and uncharitable to those that under God have hitherto saved them In a word let those that love Religion and Laws and Liberties compare the best actions on the one side with the best on the other and the worst on the one side with the worst on the other and then let charity judge if it dare or can the Parliament Fooles or Traytors to GOD and the KING and the STATE and the Kings followers the only wise men that have discovered their cunning Treachery and the only faithfull men to Religion his Majesty and Kingdome Take in then the Declarations and Protestations on the one side and on the other and remember is is not a single charity whether I shall suspect the King but first mixt whether I shall or may suspect the Kings followers who can doe any thing with him so farre as that they may doe contrary to what he saith and then a distinguishing charity whether I shall suspect them who were once most of them apparently Delinquents against Religion and the Laws Or the Publike Watchmen and the great Councell an Judicature of the Kingdom who have done so much and with such diligence to save and restore
enough that her illumination hath been so farre from the endeavours of those who might have bin heard by the King and the Queen both that Ministers have bin check't for praying for Her conversion 2. But no man hath said this alone is a sufficient Cause nor was the Chief cause at the first It is well known thaâ— at the first and for diverse yâ—eâ—s Shee carryed her self so as those that loved the true Religion pitied her rather then severely blamed her and hoped good of her if any meanes were used for Her good But when after some yeeres a Nuncio from the Pope was brought over and setled here those about her have been more active and yet more since the Qâ— Mother came first over things have ripened apace and how farre Her Religion hath beene a Cause of the dangers of Scotland England and Jreland by the countenance of the Popish Party generally and multitudes of Jesuites and Priests in Court City and Country any common understanding may judge that remember specially what even a Solomon did for Out-Landish Idolairous wives which Nehemiah set so home â— 13. 3. The little businesse of her journey into Holland and the great businesse that hath been acted by meanes of that is but an unhappy commâ—nt or explication of the iustnesse of feares and Jealousies from her Religion 4. As for the Doctrines and practises of these Times which the Doctor saith are not the way to make her fall in love with our Religion and draw her to it She hath little reason to be offended with them if she be pleased with the Doctrines and practises of her own Popish Religion Witnesse the Parisian Massacre the powder Treason and the present too lamentable rebellion of Ireland Let but that be compared with the worst can be imagined of our Doctrines and practises and then let her love which is fairest and meekest 3. Then he comes to the resort of Papists and his Majesties entertaining them and Davids example 1 Sam. 22.2 toward Ziba is alledged to justifie it Rep. 1. But the Dr. forgets that the time before the Parliament the Papists and popish party had undeniably made an inrode upon our Doctrine publike Worship Laws and Liberties and against them in speciall was the Militia desired to be setled by people and Parliament And after all this upon a difference about the Militia to imploy them against the Parliament sooner or later is an example beyond example and beyond the power of words to take off the exception Suppose a Woman suspected of incontinence And Popery is spirituall whoredome should take to her selfe the parties with whom she were suspected to be her servants the better to defend her honour were this a way to cleare her selfe Or a Captaine to take in Forces to defend himselfe having been challenged that they had a designe to ruine his Army or Castle 2. What charity can stretch it selfe to beleeve they intend to assist the King in maintaining the Protestant Religion and the Laws against themselves which yet his Protestations proclaime Surely some about him must needs give them other assurance or they would not be so mad as to fight for their own suppression and their Adversaries promotion 3. But if they be so good subjects as the Dâ—maintaines and helpe the King in such an extremity must they not be counted to deserve a great reward and what can that be but Ziba-like to divide the Land A Tolleration at least they must needs expect if not indent for or be promised 4. Or if they be strong enough to overthrow the Parliament will a division content them Will they not be able to command King and All hence-forward N. B. If Protestants charity can be so sottish by this Doctors delusions as to trust to their faire dealing with Religion and Laws when the Parliament is by their force ruined they deserve no other pitty then a bewitched or distracted Man who is not afraid of Fire nor Water but let Straw or Gun-powder lye neare the one and pulls up floud-gates to give the other passage 5. Davids followers 1 Sam. 22.2 were far from Popish qualities The Text describes them thus Every one that was in distresse and every one that was in debt and every one that was discontented bitter of soule Here is not a word of all this that signifies them to be wicked A faithfull Man may be in distresse severall wayes he may be in debt through Gods hand upon him not his mispending and not able to pay but willing if he were able and resolved when he should be able and may be bitter of soule through oppression c. So that though in likelihood among so many there were some vicious Yet here is nothing to affirme that they came as vicious but as afflicted 6. Had any of them been Idolaters as Papists are had they been of confederacy with the professed enemies of Gods true Religion and people and so known then David had been too blame to have entertained them and Saul would have been sure to have laid it to his charge Neither could he ever have purged himselfe so long as he had made them his Guard that he meant to be faithfull to God and Israel And specially if Saul had before excepted against such Men as treacherous This is the Case now The enmity of Papists by their very Religion against ours our Parliament and Protestant people is known to all the world that understands any thing The Parliament hath often and often declared their feare of them these two Yeares and in reference to the setling of the Militia that so their designe on the Kingdome might be defeated The King protests not to owne them nor their helpe Yet things all along since the first discontents are still acted as they could wish and did and doe applaud And now after all this to take them into the Armies and imploy them against the Parliament is as far from Davids fact in entertaining his Troopes as their designes against the Parliament are far from his against Saul 7. It is true indeed that professed Papists were not actually entertained at the first It had been too grosse for them to have appeared at the first specially in any number and would have raised all the Kingdome against them The Ice therefore must be broke by others first and by Court-converts Of whose Religion the Priest that had lately written on the subject on which Dr. Featly had animadverted hath given a faire warning sufficient to startle any man almost To which purpose let me adde a word of a Booke I have seen cal'd Jesuitica Negotiatio printed neare 20 Yeares since by Order of the States of Frizeland which containes Instructions surprized of the Jesuites toward the Conversion of the united Provinces Among which this was one That whosoever they could convert to the Romish Religion should be still allowed to professe the Protestant Religion and keep any Office or place he was possest of and give sentence against any Papist
though helping them in and having promise of all favour and then at Marlborow and great cruelties to those that were led away Prisoners and this since the Kings Proclamation against plundring and since that Newbury and many other Townes formerly and of late in Bark shiere Oxford shiere Surrey Buckingham shiere will have little cause to believe the Doctors intelligences or assurances that all protestations that come in the Kings name may be trusted And whereas he urges that we may not raise an evill thought against the King Eccl. 10. What shall we say to those men unlesse that of David concerning Sauls Councellours 1 Sam. 24. That at least they deserve to be accursed that force men either to distrust or to suffer ruine because they have power and will to breake that which we would trust the King in most gladly and desiredly if he had no such men about him I have no desire nor will to prosecute particulars further But the Doctor abuses his Readers to cast an oblique aspersion as if the Parliament had any thoughts of contending for a new frame of Religion which deserves no answer so grosse a slander it is And then 2dly to insinuate plainly that the 19. Propositions were urged as so necessary as unles they were granted the Kingdom must be imbroyled in a civill warr and the reliefe of Ireland neglected The fore-named Petition by the Earle of Holland clears that sufficiently and the Petition too that the Earle of Essex should have presented or sent but the King would receive none from him The rest of the Doctors book is but recapitulations Rhetoricall of what he hath said before and an Answer to the instance of Libna's revolt which I will be no justifier of because so little is said of it in Scripture To which I have only these things to adde 1. Though Absalom which he mentioned before and I slipt did falsly calumniate David what ever petty neglect might be in some officers as appears by 2 Sam. 8. 1 Ch. so being a comly person which takes much with the multitude a strange fâ—atterer of all that came for Justice what ever their cause were 2 Sa. 15. and the heire apparant of the Crown might invegle the people into a Rebellion Yet neither is this any thing like to the causes of complaint or suspitions that we have had and have still nor yet is there any probability that a people justly governed should by Parliamentary Declarations be armed against their King As besides all other Arguments appeares by the small assistance of armed men any Country hath yeelded to the Parliament even where they think them in the right in the cause and themselves too in danger to be plundered 2. If the Parliaments actions in all things about their defence cannot be excused or justified specially by those that see not the whole of their actions and much lesse the reasons of them yet their consciences that see the justnes of the action for the main of defence and grounds to believe their Protestations of their intentions in the defence are not bound to be Neuters much lesse to assist the King against them because they are not or cannot be satisfied in this or that particular For then scarce any warre might lawfully be joyned in 3. In speciall for the sufferance of so many Sects to vent their doctrins with such liberty and to commit unsufferable out-rages upon the worship of God 1 Hath not the Parliament declared against Brownists Anabaptists in the first Remonstrance 2. Have not some Sectaries bin punished as he that made the new Creed was he not imprisoned 3. How many scandalous and innovating Ministers have bin complained of and yet few of them questioned and those not fully censured scarce one by both Houses the Doctor will not lay to their charge the suffering of such which yet he may with more reason as being offendors of longer continuance and more danger 4. The truth is partly the multitude of offendors at first complained of and partly for neare a yeare and an halfe of late their owne extreame danger by the Malignant parties getting strength since the Irish rebellion broke out and so multitude of businesses over-whelming them have hindred that Justice which else those Sects and out-rages the Doctor mentions would have found and may yet in due time if legally proved 5. And if he will say some speciall men favoured them in the very Houses he cannot say more then may be made good of others favouring Superstitions Arminianisme Socianisme and even Popery it selfe Yet this were most unjustly charged upon the Body of either House and much lesse on both And when it shall please God that the Consultation of Divines shall meet for which they have more then once passed the Bill for his Majesty to confirm it will I doubt not appeare to all the world that they never ment to suffer any such opinions or practises as are truly dishonourable to the true Reformed Protestant Religion as even in the mean time the Orthodoxisme and Moderation of the Members of that Assembly generally known to all that know the persons may be a sufficient pledge among them all there being very few that are liable to any pretence of exception for Sects and perhaps none at all for countenancing any such out-rage as the Doctor cryes out upon 6. In fine the worst of the Parliament charged upon them with any shadow in matter of Religion is but omissions or delayes which are but Moats to the beames which the Doctor overlooks in their Adversaries of old and still Who have made stables of Churches but they Who have burned and troden under foot Bibles but their Partisans of Ireland Not to insist on their horrid blasphemies which if Gods word be true as they will one day find it makes our Land groane and mourne under them If a conscience comes to weigh these in the ballance with the Parliament let it if it dare be charitable to the Cavaliers and their Army so as to believe Religion is like to be defended by them when the Parliament intends to ruine it I will say no more to the Doctor but this one thing that a sober conscience that peruses his whole Treatise will wonder what kind of conscience his is that Rhetorizes so for charity on the one side and wholly neglects it on the other telling us more then once that though we lay downe our lives for our Religion it is nothing if we have not the charity he cals While himselfe with all confidence charges the Parliament with many grievous faults against Religion Allegiance Lawes and Liberties and Liberties and discredits all their Protestations and Declarations to the contrary as if he thought that as his great Text Rom. 13. speaks only in his conceit of Monarchs so 1 Cor 13. related also to them only No resisting that higher power but all charity to him what ever he doe or say But as for the Parliament their power is of no regard