exemption and impunity as to subjects of the person invested with Soveraignity and Majesty Gods law natures light and sound reason are all for this that the person or persons invested with soveraign Majesty having the Legislative-power the Jurisdictional-power the Coerecive and Punitive-power originally in himself must enjoy exemption and impunity as to subjects actings against them The contrary tenet overthrows the order of God and nature and precipitates humane Societies in a gulf of endlesse confusions 3. This hath been the constant sense of the generation of the righteous and the antient Christians and great lights of Gods Church whom none will call flatterers of Princes but such as have lost their fore-heads Tertul. apol contra gentes imperatores sunt in solius Dei potestate a quo sunt secundi post quem primi ante omnes Deos super omnes homines And a little after Majestatem Caesaris soli Deo subjicio So ad Scapulam Imperator omnibus major est dum solo deo est minor So Optat. contra Parmenian super imperatorem non est nisi solus Deus qui fecit imperatorem And Jerom. epist ad Rusticum speaking of Davids words Ps 51. Against thee against thee onely have I sinned sayes he spake so quia Rex erat alium non timebat And Ambrose in Apol. Davidis cap. 4. 10. speaking of the same words sayes Rex utique erat nullis ipse legibus tenebatur he means as to fear punishment from man quia liberi sunt Reges a vinculis delictorum neque enim ullis ad paenam vocantur Legibus tuti Imperii potestate homini ergo non peccavit qui non tenebatur obnoxius There is no doubt but David was sensible both of the horrid injury he had done to Vriah the occasion of that Psalm and of the scandal he had given to Gods people in which sense he might be well said to sin against both But in this word against thee thee only have I sinned As he minds to acknowledge that God onely was conscious to his sin in committing it So also he shews that this above all touched his conscience that he had violated Gods Law and shews that he is touched with his terrors as his only Judge though as Diodat on the place sayes well as he was a King he was exempted from the punishment of man and not obnoxious to humane Tribunals And excellent Mr. Calvin in that 20. Ch. of the 4. Book of his institut S. 2 7. Assumptum in Regiam Majestatem violare nefas est nunquam nobis seditiosae istae cogitationes in mentem veniant tractandum esse pro meritis Regem S. 29 Personam sustinent voluntate Domini cui inviolabilem Majestatem ipse impressit insculpsit And if Princes be tyrannous nostrum non est hujusmodi malis mederi c. and so S. 31. fully to our purpose it is a wonder how many who pretend respect to Calvin as he is indeed most worthy of respect should dare to violate the Sacrosanct Maiesty of Kings if they will but read over that Chapter wherein he speaks most notably against the seditious Doctrines of our times as if he had been living in them 4. It is not denyed that the King is bound before God to rule his people according to the Law of God of reason and nature yea and to take his direction in Government from the rational Laws of the Kingdom which are deductions from or determinations of the Law of God reason and nature to particular circumstances agreed to by the consent and with the good liking of his people It is too grosse a saying Regi quicquid libet licet a good King will turn the word and say Regi quod licet supposing it expedient libet he will make use of good Laws as his instruments in governing the people and account it his honour and a thing greatly becoming his Majesty to do nothing contrary to Law in the ordinary course of his Government and not at all stray there-from but when great reason urges an equitable interpretation of the Law and respect to the end and aim of it when precise cleaving to the rigidity of the letter thereof might make summum jus summa injuria It is a royal thing for a King to live by the same good Laws which are given by him to the people and it is of efficicious influence upon them to move them to walk in their duties orderly Rex tenetur servare Leges si non ut Leges tamen ut rationes But if the supreme Power should deviat we maintain that as a sure truth which this man proudly and traiterously jeers at That impunity as from Subjects necessarily attends Soveraignity and supreme Majesty which hath this inseparable priviledge of exemption from violence by Subjects by the Law of God Reason and Nature whatever sort the Government be Monarchical or Polyarchical For no man can be judged or punished but by a Judge above him and the Supreme hath none such otherwise he were not Supreme To teach contrary to this is but to confound Gods Order and dissipate humane Societies by continual rebellions Yet this inviolableness of the sacred persons of Kings and supreme â—owers invested with Soveraign Authority from God thus asserted should be so far from licensing or incouraging them to do what they list that they have the greater cause to walk with holy fear within the boundaries of Gods Law and their own just Laws for the more immunity they have from mens violence which must be granted unless all things be turned into confusion the sadder punishments they shall have from God if they debord The sixth Chapter of the Book of Wisdom though it be Apocrypha is well worthy to be read by Kings and Potentates and to be trembled at for the matter is very agreeable to Gods Word The heaviest vengeances that are recorded in History sacred and profane have come upon flagitious and tyrannous Kings their exemption from mens hands reserves them to fall into the hands of the living God which is a fearful thing who besides the wrath that is to come sometimes calls for forreign scourges upon them sometimes suffers an evil spirit of rebellion to go out amongst their own Subjects who though they do wickedly in stretching forth their hands against the sacred head of the Lords Anointed yet it is ordinary for the great God to do the work of his holy Justice by wicked hands and when men are serving their own lusts and crossing his revealed will for which vengeance attends them yet they may be in these actions serving his Providence and his Justice against wicked Powers albeit they think not so nor comes it into their minds or hearts But Potentates should remember the word Potentes paâ—ce debent uti potestate sua ut semper eam retinere possint But the Libeller will have the memorable instance of the times whereof he now speaks Naph P. 30. of casting away the Carcases and
insurrections against Kings as false Prophets do now albeit they had as great cause as ever people had under some of their Kings and were in capacity probable enough to crush them they never suggested to them that their obligations to subjection unto their Kings being but conditional they were set free when they became so extreamly wicked idolatrous c. nor did ever Godly people although they strived to keep themselves pure and to gain-stand in their private capacities the evils of the times think themselves free to use violence against Powers above them had this been their duty no doubt Gods Prophets would plainly and down-right have told them of it without circumlocutions but this they never did either that was no duty or the Prophets were not faithful in not admonishing them of their duty When at first that people sought a King from Samuel they resolved not to take him conditionally si bene regnaverit but with all the faults that might follow him neither reserved they Power to coerce him which had it been in their thoughts would easily have answered and weakned Samuels terrifying disswasive for they could have said we take him only as King on condition of his good behaviour otherwise we will take order with him but would have one as other Nations had Kings about them of whom Buchanan says they were not legitimi Reges but tyranni in his language because not under Law coaction And so also they behaved themselves toward them not using them as they deserved but forbearing violence against them although they were very evil Princes many of them But yet further it is pressed that such an Oath and Covenant betwixt King and People was in use then because Eccles 8.2 It is said I counsel thee to keep the Kings commandment and that in regard of the oath of God Therefore there was say they an Oath or Covenant betwixt King and People Ans 1. The most that can be made of this place is as Diodat in his note thereupon affirms that the subjects swore the oath of Allegiance and Obedience to the King upon the ground whereof they were to obey him it was at most foedus unilaterum as they call it in the Schools but it imports not mutual engagement of the King to them or that he swore to them much less that the Oath they made to him was conditional with a reserve of Power to punish him for his deviations which in this same King that writes this were very great albeit we grant all such oaths to Kings to be understood salvo jure Dei salva Deo obedientia 2. We do not see ground to assert that ordinarily amongst that people there were oaths of fidelity and obedience given to their Kings whatever was done in the extraordinary cases above mentioned far lesse that Kings engaged to them by oath ordinarily both the King ruled without such an oath and the people obeyed without such an oath or engagement Neither is there in Deut. 17. or Sam. 8. or any where else such a rule set in the institution or constitution of the King that any such matter should be done Nor hear we in the History of this same King Solomon who writes this that when he entred to the Throne either he swore to the people or they to him unlesse perhaps 2 Sam. 29.24 may import this as to Solomon Junius translation of this Text wherein he is followed by Cartwright may well passe praestitutum Regis observa sed pro ratione juramenti Dei i. e. Keep the Kings Commandment so far as it may be keeped retaining fidelity to God to whom absolute and illimited obedience is sworn So not the motive of obedience to the King because of the oath sworn to him is here imported but only the measure and moderation of our obedience due to him so as it may consist with the duty sworn to God our obedience to the King is here cautionated saith Cartwright dummodo non pugnet cum juramento quo divino imperio obstricti sumus we are to obey him 3. We may hold close to our own translation and yet not be necessitate to grant so much to be spoken of here as an oath of the people to the King let be a mutual Oath and Covenant betwixt King and People neither of which was in ordinary use amongst that people nor mentioned in sacred Scripture as ordinary For they were all bound by oath to obey all Gods Commandments this was the oath of God and amongst his Commandments this was one that they should obey the King in the Lord and obey all the Kings lawful Commandments in regard of their general oath and engagement to God to obey all his commandments they were bound to obey the Kings Command under God and in subordination to him albeit they never took any particular oath to obey the King and dealt not covenant-wise with him And thus the sense runs fairly I counsell thee to keep the Kings commandment and that in regard of or propter the oath of God because thou hast sworn to obey God obey the King in all lawful things for this is the will of God The motive of obedience is taken not from any particular oath made to the King but from the general oath made to God engaging in all things to obey him But yet this business of the civil Covenant is not at an end for it is urged L. R. P. 97. that this Covenant tyes the King be it tacite or expresse not to God only but to the people and brings him by reciprocation of bands to be under a Law-obligation to be subject to the peoples censure and punishment in case of failing as well as they are subject to to him in case of failing and that all covenants and contracts betwixt man and man bring the covenanters under a law and claim before men if the contract be broken And that the King becoming bound to the people he comes under action and claim by them if he fail and is punishable as they are if they fail And that the King and they have a mutual coactive power one over another and are mutually Magistrates one to another and the people if the King fail may judge him in their tribunal of necessity and that there needs no judge on earth between them more then between two Nations independent one upon another when they warr together And that in reformations of things amisse especially in Religion people may extraordinarily intrude in the Magistrates office and not only reform themselves actibus elicitis but reform others actibus imperatis And that people by vertue of this supposed covenant may when they see cause formally and effectively excercise upon their Kings that royalty which they have in themselves virtually and fountally Much of that sort of stuffe is to be found quest 14.40 and every where in that Book And it is lamentable that while they who labour to preserve Gods order in the world should be branded as flatterers
pag. 105. that a Ministers external call is not in ordination by them who have power upon trial of gifts but in having such a visible evidence of the call of Jesus Christ as in reason and charity doth obliege all men to receive the person so called as truly sent These with several other points tending to Libertinisme yea and to the abolishing of the sense of grossest sins in people are vented here as may be seen in the progress But our maine work shall be to shew the face of this mans way and how Anabaptistical-like it looks in some particular practices wherein the similitude will hold without much halting that if he will not be he healed others may be warned 1. The Sect of Anabaptists laboured much as the learned men that knew them and dealt with them declare to overthrow Magistracy in the places where they lived they represented the secular powers unto the people as the ungodly of the world instigating and stirring them up to pull them all down as the oppressors of their liberty in spirituals and civils They denied all authority to Magistrates in Church matters averring they ought not to medle in matters of Religion or Faith nor use any compulsion on men so much as to urge them to the use of the external meanes of Gods worship And upon the ground Luke 22. The Kings of the Nations c. it shall not be so amongst you which is pressed against Superiorities amongst Church-men They pleaded with no less plausibleness against superiority of Magistrates amongst and over Christians although when they came to some strength at Munster they would have their own King John of Leyden the Taylor 2. As they studied to overthrow the ordinance of Magistracy so also the other divine ordinance of Ministery these being as it were the two great lights the Sun and the Moon which God hath appointed to guid the world These masters of confusion would extinguish them both that they might vent their wares in the world for destroying not only humane Societies but the Souls of men In order to the ruine of the Ministery they declaimed most bitterly against all of that function that were not of their way as Hirelings Thieves and Wolves Ignorant-beasts Priests of Baal cursed Creatures Servants of Sathan and what ever else their invenomd hearts could prompt them to utter against Christs Ministers to work their disgrace amongst the people and so to defame them that they might be useless in the service of God Their great work was to exclude faithful Ministers from the esteem of Gods people that they might affect them only and that they might have ready accesse to poyson them with their perverse Doctrines and Dictates of sublime unconceivable non-sense set forth under the garb of a glancing novelty of words 3. They bent themselves to work division in the Church of God and to move people to forsake the assembling of themselves together in Church-meetings and to follow them to seek Christ in private Conventicles where they might with freedom enough open their hearts and debauch them into their way The Church meetings they reckoned no better of then as of droves and herds of hoggs confused mixtures unworthy the name of Churches and wherein no blessing was to be expected to the Ordinances 4. They were above all men arrogant and proud despisers of such as were not of their way as being men without God in the world reprobate and wicked denying to them even common civilities 5. When any of theirs were punished either for their errors or for fellony murther or rebellion they heavily lamented the removeal of the dear servants of God crying them up for Martyrs and complaining tragically that truth and godliness was oppressed and that men who would have all things done according to Gods word were not suffered to live in a persecuting world How neer this man with his complices doth approach to the manners of that odious Sect in these particulars may some way appear from this Libell and the Apology When the spirit that stirreth in these furious writings especially in Naphthali wherein the evil man waxeth worse and worse is considered how much confusion may be seen to be portended to Church and State if hearts be infected with the Doctrines therein held forth It is greatly to be wished and prayed for that the Lord may give his people such understanding that they be not ignorant of the wiles of Sathan who drives a deeper design against this poor Church and Land then the subversion of this or that exterior form of Church-Government The controversie rests not in matters touching a Bishop or a Presbytery which if mens passions or prejudices might permit may be for the advantage of the Gospel well consolidated by their mutual paying of due respects one to another the episcopal inspection not abrogating but strengthening the due right of Presbyters and Presbyters not despising that lawful inspection but all concurring together in a kindly mutual assistance and amicable conjunction for carrying on the real interests of Christs Kingdom without imperiousness on the one side and without froward disorderliness on the other But this polemical Presbyterian as he would seem to be though he and his brethren in evil have ruined that way of Presbytery long ago accounts such matters too low to stand upon The design his Libel runs upon is to open a gap to endlesse rebellions under whatsoever constitution of Church-Government And not only to bring all our Magistrates from the highest to the lowest under disgrace which is the next step to destruction and to make them a sacrifice to the fury of the wicked people but to ruine Kingly Authority and Magistracy the Ordinance of God and to dissolve humane Societies and Kingdoms as shall be seen and especially to ruine this Kingdom There is a great noise made it may be it is not causles and it were to be wished Rulers looked to it of the increase of Popery but truly when the spirit of such writings as this is considered it will be found there is cause to fear unless the wisdom and goodness of God and the prudence of the King and Governors under him prevent That as one way the Roman Antichrist may come in So some furious successor of John of Leyden under pretence of a Phineas-like spirit come in another way upon our Church and Land to lay it waste and to make it a field of confusion and blood the seeds of future miseries being too visibly sowen by this man and his complices whose mouths are full of Blasphemies as their hearts and hands are full of blood That this Libell and the like are not more quickly followed with meet animadversions is not to be marvelled at by any who knowes they are like the Pestilence that walks in darkness and that hardly do they come to the hands of any but such as are willing to be deceived by them being intended for the blinding of these not for the opening the eyes of others
his Acts of violent resistance and vindication of liberty according to the Covenant And in reference to the case of the Nation in these Times the man is so far transported as to teach the people That their liberty is so far lost that they are reduced to the condition of a most insupportable and unnatural conquest which should be a most just cause and provocation to all ingenuous Spirits and good Patriots to undertake the asserting of their own liberty upon the greatest peril Page 116. And that the pressures and grievances of the Nation by reason only of that Court of Commission for executing the Laws anent Church matters do far exceed all the pressures and injuries of that Spanish inquisition whereupon the United Provinces have justified and approved their revolt from the King of Spain Page 126. So that this mans design is clear from his words to dissolve and confound this Kingdom to move them who will be taken in his snare to renounce Allegiance to the King to revolt from him as having better cause then the United Provinces had to revolt from the King of Spain to combine themselves in new Societies to their own mind they being now relapsed into their primaeve liberty and the obligation to the Government being loosed and that every man and every Party as they find themselves strong enough should upon their own discretive judgement of what is their due civil Liberty as well as what is right Religion and upon their greatest peril undertake not only violent resistance of all powers above them but valiant vindication of Religion and Liberties and reforming what they think amisse vi armis even to the punishing all and whatsoever person that will oppose them in their way The particulars shall be after spoken to but now more generally we consider his fundamental Doctrines of confusion That the true ends of instituting civil Government are the true happiness of People here and hereafter and the glory of God and that Magistrates and Governours are oblieged to prosecute these ends no judicious Christian will question All the question is anent the Duty of the fearers of God in the case of the perversion of the ends of Government by these in whose hand it is whether when this perversion is manifest the band and tye to the Government ceaseth as to the persons injur'd thereby and whither this be the case as matters are now stated that private persons or any number of them are for the present suppos'd perversions of the ends of Government disoblieged from all tyes to the same and relaps'd into their primaeve liberty and priviledge to combine in Societies which are to their mind as at first they did associate themselves in the political bodies whereof now they are members for their own good and preservation As for the general position or affirmative resolution to the former question it is undoubtedly both unchristian and unreasonable When was there at any time greater perversion and straying from the ends of Government then was in the times of many of the holy Prophets of God and in the times of Christ his holy Apostles and the primitive Christians who were both replenish'd with much light to know their duties and much zeal to act for the honour of God against all perils and dangers whatsoever lying in their way Government was perverted by manifest Idolatry and horrid Tyranny many monsters of men possessing the thrones of Soveraignty yet look over all the sacred Writings of the holy Prophets look to the history of the life and actions of Christ and his Apostles or to the history of the great Lights of the primitive Church for many hundreds of years and see if any of the teachers taught such doctrine that in case of the manifest perversion of the ends of Government people did relapse into their primaeve liberty and priviledge to combine with whom they pleased to forsake the union with these political bodies with which they were conjoyn'd or that they were liberated from the obligation and band to the civil order and Government under which they were or if that was the sense of any of the godly zealous Christians and fearers of God in these times who alwayes keeped themselves pure from sinning against God refusing obedience unto mens unlawful Commandments but the Doctrine of these new Christians never came in their hearts that they should make secessions from the civil Societies wherein they lived so long as they keep'd within the bounds over which such or such Government was and account all their obligation to abused Government dissolved Yea upon the contrary as there are never to be found amongst the people fearing God any such rentings of the States and Common-wealths they lived in approven of God or injoyn'd by his Prophets in his name So in reproving sins and menacing judgements against these in Authority albeit they grievously abused their places yet the Prophets Apostles and Christ also studied to preserve respects to the Soveraignty and Powers set over People and while they warn'd all from the highest to the lowest to amend their wayes they guarded against seditious dissolutions of the Common-wealth on any pretext never prescribing rebellion and revolting the greater sin as the cure of Tyranny or irreligiousness in the Actings of Powers What abusers of Government and perverters of the ends thereof were Tiberius Claudius Nero Domitian c. yet Christ will have Caesars due given him and his Apostles presse subjection to them Honor to be given them Tribute to be paid to them Prayers to be made for them not for destroying them and their Government but for preserving their Persons and sanctifying their hearts that they might govern rightly and peaceably a Prayer Point-blank contrary to endeavours to disturbe their Kingdoms by seditious courses to dissolve and dissipate them and to take vengeance on their persons So that they must needs be the disciples not of Christ or Paul or Peter but of Judas of Galilee and of Theudas Acts 5.36 37. who upon account of perversion of Government teach any part of the people to dissolve and confound the Societies whereof they are members and that the obligation being loosed from the Government they may break off from it and erect themselves in new Combinations and Societies with whom they think best If this may passe for good divinity the grand enemy shall never want opportunity of casting Fire-balls in humane Societies and working confusion and every evil work But as this position is very dissonant from Religion so it is no less to sound reason for it hath a clear tendency to the breaking and crumbling in pieces of all humane political Societies all Commonwealths and Kingdoms of the World which no wit of Man can preserve from dissolution if once this Principle be drunk into the hearts of People and sink there For by this mans opinion the judgement of the perversion of the ends of Government in tyranny oppression c. is alwayes put over to the
discretion of the sufferers of prejudice by it were they never so few in comparison of the whole body of the people they may pronounce upon the same and according to their discretive judgement of the injurious perverting of Government determine their actions for renouncing or revolting from the society in which and Government under which they are and nothing should hinder them from this but want of probable capacity to through their work as he often speaks So wise and cautious must his followers be though not conscientious that in working a mischief they light not upon a mischief Good God! to what times are we reserved wherein the unmeasurable audaciousness of men dare present such poyson to a Christian People and to attempt the breaking them in pieces by such Doctrines which both Religion and sound Reason abhorres Dare this Libeller say that this is a fundamental constitution of political Societies that at the arbitrement and lust of any minor part of private persons pretending a perversion of the ends of Government a pretence that will never be wanting to malecontents and malapert wicked ones even katherines and highlandish theeves and it is real to them if they themselves be admitted Judges they may make secession from the Society in which they are embodied and renounce their obligation to the Government thereof Is not such a principle rather contra-fundamental to all humane combined Societies and were it at first entring of the Society expresly proposed that when ever any minor party should account the ends of Government perverted they should be at their primaeve liberty again to break off from all the magistratical Order and from society with the major party of these with whom they are combined Would not the overture of such a condition be rejected with indignation and upon just reason for that were to open a gap to continual seditions divisions and fractions And all rational men would judge it were better not to joyn in society with such men then to joyn in such termes Again suppose there be a breaking off from a magistratical Power and major part of a society upon pretension which will never be wanting to cover sedition and confusion such is the corruption of men of a perversion of the ends of Government the party making secession may haply meet with that same measure they gave to the Community wherewith they were formerly joyned For when they have combined and embodied themselves in a Society if a minor party arise amongst themselves with the same accusations against them which they had against the body they did separate from Must not that same party have the same priviledge of Primaeve liberty to combine and erect a corporation by themselves which they claimed before will not they plead that the obligation to the Government and Society ceaseth and they are free to erect a new one And where shall there be a stand till humane Societies be miserably broken in pieces which seems to be Satans design by this Mans Doctrine Further can this assertion subsist that neither alledgiance or fidelity nor obedience is to be given unto any created power but in defence of Religion and Liberty That obedience is not to be given unto any Creature on earth against Religion or the Revealed Will of God shall be easily granted we abhorre the very thought of so doing Again it shall not be said that obedience is to be given to Powers against the Liberty competent to us as Subjects and consistent with Soveraignty yet so that the measure of that Liberty must not be made by every private mans will but by the Declarature of the Parliament representative of the Subjects which best knows what thereunto belongs But to say that all not only obedience but alledgiance and fidelity due to any created power is indispensibly restricted to this qualification in Defence of Religion and Liberty viz. of the subject is a most false assertion It is known that a restriction excludes all other cases which are not in the restrictve proposition included now it is certain there may be cases wherein we ought to obey the Magistrate and yet the act of obedience cannot be properly and directly said to be either in defence of Religion or the Liberty of the Subject there may be some causes that properly concern his own honour wherein defence of Religion is not concerned the Magistrate perhaps not being of our Religion and far less defence of the Liberty of the Subject unless by a very remote and unnecessary consequence yet am I bound to him in causes concerning his honour this made the Ministers that disputed with the Doctors of Aberdeen decline to acknowledge that clause of the first Covenant in defence of Religion c. to be limitative or restrictive of duty to the King affirming it onely to be specificativen aming duties to him in some respects or in respect to some things not excluding others Yea the General Assembly 1639. will not have that clause in the Covenant restrictive for in their supplication to the Commissioner and Council they speak thus We have solemly sworn and do swear not only our mutual concurrence and assistance for the cause of Religion and to the utmost of our power with our Means and Lives to stand to the defence of our Dread Soveraign His Person and Authority in the preservation of true Religion Liberties and Laws of this Kirk and Kingdom but also n. b. in every cause that may concern His Majesties Honour shall concur with our friends and followers as we shall be required c. So Duty and Obedience to the King is there extended beyond what is expresly mentioned in the Covenant in defence of Religion and Liberties But further as to the point of Alledgiance or Fidelity that is another matter then Obedience Alledgiance to a King imports owning him as Lawful and Rightful King and that none others have power over him together with fidelity to his Person Crown and Dignity against all conspiracies and treason Obedience is the result of this acknowledged Soveraignty where commands appear lawful A man may keep Alledgiance and Fidelity to the King albeit sometimes there may be commands given which cannot be obeyed because of Gods countermand many learned Priests and Papists in England took the Oath of Alledgiance when first it was emitted and injoyn'd albeit they thought they could not give obedience to the King as to matters of Religion But this man is plain in his assertion that no Alledgiance is due to the King except with this restriction in defence of Religion And as he said a main part of his Religion is to erect Presbytery and root out Prelacy So that if Presbytery be not defended people are taught to renounce Alledgiance to the King How contrary is this to the Confession of Faith cap. 23. S. 4. Difference in Religion doth not saith the Confession make void the Magistrates just and legal Authority nor free the people from their due obedience to him But this
insurrection all sorts of which he holds out as unlawful given even where obedience cannot be given and Page 319. persona invadens potest esse talis aliae etiam circumstantiae ut magis invasum deceat mortem ipsam pati quam tali desensione propulsare To these may be joyned moderate Papists Aestius Lib. 2. in Sententias cap. ult privato nâ—mini licet superiori etiam tyrannice imperanti resistere multo minus è medio tollere Tollet Lib. 5. de instruct sacerdotis cap. 6. non licet cuiquam se defendere a Judice vulnere vel pugna licet sit innocens Many moe might be cited But it may be evident that this Libellers doctrine of the lawfulness of private persons one or moe resisting the Magistrate violently with destroying him in self-defence far more taking on them a vindicative and punishing power of which in the following Chapter is against the common sense of Protestant Divines and of the founder Papists also Whatever may be said of moral or legal self-defence against the Soveraign by way of petition or plea in Court for safety of a mans person or Estate And whatever may be said of warding off and defensively putting back personal injurious assaults to the manifest and immediate peril of life without any colour of deserving of Reason of Law or judicial proceeding or of a Womans violent resisting attempts against the honour of her chastity dearer to her then life and tending to ensnare her also in sin against God whereof her non-resistance makes her formaly guilty And whatever may be done in the case of most habited not our and compleat tyranny against all appearance of Law manifestly tending to the destruction of the body of a people or greater part thereof by hostile furious actions or in the case of violent attempts of destruction of all known legal liberties and the beeing of Religion according to Law or in the case of vendition alienation of and giving a whole Kingdom to forrainers or strangers or some such like What ever I say in such horrid cases which for most part cannot befall a Prince in his natural and right wits a case wherein provision may be made that he hurt not himself nor his Dominions may be done comes not at all within the compasse of our question although most disingenuously the discontented and seditious do strive on all occasions to aggravate matters so that the case concerning them may seem co-incident with these or the like that so they may justifie their violence against the powers But the question is as hath been said whether when the Magistrate proceeds according to Law agreed unto by himself and the body of the Community suppose upon the matter it be Lex male posita or no right or just Law may any part of the people or meer private persons who think themselves in capacity so to do offer violence to the Magistrate or to his Ministers and Officers proceeding according to Law or if they ought to submit to punishment or else flee if they cannot obey the praeceptive part of the Law being bound up as they say in conscience As for private persons going out further to revenge wrongs done them on the Magistrate or punishing them that is to be spoken to hereafter But this now is the true state of the business at this time anent violent resistance of the Magistrates all of them from the highest to the lowest and of the whole body of the Nation by any minor part of private persons who apprehend themselves in capacity for that work It ought to be well considered and it may be easily perceived how Satan in these last and worst of times is mainly labouring to bring in confusion into humane Societies to raise scandals upon Religion and to tempt and provoke the Princes of the World to dislodge the Church of God out of their Dominions because of the seditious Principles and unquiet Practices of some Professors thereof though Religion is innocent as to these which tend to the dissolution of the State-government yea and also of all Church-government It is to be marked that when Lex Rex had in several places See Pag. 463. and Pag. 313. vented that Principle in reference to the Civil Government That no Man is bound in Conscience to subjection passive under unjust punishments inflicted by the Magistrate more then to active obedience unto unlawful Comands and that passive obedience under unjust Sentences comes under no Command of God Yea that it is a sin against Gods Command to be passively subject to an unjust Sentence And that it is an act of Grace and Vertue for a Man to resist the Magistrate violently when he does him wrong and a self-murther against the sixth Command not to resist when he offers to take the life without cause though not without Law pag. 314.322 When I say these Doctrines were broached in reference to the Common-wealth they were very quickly translated and applied to the Church by this man and his party who pleaded some years ago very strongly as they thought for non-submission unto and counteracting of all the Judicatories of the Presbyterial Government whensoever the persons injured thought the Sentence wrong and unlawful so that no excommunicate private person ought to submit to the Sentence of any or all the Judicatories if he thought the Sentence wrong and unlawful and no Minister should leave his Minstery but continue acting in it if he thought the Sentence of deposition given against him by any or all the Judicatories of the Church unjust And they cryed out if this might not be admitted for sound Doctrine that Presbytery was turned into Papacy and absolute Tyranny yea they proceeded further then the point of counteracting for the Agitators of the schimatical Party would take upon them to possesse the power of the most eminent Church-judicatories they being the far minor Part and did in that self-created capacity of Government over all others in this Church act excluding others who were the greater Part thinking that though they were the far lesser Part yet being the founder in their own judgement the Government and managing of it belonged unto them and not unto the corrupt plurality of Ministers who behoved all to bow before them And how well their Practices in the Church do homologate with their Practices as to the State proceeding from one and the same Principle we may now see For it is the way which they clearly own that every private person when and so long as they are able or are in probable capacity to act violently against the Magistrate ought to counter-act him violently when he thinks the Magistrate wrongs him for this must be referred to every Mans private discretive judgement as Naphtali tells us pag. 148. and nothing excuses from this violent resisting but quando desunt vires temporales No submission is to be expected from them by Magistrates when they Govern not according to their mind but when they cannot otherwise do nor any
these but subjection to the passion may fall under a command and this is called passive obedience which implyes more then meer passion or suffering even a disposition and motion of the heart to lye under that lot with an eye to God whose ordinance is used upon the sufferer Only it is called passive obedience because as to the precise suffering the punishment there is no external action done enjoyned by the Law or Command of the Magistrate as there is in active obedience although there be some dispositive or preparatory actions in order to suffering not inferring a direct co-operation to a mans own suffering which he may and ought to do as going to a Gallows on his own feet or up a Ladder or laying down his head on a Block that it may be strucken off It is an error to say that such passive obedience is not commanded of God but only the modus rei that it be done patiently and christianly when it cannot be by force avoided For it is clear that passive obedience or submission and subjection to suffering where the Magistrate hath just cause to inflict the punishment falls under a command of God that same command that forbids resisting the Magistrate in doing his duty enjoyns submission and passive obedience to him although we were able by force to deliver our selves out of his hand In conscience we are bound not to offer him violence in doing his duty though there were power in our hand so to do so that it is not only modus rei that in this case is commanded viz. that we suffer patiently in a christian way when it cannot be avoided but res ipsa that we submit to the suffering if there be no occasion of flying without using force against him Besides that in this case Christian patience and violent resistance are incompatible there can be no Christian patience opposite to Christian submission and subjection to the Powers ordained by God doing their duty But if it might stand with violent resistance it should be opposite to this Christian submission Therefore it appears to be a groundlesse assertion that no passive obedience or submission to suffering is under a command For it is clear there is a command for this subjection we have spoken of But then the difficulty is if passive obedience to unjustly punishing Powers fall under any commandment of God or if there be any command of submission to cleanly suffering it is this mans mind so long as there is any power of violent and forcible resisting a man is guilty of self-murther who will not in this case as well as in the former and the former as well as this endeavour the preservation of his own life by fighting and resisting and re-offending and all that is required is when he is overpowered then to use Christian patience in bearing affliction But we assert that a private person though wrongfully afflicted by the lawful Magistrate proceeding according to Law let it be so that it is Lex male posita or an evil Law is bound not only to Christian patience in suffering to this he is obliged in suffering from any private wicked hand or from the hand of a manifest Usurper or Intruder in Magistracy whose violence he may repell by violence so long as he can but unto a submission without repelling of violence by violence and that in conscientious respect to the Ordinance of God wherewith the lawful Magistrate is invested although abusing it in this particular and with a tender regard to the prevention of seditions and confusions in humane Societies which are unavoidable if every one as he thinks himself wrong'd shall be allowed to use force upon the lawful Magistrat's proceeding by Law the greatest Malefactors being ready to justifie themselves and to violate the justest Magistrates in their just proceedings if once this repelling the Magistrat's force be allowed as a duty And no tender-hearted Christian is there who will not rather submit without resistance to his own private suffering commending his soul and cause to God then by such evil and scandalous doctrines open a wide gap for all wicked seditious persons to work confusion in the Common-wealth and to overthrow the best and justest Magistrates Mr. Burroughs an Independent writing on the 1. of Hos 10. v. hath said well to this purpose When saith he things are brought into a Law suppose the Authority be abused and there be an evil Law made then I confess if the Law be in force we must either quite our selves of the Countrey or else submit and suffer when it comes to be a Power or a Law it is Authority though abused and we must yeeld obedience to it either actively or passively This is sound and Orthodox and it were well others would homologate this Doctrine to prevent the scandals of sedition and rebellion which this tender-hearted Libeller speaks of very slightingly striving to introduce Libertinisme and to abolish the sense of these sins For sayes he Napth Page 39. Treason sedition and disorder are but formalities and notions pretended to palliate and colour the Kings usurpation But to add no more from the Scripture that known passage Rom. 13.1 2. c. with 1. Pet. 2.11 makes for this submission and subjection which is pleaded for by us For such subjection is there commanded to the powers then existing or in beeing 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 such as were Caligula Nero Domitian monstruous tyrants enemies and persecutors of Gods people as is opposed to 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to stand in order against them the word is from 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a military term every Soul is commanded to be subject or to stand in order under them 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and forbidden to be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to stand in military order against them either defensive or offensive by powers which are not to be resisted are clearly mâ—ant the persons iâ— power as the Apostle after expones himself 3. and 4. vers calling them Rulers and the Ministers of God he meanes undoubtedly certain supposita and persons invested with power And cannot mean the abstract Ordinance of God Magistracy or Power in the abstract for it can neither be said to exist separate from persons nor to be the subject and recipient of duties enjoyned to be payed to the Power nor of the offences forbidden nor can it be an Agent or Administrator of these Acts attributed to the Power as to bear the Sword to be the Minister of God to praise the good or terrify the evil So that of necessity by Power is meant Power in the Concrete or the person invested with the Power who is not to be violently resisted by private persons under him when he is acting according to Law suppose the Law be judged by private men not just which is the present case of private persons resistance to Authority The person of the King because invested with power official power though in a particular act abused is not to be
and Parasits of Princes such flatterers of People to their own confusion and destruction should with their writings have such entertainment and countenance But yet it must be said that L. R. is far more tolerable then Naph for what he grants only to the body of the people or the inferior Rulers and Nobles with the people in acting against the King Napht. extends in favours of any party of meer private persons amongst the people against all Magistrates supreme and subordinate and affirms what the whole body with inferior Magistrates may do against a King deviating from his duty any small part of meer private persons if they have strength enough may by vertue of the Covenant do the same against all Magistrates supreme and subordinate not only as to resistance but as to revenge and punishing them A few notes shall be sufficient upon the former Doctrine and then the matter shall be at an end 1. Where a Covenant is made between a King and a People a King I say that is truly such a one it s granted that the Covenant on the Kings part binds him not only to God in relation to the people as the object of his duty but doth bind him to the people formally yet not so as if he be deficient in his duties they are enstated in a power above him to sit as his Judges or that they are loosed from all duty to him and free to do him violence If a Father swear to do his fatherly duty to his Child that makes not the Child his Superior to punish him if he fail when a Minister is admitted to teach a people he swears to them to be dutiful but they are not therefore made his Superiors to punish him if he fail It is a most false assertion that goes alongs that whole Book that a right is given by the covenant sworn to the inferiors and subjects in the politick Society to judge and punish their superiors in case of failing No man can lawfully be judged and punished whatever contract be by another then his lawful Judge that is above him in that Society whereof he is a part L R. Pag. 100.101 2. There is a very great difference between these who are in different political Societies when they break their Contracts or Covenants one with another and betwixt the head and body or members of one and that same civil Society God having allowed lawful Wars allows seeking of reparation or repelling of wrongs done by one Nation to another by force of the Sword when no rational means can bring the doers of the wrong to do right and there being no other remedy he himself the Lord of hosts and God of armies sits Judge and Moderator in that great business and in the use of War is appealed to as Judge there being no common Judge on earth to sit on the causes of these independent Nations But God having set and established in one particular and political Society or Nation his own Ordinance of Magistracy to which every soul must be subject and all subject to the Supreme he hath not put the punishing Sword in any hand but in the hand of the Magistrate his Sword-bearer Rom. 13. Nor hath allowed liberty to meer private persons to manage it against the supreme Magistrate no nor to inferior Magistrates as to him who in respect of the supreme Majesty are but private persons whatever they be toward their inferiors The Magistrates chiefly the Supreme are by their official power above the whole Nation and as absurd it is to say they are above the powers which God hath set over them as L R. p. 460. saith Thrasonically he hath proved unanswerably as to say that every Parish is above the Minister in an Ecclesiastical way though he have official power over them all or that every Lord in Scotland have their Tennents and Vassals above them a thing which the Nobles of Scotland had need to look to For certainly the Principles which lead to subject Kings to people lead clearly and by undoubted consequence to subject them to their Vassals and to all under them yea and all Masters to Servants and Parents to Children and to confound and invert the order of all humane Societies This truth we must cleave to that in one and that same civil Society where God hath appointed Rulers and ruled Subjects cannot without sacrilegious intrusion and contempt of God snatch the Sword out of the Magistrates hand to punish him with it though in some particulars he abuse it Neither can a War intended for this end by meer private persons be lawful against their head or heads nor can any forraign War be managed without a lawful Authority on the Part of the undertakers 3. It is a very false assertion That the people gave the Kingdom to David only conditionally if he did such and such duties to them and if not reserving power to dethrone him L. R. p. 97. God having set David upon his holy hill as his King and not only made him King by his Providence but express designment special command and word none on earth were left at liberty to undo what God would have done and appointed to be 4. It is very weakly reasoned L. R. p. 97. That because Gods people may humbly plead with himself upon the account of his own fidelity in promising or as this man sayes have action of Law and jus quoddam a bold enough expression against God to plead with him that therefore the Kings Covenant gives the people ground of civil action against him to coerce or punish him It had been better said that upon this ground they might humbly plead with him supplicat and reason with him as Gods Deputy bearing the impress of his Majesty and Soveraignty on earth But as God cannot otherwise be pleaded with upon account of his promise wherein he is bound not so much to us as to his own fidelity to evidence it reddit ille debita nulli debens and cannot be pleaded with by force or violence So his Deputies on earth on whom under himself he hath stamped inviolable Majesty whatever they be as Calvin writes in the place often cited are not to be pleaded with by strong hand and force howsoever in somethings they miscarry a thing not competent to the Majesty of God For he hath not in his Word given any commission to any of their Subjects to rise violently against them or use the punishing Sword upon them If this commission can be produced we have no more to say but Good is the Word of the Lord but till this be seen we shall cleave to Rom. 13. that makes the Magistrate the only Sword-bearer of God to avenge or punish however perhaps he hath his aberrations in using it If this man can shew a Superior on earth to use the Sword upon the Soveraign Magistrate people shall have fair liberty to plead their claim or law-suit as he calls it before him But who will judge it more
Nec Samson saith he aliter excusatur quod seipsum cum hostibus ruina domus oppressit nisi quod latenter Spiritus sanctus hoc jusserat So he is accounted amongst heroick Believers Heb. 11.32 And of his fact Bernard saith lib. de precept dispensatione Si defenditur non fuisse peccatum privatum habuisse à Deo consilium indubitanter credendum est 2. Phineas had not only a large reward of his fact Numb 25.12 13. but an ample approbation of it Ps 106.31 It was accounted to him for righteousness i. e. as a righteous action both as to the intention of it Gods honour and as to the ground and warrand of it Gods direction God does not approve or remunerate any action which one way or another he doth not command there are none of these extraordinary actions mentioned in Scripture but either Gods stirring men up to the same or his approbation of the same one way or another is noted See Judg. 3.10 and 5.7 and â—0 23 and 3.9.15 and 2.16.18 he raised up stirred up mens spirits or afterward approved them expresly in these actions As for the private persons which this man will have to take the punishing Sword in their hand against all Magistrates as they cannot pretend extraordinary special commands So the real rebukes of God given them proclaims they have not his approbation 5. Divines have given it as a good rule Opera liberi spiritus non sunt exigenda ad regulas communes nec trahendâ— in exemplum vitae If once men come to make rules of the actions specially warranded beyond the common rule of the Word where will they stand As to instance this same example of Phineas If they will go on to presse the imitation of it 1. They must say that even when the Magistrate is godly and zealous and willing to execute judgement as Moses and the great Council were private persons may do it without them and not wait their warrand as they think Phineas did not 2. That any private person may go to mens Tents or Chambers and stab them without any legal Processe which Phineas they will say used not 3. That if such things be done inconsulto pro Magistratu such as Moses was yet the doer must not be challenged as Phineas was not challenged by Moses 6. The Libeller striving to parallel the Acts of his party which he justifies and incites unto with Phineas his act as he dare not say the acts which he justifies and instigates unto are extraordinary but only heroical so he asserts Phineas act was not extraordinary nor upon extraordinary warrant but heroical and imitable by others who may have such measures of zeal as he had He should in order to this laboured to have set some distinction betwixt heroical and extraordinary acts but this he doth not only labours to jumble the matter and speaks so confusedly that as others cannot understand him so he gives evience he did not understand himself in this matter only something he would gladly say to encourage men to irregular actions under the pretence of Phineas fact But the man if he would might have known the distinction betwixt extraordinary and heroical acts Philosophers and Divines too distinguish betwixt heroical vertues with the acts suitably thereto and common vertues and their acts 3â— pars Thomae qu. 7 art 2ª ad 2 m â— and aggree in this that there is no difference between heroical vertues and virtutes communiter dictae nisi secundum perfectiorem modum A heroick act doth not deviate from the rule of a common vertue but only proceeds from a more intense disposition to a high pitch of vertue and of the acts thereof but yet keeps within the bounds of the ordinary rule of such or such a vertuous action But an extraordinary action goes beyond any ordinary rule of common reason or divine Word as that Abraham should kill Isaac without any hatred of him or cause in him was an act of extraordinary obedience to a special mandate of God Albeit the love that is due to God above all and the respect due to his Sovereignty should incline to obey whatever he enjoyns yet the particular act of slaying his harmlesse child meerly upon the declared will of God was an extraordinary act of obedience not comprisable within the lists of common vertues that direct our actings toward men under God Extraordinary actions are such as are done upon special mandate of God and are not within the compasse of ordinary acts of obedience according to the rule that is set Men may have heroick motions and actions within the bounds of an ordinary calling as sometimes though they have extraordinary calling they may want heroical motions Luther had no immediate nor extraordinary calling to reform the Church but within the bounds of ordinary calling he had special excitations of Gods Spirit and was elevated unto heroick actings for Gods glory in an exceedingly corrupt and collapsed state of the Church Peter had an extraordinary calling and immediate yet he wanted sometimes heroical motions and actions as when he dissembled Gal. 2. Phineas had not only excitations of zeal and heroical motions but supposing him a meer private Person he is to be looked upon as having extraordinary calling from God which is fully enough insinuated both by Gods approving and rewarding him Numb 25. and he rewards not our will-service nor approves it but what he hath enjoyned himself and also by Ps 106. where it is said emphatically it was imputed to him for righteousness though judging according to ordinary rules it might be imputed to him for sin supposing him a meer private man Yet having Gods warrand whose will is the rule of righteousness the deed was imputed to him for righteousness 7. Great gifts secret impulses heroical motions do not as this man suggests give men sufficient call to go beyond the ordinary rules God hath set to men in their callings though they dispose them to act eminently in their callings yet cannot give a new or another calling Every calling a man hath to any work God sets him about must be either mediate or immediate there is no midst betwixt these two as there is not between contradictories If men be not called to a work by the intervention of men and their allowance they must plead an immediate calling from God And we would gladly hear if this man will allow the private persons whom he instigates to insurrections against Magistrates an immediate calling by vertue of their secret impulses and excitations for we are sure they have no mediate ordinary calling If he will go on to say that great gifts of zeal c. great excitations and impulses allows people to desert their own calling and state like these spirits Jude 6. that kept not their first estate but left their own habitation and to intrude upon the Magistrates office alwayes when they think there is cause without an external vocation from men Where will he rest till he
piece of holy policy meet for that time to gather together the scattered people of God who might be tempted otherwise to other courses they were now coming to be his Subjects who were not so before but were under another King and fit it was to give them security touching his good mind toward them they having so long stood it out in arms against him But the question is what was the nature the matter and import of that Covenant The Scripture sayes not it was such a Covenant as these men would have I shall rule you rightly if you obey me dutifully otherwise not upon the Kings part And upon the peoples part We shall obey you and be subject to you if ye rule us rightly otherwise we will not but use our co-active power upon you to dethrone and destroy you and punish you That there was any such conditional Covenant expressed or meant is far from the truth David neither minds to admit them to be his Subjects conditionally or to subject himself to their co-active power nor minde they to offer themselves to be his Subjects in such terms On the contrary it appeareth clearly in the Text that they recognosce his right of reigning over them is from God and that he was not subject to be removed by them see 2 Sam. 5.2 1 Chr. 11.2 3. They say The Lord said to thee thou shalt feed my people Israel and shalt be Captain or Ruler over them And it is added Therefore they came c. and anointed him King over Israel according to the Word of the Lord by Samuel They humbly declare him King whom God had constituted whom they could not lawfully reject and it is impious to think that they recognoscing Gods constitution of him yet should fancy a Paction or Covenant giving them co-active superiority over him to remove him when they thought meet though God had set him on the Throne by a special appointment All the Covenant that can be supposed here is upon the peoples part an engagement to humble subjection and homage And upon the Kings part a Covenant of indempnity for former oppositions to him wherein they had need to be comfortably secured or at most we shall not repugne if it be called a Covenant both of protection and right ruling of them yet so as not subjecting himself to their censures or co-action or that they should be his Subjects only upon that condition being otherwise free to fall upon him The Covenant may be to mutual duties and yet on neither side conditional but absolute each party oblieging themselves to their own duty absolutely but not on condition that the other party do their duty As if a man bind himself by oath to give me one hundred pounds and I bind my self again by oath to him to give him one hundred pounds without conditional provision that he pay me the money he promised me Albeit he should fail in his oath and not pay me yet must not I fail in mine but must pay him because my oath is separate from his and independent upon it and hath a separate obligation absolute which no failing of the other party to me can loose Indeed the case is otherwise when there is a reciprocal contract of things to be done by one party upon condition of some things to be done by the other as in Covenants of Peace between Nations there the breach of condition by one party looses the promise of the other which was only conditionally made But subjection is not engaged to Kings conditionally but absolutely albeit obedience to God be reserved when any active obedience contrary to him is called for Again for the other instance of the Covenant which Jehoiadah made between King Joash and the people 2 Chr. 13.2 3. 2 Kings 11.17 this was also made upon an extraordinary occasion for ordinarily we never hear of any such Covenants amongst Gods people and their Kings and extraordinaries cannot Found ordinary Rules Athaliah had murthered all the royal Seed 2 King 11. 2 Chr. 23. except Joash who was kept secret six years in the house of the Lord while the usurper possessed the Kingdom Now when the godly Priest Jehoiadah the Kings Tutor saw a fit time he ingaged the principal men in Covenant of fidelity to the King 2 King 11.4 and shewed them the Kings Son This was a necessary piece of holy Policy when the Usurper and her faction had so long strengthned themselves to engage the chief men to special fidelity to him And after that 12.17 He brought forth the Kings Son and put the Crown upon him and gave him the Testimony and they made him King and anointed him and they clapt their hands and said God save the King and Jehoiadah made a Covenant betwixt the Lord and the King and the people and that they should be the Lords people between the King also and the people Joash was then but seven years old and not in capacity to make a Covenant with the people but his godly Tutor did preside in that business But two things to our purpose are remarkable 1. That he is Crowned and made King before the Covenant is made as is clear in the Text which crosses our Antimonarchists who assert the King cannot be made King untill he make the Covenant with the people and that he gets the Crown and royal Authority Covenant-wise and conditionally whereas here he is made King antecedently to any Covenant as the Text clears it 2. That albeit the matter of King and peoples Covenant with God be expressed viz. That they should be the Lords people yet it is not told us what the tenor of the Covenant betwixt King and people was nor what the King or Jehoiadah Covenanted in his name the young King of seven years old what could he say in Covenanting Jehoiadah was only President in the matter Diodat seems to say well that in this place Jehoiadah made the people swear alledgiance and fidelity to the King as before he had made the Rulers do vers 4. and no more he took an oath of fidelity of them But how shall it be cleared that it was conditional and with a reserve of coactive and punitive Power over him as these men will have it But passing from this let it be so which cannot be asserted with warrand that all the Kings of Judah made such conditional Covenants with the people as is supposed yet will any judicious man force the particular customes of that Nation on all Nations that might be best for that Nation that was not simply best their customs without a Law of God bearing a standing reason cannot be obligatory on others least we judaize too much But the constant practice of all the Prophets and people of God in that Kingdom when their Kings were very wicked idolatrous and tyrannous speaks clearly that they never had such thoughts of a liberty by vertue of covenant to fall with violence on their Kings The Prophets of God never taught them