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
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
SCRIPTURE AND REASON PLEADED FOR DEFENSIVE ARMES OR The whole Controversie about SUBjECTS taking up ARMES WHEREIN Besides other Pamphlets an Answer is punctually directed to Dr. Fernes Booke entituled Resolving of Conscience c. The Scriptures alleadged are fully satisfied The rationall Discourses are weighed in the ballance of right reason Matters of fact concerning the present differences are examined Published by divers Reverend and Learned Divines IT is this fourteenth day of Aprill 1643. ordered by the Committee of the House of COMMONS in Parliament concerning Printing That this Booke entituled Scripture and Reason pleaded for Defensive Armes be Printed by Iohn Bellamy and Ralph Smith JOHN WHITE LONDON Printed for Iohn Bellamy and Ralph Smith at the Signe of the three Golden Lions neare the Royall-Exchange M.DC.XLIII To the READER T Is a bitter Controversie that our poore sinfull Nation is fallen upon wherein not onely Armes are ingaged against Arms but Bookes written against Bookes and Conscience pretended against Conscience In this perplexed condition What shall the people doe What shall they resolve They expect to receive Councell from Divines who though it be a mixt Argument are most likely to settle them And they have great reason to doe it for the truth is The world takes sufficient notice that the Cause as it now stands hath many Divines strongly ingaged unto it on either side and that their Resolutions have had a great Influence upon it and upon the people We know upon whom Doctor Ferne layes the burthen when he saith Many in the simplicity of their hearts have been wrought upon by such as misled them But we pleade in the words of the great Apostle That our rejoycing is this that in simplicity and godly sincerity not with fleshly wisdome but by the grace of God we have had our conversation to the world and more abundantly towards our Congregations To whom wee appeale and to our Sermons preached among them whether wee have taught any thing but humble and holy obedience to all just and lawfull authority sincere love and constant maintenance of the Truth What is it that We may be suspected of What Designes may we be thought to carry on What Interesses What ends What is it that Wee hold deare unto us but the Gospell of our Lord but the soules of our people Did we make a gaine of them Did Titus make a gaine of you Thinke you that wee excuse our selves Wee speake before God in Christ 'T is not a new thing to be challeng'd as Seditious as Tertullus accused Paul To be hurtfull unto Kings aâ—d Provinces as Rehum and others wrote against the Jewes To be setters forth of new Doctrines as the Epicureans blasphemed that chosen vessell But our witnesse is with God and in our consciences and before the people in our preaching and in our conversation That we are not the troublers of Israel That we pray for the Peace of our King and that we seeke the wellfare of our Nation and that we teach no new no other Doctrine then what the Scriptures confirme as this Treatise will fully shew Theâ— what our King himselfe hath allowed in his clearing our Brethren of Scotland by Proclamation when they had Covenanted and taken up Armes then what our State hath formerly favoured in yeelding ayde to Rochell Then what other Churches Scotland the French Protestants the united Provinces and great Divines have given suffâ—â—ge unto And as for the State of this Kingdome in the very Constitution of it The Case is yet clearer King James himselfe blamed a Bishop for a right-Court-Sermon that hee preached before Him and the House of Peeres That hee had not distinguish'd well betweene a King at large and the King of England And in a manner even all the points of the present difference might be answered against the King by the King Himselfe in His Majesties Answer to the nineteene Propositions pag. 17 18 19 20. Which wee desire the Readers seriously againe to peruse as out of which a politicall Catechisme might be drawne to instruct the people just so as wee have instructed them To conclude After the Kingdome hath duely considered the many provocations it hath had which will appeare by the Remonstrances Declarations and Votes of Parliament The Noâ—successe of other Remedies as namely frequent Petitions and Treaties and hath read this following Discourse with a minde not prejudiced We hope that this present Action of Parliament will stand justified and our Judgement and Consciences cleare Especially after this our Protestation That wee seeke nothing but the Truth and to the Truth if others can convince us we are resolved to yeeld SCRIPTVRE AND REASON PLEADED For Defensive Armes SECT I. The Question rightly stated THe Question which the Doctor hath propounded as necessary to be scanned is thus exprest Whether if any King will not discharge his Trust but is bent or seduced to subvert Religion Lawes and Liberties Subjects may take up Armes and Resist He maintaines the negative and his principall place of strength is Rom. 13.2 Whosoever resists shall receive to themselves damnation This he interprets of resisting the higher power mentioned ver 1. by which he understands the King or Supreame and the resisting a resisting by Armes But it seemes to me however he make a shew of distinct handling his matter that he either carelesly or sophistically confounds things which ought to have been more distinctly exprest by one that truly desired to have resolved consciences in so weighty a cause as forbearing to defend Religion Laws and Liberties when they are all in danger of subversion To which purpose I shall make bold to propound divers considerations towards a better clearing of the true state of the question and the strength of his proofes for it 1. It cannot be imagined that a King who is bent or seduced to subvert Religion Lawes and Liberties meanes to doe this by a meere personall strength For which no Sampson-like strength would suffice but by the assistance of others whether men in office and trusted with the civill Sword under him if he can draw them into his designe or by the souldiery ordinary or extraordinary and that not in one part of the Kingdome but in severall parts as fast as he can get instruments for his turn 2. Here then will come divers questions belonging to the case 1. Whether the resisting by Armes the illegall attempts of an under Officer of Justice suppose a Major or Sheriffe though armed with Commission under the Kings hand or seale be a resisting of the higher power and damnable 2. Whether the resisting a Captaine of the Souldiery comming to act any illegall commands with his bands of armed men though he also have a like Commission from the King be a resisting of the King and so forbidden Both these where the King is not present but in another part of the Kingdome 3. It will be further questioned in case he should grant resistance lawfull thus farr
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
thence and from his owne words partly the Question in hand between us as farre as concernes the first Proposition I am now to proceed to his owne allegations against us In which he is so confident as he promises That Scripture excludes this and all other exceptions giving no allowance to resistance in regard of persons or causes or other pretences how true this is let what hath been said already be judge and this not only by Examples but by Precepts Conclusions Resolutions which are more safe These we are now to examine First his Allegation of the 250 Princes gathering the people against Moses and Aaron Himself satisfies that there was no cause for it Moses and Aaron did not deserve it I add they had done nothing but what appeared to be the formall will of God whose cloud and pillar was by day and night over their heads and whose many miracles had continually ratified the authority of Moses and Aaron Moses his very face by a continued miracle was sufficient to have dazeled them if he had pul'd off his vaile But to this he answers The Princes supposed they did deserve it and that is now enough it seemes to make people not only say to their Princes Yee take too much upon you but therefore to rise in Armes also Which I hope will appeare to be without cause too in the end of this Treatise Repl. 1. I have shewed there was not the least ground for them to suppose ill of Moses but all contrary 2. Because a false supposall allowes not a man to doe such or such a thing shall this forbid that action where the supposall is true and certaine By this all warre should be unlawfull for upon a false supposall it is Also all Justice should be injustice and unlawfull for upon a false supposall it is so We never said nor thought That uncertain supposals suffice to arme against a Prince but at least such as rules of reason and prudence allow in all cases of importance And whether there be now any such As he referrs so doe I to the end of the Treatise Secondly he urges 1 Sam. 8.11 Namely that God by Samuell tels Israel that if they would needs have a King he should take away their goods and make their children servants and then they should cry to God because of their King but he would not heare them which implyes they should be left without all remedy against his oppression but only crying to the Lord. To this divers Answers may and must be given Answ 1. Though this be further urged by some to authorize Kings to take their Subjects goods at their pleasure yet lesse the Kings of Israel never tooke it so For Ahab and Jezabel were not so unskillfull in the right of Kings that they would have had Naboth put to death by false witnesses for blasphemy that so his vineyard might come to the King by confiscation if by a plaine Law of God at the founding of the Monarchy he might have taken the vineyard at his will as the Text 1 Sam. 8.13 mentions his taking of vineyards even to give to his servants and much more for his own use But Ahab and Jezabel both though they wanted neither wit nor stomack to advance that Prerogative were it seemes novices in both to our Moderne Advocates for Monarchy or rather it is certain Samuell tells them what their King would do and not what he should do by right His words are Prophesies not Laws 2. Neither are the latter words of their crying to God and his not hearing them in forme of a Law and Prohibition or at the most but a Prohibition of attempting or thinking to have the government altered againe from Kings to Judges but a prediction by way of punishment what should befall them for their sinfully impetucus affecting and asking a King that they should feele him oppressing them and that God would never remove the burden as long as that King whom they should first have should live Nor yet alter the government againe from Kings to Judges though they should be never so weary of the one or other and pray never so much to him for either or both And indeed the event verifies this interpretation in both respects For Saul proved tyrant enough and particularly in taking their sons from them as it is threatned 1 Sam. 8.11 12. c. so recorded Cap. 14.51 But specially his tyranny was most prodigious in the Massacre of the Priests fore-mentioned And so did many of his successours after they had a King once they never were under any other government altogether For though they had no Kings of their owne from the Babylonish Captivity till the Maccabees time yet were they under strange Kings which was worse the Babylonians and Persians of which after their returne from captivity see their heavy complaint Neh. 9. and after them the Grecians and the Kings of Syria and Aegypt and then a while the Maccabees race possest the Kingdome till the Romans subdued them and set up Harod and his race under the Emperour who was indeed their King from thence forth the high Priest cals Caesar their King Joh. 19.15 and so doth the Prophet Zach. 11.6 till Vespasian and Titus destroyed their Common-wealth 3. This Prediction then of such punishment to them by their Kings oppressing of them cannot be a Law or punishment intended to other Nations being under a King who have not provoked God in seeking a King as Israel had God threatned and imposed on the Jews and other Nations in Nebuchadnezzars time their putting their necke under his yoake though he was not their hereditary Prince but an invading enemy From whence no man will gather I hope that any Nation are bound to yeeld to a forraigne Enemy invading them Also God threatned that the Jewes should be carried captives into other Countries and there they should serve other gods wood and stone c. where he would not shew them any favour I am sure no man will argue from hence that this is a law for other captives to submit to or was any excuse to them much lesse a law but a meere punishment to them and warning â—o other least in them also sin be punished with sin which is the forest punishment of all 4. This place then being such a prediction of punishment doth not prove so much as that to them it was unlawfull to defend their very goods against their Kings tyranny but that at the most it should be vaine to them because if God would not heare their cry their defence would be to little purpose and what they might save at one time would begotten from them at another when their King should list to attempt it 5. After all this Text let the utmost be made of it that can be reaches not to the first and maine Proposition of defending life Or the second of chastity but still the defence of those remaine lawfull and warrantable though also so doth the defence
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
him of all sorts of Judges and so Exod. 22.28 Thou shalt not Curse the GODS nor speake evill of the Ruler of the People Yet this S. Paul acknowledges extended even to the High Priest the Ecclesiasticall Goververnour 2. Is not the Text at least meant of all the Governours in a Democracy and in Aristocracy that they are call'd GODS yet each hath the rest above him 3. However still his Reason is voyde for all Reasonable Creatures are not governed by others in GODS stead for by his saying Monarks are not and yet they oft times need to be governed so far as not to be suffered to undo all by their Governing or else this Question had never bin in the world which our hearts bleed to be forced to dispute concerning the power of resisting Monarks If now the Dr. will say that we afford GOD a poore part in setting up of power for the governing of Men he had need seek better proofe or else he will hardly perswade any more to a considerate Reader But perhaps hee will say I have yeelded him enough and more then others have done that will be seene by the use he can make of his assertion But in the meane time I have 2 or 3 Considerations to propound from his Texts and Reason and my own grants and assertions 1. Each one of his Texts speaks of more then the Supreame Powers Rom. 13.9 Plainly Plurall more then once and takes in all Ranks as hath been proved Saint Peter names Governours to be submitted to for the LORDS sake aswell as the Supreame and I should thinke Sent by him is by the LORD rather then by the Supreme as I shall shew by the Reason by and by and St. Paul hath said the powers that he even the Governors are ordained of GOD. And Prov. 8. after the words By me Kings Raigne follows And Princes Decree justice By me Princes Rule and Nobles even all the Iudges of the Earth This is plaine aswell for other Governors as Supreme being the Ordinance of God And as for Psal 82. and Ioh. 10. I have spoken before I wonder then that the Dr. in a Treatise of Conscience and having that word so often in his Discourse makes no conscience of confining these places as in effect he doth continually meerely to Supreme power It was for his turne indeed as will appeare more anon But that will hardly satisfie a Conscience let him think on it But I must not forget his reason now serving me once more against him God governes all men by others in his stead now that is done by subordinate Governours as well as supreame and so the inferiour and unreasonable creatures by divers subordinations and the subordinate doe sometimes even ten more then then the supreame let him be never so good if they be bad the government and order will be disturbed and perverted in a large Dominion because his eye and hand can not be but in one place at once and all may be and will be naught if those under Governours be naught whiles he his absent But if they be good they keepe things for the generall tolerably well how bad soever he is For his badnesse then as his goodnesse before will not reach to all places and scarcely though badnesse in a corrupted world will reach further then goodnesse much further then where hee is present Kingdomes then are governed under God by other Powers as well as by the preame and they no lesse sent by him then the supreame I shall make an inference or two from this afterward Secondly meane time I add my second consideration That in all the forementioned Texts the spirit of God with the mention of Governours authorized and ordained by him inculcates their duty to him and their obligation to Justice c. and that not onely when hee speakes to them Psal 82. and of them at large Prov. 8. But even when he speakes to inferiours to be subject to them and especially when he forbids resistance Rom. 13. And for this cause they are all to be prayd for 1. Tim. 2 2. That we may lead a quiet and peaceable life in all godlinesse and honesty Which words if they may not be taken as intending why God hath set any in Authority yet the thing is undoubtedly true hee never by way of ordinance gave any Authority for any other End Those Governours then whether supreame or other that under pretence of their Authority from Gods Ordinance disturb the quiet and peaceable life which the inferiours should lead in all godlinesse and honesty as to bee sure they doe that are bent or seduced to subvert Religion Lawes and Liberties are farre from being Gods Ordinance in so doing and therfore however their power it selfe a sufficiency of Authority for command and coercion in governing the People be from God yet their Tyranny is not at all from him by way of Ordinance or Approbation and so they that resist it even with Armes Resist not the Ordinance of God but resist the violation of his Ordinance and so doe nothing unlawfull though it be a resisting of the supreame person Thirdly let it be remembred that St. Peter in the place fore-mentioned speaking of Governours suppose if meant as the Doctor would sent by the supreame adds for the punishment of evill doers and for the praise of them that doe well If then the supream send Governours to erect or practise a Tyranny to subvert Religion Lawes and Liberties whether under the name of Iustices of Oyeâ— and Terminer Sheriffes Commissioners of Array or the like which is to the Punishment rather of those that doe well and the praise of Evill doers St. Peter saith not a word to bid be subject to them either actively or so much as passively Nor any where else in Scripture I dare be bold to say it doth the Spirit of God bid be subject to Princes or politick Governours though tyrannous or perverters of Religion and Justice I meane not when it speaks of them as such And till then though they have power from God which is not to be rejected yet their Tyranny being not from him but against him may and the Doctor hath not been able nor will never be to prove to the contrary SECT IV. IN this Section the Doctor undertakes to treat of the Forfeiture of the Power and so of the Re-assuming of it by the Parliament or People for the Kings not discharging his trust And denies this Forfeiture and this power of Reassuming that Power But this he saith they that plead for it offer to prove by two or three things laid together First that the power is derived from the People by way of Election Secondly that there is a Covenant betweene the King and the People Thirdly that it is necessary for a State have a meanes within it selfe to preserve it selfe Against all those the Dr. argues and I follow him Onely remembring him that by Forfeiture is not understood Forfeiture of all Kingly Authority nor
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