together to live and dye for justice and to their power to destroy the TRAITORS OF THE REALME Especially the two Spensers after which they raised an Army whereof they made Thomas Earle of Lancaster Generall and meeting at Sherborne they plunder and destroy the Spensers Castles Mannors Houses Friends Servants and marching to Saint Albanes with Ensignes displayed sent Messengers to the King then at London admonishing him not onely to rid his Court but Kingdome of the TRAITORS TO THE REALME the Spensers condemned by the Commons in many Articles to preserve the peace of the Realme and to grant them and all their followers Letteâ—s Pattents of indemnity for what they had formerly done Which the King at first denied but afterwards this Armie marching up to London where they were received by the City he yeelded to it and in the 15 th yeare of his Raigne by a speciall Act of Parliament the said Spensers were disinherited and banished the Realme formis-councelling the king oppressing the people by injustice a vising him to levie warre upon his Subjects making evill Iudges and other Officers to the hurt of the King and Kingdome â—ngâ—ossing the Kings eare and usurping his Royall authority as ENEMIES of the King and OF HIS PEOPLE and by another Act of Parliament it was then provided that no man should be questioned for any felonies or trespasses committed in the prosecution of Hugh â—e de pensers the father and sonne which Act runnes thus Whereas of late many great men of the Realme surmised to Sir Hugh le Despenser the sonne and Father many misdemeanors by them committed against the estate of our Lord the King and of his Crowne and to the disinheritance of the great men and destruction of the people and pursued those misdemeanors and attainder of them by force because they could not be attainted by processe of Law because that the said Sir Hughes had accroached to them the royall power in divers manner the said Grandees having mutually bound themselves by oath in writing without the advise of our Lord the King and after in pursuing the said Hugh and Hugh and their alies and adherents the said great men and others riding with banners displaied having in them the Armes of the king and their owne did take and occupie the Chattels Villages Mannors Lands Tenements Goods and likewise take and imprison some of the Kings leige people and others tooke some and slew others and did many other things in destroying the said Hugh and Hugh and their alies and others in England Wales and in the Marches whereof some things may be said Trespasses and others felonies and the said Hugh and Hugh in the Parliament of our Lord the King sommoned at Westminster three weekes after the Nativitie of Saint John Baptist the 15. yeare of his Raigne for the said misdemeanors were fore judged and banished the Realme by a vote of the Peeres of the Land and the foresaid great men in the said Parliament shewed to our Lord the King that the things done in the pursuite of the said Hugh and Hugh by reason of such causes of necessity cannot be legally redressed or punished without causing great trouble or perchance warre in the land which shall be worse and prayed our Lord that of all alliances trespasses and felonies they might be for ever acquitted for the preservation of peace the avoyding of warre and asswaging of angers and rancors and to make unitie in the land and that our Lord the King may more intirely have the hearts and Wills of the great men and of his people to maintaine and defend his Lands and to make warre upon and grieve his enemies It is accorded and agreed in the said Parliament by our Lord the King and by the Prelates Earles Barrons and Commons of the Realme there assembled by command of our Lord the King that none of what estate or condition soever he be for alliance at what time soever made by deed oath writing or in other manner nor for the taking occupying or detainer of Chattels towns Mannors Lands Tenements and good taken imprisoning or ransoming the Kings leige People or of other homicides robberies felonies or other things which may be noted as trespasses or fellonies committed against the peace of the king by the said great men their allies or adherents in the pursuite aforesaid since the first day of March last past till the thursday next after the feast of the assumption of our Ladie to wit the 19. day of August next ensuing be appealed nor challenged taken nor imprisoned nor grieved nor drawne into judgement by the King nor any other at the suite of any other which shall be in the Kings Court or in any place else but that all such trespasses and Felonies shall be discharged by this accord and assent saving alwaies to all men but to the said Hugh and Hugh action and reason to have and recover their Chattels Farmes mannors Lands tenements wards and marriages according to the Lawes and customes used in the Realme without punishment against the king or damages recovered against the party for the time aforesaid For which end they prescribed likewise a Charter of Pardon annexed to this Act according to the purport of it which every one that would might sue out which Charter you may read in old Magna Charta From which Act of Parliament I shall observe these three things First that this their taking up Armes to apprehend the Spensâ—rs as enemies to the King and kingdom and marching with banners displayd was not then reputed high Treason or Rebellion against the King though it were by way of offence not of defence and without any authority of Parliament for there is not one word of Treason or Rebellion in this Act or in the Charter of pardon pursuing it and if it had beene high Treason this Act and Charters on it extending onely to Fellonie and Trespasses not to Treasons and Rebellions would not have pardoned these transcendent Capitall crimes Secondly that the unlawfull outrages robberies and murders committed by the souldiers on the kings leige people and not on the two Spensers the sole delinquents were the occasion of this Act of oblivion and pardon not the Armed pursuing of them when they had gotten above the reach of Law Thirdly that though this were an offensive not defensive warre made without common assent of Parliament and many murthers robberies and misdemeanors committed in the prosecution of it upon the kings leige people who were no Delinquents yet being for the common good to suppresse and banish these ill Councellors enemies Traytors to King and Kingdome the King and Parliament thought it such a publicke service as merited a pardon of these misdemeanors in the carriage of it and acquitted all who were parties to it from all suites and punishments All which considered is a cleare demonstration that they would have resolved our present defensive warre by Authoritie of both Houses accompanied with no such outrages as these for
reports that Symon after his death grew famous by many miracles which for feare of the King came not in publicke Thus this Historian thus Robert Grosthead the most devout and learned Bishop of that age who most of any opposed the Popes Vsurpations and exactions determine of the justice and lawfulnesse of the Barons Warres Walter Bishop of Worcester concurring in the same opinion with Grosthead The same author Rishanger records that the Earle of Glocester a great stickler in these warres against the king with whom at last he accorded signified to the King by his Letters Patents under his seale that he would never beare Armes against the King his Lord nor against his Sonne Prince Edward NISI DEFENDO but onely in his Defence which the King and Prince accepting of clearely proves that defensive Armes against King or Prince were in that age generally reputed Lawfull by King Prince Prelates Nobles People I may likewise adde to this what I read in Matthew Westminster that Richard Bishop of Chichester the day before the battle of Lewis against King Henry and his sonne who were taken prisoners in it by the Barons and 20000. of their Souldiers slaine absolved all that went to fight against the King their Lord from all their sinnes Such confidence had he of the goodnesse of the cause and justnesse of the warre In one word the oath of association prescribed by the Barons to the King of Romans brother to King Henry the third in the 43. yeare of his Raigne Heare all men that I Richard Earle of Cornewall doe here sweare upon the holy Evangelists that I shall be faithfull and diligent to reforme with you the Kingdome of England hitherto by the councell of wicked persons overmuch disordered and be an effectuall Coâ—djutor TO EXPELL THE REBELLS and disturbers of the same And this Oath I will inviolaby observe under paâ—ne of losing all the lands I have in England So helpe me God Which Oath all the Barrons and their associates tooke by vertue whereof they tooke up armes against the Kings ill Councellors and himselfe when he joined with them sufficiently demonstrates their publicke opinions and judgements of the lawfulnesse the justnesse of their warres and of all other necessarie defensive armes taken up by the Kingdomes generall assent for preservation of its Lawes Liberties and suppression of those Rebels and ill Councellors who fight against or labour to subvert them by their policies In the third yeare of King Edward the 2 d this king revoking his great Mynion Piers Gaveston newly banished by the Parliament into Ireland and admitting him into as great favour as before contrary to his oath and promise the Barrons hereupon by common consent sent the King word that he should banish Piers from his company according to his agreement or else they would certainâ—ly rise up against him as a perjured person Vpon which the King much terrified suffers Piers to abjure the Realme who returning againe soone after to the Court at Yorke where the king entertained him the Lords spirituall and temporall to preserve he liberties of the Church and Realme sent an honourable message to the King to deliver Piers into their hands or banish him for the preservation of the peace Treasure and weale of the Kingdome this wilfull King denies their just request whereupon the Lords thus contemned and deluded raised an army and march with all speede towards New-Castle NOT TO OFFER INIVRIE OR MOLESTATION TO THE KING but to apprehend Peirs and judge him according to Law upon this the King fleeth together with Peirs to Tinemouth and from thence to Scarborough Castle where Piers is forced to render himselfe to the Barrons who at Warwicke Castle without any legall triall by meere martiall Law beheaded him as a subvertor of the Lawes and an OPEN TRAITOR TO THE KINGDOME For which facts this King afterwards reprehending and accusing the Lords in Parliament in the 7 th yeare of his Raigne they stoutly answered THAT THEY HAD NOT OFFENDED IN ANY ONE POINT BVT DESERVED HIS ROYAL FAVOVR for they HAD NOT GATHERED FORCE AGAINST HIM though he were in Piers his company assisted countenanced and fled with him BVT AGAINST THE PVBLICKE ENEMIE OF THE REALME Whereupon there were two acts of oblivion passed by the King Lords and Commons assembled in that Parliament Printed in the 2 d Part of old Magna Charta The first that no person on the Kings part should be questioned molested impeached imprisoned and brought to judgement for causing Pierce to returne from Exile or harboring councelling or ayding hiâ—â—ere after his returne The second on the Barons part in these words It is provided by the King and by the Archbishops Bishops Abbots Priors Earles Barâ—s and Commons of the Realme assembled according to our Command and unanimously assented and accorded that none of what estate or condition soever he be shall in time to come be appealed or challenged for the apprehending deteining or death of Peirsde Gaveston nor shall for the said death be apprehended nor imprisoned impeached molested nor grieved nor judgement given against him by us nor by others at our suite nor at the suite of any other either in the Kings Court or elsewhere Which act the King by his Writ sent to the Judges of the Kings Bench commanding that this grant and concord shall be firme and stable in all its points and that every of them should be held and kept in perpetuitie to which end he commands them to cause this act to be there inrolled and firmely kept for ever A pregnant evidence that the Barons taking up Armes then against this Traytor and enemie of the Realme in pursuance of the Act and sentence of Parliament for his banishment though the King were in his company and assisted him all he might was then both by King and Parliament adjudged no Treason nor Rebellion at all in point of Law but a just honorable action Wherefore their taking up Armes is not mentioned in this Act of oblivion seeing they all held it just but their putting Piers to death without legall triall which in strictnesse of Law could not be justified Now whether this be not the Parliaments and kingdomes present case in point of Law who tooke up armes principally at first for defence of their owne Priviledges of Parliament and apprehention of delinquents who seducing the king withdrew him from the Parliament and caused him to raise an Army to shelter themselves under its power against the Parliament let every reasonable man determine and if it be so we see this ancient Act of Parliament resolves it to be no high Treason nor Rebellion nor offence against the King but a just lawfull act for the kings the kingdomes honour and safety Not long after this the two Spensers getting into the kings favour and seducing miscouncelling him as much as Gaveston did the Lords and Barrons hereupon in the 14 th and 15 th yeares of his raigne confederated
them battle but his wisest councellors disswaded him affirming that the King should gaine no benefit if hee vanquished them and should sustaine great dishonour and losse if he were conquered by them In the meane time Hugh Linne an old Souldier who had lost his senses and was reputed a foole comming in to the Councell the King demanded of him in jest what hee should doe against the Nobles met together in the said Parke who answered Let us goe forth and assault them and slay every mothers sonne of them and by the eyes of God this being finished THOU HAST SLAINE ALL THE FAITHFVLL FRIENDS THOU HAST IN THE KINGDOME Which answere though uttered foolishly yet wise men did most of all consider At last is was resolved by the mediators of Peace that the Lords should meete the King at Westminster and there receive an answere to the things for which they tooke Armes thither they came strongly Armed with a great guard for feare of ambuscadoes to intrap them where the Chauncellour in the Kings name spake thus to them My Lords our Lord the King hearing that you were lately assembled at Harenggye Parke in an unusuall manner would not rush upon you as he might have easily done had he not had care of you and those who were with you because no man can doubt if he had raised an Army he would have had many more men than you and pâ—rchance much blood of men had beene spilt which the King doth most of all abhorre and therefore assuming to himselfe patience and mildnesse he hath made choyce to convent you peceably and to tell him the reason why yoy have assâ—mbled so many men To which the Lords answered That THEY HAD MET TOGETHER FOR THE GOOD OF THE KING AND KINGDOME AND THAT THEY MIGHT PVLL AWAY THOSE TRAITORS FROM HIM WHICH HE CONTINVALLY DET AINED WITH HIM The Traytors they appealed were the foresaid ill Councellors and Nicholas Brambre the false London Knight and to prove this appeale of them true casting down their gloves they said they would prosecute it by Duell The King answered This shall not be done now but in the next Parliament with we appoint to be the morrow after the Purification of the blessed Virgin to which as well you as they comming shall receive satisfaction in all things according to Law The Lords for their owne safety kept together till the Parliament and in the meane timed feated the Forces of the Duke of Ireland raised privately by the Kings Command to surprise them The Parliament comming on the 11. yeare of Richard the second these ill councellors were therein by speciall Acts attainted condemned of High Treason and some of them executed and these defensive Armes of the Lords for their owne and the Kingdomes safety adjudged and declared to be no Treason but a thing done to the honour of God and Salvation of the King and his Realme witnesse the expresse words of the Printed Act of 11 R. 2. c. 1. which I shall transcribe Our Soveraigne Lord the King amongst other Petitions and requests to him made by the Commons of his said Realme in the said Parliament hath received one Petition in the forme following The Commons prayed that whereas the last Parliament for cause of the great and horrible mischiefes and perills which another time were fallen BY EVILL GOVERNANCE WHICH WAS ABOVT THE KINGS PERSON by all his time before by Alexander late Archbishop of Yorke Robert de Veere late Duke of Ireland Michael de la Pole late Earle of Suffolk Rober Trisilian late Iustice and Nicholas Brambre Knight with other their adherents and others Whereby the King and all his Realme were very nighâ— to have beene wholly undone and destroyed and for this cause and to eschew such perils and mischiefes for the time to come a certaine statute was made in the same Parliament with a Commission to diverse Lords for the weale honour and safeguard of the King his regalty and of all the Realme the tenour of which Commission hereafter followeth Richard c. as in the Act. And thereupon the said Alexander Robert Mighill Robert and Nicholas and their said adherents seeing that their said evill governance should be perceived and they by the same cause more likely to be punished by good justice to be done and also their evill deedes and purposes before used to be disturbed by the sayd Lords assigned by commission as afore made conspired purposed divers horrible Treasons and evils against the King and the said Lords so assigned and against all the other Lords and Commons which were assenting to the making of the said Ordinance and Commission in destruction of the king his Regalty and all his Realme Whereupon Thomas Duke of Glocester the kings Vncle Richard Earle of Arundle and Thomas Earle of Warwicke perceiving the evill purpose of the sayd Traytors did assemble themselves in forcible manner for the safety of their persons to shew and declare the said Treasons and evill purposes and thereof to set remedie as God would and came to the Kings presence affirming against the said 5. Traytors appealed of High Treason by them done to the King and to his Realme upon which appeale the king our Soveraigne Lord adjourned the said parties till this present Parliament and did take them into his safe protection as in the record made upon the same appeale fully appeareth And afterwards in great Rebellion and against the said protection the said Traytors with their said adherents and others aforesaid continuing their evill purpose some of them assembled a great power by letters and Commission from the King himselfe as Walsingham and others write to have destroyed the said Duke and Earles appellants and other the kings lawfull leige people and to accomplish their Treasons and evill purposes aforesaid Whereupon the said Duke of Glocester Henry Earle of Darby the sayd Earles of Arundell and Warwicke and Thomas Earle Marshall seeing the open Destruction of the King and all his Realme if the said evill purposed Traitors and their adherents were not disturbed which might not otherwise have beene done but with strong hand for the weale and safeguard of the King our Soveraigne Lord and of all his Realme did assemble them forcibly and rove and pursued till they had disturbed the said power gathered by the said Traytors and their adherents aforesaid which five Traytors be attainted this present Parliament of the Treasons and evills aforesaid at the suite and appeale of the said Duke of Glocester Earles of Darby Arundle Warwicke and Marshall That it would please our redoubled Soveraigne Lord the King to accept approve and affirme in this present Parliament all that was done in the last as afore and as much as hath beene done since the last Parliament by force of the statute Ordinance or Commission aforesaid and also All that the said Duke of Glocester Earles of Arundell and Wâ—rwicke did and that the same Duke and Earles and the said Earles of Derby and Marshall or any
violence And his Speech to Pilate after his taking plainely iustifies the lawfulnesse of such a forcible defence with Armes to preserve a mans life from unjust execution Iohn 18. 36 If my Kingdome were of this world Then would my Servants fight in my Defence and Rescue that I should Not be delivered to the Iewes but now my kingdom is not from hence All which considered clearely justifies the Lawfulnesse of resisting the Kings or higher Powers Officers in cases of apparant unjust open violence or assaults and withall answers one grand argument against resistance from our Saviours present Example namely Christ himselfe made no resistance when hee was unjustly apprehended Ergo Christians his Followers Ergo no Kings no Magistrates too as well as Christ the King of Kings and Lord of Lords for they are Christians as well as subjects ought not to make any forcible resistance of open violence Which argument is a meere inconsequent because the reason why Christ resisted not these Pursevants and High Priests Officers was onely that his Fathers decree and the Scriptures foretelling his Passion might be fulfilled as himselfe resolves not because hee deemed resistance Vnlawfull which he even then approved though hee practised it not as these Texts doe fully proove Fourthly The lawfulnesse of a defensive Warre against the invading Forces of a Soveraigne is warranted by the example of the City Abel which stood out and defended it selfe against Ioab Davids Generall and his Forces when they besieged and battered it till they had made their peace with the head of Sheba who fled into it for shelter 2 Sam. 20. 14. to 23. And by that of Ester Ch. 8. 8. to 17. chap 9. 1. to 17. pertinent to this purpose Where Haman having gotten the Kings Decree to be sent unto all Provinces for the utter extirpation of the whole Nation of the Iewes the King after Hamans Execution through Gods great mercy and Mordecaies and Queene Esters diligence to prevent this bloody massacre by their Enemies granted to the Iewes in every City by Letters under his Seale To gather themselves together and to stand for their lives to destroy to slay and to cause to perish all the power of the people and Province That would Assault them both litle ones and women and to take the spoile of them for a prey and that the Iewes should be ready against the day to avenge themselves of their enemies Hereupon when the day that the Kings Commandment and Decree for their extirpation drew neere to be put in execution in the day that the enmies of the Iewes hoped to have power over them the Iewes gathered themselves together in their Cities throughout all the Provinces of King Ahasuerus to lay hand on such as sought their hurt and no man could withstand them for the feare of them fell upon all people And all the Rulers of the Provinces and the Lieutenants Deputies and Officers of the King helped the Iewes because the feare of Mordecai fell upon them So the Iewes smote all their enemies with the stroake of the Sword and slaughter and destruction and did what they would unto those that hated them In the Palace they slew eight hundred men and Hamans tenne sonnes on severall dayes And the other Iewes that were in the Provinces gathered themselves together and Stood for their Lives and had rest from their enemies and slew of their foes seventy and five thousand but they laid not their hands on the prey Loe here a Defensive war justified and granted lawfull by the Kings owne Letters to the Iewes against their enemies who by former Charters from him had Commission wholly to extirpate them Neither had this licence of the King in point of Conscience been lawfull had their defence and resistance of the Kings former Commission been wholly unlawfull And the reason of the Kings grant to them to resist and slay their Enemies that would assault them was not simply because their resistance without it and standing for their lives had beene unlawfull by reason of the Kings first unjust Decree which they ought not in Conscience to submit to without repugnancy But onely to enable the Iewes then Captives and scattered abroad one from another in every Province with more convenience securitie boldnesse and courage now to joyne their forces together to resist their malicious potent enemies to daunt them the more thereby Nature it selfe yea and all Lawes in such a bloody Nationall Butchery as this without any just cause at all both taught and enabled every one of the Iewes to stand for his life his Nations Religions preservation even to the last drop of blood Therefore the Letters of the King did not simply enable them to resist their enemies which they might have done without them but give them Authority to destroy and slay the Wives and little children of their Enemies and to take the spoile of them for a prey which they refused to doe because they deemed it unjust notwithstanding the Kings permission and concession which as to these particulars was illegall and more then hee could justly grant This generall Nationall resistance of Gods own people then of their assaulting cruell Enemies even among Strangers in the land of their Captivity under a forraigne Enemy with the former and other following precedents will questionlesse more then conjecturally prove if not infallibly resolve The lawfulnesse of a necessary Defensive Warre and opposition by free Subiects against their Kings assailing Forces which seekes their ruine though armed with their Kings Commission and that without any Ordinance of Parliament authorising them to resist much more then when enabled to oppose them by Ordinances of both Houses as the Iewes were to resist and slay their enemies by this Kings Letters and Authority Thirdly That kind of resistance which hath no one Text nor Example in Scripture to impeach its lawfulnesse but many Texts and precedents to countenance it must doubtlesse be lawfull in point of Conscience But the resisting of Kings invading pillaging destructive Forces who have nothing to plead to justifie all their Villanies but a void illegall Warrant hath no one Text nor example in Scripture to impeach its lawfulnesse for ought I can finde and if there be any such I wish the Opposites would object it for Rom. 13. as I shall shew hereafter doth no waies contradict but approve it But it hath many Texts and precedents to countenance it as the premises and sequell attest Therefore it must doubtlesse bee-lawfull in point of Conscience Fourthly it is confessed by all men yea those who are most intoxicated with an Anabaptisticall spirit condemning all kind of warre refusing to carry Armes to defend themselves against any Enemies Theeves or Pirates that it is lawfull not onely passively to resist their Kings unlawfull Commands and invading Forces but likewise by flight hiding or other pollicies to evade and prevent their violence which is warranted not onely by Moses Davids and Elijahs
or the Subjects and every man with safe conscience may chearefully serve in such a warre upon the Parliaments encouragement or command without guilt of treason or rebellion either in Law or Conscience For the third Question Whether Tyrants or unjust oppressing Magistrates as they are such be within the intendment of this Text and not to be resisted in any case I have fully cleared this before from the occasion scope and arguments used in this Chapter that they are not within the compasse of this Text as they are such and may be resisted in their Tyranny and oppressions notwithstanding this inhibition I shall not repeat but onely fortifie this Position with some new reasons and authorities First then that which is not the ordinance of God but rather of the Devill and the meere sinne and enormity of the Governour himselfe not of the Government is not within the intention of this Text and may lawfully bee resisted without any violation of it But Tyrants and unjust oppressing Magistrates as they are such are not Gods ordinance but rather the Devills and their Tyranny and oppression is onely the sinne and enormity of the Governours themselves not of the government A truth granted by all men Therefore they are not within the compasse of this Text and may lawfully be resisted without any violation of it Secondly that which is no point of the Magistrates lawfull power ordained of God but diametrally repugnant to it cannot be within the meaning of this Text and may lawfully be resisted but the tyranny oppression rapine and violence of lawlesse Kings and Magistrates are such as all must and doe acknowledge Ergo they are not within the verge and compasse of this Text and may lawfully bee resisted Thirdly all powers intended in the Text are not only ordained but ordered of God that is Paraeus with others observe they are circumscribed bounded with certain Rules or Lawes of justice and honesty within which they must containe themselves else they exorbitate from Gods ordinance when they passe beyond these limits and become none of Gods This the Greeke word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which Arias Montanus and others render ordinatae and the Margin of our English Bibles are ordered of God doth sufficiently warrant being coupled with the subsequent limitations For rulers are not a terrour to good workes but to evill c. they are Gods Ministers attending continually on this very thing Now the Tyranny and oppression of Kings and other Rulers are meere exorbitances arbitrary illegall actions exceeding the bounds of justice and honesty prescribed by the Lawes of God and men Therefore not within the limits of this Text and resistible Fourthly it is generally accorded by all Commentators that though the lawfull power of Princes or other Magistrates degenerating unto Tyrants be of God and not to be resisted yet the Tyranny it selfe and abuse of this power is of Satan not of God and the vice of the persons onely not of the Power it selfe whence they conclude that Tyrants are not within the meaning of this Scripture So Origen Paraeus Willet with most others on this Text and Zuinglius most expresly Explanatio Artic. 41. Tom. 1. f. 82. 83. where he complaines that many Tyrants cheate steale rob slay plunder and attempt any thing against their subjects to oppresse them assuming a pretext and vayle of their malice from this Text of Paul Yea Dominicus Soto Cajetan Pererius and other Popish commentators on this place observe that Paul addes this Epithet of higher or excelling powers omitted by him in other parallel Texts of purpose to exclude Tyrants who are no excelling Lords nor lawfull Powers reigning oft times by Gods permission for the peoples punishment not by his ordination for their good and blame Bueer for saying that Tyrants power is from God as if he were ths author of sinne and Tyranny This then fully answers that absurd errour of Doctor Ferne wherein all his force is placed That the Power in Pauls dayes which he here prohibits to resist were subverters of that which was good and the Roman Emperors Tyrants where he sottishly confounds the tyranny lusts and vices of the Emperors persons which were detestable with their power it selfe which was good and commendable as if the Imperiall power it selfe was ill because Nero was ill and was therefore justly condemned to death by the Roman Senate as a publike enemy to the Roman State though they approved and continued his just Imperiall principality which lasted in succession for many hundred yeares after his censure death To which I shall onely adde that though Nero himselfe were a Tyrant yet the Roman Senate and all their Inferiour Offices were not Tyrants many of them no doubt being just and upright Magistrates The Precept therefore being thus in the generall and the plurall number Let every soule be subject unto the higher powers nor personall let them be subject to Nero or speciall to the Roman Emperour whom Paul no doubt would have specified had he specially intended them as our opposites fondly dreame we may safely conclude that the Apostle intended it onely of lawfull powers and Magistrates not of Nero or other Tyrants And writ this to Christians onely to whom he dedicates this Epistle witnesse Ch. 1. V. 7. To all that be at Rome beloved of God called to be Saints c. not to Pagan Romans as the Doctor dreames to whom he writes not much lesse to the Roman Senate who were then the soveraigne power and therefore could bee subject to no other but themselves Precepts of obedience to children and Servants concerne not parents and masters as such in point of submission or obedience For the fourth Quere Whether Kings and Kingdomes be Gods ordinance or an institution Jure divino not a humane ordinance instituted Jure humano or how farre divine or humane Is a necessary considerable question grounded on this Text and very needfull to be discussed to cleare the present controversie Some of our opposites are so intoxicated with the divinity of Monarchy as they confidently determine hat the efficient cause of royall Monarchicall power is onely God not the people That Kings receive no power or regall Authority from the people but from God alone That the power of Kings is not a humane but a divine power of which God onely is the efficient cause That the people doe not make the King but God properly and absolutely this power right and authority he hath from God That the King hath no dominion and power from his Subjects by way of trust but from God from whom he hath his kingdome and power so that by Idolatry and oppression he breakes not the trust reposed in him by his Subjects because the people HAVE COMMITTED NOTHING TO HIS CHARGE but God onely c. For proofe whereof they produce Prov. 8. 15. By me Kings reigne Dan. 2. 21. God removeth Kings and setteth up Kings Dan. 4. 17. 25. The most
some to be Apostles some Prophets some Evangelists c. So that by their determination Ministers are more Gods Ordinance and more jure Divino then Kings yea but few years since they all professed themselves to be as much if not more Gods anointed then Kings and some of our Archest Prelates made publike challenges in the open Court That if they could not prove their Lordly Episcopacy to be Iure Divino they would presently burn their Rochets and lay down their Bishopricks though they never made good their promises to doubt whether the Pope and his supreme Authoritie be iure Divino by Christs own immediate institution deserves a fagot in the Roman Church Yet notwithstanding all this Divine Right and institution our Opposites will grant That if Popes Archbishops Bishops Priests Ministers preach false Hereticall doctrines oppresse wound slay rob plunder the people committed by God to their cares or attempt with force to subvert Religion Laws Liberties or commit any capitall offences they may not onely with safe conscience be resisted repulsed by their people but likewise apprehended arraigned deprived condemned executed by Lay Iudges as infinite examples in our Histories manifest and the example of Abiathar the High Priest 1 Kings 2. 26 27 And if so then why not Kings as well as they or other temporall Magistrates notwithstanding any of the obiected Texts Either therefore our Opposites must grant all Bishops Priests Ministers yea all other Magistrates whatsoever as irresistable uncensurable undeprivable uncondemnable for any crimes whatsoever as they say kings are which they dare not do or else make Kings as resistable censurable deprivable and lyable to all kindes of punishments by their whole Kingdoms consent in Parliament as far forth as they notwithstanding all the former Objections which quite subverts their cause Thirdly Kings and Kingdoms are not so Gods Ordinance as that they should be universall over all the world and no other Government admitted or so as any one Nation whatsoever should be eternally tyed to a Monarchiall Government without any power to alter it into an Aristocracy or other form upon any occasion or so as unalterably to continue the Soveraign power in one family alone as not to be able to transfer it to another when the whole State shall see just cause Hereditary Kingdoms being but Offices of publike trust for the peoples good and safety as well as elective most of them were elective at first and made hereditary onely either by violent usurpation or the peoples voluntary assents and institution and not by any immediate divine Authority and so alterable by their joynt assents as Zuinglius Buchanon Mariana observe and the Histories of most Kingdoms the experience of all ages evidence Which truths being generally confessed by all Polititians Historians Statists by many judicious Divines contradicted by no one text of Scripture that I have met with which our Opposites have objected hitherto they will finde all Monarchies upon the matter to be meer humane Institutions alterable still by that humane Power which did at first erect them and subordinate still thereto as the Creature to its Creator and to be Gods Ordinance onely in regard of speciall providence and the like as other inferiour Magistrates Rulers are who may be justly resisted altered removed censured notwithstanding the objected Text. From which whiles some men earnestly presse that every soul by Gods own Ordinance ought to be subject to some publike civill power which others safely deny fince the Patriarks the first families of most Nations and Countries were not so and all Nations all people before setled publike governments were erected which in many places are not very ancient since those whose Parents are dead and are not by them subjected to a Government are naturally free and none bound to part with their freedom to any other unlesse they see a necessitie a great advantage and that upon such terms and conditions as they deem meet they involve even Kings and Emperours themselves by Gods own Ordinance in a subiection to a superiour earthly civill power to wit to their Laws Parliaments Kingdoms which I have proved Paramount them collectively considered according to the common proverbe Omne sub Regno graviore Regnum est and that of Solomon concerning oppressing Kings and Judges He that is higher then the Highest considers and there be higher then they And so make kings not onely resistble by their whole Kingdoms the supreme Soveraign power but likewise subiect to their Realms superiour commands and uncapable to resist their lawfull power and Forces even in point of Conscience by vertue of this very Text. And so much for the fourth Question For the fifth and last What kinde of resistance of the Higher powers is here prohibited I answer briefly That resistance is here forbidden which is contrary to subiection or obedience as the words Let every soul be subject to the higher Powers coupled with the ensuing reason Whosoever therefore resisteth that is disobeyeth or is not subiect to the Power resisteth the Ordinance of God and they that resist shall receive to themselves damnation In the Greek there are two distinct words used 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Latine English French Dutch use them both as one without distinction The first word signifies properly disordered counter-ordered or ordered against as Paraeus Willet and others observe and it is thus used by the Apostle 2 Thess 3. 6 7 11 or disobedient 1 Tim. 1. 9. The later word signifieth properly to resist withstand or oppose in which sence it is used Matth. 5. 39. Luke 21. 1 5. Act. 6. 10. Rom. 9. 19. Gal. 2. 11. 2 Tim. 3. 1. Hebr. 12. 4. Iam. 4. 7. chap. 5. 6. 1 Pet. 5. 9. and applied indifferently both to a spirituall corporall and verball resistance of the Holy Ghost the Devill or men Since then the Apostle in this Text useth the Hebrew phrase Soul not Man Let every Soul be subject to the Higher Powers because as Haymo Tollet Willet Soto and most other Interpreters observe we ought willingly and cheerfully to submit to the higher Powers not only with our bodies but soules and spirits too I may hence cleerly inferre that the resistance of the higher Power hee prohibited as contrary to this subjection is not only that which is corporall and violent by force of armes as the Objectors glosse it but that likewise which is verball mentall spirituall in the soule it selfe without the body and no more then a meer passive resistance or not obeying For not to doe what the higher Powers enjoyn is in verity actually to resist to withstand them as not to doe the will not to yeeld obedience to the motions dictates of the Holy Ghost or devill is really to resist them even in Scripture phrase Yea corporall resistance or opposition by way of force is only an higher degree of resistance but not the onely or proper resistance here prohibited which
intending to reduce them to his obedience by force of armes God by his Prophet Shemiah expressely prohibited him and his army to goe up or fight against them and made them all to returne to their owne houses without fighting and to Isay 14. 4. 19. to 22. where God threatens to cast the King of Babilon out of his grave as an abhominable branch as a carcasse trodden under foot marke the reason Because thou hast destroyed thy Land and slaine thy People to cut off from Babylon his name and remembrance and Sonnes and Nephewes as he had cut off his peoples though heathens Yea contrary to that memorable Speech of that noble Roman Valerius Corinus when he was chosen Dictator and went to fight against the Roman conspirators who toke up armes against their Country Fugeris etiam honestius tergumque civi dederis quam pugnaveris contra patriam nunc ad pacificandum bene atque honeste inter primos stabis postulate aequa et ferte quanquam vel iniquis standum est potius quam impias inter nos conseramus manus c. If then a Kings offensive warre upon his Subjects without very just grounds and unevitable occasions be thus utterly sinfull and unlawfull in law and Conscience and most diametrally contrary to the Oath Office trust and duty of a King who by this strange metamorphosis becomes a Wolfe instead of a Shepheard a destroyer in liew of a Protector a publike Enemy in place of a Common friend an unnaturall Tyrant instead of a naturall King it followes inevitably that the Subjects or Kingdomes resistance and defensive warre in such a case both by the law of God of nature of the Realme must be lawfull and just because directly opposite to the only preservative against that warre which is unlawfull and unjust and so no Treason nor Rebellion by any Law of God or man which are illegall and criminall too Eightly It is the received resolution of all Canoniâ—â—s Schoolemen and Civill Lawyers That a defensive warre undertaken onely for necessary defence doth not propâ—ly deserve the nam of warre but onely of Defence That it is no lâ—vying of warre at all which implies an active offenâ—ive not passive defensive raising of forces and so no Treason nor offence within the statute of 25. E. 3. c. 2. as the Parliament the onely proper Iudge of Treasons hath already resolved in point of Law but a faculty onely of defence Cuilibet Omni Iure ipsoque Rationis Ductu Permissa c. permitted to every one By all Law or right and by the very conduct of reason since to propulse violence and iniury is permitted by the very Law of Nations Hence of all the seven sorts of warre which they make they define the last to be A just and Necessary War quod fit se et sua defendendo and that those who dâ—e is such a war caeteris paribus are safe Causa 23. qu. 1. and if they be slaine for defence of the Common-wealth their memory shall live in perpetuall glory And hence they give this Definition of a just Warre Warre is a Lawfull Defence against an imminent or praeceeding offence upon a publike or private cause concluding That if Defence be severed from Warre it is a Sedition not Warre Although the Emperour himselfe denounce it Yea although the whole World combined together Proclaime it For the Emperour a King can no more lawfully hurt another in Warre then he can take away his goods or life without cause Therefore let Commentatoâ—s bâ—awle eternally about Warre yet they shall never justifie nor prove it lawfull Nisi ex Defensione Legitima but when it proceeds from Lawfull defence all Warres being rash and unjust against those who justly defend themselves This Warre then being undertaken by the Parliament onely for their owne and the Kingdomes necessary defence against the Kings invasive Armies and Cavalliers especially now after the Kings rejection of all Honourable and safe termes of Peace and accommodation tendered to him by the Parliament must needs be just and lawfull and so no Treason nor Rebellion in point of Law or Conscience Since no Law of God nor of the Realme hath given the King any Authority or Commission at all to make this unnaturall Warre upon his Parliament his people to enslave their Soules and Bodies or any inhibition to them not to defend themselves in such a case These generall Considerations thus premised wherein Law and Conscience walke hand in hand I shall in the next place lay downe such particular grounds for the justification of this Warre which are meerely Legall extracted out of the bowels of our knowne Lawes which no professors of them can contradict First it is unquestionable that by the Common and Statute Law of the Land the King himselfe who cannot lawfully proclaime Warre against a Forraigne Enemy much lesse against his people without his Parliaments previous assent as I have elsewhere proved cannot by his absolute Soveraigne Prerogative either by verball Commands or Commissions under the great Seale of England derive any lawfull or just Authority to any Generall Captaine Cavalliers or person whatsoever without Legall Triall and Conviction to seize the Goods or Chattels of any his Subjects much lesse forcecibly to Rob Spoile Plunder Wound Beat Kill Imprison or make open War upon them without a most just and in vitable occasion and that after open kostilitij denounced against them And if any by vertue of such illegal Commissions or Mandats Assault Plunder Spoile Rob Beat Wound Slay Imprison the Goods Chattels Houses Persons of any Subject not lawfully convicted They may and ought to be proceeded against resisted apprehended indicted condemned for it notwithstanding such Commissions as Trespassers Theeves Burglarers Felons Murderers both by Statute and Common Law As is clearely enacted and resolved by Magna Charta cap. 29. 15. E. 3. Stat. 1. cap. 1. 2. 3. 42. E. 3. cap. 1. 3. 28. E. 1. Artic. super Chartas cap. 2. 4 E. 3. c. 4. 5. E. 3. cap. 2. 24. E. 3. cap. 1. 2 R. 2 cap. 7. 5 R. 2 ca 5. 1. H. 5. cap. 6. 11. R. 2. cap. 1. to 6. 24 H. 8. cap. 5. 21. Jacob. c. 3. Against Monopolies The Petition of Right 3. Caroli 2. E. 3. c. 8. 14. E. 3. ca. 14. 18. E. 3. Stat. 3. 20. E. 3. cap. 1. 2. 3. 1. R 2. cap. 2. And generally all Satutes against Purveyers 42. Ass Pl. 5. 12. Brooke Commissions 15. 16. Fortesoue c p. 8. 9. 10. 13. 14. 26. 1. E. 3. 2. 2. H. 4. 24. Br. Faux Jmprisonment 30. 28. 22. E. 4 45. a Tr. 16. H. 6. Monstrans de Faits 182 Stamford lib. 1. fol. 13. a. 37. a. The Conference at the Committies of both Houses 3 o. Aprilis 4 o. Caroli concerning the Right and Priviledge of the Subject newly Printed Cooke lib. 5. fol. 50. 51. lib. 7. fol. 36. 37. lib. 8. fol. 125. to 129. Iudge Crooks and Huttons Arguments against Shipmoney with divers
other Law-Bookes Therefore the Cavalliers can no waies justifie nor excuse their Wounding Murthering Imprisoning Assaulting Robbing Pillaging and spoiling of his Majesties people and Subjects and making Warre upon them by vertue of any Warrant or Commission from the King but may justly and legally be apprehended resisted and proceeded against as Murtherers Rebels Robbers Felons notwithstanding any pretended Royall Authority to countenance their execrable unnaturall proceedings Secondly It is irrefragable that the Subjects in defence of their own Persons Houses Goods Wives Families against such as violently assault them by open force of Armes to wound slay beate imprison robbe or plunder them though by the Kings own illegall Commission may not onely lawfully arme themselves and fortifie their houses their Castles in Iudgement of Law against them but refist apprehend disarme beat wound repulse kill them in their just necessary defence not onely without guilt of Treason or Rebellion but of Tresspas or the very least offence And Servants in such Cases may lawfully justifie not onely the beating but killing of such persons who assault their Masters persons goods or houses as is expresly resolved by the Statute of 21. E. 1. De malefactoribus in Parcis By 24. H. 8. cap. 5. Fitzherbert Corone 192. 194. 246. 258. 261. 330. 21. H. 7 39. Trespas 246. Stamford lib. 1. cap. 5. 6. 7. 22. Ass 46. 11. H. 6. 16. a. 14. H. 6. 24. b. 35. H. 6. 51. a. 9. E. 4. 48. b. 12. E. 4. 6. a. 12. H. 8. 2. b. Brooke Coron 63. Trispas 217. Therefore they may justly defend themselves resist oppose apprehend and kill his Majesties Cavalliers notwithstanding any Commissions and make a defensive Warre against them when as they assault their persons houses goods or habitations without any Treason Rebellion or Crime all against the King or Law Thirdly It is past dispute That the Sheriffes Iustices of Peace Mayors Constables and all other Officers of the Realme may and ought by our Lawes and Statutes to raise the power of the Counties and places where they live and command all persons to arme themselves to assist them upon their Command when they see just cause which commands they are all bound to obey under paine of imprisonment and fines for their contemptuous disobediene herein to suppresse and withstand all publicke breaches of the Peace Riots Routs Robberies Fraies Tumults Forcible Entries and to apprehend disarme imprison and bring to condigne punishment all Peace-breakers Riotors Trespassers Robbers Plunderers Quarrellers Murtherers and Forces met together to doe any unlawfull-Hostile act though by the Kings owne precept and in case they make resistance of their power they may lawfully kill and slay them without crime or guilt if they cannot otherwise suppresse or apprehend them yea the Sheriffes and all other Officers may lawfully raise and arme the power of the County to apprehend Delinquents by lawfull Warrants from the Parliament or Processe out of other inferiour Courts of Iustice when they contemptuously stand out against their Iustice and will not render themselves to a Legall triall in which service all are bound by Law to assist these Officers who may lawfully slay such contemptuous Offenders in case they cannot otherwise apprehend them All which is Enacted and Resolved by 19. E. 3. cap. 38. 3. Ed. 1. cap. 5. 2. R. 2. cap. 6. 5. R. 2. cap. 5. 6. 7. R 2. cap. 6. 17. R. 2. cap. 8. 13. H. 4. cap 7. 1. H. 5. cap. 6. 2. H. 5. cap. 6. 8. 19. H. 7. cap. 13. 3. E. 6. cap. 5. 1. Mar. cap. 12. 31. H. 6. cap. 2. 19. E. 2. Fitz Execution 247. 8. H. 4. 19. a 22. Ass 55. 3. H. 7. fol. 1. 10. 5. H. 7. fol. 4. Register fâ— 59. 60. 61. Fitz. Coron 261. 288. 289. 328. 346. Stamford lib. 1. cap. 5. 6. Cooke lib. 5. fol. 92. 9. 3. with sundry other Bookes and Acts of Parliament and Walsingham Hist Angliae pag. 283. 284. Yea the Statute of 13. Ed. 1. cap. 38. recites That such resistance of Processe out of any the Kings Courts much more then out of the Highest Court of Parliament redounds much to the dishonour of the King and his Crowne and that such resisters shall be imprisoned and fined because they are desturbers of the Kings Peace and of his Realme And the expired Statute of 31. H. 6. cap. 2. Enacted That if any Duke Marquesse Earle Viscount or Baron complained of for any great Riots Extortions Oppressioâ—s or any offence by them done against the Peace and Lawes to any of the Kings Liege-people should refuse to obey the Processe of he Kings Court under his Great or-privie Seale to him directed to answer his said offenes either by refusing to receive the said Processe or dispiting it on withdrawing himselfe fâ—r that cause and not appearing after Proclamation made by the Sheriffe in the County at the day prescribed by the Proclamation that then hee should for this his contempt forfeit and lose all his Offices Fees Annuities and other Possessions that he or any man to his use hath of the gift or grant of the King or any of his Progenitors made to him or any of his Ancestors And in case he appeares not upon the second Proclamation on the day-therein to him limited that then he shall lose and forfeit his Estate and place in Parliament and also All the Lands and Tenements whâ—ch he hath or any other to his use for terme of his life and all other persons having no Lands not appearing after Proclamation were to be put out of the Kings Protection by this Act. Such a hemous offence was it then reputed to disobey the Processe of Chancery and other inferiour Courts of Iustice even in the greatest Peeres how much greater crime then is and must it be contemptuously to disobey the Summons Processe and Officers of the Parliament it selfe the supremest Court of Judicature especially in those who are Members of it and stand engaged by their Prostestations trusts and Places in it to maintaine its honour power and priviledges to the uttermost which many of them now exceedingly vilifie and trample under feete and therefore deserve a severer censure then this statute inflicts even such as the Act of 21. R. 2. c. 6. prescribed to those Nobles unjustly fore-judged in that Parliament That their issues males now begotten shall not come to the Parliaments nor to the Councells of the King nor his heires nor be of the Kings Counsell nor of his heires Therefore it is undubitable that the Sherifes Iustices of Peace Majors Constables Leivtenantes Captaines and other Officers in every County through the Realme may by their owne Authority much more by an Ordinance and Act of association of both houses raise all the power of the County all the people by vertue of such commands may lawfully meete together in Armes to suppresse the riots burglaries rapines plunders butcheries spoyling robberies and armed violence of his Majesties Cavaleers and apprehend imprison slay arraigne
execute them as common enemies to the kingdomes peace and welfare even by the knowne Common Law and Statutes of the Realme and seife Delinquents notwithstanding any royall Commission or personal commands they may or can produce Fourthly it is most certaine that every Subject by the very Common Law of the Realm yea Law of Nature as he is a member of the State and Church of England is bound both in duty and conscience when there is necessary occasion to Array and Arme himselfe to resist the invasions and assaults of open enemies of the Realme especially of Forraigners as is cleare by infinite * Presidents cited by the Kings owne Councell and recited by Judge Crooke in his Argument concerning Ship-money in both the Houses two Remonstrances and Declarations against the Commission of Array and the Answer of the first of them in the Kings name all newly Printed to which I shall referre the Reader for fuller Satisfaction and by the expresse statutes of 1 E. 3. c. 5. 25. E. 3. c. 8. and 4. H. 4. c. 13. The reason is from the Originall compact and mutuall stipulation of every member of any Republicke State or Society of men for mutuall defence one of another upon all occasions of invasion made at their first association and incorporation into a Republike state kingdome Nation of which we have a pregnant example Iudg. 20. 1. to 48. If then the King himselfe shall introduce forraigne Forces and enemies into his Realme to levie war against it or shall himself become an open enemie to it the Subjects are obleiged by the self-same reason law equity especially upon the Parliaments command to Arm themselves to defend their Native Country Kingdome against these forraigne and domesticke Forces and the King himselfe if he joyne with them as farre forth as they are bound to doe it upon the Kings own Writ and Commission in case he joyned with the Parliament and Kingdome against them the necessary defence and preservation of the Kingdome and themselves and of the King onely so farre forth as he shewes himselfe a King and Patron not an enemie of his Kingdome and Subjects being the sole ground of their engagement in such defensive warres according to this notable resolution of Cicero Omnium Societatum nulla est gratior nulla carior quà m ea quae cum Republica est unicuique nostrum Cari sunt pareâ—tes cariliberi propinqui familiares SED OMNES OMNIVM CARITATES PATRIA VNA COMPLEXA EST pro qua quis bonus dubit tâ—mortem oppetere si ei sit prosuturus Qâ—o est detestabilior illorum immanitas qui lacerant omni scelere Patriam nâ—a sunditus delenda occupati sunt fuerunt and seeing kings themselves as well as Subjects are bound to hazard their lives for the preservation of their Kingdomes and peoples safeti and not to endanger the ruine of the Kingdome and people to preserve their owne lives and prerogatives as I have elsewhere manifested it cannot be denyed but that every Subject when the King is unjustly divided against his Kingdome Parliament and People is mere obleiged to joyne with the kingdome Parliament and his Native dearest Countrey who are most considerable against the King than with the king against their and rather in such a case than any other because there is lesse neede of helpe and no such danger of ruine to the whole Realme and Nation when the King joynes with them against forraigne invading enemies as there is when the king himselfe becomes an open intestine Foe unto them against his Oath and Daty and the Peoples safety being the Supremest Law the Houses of Parliament the most Soveraigne Authoritie they ought in such unhappie cases of extremitie and division to oversway all Subjects to contribute their best assistance for their necessary just defence even against the king himself and all his Partisans who take up Hostile Armes against them and not to assist them to ruine their owne Country Kingdome Nation as many as now over-rashly do Fifthly I conceive it cleare Law that if the King himselfe or his Courtiers with him shall wrongfully assault any of his Subjects to wound rob or murther them without just cause that the subjects without any guilt of Treason or Rebellion may not onely in their owne defense resist the King and his Courtiers assaults in such a case and hold their hands as Doctor Ferne himselfe accords but likewise close with and disarme them and if the King or his Courtiers receive any blowes wounds in such a case or be casually slaine it is neither Treason nor Murder in the Defendants who had no Treasonable nor murtherous intention at all in them but onely endeavoured their own just defence attempting nothing at all against the kings lawful Royall authority as is cleare by all Law Cases of man slaughter se defendends and to put this out of question I shall cite but two or three cases of like Nature It hath been very frequent with the Kings of England France and other Princes for triall of their man hood to runne at Iousts and fight at Barriers not onely with forraigners but with their owne valiantest Lâ—rds and Knights of which there are various Examples In these Martiall disports by the very Law of Armâ—s these Subjects have not onely defended themselves against their kings assaults and blowes but retorted lance for lance stroke for stroke and sometimes unborsed disarmed and wounded their Kings our King Henry the eight being like to be slaine by the Earle of Suffolke at a Tilting in the 16. yeare of his reigne and no longer since then the yeare 1559. Henry the 2 d King of France was casually slaine in a loust by the Earle of Mountgommery his Subject whom hee commanded to Iust one bout more with him against his will whose Speare in the counter-blow ran so right into one of the Kings eyes that the shivers of it peirced into his head perished his braine and slew him yet this was Iudged no Treason Fellony nor offence at all in the Earle who had no ill intention If then it hath ever beene reputed lawfull and honourable for Subiects in such militarie exercises upon the challenges of their kings to defend themselves couragiously against their assaults and thus to fight with and encounter them in a martiall manner though there were no necessity for them to answer such a challenge and the casuall wounding or slaying of the King by a Subiect in such a case be neither Treason nor Fellony then much more must it be lawfull by the Law of Armes Nature and the kingdome for the Parliament and subjects in a necessary just unavoydable warre to defend resist repulse the kings and his Cavaleers-personall assaults and returne them blow forblow shot for shot if they will wilfully invade them and if the king or any of his Forces miscarry in this action they must like King Henry the 8 th when endangered by
tilting blame themselves aloâ—e and have no other just legall remedie but patience it being neither Treason Rebellion nor Murther in the defensive party and most desperate folly and frenzie in any Prince to engage himselfe in such a danger when beneede not doe it I reade of Charles the first of France that he fell sodainely destracted upon a message he recâ—ived from an old poore man as he was marching in the head of his Army and thereupon thinking himselfe bâ—trayâ—d encountred his owne men and slew two or three of them ere they were ware of him woâ—nding others Whereupon they closing with him disâ—rmed and led him away foâ—ceably keeping him close shut up like à Bedlaâ— till he recovered his sensâ—s I thinke no man in his right wits will deeme this their action Treasonable or unlawfull neither did the king or any in that age thus repute it If then a King in an angry franticke passion for Ir. brevius furor est shall take up Armes against his loyall Subjects and assault their persons to murther them and spoyle their goods if they by common consent in Parliament especially shall forcibly resist disarme or restraine his person till his fury be appeased and his judgement rectified by better councells shall this be Treason Rebellion or Disloyaltie God forbid I thinke none but mad men can or will averte it It was a great doubt in Law till the statute of 33. H. 8. c. 20. setled it If a party that had committed any high Treasons when he was of perfect memory after accusation examination and confession thereof became madde or lunaticke whether he should bâ— tried and condemned for it during this distemper And some from that very act and 21. H. 7. 31. 36. Ass 27. 12. H. 3. For faiture 33 and Dower 183. Fitz. Nat. Br. 202. D. Stamford Pleas 16. b. and Cooke l. 4. f. 124. Beverlyes case which resolve â—hat a Lunaticke or Non Compos cannot be guilty of murtheâ— fel nâ—y â—â—petite Treason because having no understanding and knowing not what he doth he can â—ave nâ— follonius intention conceive that a reall mad-man cannot be guilty of high Treason though Sir Edward Cooke in Bevâ—rlies case be of a contrary opinion if he should assault or kill his king And I suppose few will deeme Walter Terrils casuall killing of King William Rufus with the glance of his arrow from a tree shot at a Deere high Treason neither was it then reputed so or he prosecuted as a Traytor for it because he had no malicious intention as most thinke against the King or any thought to hurt him But I conceive it out of question if a king in a distracted furious passion without just cause shall invade his subjects persons in an open hostile manner to destroy them it neither is nor can be Treason ner Rebellion in them if in their owne necessary defence alone they shall either casually wound or slay him contrary to their loyall intentions and those Statutes and Law-bookâ—s which judge it high Treason for any one maliciously and trayterously to imagine compasse or conspire the death of the King will not at all extend to such a case of meere just defence since a conspiracie or imagination to compasse or procure the Kings death can neither be justly imagined nor presumed in those who are but meerely defensive no more then in other common cases of one mans killing another in his owne inevitable defence without any precedent malice in which a Pardon by Law is granted of course however questionlesse it is no Treason nor murther at all to slay any of the kings souldiers and Cavaliers who are no kings in such a defensive warre Sixthly suppose the King should be captivated or violently led away by any forraign or domesticke enemies to him and the kingdome and carried along with them in the field to countenance their warres and invasions upon his loyallest Subjects by illegall warrants or Commissions fraudulently procured or extorted from him If the Parliament and Kingdome in such a case should raise an Army to rescue the King out of their hands and to that end encountring the enemies should casually wound the King whiles they out of loyalty sought onely to rescue him I would demaund of any Lawyer or Divine whether this Act should be deemed Treason Rebellion or Disloyalty in the Parliament or army Or which of the two Armies should in point of Law or Conscience be reputed Rebells or Traytors in this case those that come onely to rescue the King and so fight really for him indeed though against him in shew and wound him in the rescue Or those who in shew onely fought for him that they might still detaine him captive to their wills Doubtlesse there is no Lawyer nor Theologue but would presently resolve in such a case that the Parliaments Army which fought onely to rescue the King were the loyall Subjects and the Malignants army who held him captive with them the onely Rebels and traytors and that the casuall wounding of him proceeding not out of any malicious intention but love and loyalty to redeeme him from captivity were no trespasse nor offence at all being quite besides their thoughts and for a direct president It was the very case of King Henry the third who together with his sonne Prince Edward being taken Prisoner by the Earle of Leycester in the battle of Lewis and the Earle afterwards carrying him about in his Company in nature of a Prisoner to countenance his actions to the great discontent of the Prince the Earle of Glocester and other Nobles hereupon the Prince and they raising an Army encountred the Earle and his Porces in a battle at Eveshaâ— where the King was personally present slew the Earle Routed his Army and rescued the king in this cruell battell the king himselfe being wounded unawares with a Iavelin by those who rescued him was almost slaine and lost much of his blood yet in a Parliament soone after sommoned at Winchester Anno 1266. the Earle and his Army were dis-inherited as Traytors and Rebels but those who rescued them though with danger to his person rewarded as his loyall subjects And is not this the present case A company of malignant ill Councellors Delinquents Prelates Papists have withdrawne his Majestie from his Parliament raised an Army of Papists Forraigners Delinquents and Male-contents to ruin the Parliament Kingdome Religion Lawes Liberties to countenance this their designe they detaine his Majestie with them and engage him all they can on their side the Parliament out of no disloyall intention but onely to rescue his Majesties person out of their hands to apprehend delinquents preserve the Kingdome from spoyle and defend their Priviledges Persons Liberties estates religion from unjust invasions have raised a defensive Army which encountred these Forces at Edgehill where they say the King was present slew the Lord Generall Earle of Lindsey with many others and as they never intended so they
he offered to render unto him his Kingdome and to hold the same by tribute from him as his Soveraigne Lord to forgoe the Christian Faith as vaine and to receive that of Mahomet imploying Thomas Hardington and Ralph Fitz-Nicholas Knights and Robert of London Clerke Commissioners in this negotiation whose manner of accesse to this great King with the delivery of their Message and King Johns Charter to that effect are at large recited in Mathew Paris who heard the whole relation from Robert one of the Commissioners Miramumalim having heard at large their Message and the Description of the King and Kingdome governed by an annointed and Crowned King knowne of old to be free and ingenuous ad nullius praeterquam Dei spectans dominationem with the nature and disposition of the people so much disdained the basenesse and impiety of the Offerer that fetching a deepe sigh from his heart he answered I have never read nor heard of any King possessing so prosperous a Kingdome subject and obedient to him who would thus willingly ruine his Principality as of free to make it tributary of his owne to make it anothers of happy to make it miserable and to submit himself to anothers pleasure as one conquered without a wound But I have heard and read of many who with effusion and losse of much blood which was laudable have procured liberty to themselves modo autem audio quod Dominus vester miser deses imbellis qui nullo nullior est de libero servus fieri desiderat qui omnium mortalium miserrimus est After which he said That the King was unworthy of his Confederacie and looking on the two Knights with a sterne countenance he commanded them to depart instantly out of his presence and to see his face no more whereupon they departing with shame hee charged Robert the Clerke to informe him truely what manner of person King Iohn was who replied That he was rather a Tyrant then a King rather a Subverter then a Governour a Subverter of his owne Subjects and a Fosterer of Strangers a Lyon to his owne Subjects a Lambe to Aliens and Rebels who by his sloathfulnesse had lost the Dutchy of Normandy and many other Lands and moreover thirsted to lose and destroy the Kingdome of England An unsatiable Extortioner of money an invader and destroyer of the possessions of his naturall people c. When Miramumalim heard this he not onely despised as at first but detested and accursed him and said Why doe the miserable English permit such a one to raigne and domineer over them Truely they are effeminate and flavish To which Robert answered the English are the most patient of all men untill they are offended and damnified beyond measure But now they are angry like a Lion or Elephant when he perceives himselfe hurt or bloody and though late they purpose and endeavour to shake the yoake of the Oppressor from their necks which lie under it Whereupon he reprehended the overmuch patience and fearefulnesse of the English and dismissed these Messengers who returning and relating his Answer to King Iohn he was exceeding sorrowfull and in much bitternesse of Spirit that he was thus contemned and disapointed of his purpose Yet persisting in his pre-conceived wicked designe to ruine his Kingdome and people and hating all the Nobility and Gentry of England with a viperous Venom he sets upon another course and knowing Pope Jnnocent to be the most ambitious proud and covetous of all men who by gifts and promises would be wrought upon to act any wickednesse Thereupon he hastily dispatcheth messengers to him with great summes of Money and a re-assurance of his tributary Subjection which shortly after he confirmed by a new Oath and Charter to procure him to Excommunicate the Archbishop of Canterbury and the Barons whom he had formerly favoured which things he greedily desired that he might wrecke has malice an them by Dis inheriting Imprisoning and Spoiling them being Excommunicated Which things when he had wickedly plotted he more wickedly executed afterwards In the meane time the Barons foreseeing that nothing was to be obtained but by strong hand assemble an Army at Stamford wherein were said to be two thousand Knights besides Esquires and marched from thence towards Oxford where the King expected their comming to answer their demands And being come to Brackley with their Army the King sends the Earle of Pembroke Mariscall and the Archbishop of Canterbury with others to demand of them what were those Lawes and Liberties they required to whom they shewed a Schedule of them which the Commissioners delivered to the King who having heard them read in great indignation asked Why the Barons did not likewise demand the Kingdome and swore he would never grant those Articles whereby himselfe should be made a Servant So harsh a thing is it to a power that is once gotten out into the wide libertie of his will to heare againe of any reducing within his Circle Vpon this answer the Barons resolve to seize the Kings Castles constitute Robert Fitz-walter their Generall entituling him Mariscall of the ARMY of GOD and of HOLY CHVRCH A Title they would never have given their Generall or Army had they deemed this Warre unlawfull in Law or Conscience After which they tooke divers of the Kings Castles and are admitted into London where their number daily increasing they make this Protestation Never to give over the prosecution of their desire till they had constrained the King whom they held perjured to grant them their Rights Which questionlesse they would not have done had they not beleeved this Warre to be just and lawfull King Iohn seeing himselfe in a manner generally forsaken of all his people and Nobles having scarce 7. Knights faithfull to him another strong argument that the people and Kingdome generally apprehended this taking up armes against the King to regaine to preserve their hereditary Rights and Liberties to be lawfull counterfeits the Seales of the Bishops and writes in their Names to all Nations That the English were all Apostates and whosoever would come to invade them hee by the Popes consent would conferre upon them all their Lands and Possossions But this device working no effect in regard they gave no credit to it and found it apparently false the King seeing himselfe deserted of all and that those of the Barons part were innumerable cum tota Angliae Nobilitas in unum collecta quasi sub numero non cadebat writes Mathew Paris another argument of the justice of this cause and warre in their beliefes and consciences at last condescended to grant and confirme their Liberties which he did at Running-Meade in such sort as I have formerly related And though the Pope afterwards for his owne private ends and interest bribed by King Iohn who resigned his Kingdome to him and became his Vassall without his peoples consent which resignation was judged voide excommunicated the Barons withall their assistance Qui Iohaâ—nem illustrum Regim
the King had entred my Land and so I did injurie to the King for which I ought to implore his mercie least others should take example thence to raise up Armes against the King I answer that I was not there in person and if any of my Family were thereby chance they invaded onely the Family of the King not the person of the King which yet if they had done it were no wonder seeing the king came with his Army into my Land that he might invade me and oppresse me by all the meanes he could which may appeare to all by the tenor of his Letters by which hee made a generall assembly throughout England against my Army And since the premises objected against mee are false and it is true that the King hath treated me worse since the time I expected his mercy then any time before and doth yet use the same Counsell as then and since he endeavours precisely to follow their Counsels in all things by whose advise I suffer all the premised grievances I ought not to prostitute my selfe to his mercy Neither would this be for the Kings honour that I should consent unto his will which is not grounded upon reason Yea I should doe an injury to him and to Iustice which he ought to use towards his Subjects and to maintaine And I should give an ill example to all by deserting Iustice and the prosecution of right for an erronious will against all Iustice and the injury of the Subjects For by this it would appeare that we loved our worldly possessions more then Iustice it selfe And whereas the Kings Counsellours object that wee have combined with the Kings capitall enemies namely the French Scots Welsh out of hatred and dammage to king and kingdome That of the French is altogether false and that of the Scots and Welsh too excepting the king of Scots and Leoline Prince of Northwales who were not the kings enemies but faithfull friends untill by injuries offered them by the King and his Counsell they were by coertion against their wills alienated from their fidelitie as I am And for this cause I am confederated with them that we may the better being united then separated regaine and defend our rights of which we are unjustly deprived and in a great part spoiled Whereas the Kings Counsell propose that I ought not to confide in my Confederates because the King without any great hurt to his Land can easily separate them from my friendship Of this I make no great doubt but by this the iniquity of his Counsellors doth most of all appeare that in some sort they would cause the King to sustaine losse by those whom he specially calls capitall enemies to injure mee who have alwaies beene his faithfull Subject whiles I remained with him and yet would be so if he would restore to me and my friends our right Whereas the said Counsellors say that the Pope and Church of Rome doe specially love the King and kingdome and will Excommunicate all his adversaries which thing is even at the dores because they have already sent for a Legate It pleaseth mee well said the Marshall because the more they love the King and Kingdome by so much the more will they desire that the King should treat his Realme and Subjects according to justice And I am well pleased they should excommunicate the adversaries of the Kingdome because they are those who give Counsell against Iustice whom workes will manifest because Iustice and Peace have kissed each other and because of this where Iustice is corrupted Peace is likewise violated Also I am pleased that a Legate is comming because the more discreet men shall heare our justice by so much the more vilely shall the adversaries of Iustice be confounded In which notable discourse we see the lawfullnesse of a necessary defensive Warre yeelded and justified both by the King his Counsell and the Earle Marshall as well against the King himselfe if he invade his Subjects first as any of his Forces who assist him After which the Marshall slew many of his Enemies by an Ambuscado while they thought to surprise him and wasted and spoiled their goods houses lands observing this generall laudable rule which they made to doe no hurt nor ill to any one but to the Kings evill Counsellors by whom they were banished whose goods houses woods Orchards they spoiled burnt and rooted up The King remaining at Glocester heard of these proceedings of the Marshall but his forces being too weake he durst not encounter him but retired to Winchester with Bishop Peter confounded with over much shame leaving that Country to be wasted by his adversaries where innumerable carcases of those there slaine lay naked and unburied in the wayes being food to the beasts and birds of prey a sad spectacle to passengers which so corrupted the ayre that it infected and killed many who were healthy Yet the Kings heart was so hardned by the wicked councell he followed against the Marshall that the Bishops admonishing him to make peace with him WHO FOVGHT FOR IVSTISE he answered that he would never make peace with him unlesse comming with an halter about his necke and acknowledging himselfe to be a Traytor he would implore his mercy The Marshall both in England and Ireland professed that he was no Traytor that his warre being but defensive was just immutabiliter affirmant quod liâ—uit sibi de jure quod suum crat repetere posse Regis Consiliorum suorum modis omnibus quibus poterat infirmare William Rishanger in his continuation of Matthew Paris speaking of the death of Simon Monfort Earle of Leycester slaine in the Battle of Evâ—sham the greatest Pillar of the Barrons warres useth this expression Thus this magnificent Earle Symon ended his labors who not onely bestowed his estate but his person also for releiefe of the oppression of the poore for the asserting of Iustice and the right of the Realme he was commendably skilfull in learning a dayly frequenter of divine Offices constant in word severe in countenance most confiding in the prayers of Religious persons alwayes very respectfull to Ecclesiasticall persons He earnestly adheared to Robert Grosthead Bishop of Lincolne and committed his children to his education By his advise he handled difficult things attempted doubtfull things concluded things begun specially such things whereby he thought he might gaine desert Which Bishop was said to have enjoyned him as he would obtaine remission of his sinnes that he should undertake this cause for which he contended even unto death affirming that the peace of the Church of England could never be established but by them materiall sword and constantly averring THAT ALL WHO DIED FOR IT WERE CROWNED WITH MARTYRDOME Some say that this Bishop on a time laying his hand on the head of the Earles eldest sonne said unto him O most deare sonne thou and thy father shall both dye on one day and with one hand of death YET FOR JUSTICE AND TRVTH Fame
the honour of God the Salvation of the King for if the Kingdome perish or miscarry the king as king must needs perish with it the maintenance of his Crowne supported onely by the maintenance of the kingdomes welfare and the Salvation and common profit of all the Realm and this being one of the first solemne judgements if not the very first given in Parliament after the making of the statute of 25 E. 3. which hath relation to its clause of levying war must certainely be the best exposition of that Law which the Parliament onely ought to interpret as is evident by the statute of 21. R. 2. c. 3. It is ordained and stablished that every man which c. or he that raiseth the people and riseth against the King to make warre within his Realme and of that be duly attainted and judged in the Parliament shall be judged as a Traytor of High Treason against the Crowne and other forecited Acts and if this were no Treason nor Rebellion nor Trespasse in the Barons against the king or kingdome but a warre for the honour of God the salvation of the king the maintenance of his Crowne the safety and common profit of all the Realme much more must our Parliaments present defensive warre against his Majesties ill Councellors Papists Malignants Delinquents and men of desperate fortunes risen up in Armes against the Parliament Lawes Religion Liberties the whole Kingdomes peace and welfare be so too being backed with the very same and farre better greater authority and more publike reasons then their warre was in which the safety of Religion was no great ingredient nor the preservation of a Parliament from a forced dissolution though established and perpetuated by a publike Law King Henry the 4 th taking up Armes against King Richard and causing him to be Articled against and judicially deposed in and by Parliament for his Male-administration It was Enacted by the Statute of 1. Hen 4. cap. 2. That no Lord Spirituall nor Temporall nor other of what estate or condition that he be which came with King Henry into the Realme of England nor none other persons whatsoever they be then dwelling within the same Realme and which came to this King in aide of him to pursue them which were against the Kings good intent and the COMMON PROFIT OF THE REALME in which pursuit Richard late King of England the second after the Conquest was pursued taken and put in Ward and yet remaineth in Ward be impeached grieved nor vexed in person nor in goods in the Kings Court nor in none other Court for the pursuites of the said King taking and with-holding of his body nor for the pursuits of any other taking of persons and cattells or of the death of a man or any other thing done in the said pursuite from the day of the said King that now is arived till the day of the Coronation of Our said Soveraigne Lord Henry And the intent of the King is not that offendors which committed Trespasses or other offences out of the said pursuits without speciall warrant should be ayded nor have any advantage of this Statute but that they be thereof answerable at the Law If those then who in this offensive Warre assisted Henry the 4 th to apprehend and depose this persidious oppressing tyrannicall king seduced by evill Counsellors and his owne innate dis-affection to his naturall people deserved such an immunity of persons and goods from all kinds of penalties because though it tended to this ill kings deposition yet in their intentions it was really for the common profit of the Realme as this Act defines it No doubt this present defensive Warre alone against Papists Delinquents and evill Counsellors who have miserably wasted spoiled sacked many places of the Realme and fired others in a most barbarous maner contrary to the Law of Armes and Nations and labour to subvert Religion Laws Liberties Parliaments and make the Realm a common Prey without any ill intention against his Majesties Person or lawfull Royall Authority deserves a greater immunity and can in no reasonable mans judgement be interpreted any Treason or Rebellion against the king or his Crowne in Law or Conscience In the 33. yeare of king Henry the 6 th a weake Prince wholly guided by the Queene and Duke of Somerset who ruled all things at their wills under whose Government the greatest part of France was lost all things went to ruine both abroad and at home and the Queene much against the Lords and Peoples mindes preferring the Duke of Sommerset to the Captain ship of Calice the Commons and Nobility were greatly offended thereat saying That he had lost Normandy and so would he doâ— Calice Hereupon the Duke of Yorke the Earles of Warwicke and Salisbury with other their adherents raised an Army in the Marches of Wales and Marched with it towards London to suppresse the Duke of Sommerset with his Faction and reforme the Governement The king being credibly informed hereof assembled his Host and marching towards the Duke of Yorke and his Forces was encountred by them at Saint Albanes notwithstanding the kings Proclamation to keepe the Peace where in a set Battell the Duke of Somerset with divers Earles and 800. others were slaine on the kings part by the Duke of Yorke and his companions and the kingâ—â— a manner defeate The Duke after this Victory obtained remembring that he had oftentimes declared and published abroad The onely cause of this War to be THE ADVANCEMENT OF THE PUBLIKE WEALE and TO SET THE REALME IN A MORE COMMODIOVS STATE and BETTER CONDITION Vsing all lenity mercy and bounteousnesse would not once touch or apprehend the body of King Henry whom he might have slaine and utterly destroyed considering that hee had him in his Ward and Governance but with great honour and due reverence conveyed him to London and so to Westminster where a Parliament being summoned and assembled soone after It was therein Enacted That no person should either judge or report any point of untruth of the Duke of Yorke the Earles of Salisbury and Warwicke For comming in Warlike manner against the King at Saint Albanes Considering that their attempt and enterprise Was onely to see the Kings Person in Safeguard and Sure-keeping and to put and Alien from Him the publike Oppressors of the Common wealth by whose misgovernance his life might be in hazard and his Authority hang on a very small Thred After this the Duke and these Earles raised another Army for like purpose and their owne defence in the 37 and 38 yeares of H. 6. for which they were afterwards by a packed Parliament at Coventree by their Enemies procurement Attainted of high Treason and their Lands and Goods confiscated But in the Parliament of 39. H. 6. cap. 1. The said attainder Parliament with all Acts and Statutes therein made were wholly Reversed Repealed annulled as being made â—y the excitation and procurement of seditious ill disposed Persons for the
accomplishment of their owne Rancor and Covetousnesse that they might injoy the Lands Offices Possessions and Goods of the lawfull â—ords and liege People of the King and that they might finally destroy the laid lawfull Lords and Liege People and their Issues and Heires for ever as now the Kings ill Counsellors and hungry Cavalleers seek to destroy the Kings faithfull Liege Lords and People that they may gaine their Lands and Estates witnesse the late intercepted Leâ—ter of Sir Iohn Brooks giving advise to thus purpose to his Majestie and this Assemblâ— was declared to be no lawful Parliament but a devillish Counsell which desired more the destruction then advancement of the Publike weale and the Duke Earles with their assistants were restored and declared to be Faithful and Lawful Lords and Faithful liege People of the Realme of England who alwaies had great and Fathfull Love to the Preferrement and Surety of the Kings Person according to their Duty If then these two Parliaments acquitted these Lords and their companions thus taking up Armes from any the least guilt of Treason and rebellion against the King because they did it onely for the advancement of the publike weale the setting the Realme in a better condition the removing ill Counsellors and publike oppressors of the Realme from about the King and to rescue his person out of their hands then questionlesse by their resolutions our present Parliaments taking up defensive armes upon the selfe-same grounds and other important causes and that by consent of both Houses which they wanted can be reputed no high Treason nor Rebellion against the King in point of Law and no just no rationall Iudge or Lawyer can justly averre the contrary against so many forecited resolutions in Parliament even in printed Acts. The Earle of Richmund afterward King Henry the seventh taking up armes against Richard the third a lawfull King defacto being crowned by Parliament but an Vsurper and bloody â—yrant in Verity to recover his Inheritance and Title to the Crowne and ease the Kingdome of this unnaturall blood-thirsty Oppressor before his fight at Boswell Field used this Oration to his Souldiers pertinent to our purpose If ever God gave victory to men fighting in a just quarrell or if he ever aided such as made warre for the wealth and tuition of their owne naturall and nutritive Countrey or if he ever succoured them which adventured their lives for the reliefe of Innocents suppression of malefactors and apparent Offenders No doubt my Fellowes and Friends but he of his bountifull goodnesse will this day send us triumphant victory and a lucky revenge over our proud Enemies and arrogant adversaries for if you remember and consider the very cause of our just quarrel you shall apparently perceive the same to be true godly and vertuous In the which I doubt not but God will rather ayde us yea and fight for us then see us vanquished and profligate by such as neither feare him nor his Lawes nor yet regard Iustice and honesty Our cause is so just that no enterprise can be of more vertue both by the Laws Divine and Civill c. If this cause be not just and this quarrell godly let God the giver of victory judge and determine c. Let us therefore fight like invincible Gyants and set on our enemies like untimorous Tygers and banish all feare like tamping Lyons March forth like strong and robustious Champions and begin the battaile like hardy Conquerors the Battell is at hand and the Victory approacheth and if wee shamefully recule or cowardly fly we and all our sequele be destroyed and dishonoured for ever This is the day of gaine and this is the time of losse get this dayes victory and be Conquerours and lose this dayes battell and bee villaines And therefore in the name of God and Saint George let every man couragiously advance his standard They did so slew the Tyrannicall Vsurper wonne the Field And in the first Parliament of his Raigne there was this Act of indemnity passed That all and singular persons comming with him from beyond the Seas into the Realme of England taking his party and quarrell in recovering his just Title and Right to the Realme of England shall be utterly discharged quit and unpunishable for ever by way of action or otherwise of or for any murther slaying of men or of taking and disporting of goods or any other trespasses done by them or any of them to any person or persons of this his Realme against his most Royall Person his Banner displayed in the said field and in the day of the said field c. Which battell though it were just and no Treason nor Rebellion in point of Law in those that assiâ—ted King Henry the 7 th against this Vsurper yet because the killing of men and seising their goods in the time of Warre is against the very fundamentall Lawes of the Realme they needed an Act of Parliament to discharge them from suits and prosecutions at the Law for the same the true reason of all the forecited Acts of this nature which make no mention of pardoning any Rebellions or Treasons against the King for they deemed their forementioned taking up of Armes no such offences but onely discharge the Subjects from all suites actions and prosecutions at Law for any killing or slaying of men batteries imprisonments robberies and trespasses in seising of Persons Goods Chattels What our Princes and State have thought of the lawfulnesse of necessary Defensive sive Warres of Subjects against their oppressing Kings and Princes appeares by those aides and succours which our Kings in former ages have sent to the French Flemmings Almaines and others when their Kings and Princes have injuriously made Warres upon them and more especially by the publike ayde and assistance which our Queene Elizabeth and King James by the publike advise and consent of the Realme gave to the Protestants in France Germany Bohemia and the Netherlands against the King of France the Emperour and King of Spaine who oppressed and made Warre upon them to deprive them of their just Liberties and Religion of which more hereafter Certainely had their Defensive Warres against their Soveraigne Princes to preserve their Religion Liberties Priviledges beene deemed Treason Rebellion in point of Law Queene Elizabeth King James and our English State would never have so much dishonoured themselves nor given so ill an example to the world to Patronize Rebells or Traitours or enter into any solemne Leagues and Covenants with them as then they did which have been frequently renued and continued to this present And to descend to our present times our King Charles himself hath not onely in shew at least openly aided the French Protestants at Ree and Rochel against their King who warred on them the Germane Princes against the Emperour the Hollanders and Prince of Orange to whose Sonne hee hath married his elstest Daughter against the Spaniard and entred into a solemne League with them which hee could
Theology which others have wholly omitted may seasonably be here supplyed to satisfie Consciences yet unresolved of the justnesse of the present and all other necessary Defensive Warres I shall not over-sparingly or cursorily passe through it without a competent debate Now lest the Consciences of any should bee seduced ensnared with generalities or cleere mistakes through the mis-stating of the points in question with which devise many have beene hitherto deluded by the Opposites who cumbate onely with their owne mishapen fancies discharging all their Gunshot against such Tenets as are not in question and no waies comming neere the White in Controversie I shal for my own orderly proceeding and the better satisfaction of ignorant scrupulous seduced consciences more punctually state the Question then formerly in the Legall Part first Negatively next Positively and then proceede to its debate Take notice therefore First that this is no part of the question in dispute Whether the Parliament or any Subjects who soever may actually disobey or violently with force of Armes resist the Kings or any other lawfull Magistrates just commands warranted either by Gods Word or the Lawes of England it being out of controversie readily subscribed by all of both sides that Such commands ought not so much as to be disobeyed much lesse forcibly resisted but cheerefully submitted to and readily executed for Conscience sake Rom. 13. 1. to 6. 1 Pet. 2. 13 14. Tit. 3. 1. Hebr. 13. 17. Iosh 1. 16 17. 18. Ezra 7. 26. Eccles 8 2 3 4 5. the onely thing these objected Scriptures prove which come not neere the thing in question though our Opposites most rely upon them Secondly Neither is this any branch of the dispute Whether Subjects may lawfully rise up or rebell against their Prince by way of Muteny Faction or Sedition without any just or lawfull publicke ground or for every trifling injury or provocation offered them by their Prince Or whether private men for personall wrongs especially where their lives chastities livelihoods are not immediatly endangered by actuall violent unjust assaults may in point of Conscience lawfully resist or rise up against their Kings or any other lawfull Magistrates Since all disavow such tumultuous Insurrections and Rebellions in such cases yet this is all which the oft objected Examples of Korah Dathan and Abiram with other Scriptures of this Nature doe or can evince Thirdly nor is this any parcell of the Controversie Whether Subjects may lay violent hands upon the persons of their Princes wittingly or willingly to deprive them of their Lives or Liberties especially for private Injuries or in cold blood when they doe not actually nor personally assault their lives or chastities or for any publike misdemeanours without a precedent sentence of Imprisonment or death against them given judicially by the whole States or Realmes where they have such Authority to araigne and judge them For all unanimously disclaime yea abominate such Traitorous practises and Iesuiticall Positions as execrable and unchristian yet this is all which the example of Davids not offering violence to King Saul the 1 Sam. 24. 3. to 22. cap. 26. 2. to 25. 2 Sam. 1. 2. to 17. or that perverted Text of Psal 105. 15. the best Artillery in our Adversaries Magazines truely prove Fourthly Neither is this the thing in difference as most mistake it Whether the Parliament may lawfully raise an Army to goe immediately and directly against the very person of the King to apprehend or offer violence to him much lesse intentionally to destroy him or to resist his owne personall attempts against them even to the hazard of his life For the Parliament and their Army too have in sundry Remonstrances Declarations Protestations and Petitions renounced any such disloyall intention or designe at all for which there is no colour to charge them and were his Majestie now alone or attended onely with his Ordinary Courtly Guard there needed no Army nor Forces to resist his personall assaults Yet this is made the principall matter in question by Doctor Ferne by An appeale to thy Conscience and other Anti-parliamentary Pamphlets who make this the sole Theame of their Discourses That Subjects may not take up Armes Against their Lawfull Soveraigne because he is wicked and unjust no though he be an Idolater and Oppressor That Suppose the King will not discharge his trust but is bent or seduced to subvert Religion Lawes Liberties yet Subjects may not take up Armes and resist the King it being unwarrantable and according to the Apostle damnable Rom. 13. Yea this is all the questions the G. valleers and Malignants demand of their Opposites in this cause What will you take up Armes will you fight against or resist the King c. Never stating the question of his Forces his Army of Papists Malignants Delinquents but onely of the King himselfe abstracted from his invading depopulating Forces against whom in this sence of theirs the Parliament never yet raised any Forces nor made the least resistance hitherto These foure particulars then being not in question I shall here appeale to the most Malignant Conscience Whether Doctor Ferne and all other our Opposites pretenders of Conscience haue not ignorantly if not maliciously made shipwracke of their good Consciences had they ever any by a wilfull mistating of the Controversie concerning the present Defensive Warre in the foure preceding particulars which they make the onely Questions when not so much as one of them comes within the Verge of that which is the reall Controversie and never once naming that in all or any of their Writings which is the point indeed Secondly Whether there bee any one Text or Reason in all their Pamphlets particularly applied to any thing which concernes the present Warre but onely to these foure particulars which are not in debate And if so as no Conscience can gaine-say it then there is nought in all the wast Papers they have published which may either resolve or scruple any Conscience That the Parliaments Defensive Armes and resistance are unlawfull in point of Divinity or Conscience which is steered by the Scriptures Compasse But if these particulars be not in question you may now demand what the knot and true state of the present Controversie in point of Conscience is In few words take it thus Whether both Houses of Parliament and the Subjects by their Authority for the preservation of their owne Persons Priviledges Lawes Lives Liberties Estates Religion the apprehension of Voted coâ—tumatious Traitors and Delinquents the rescuing his seduced Majestie out of the power of Popish pernicious Counsellours and Forces who end avour the Kingdomes subversion by withdrawing him from and incensing him against his Parliament may not lawfully with a good Conscience take up necessary defensive Armes and make actuall Warlike resistance against his Majesties Malignant ill Counsellors and invading Popish Forces who now Murther Rob Spoile Sacke Depopulate the Kingdome in a most Hostile manner to set up Tyranny Popery and an
had delegated to Moses and Aaron without any injury or injustice at all once offered to them or any assault upon them Ergo marke the Non-sence of this argumentation no Subjects may lawfully take up meere necessary defensive Armes in any case to resist the bloody Tyrannie Oppression and outrages of wicked Princes or their Cavalleires when they make warre upon them to destroy or enslave them An Argument much like this in substance No man ought to rise up against an honest Officer or Captaine in the due execution of his Office when he offers him no injury at all Therefore he ought not in conscience to resist him when he turnes a theefe or murtherer and felloniously assaults him to rob him of his purse or cut his throate Or private men must not causelesly mutinie against a lawfull Magistrate for doing justice and performing his duty Ergo the whole Kingdome in Parliament may not in Conscience resist the Kings Captaines and Cavalleeres when they most unnaturally and impiously assault them to take away their Lives Liberties Priviledges Estates Religion oppose and resist justice and bring the whole Kingdome to utter desolation The very recitall of this argument is an ample satisfactory refutation of it with this addition These seditious Levites Rebelled against Moses and Aaron onely because God himselfe had restrained them from medling with the Priests Office which they would contemptuously usurpe and therefore were most severely punished by God himself against whose expresse Ordinance they Rebelled Ergo the Parliament and Kingdome may in no case whatsoever though the King be bent to subvert Gods Ordinances Religion Lawes Liberties make the least resistance against the king or his invading forces under paine of Rebellion High Treason and eternall condemnation This is Doctor Fernes and some others Bedlam Logicke Divinity The next is this Thou shalt not revile the Gods nor curse the Ruler of thy people Ex. 22. 28. Eccl. 10. 20. Curse not the King no not in thy thought and curse not the rich in thy bed-Chamber which is well explained by Prov. 17. 26. It is not good to strike Princes for equitie Ergo it is unlawfull for the Subjects to defend themselves against the Kings Popish depopulating Cavaleers I answer the first text pertaines properly to Judges and other sorts of Rulers not to Kings not then in being among the Israelites the second to rich men as well as Kings They may as well argue then from these texts that no Iudges nor under-rulers nor rich men whatsoever though never so unjust or wicked may or ought in conscience to be resisted in their unjust assaults Riots Robberies no though they be bent to subvert Religion Lawes Liberties as that the King and his Souldiers joyntly or severally considered may not be resisted yea these acute disputants may argue further by this new kinde of Logicke Christians are expresly prohibited to curse or revile any man whatsoever under paine of damnation Rom. 12. 14. Mat. 5. 44. Levit. 19 14. Numb 23. 7. 8. 2 Sam. 16. 9. Levit. 20. 9. c. 24 P 1. 14. 23. Levit. 20. 9. Prov. 20. 20. 1 Cor. 6. 10 1 Cor. 4. 12. 1 Pet. 2. 23. Jude 9. Ergo we ought to resist no man whatsoever no not a theefe that would rob us cut-throate Cavaleers that would murther us lechers that would ravish us under paine of damnation What pious profitable Doctrine thinke you is this All cursings and railings are simply unlawfull in themselves all resistance is not so especially that necessary we now discourse of against unlawfull violence to ruine Church and State To argue therefore all resistance is simply unlawfull because cursing and reviling of a different nature are so is ill Logicke and worse Divinity If the objectors will limit their resistance to make the Argument sensible and propose it thus All cursing and reviling of Kings and Rulers for executing justice impartially for so is the chiefe intendment of the place objected delinquents being apt to clamour against those who justly censure them is unlawfull Ergo the forcible resisting of them in the execution of justice and their lawfull authority is unlawfull the sequell I shall grant but the Argument will be wholy impertinent which I leave to the Objectors to refine The third Argument is this That which peculiarly belongs to God no man without his speciall authority ought to meddle with But taking up Armes peculiarly belongeth to he Lord. Deut 32. 35. Where the Lord saith vengeance is mine especially the sword which of all temporall vengeance is the greatest The Objector puts no Ergo or conclusion to it because it concludes nothing at all to purpose but onely this Ergo The King and Cavalleeres must lay downe their Armes and swords because God never gave them any speciall commission to take them up Or Ergo no man but God must weare a sword at least of revenge and â—hether the kings and Cavalleers Offensive or the Parliaments meere Defensive sword be the sword of vengeance and malice let the world determine to the Objectors shame The fourth is from Eccles 8. 2. 3. 4. I councell thee to keepe the Kings Commandment and that in regard of the Oath of God Be not hasty to goe out of his sight stand not in an evill thing for he doth whatsoever pleaseth him where the word of a king is there is power and who may say unto him what dost thou This Text administers the Opposites a double Argument The first is this All the Kings Commands are to be kept of all his Subjects by vertue of the Oathes of supremacy alleigance and the late protestation including them both Ergo by vertue of these Oathes we must not resist his Cavalleeres but yeeld our thoates to their swords our purses and estates to their rapines our chastities to their Lecheries our Liberties to their Tyrannies our Lawes to their lusts our Religion to their Popish Superstition and Blasphemies without any opposition because the king hath oft commanded us not to resist them But seeing the Oath and Law of God and those oathes of ours obleige us onely to obey the Kings just legall commands and no other not the Commands and lusts of evill Councellors and Souldiers this first Argument must be better pointed ere it will wound our cause The second this The king may lawfully do whatsoever pleaseth him Ergo neither are He or his Forces to be resisted To which I answer that this verse relates onely unto God the next antecedent who onely doth and may doe what he pleaseth and that both in heaven and earth Psal 135. 6. Psal 115. 3 Esay 46. 10. not to Kings who neither may nor can doe what they please in either being bound both by the Laws of God man and their Coronation Oathes perchance the oath of God here meant rather then that of supremacie or alleigance to doe onely what is lawfull and just not what themselves shall please But admit it
both But this anointing in subiects can neither exempt their persons from necessary iust resistance if they unlawfully assault or war upon their Superiours equalls inferiours nor free them from arrests imprisonments arraignments deprivations or capitall censures if they offend and demerit them as we all know by Scripture and experience Therefore it can transfer no such corporall immunities or exemptions from all or any of these to kings but onely exempt them from unlawfull violence and injuries in point of right so far forth as it doth other Subjects In a word this annointing being common to all Christians can give no speciall Prerogative to Kings but onely such as are common to all Subiects as they are Christians Secondly admit it be meanâ— of an actuall externall anoynting yet that of it self affords Kings no greater priviledge then the inward unction of which it is a type neither can it priviledge them from just resistance or just corporall censures of all sorts First it cannot priviledge them from the iust assaults invasions resistance corporall punishments of other forraign kings Princes States Subiects not subordinate to them who upon any iust cause or quarrell may lawfully resist assault wound apprehend imprison slay depose iudge censure forraigne kings even to death as is apparent by Sâ—hon King of the Amorites and Og the king of Bashan slain the King of Ai hanged by Ioshua the five kings of Canaan that besieged Gibeon on whose ne-ks Ioshua made his men of war to put their feet then smote slew and hanged them upon five trees Who also assaulted resisted imprisoned condemned slew executed divers other kings of Canaan to the number of thirty one in all by king Adonibezek Eglon Agag with other Heathen Kings imprisoned stabbed hewen in pieces by the Israelites If any obiect These kings were not actually annoynted which they cannot prove since Cyrus an Heathen King is stiled Gods annoynted no doubt Saul was an annoynted King if not the first in the world 1 Sam. 10. 1. yet he was justly resisted wounded pursued by the Philistines 1 Sam. 31. 3. Iosiah an annoynted good King was slain by Pharaoh Necho King of Egypt whom he rashly encountred King Ahab was slain by an Archer of the King of Assyria King Ioram and Ahaziah were both slain by Iehu by Gods command Iehoaaz was deposed by the King of Egypt Iehoiakim and Iehoiakin both deposed fettered and kept prisoners by the King of Babylon bylone who also y appâ—eherded dâ—posed judicially condemned King Zedechiah put out his eyes and sent him prisoner to Bâ—hylon bound with fetters of brasse So Manasses was deposed bound with fetters of brasse and carryed captive by the Captaines of the King of Assyria Amaziah King of Iudah was taken prisoner by Iehoash King of Israel Infiâ—ite are the presidents in stories where kings of one Nation in just warrs have been assaulted invaded imprisoned deposed slain by Princes and Subjects of another Nation and that justly as all grant without exception neither their annointing nor Kingship being any exemption or priviledge to them at all in respect of forraigners in cases of hostility to whom they are no Soveraigns no more then to any of their Subjects Whereas if this royall annointing did make their persons absolutly sacred and inviolable no forraign Princes or Subjects could justly apprehend imprison smite wound slay depose or execute them Secondly Kings who are suborordinate Homagers and Subjects to other Kings or Emperours though annointed may for Treasons and Rebellions against them he lawfully resisted assaulted imprisoned deposed judged to death and executed because as to them they are but Subjects notwithâ—â—anging their annointing as appears by sundâ—y presidents in our own and forraign Histories and is generally confessed by the learned Thirdly the Roman Greek and German Experours though annointed the ancient Kings of France Spain Arragon Britain Hungary Poland Denmarke Bohemia India Sparta and other places who were not absolute Monarchs have in former ages been lawfully resisted imprisoned deposed and some of them judicially adjudged to death and executed by their owne Senates Parliaments Diets States for their oppression mal-administration tyranny and that justly as Bodin Grotius with others affirm notwithstanding any pretence that they were annointed Soveraigns Fourthly Popes Bishops and Priests anciently were and at this present in the Romish Churches are actually annointed as well as Kings and we know the Popish Clergy and Canonists have frequently alledged this Text Touch not mine annointed and doe my Prophets no harme in Councels Decretalls and solemâ— debates in Parliament to prove their exemption from the arrests judgements capitall censâ—res and proceedings of Kings and secular Iudges for any crimes whatsoever because forsooth they were Gods annointed intended in this Text not Kings therefore Kings and Seculars must not touch nor offer any the least violence to their persons no not in a way of justice By colour of this Text they exceedingly deluded the world in this particular for â—undreds of yeeres But in the seventh yeer of Hen. the 8. in Dr. Standish his case debated before a Committee of both Houses of Parliament and all the Iudges of England this Text being chiefly insisted on to prove the Clergies exemption Jure Divino was wholly exploded in England and since that in Germany France other Realms and notwithstanding its protection many Fopes Bishops and Clergy-men in all Kingdomes ages for all their annointing have for their misdemeanors not only been resisted apprehended imprisones but deprived degraded hanged quartered burned as well as other men Yea Abiathar the High Priest was deposed by S. â—omon for his Treason against him notwithstanding his Annointing their annointing giving them not the smallest immunity to doe ill or not to suffer all kinds of corporall capitall punishments for their misdemeanors If this actuall annointing then cannot lawfully exempt or secure Priests and Prelates persons nor the Pope himselfe from the premises how then can it justly priviledge the persons of Kings Fifthly among the Papists all infants either in their baptisme or confirmation are actually annointed with their consecrated Chrisme and with extream unction to boot at last cast which they make a Sacrament and so a thing of more divine soveraign Nature then the very annointing of Kings at their inauguration which they repute no Sacrament as being no where commanded by God But neither of these actuall unctions exempt all or any of those annointed with it from resistance or any corporall punishments or just censures of any king therefore the very annointing of Kings cannot doe it Sixthly the Ceremony of annointing kings as Cassanaeus with others write is peculiar onely to the German Emperor the King of Ierusalem the King of France the King of England and the King of Sicily but to no other kings else who are neither annointed nor crowned as he affirmes so that it cannot give any priviledge
my hand against my Lord for he is the Lords anoynted Moreover my father see yea see the skirt of thy Robe in my hand for in that I cut off the skirt of thy Robe and KILLED THHE NOT know then and see that there is neither evill nor transgression in mine hand and I have not sinned against thee yet then huntest my soul to take it The Lord judge between me thee and the Lord avenge me of thee but mine hand shall not be upon thee and plead my cause and deliver me out of thine hand And after this upon the second advantage he useth like words The Lord render to every man according to his right consnes faithfulnes for the Lord delivered thee into my hand to day but I would not stretch forth my hand against the Lords annointed And behold as THY LIFE WAS MVCH SET BY THIS DAY IN MY EYES so let my life be much set by in the eyes of the Lord and let him deliver me out of all tribulations Wherein David declared that God had given up Sauls life into his power that it was his owne meer goodnesse that moved him to spare Saul contrary to his Souldiers and Abishaies minds who would have slain him without any seruple of conscience that the reasons he spared him were First because he was Gods Annointed that is specially designed and made King of Israel by Gods own election which no kings at this day are so this reason extends not so fully to them as to Saul Secondly Because he was his Father and Lord too and so it would have been deemed some what an unnaturall act in him Thirdly because it had favoured onely of private self-revenge and ambitious aspiring to the Crown before due time which became not David the quarrell being then not publike but particular betwixt him and David onely who was next to succeed him after his death Fourthly because by this his lenity he would convince reclaim Saul froÌ„ his bloody pursuit and cleare his innocency to the world Fifthly to evidence his dependence upon God and his speciall promise that he should enjoy the Crown after Saul by divine appointment and therefore he would not seem to usurp it by taking Saul life violently away Most of which consideration faile in cases of publike defence and the present controversie Thirdly that Saul himselfe as well as Davids Souldiers conceived that David might with safe conscience have slain as well as spared him witnesse his words 1. Sam. 24. 17 18 19 Thou art more righteous then I for thou hast rewarded me good where as I have rewarded thee evill And thou hast shewedme this day how thou hast deals well with me for asmuch as when the Lord had delivered me into thine hand THOU KILLEDST ME NOT. For if a man finde his enemy WIL HE LET HIM GO WEL AWAY Wherefore the Lord reward three good for that thou hast done unto me this day c. And in 1. Sam. 26. 21. Then said Saul I have sinned returne my sonne David for I will no more do thee harm because my solve was precious in thine eyes this day behold I have played the fool exceedingly c. But the former answers are so satisfactory that I shall not pray in ayd from these much lesse from that evasion of Dr. Fern who makes this and all other Davids demeanors in standing out against Saul EXTRAORDINARY for he was annointed and designed by the Lord to succeed Saul and therefore he might also use all extraordinary wayes of safe guarding his persons which like wise insinuaâ—es that this his scruple of conseience in sparing Sauls life was but extraordinary the rather because all his Souldiers and Abishai would have slain Saul without any such scruple and Saul himselfe conceived that any man else but David would have done it and so by consequence affirms that this his sparing of Saul is no wayes obligatory to other subjects but that they may lawfully in Davids case kill their Soveraigns But Davids resistauce of Saul by a guard of men being only that ordinary way which all subjects in all ages have used in such cases and that which nature teacheth not onely men but all living creatures generally to use for their own defence and this evasion derogating exceedingly from the personall safety of Princes yea and exposing them to such perils as they have cause to con the Dr. small thanks for such a bad invention I shall reject it as the extraordinary fansie of the Dr. other loyalists void both of truth and loyalty The 7. Objection out of the Old Testament is this 1. Sam. 8. 11. Samuel tells the people how they should be oppressed under kings yet all that violence and injustice that should be done unto them is no just cause of resistance for they have NO REMEDY LEFT THEM BVT CRYING TO THE LORD v. 18. And ye shall cry out in that day because of the King which ye shall have chosen you and the Lord will not hear you in that day To this I answer 1. that by the Doctors own confession this text of Samuel much urged by some of his fellows to prove an absolute divine Prerogative in Kings is quite contrary to their suggestion and meant onely of the oppression violence and injuâ— not lawfull power of Kings which should cause them thus to cry out to God This truth we have clearly gained by this objection for which some Royallists will renounce their champion 2. It is but a meer fallacie and absurdity not warranted by the Text which saith not that they shall onely cry out or that they shall use no remedy or resistance but crying out which had been materiall but baâ—ely ye shall cry out in that day c. Ergo they must and should onely crie out and not resist at all is a grosse Non-sequitur which Argument because much cryed up I shall demonstrate the palpable absurdity of it by many parrallell instance First Every Christian is bound to pray for Kings and Magistrates 1 Tim. 2. 1 2. Ergo they must onely pray and not fight for them nor yeeld tribute or obedience to them Kings and their Subjects too are bound to crie out and pray to God against forraign enemies that come to war against them as Moses did against Pharaoh and his Host David against his enemies Hezekiah against Sennacherib and his Hoste Asa against his enemies Abijah and the men of Iudah against Ieroboam and the Israelites their enemies and as all Christians usually do against their enemies Yea I make no doubt but the Doctor and other Court-Chaplains inform his Majesty and the Cavalleers that they must cry to God against the Parliamenteers and Round heads now in Arms to resist them Ergo they must onely pray but in no wise resist or fight against them All men must pray to God for their daily bread Ergo they must onely pray and not labour for it Sick persons
must pray to God to restore their health Ergo they must take no Physick but onely pray All men are expresly commanded to crie and call upon God in the day of trouble Ergo they must use no meanes but prayer to free themselves from trouble pretty Logick Reason Divinity fitter for derision then any serious Answer This is all this Text concludes and that grosly mistaken Speech of Saint Ambrose Christians weapons are Prayers and Tears of which anon iâ— its due place In one word prayer no more excludes resistance then resistance prayer both of them may and sometimes when defence is necessary as now ought to concurre so that our Court Doctors may as well argue as some Prelates not long since did in word and deed Ministers ought to pray and Gods House is an Oratory for prayer Ergo they must not Preach atleast â—ery seldom or make his House an Auditory for Preaching Or as rationally reason from this Text That Subjects must cry out to God against their kings oppressions Ergo they must not petition their Kings much lesse complain to their Parliament for relief as conclude from thence Ergo they may in no case resist the king or his invading Forces though they indeavour to subvert Religion Laws Liberties as the Doctor himself states the controversie whose arguments will hardly satisfie conscience being so voyd of reason sence yea science The eighth is this None of the Prophets in the old Testament reprehending the Kings of Israel and Iudeh for their grosse Iaolatry cruelty oppression did call upon the Elder of the people for the duty of resistance neither do we finde the people resisting or taking up Arms against any of their kings no not against Ahab or Manasseh upon any of these grounds Ergo resistance is unlawfull To which I must reply first That none of the Prophets did ever forbid resistance in such cases under pain of Damnation as our new Doctors do now Ergo it was lawfull because not prohibited Secondly that as none of the people were then inhibited to resist so not dehorted from it therefore they might freely have done it had they had hearts and zeal to do it Thirdly Iosephus resolves expresly That by the very Law of God Deuter. 17. If the King did contrary to that Law multiply silver gold and horses to himself more then was fitting the-Israelites might lawfully resist him and were bound to do it to preserve themselves from Tyrannie Therefore no doubt they might have lawfully resisted their Kings Idolatry cruelty oppressions Fourthly Hulderichus Zuinglius a famous Protestant Divine with others positively affirms That the Israelites might not onely lawfully resist but likewise deposeâ— heâ—r Kings for their wickednesses and Idolatries yea That all the people were justly punished by God because they removed not their flagitious idolatrous Kings and Princes out of their places which he proves by Ierem 15. where after the four Plagues there recited the Prophet subjoynes the cause of them saying Verse 4. I will give them in fury to all the Kingdoms of the Earth that is I will stirre up in fury all the kings of the earth against them because of Manasseh the son of Hezekiah king of Iudah for that which he did in Ierusalem This Manasseh had committed many wickednesses by Idolatrie and the stedding of innocent blood as we may see in the one and twentieth Chapter of the second of the Kings for which evills the Lord grievously punished the people of Israel Manasseh shed overmuch innocent blood untill he had filled Ierusalem even to the mouth with his sins wherewith he made Iudah to sinne that it might do evill before the Lord Therefore because Manasseh King of Iudah did these most vile abominations above all that the Amorites had done before him and made the Land of Iudah to sin in his undeanesse therefore thus saith the Lord God of Israel Behold I will bring evill upon Ierusalem and Iudah that whosever shall hear both his ears shall tingle c. In summe if the Iews had not thus permitted their King to be wicked WITHOVT PVNISMENT they had not been so grievâ—â—nsly punished by God We ought to pull and crost away even our eye that offends so a hand and foot c. If the Israelites had thus DE OSED Manassch by consent and suffrages of all or the greatest part of the multitude they had not been so grievessly punished of God So Zuinglius with whom even B. Rilson himself in some sort accords who in de ending interpreting his opinion câ—ntesseth That it is a question among the Learned What Soveraignty the whole people of Israel had over their Kings confessing that the peoples resouing Ionathan that he died not when Saul would have put him to dâ—â—th Davids speech to the peoâ—le when he purposed to reduce the Arke all the Congregations speech and carriage toward Rehoboam when they came to make him King with the pâ—ople speech to Ieremy Thou shalt die the death have perswaded some and might lead Zuingliâ—s to think that the people of Israel notwithstanding they called for a King yet REâ—ERVED TO THEMSELVES SVFFICIENT AVTHORITY TO OVERRVLE THEIR KING IN THOSE THINGS WHICH SEEMED EXPEDIENT AND NEEDFVLL FOR THE PVBLIKE WLLFARE else God would not punish the people for the kings iniquity which they must suffer and not redresse Which opinion if as Orthodox as these learned Divines and Iosephus averre it not onely quite ruines our Opposites Argument but their whole Treatises and cause at once But fiftly I answer that subjects not onely by command of Gods Prophets but of God himself and by his speciall approbation have taken up Arms against their Idolatrous Princes to ruine them and their Posterities A truth so apparent in Scripture that I wonder our purblinde Doctors discern it not For did not God himself notwithstanding his frequent conditionall Promises to establish the Kingdom of Israel on David Solomon and their Posterity for Solomons grosse Idolatry occasioned by his Wives tell Solomon in expresse terms VVherefore for as much as this is done of thee and thou hast not kept my Covenant and my Statutes which I have commanded thee I will surely REND THE KINGDOM FROM THEE and will give it to thy servant Notwithstanding in thy dayes I will not do it for David thy fathers sake but I will rend it out of the hand of thy son Did not the Prophet Abijah in pursuance hereof rending Ierohoams garment into twelve pieces tell him Thus saith the Lord the God of Israel behold I will rend the Kingdom out of the hand of Solomon and will give ten tribes to thee And I will take the Kingdom out of his sons hand and will give it unto thee even ten Tribes and I will take thee and thou shalt reign according to all that thy soul desireth and shalt be King over Israel and I will for this afflict the Seed of David y Yea
did not ALL ISRAEL upon Solomons death when Rehoboam his son refused to grant their iust requests at their coming to Sechem to make him king use this speech to the king What Portion have we in David neither have we inheritance in the son of lesse to your Tents ô Israel now see to thine own house David Whereupon they departed and fell away from the house of David ever after and made Iereboam King over all Israel And doth not the Text directly affirm Whenefore Rehoboam hearkned not unto the people for the cause was from the Lord that he might perform the saying which the Lord spake to Abijah unto Ieroboam the son of Nebat After which when Rehoboam raised a mighty Army to reduce the ten Tribes to obedience the Word of the Lord came to Shemaiah the man of God saying Speak unto Rehoboam and all the house of Iudah and Benjamin Thus SAITH THE LORD Ye shall not go up to fight against your brethren the children of Israel return every man to his house FOR THIS THING IS FROM ME They hearkned therefore to the word of the Lord and returned to depart according to the word of the Lord. Lo here a Kingdom quite rent a way from the very house of David yea a new King and kingdom erected by the People by Gods and his Prophets speciall direction and approbation for King Solomons Idolatry Who is such a stranger to the sacred Story but hath oft-times read how God anoynted Iehu King of purpose to extirpate and out off the whole house of K. Ahab his Lard for his and Iezabels Idolatry and blood-shed in flaying the Prophets and unjustly executing Naboth for his Vineyard in performance whereof he slew his Soveraign King Ioram Ahaziah King of Iudah Queen Iezabel all Ahabs posterity his great men his Nobles and all the Priests and Worshippers of Baal till he left none remaining according to the word of the Lord which he spake by his servant Elijah 2 Kings c. 9. 10. For which good service the Lord said unto Iehu Because THOV HAST DONE WELL in executing that which is right in mine eyes and hast done unto the house of Ahab according to all that was IN MINE HEART thy children of the 4. generation shall sit on the Thron of Israel This fact therefore of his thus specially commanded approved rewarded by God himself must needs be just and lawfull nor Treason nor Rebellion in Iehu unlesse the Opposites will charge God to be the author approver and rewarder of sin of Treason Neither will it serve their turns to Reply that this was an extraordinary example not to be imitated without such a speciall commission from heaven as Iehu had and no man can now a dayes expect For since God hath frequently injoyned all grosse incorrigible Idolaters especially those who are nearest and dearest to and most potent to seduce us to be put to death without any pitty or exception of Kings whose examples are most pernicious and apt to corrupt the whole Nation as the presidents of the Idolatrous kings of Israel and Iudah abundantly evidence if Kings become open professed Idolaters though private persons may not murther them and their families as Iehu yet the representative body or greater part of their Kingdoms as many Pious Divines affirm may lawfully convent depose if not judge them capitally for it and Gods putting zeal and courage into their hearts or exciting them by his faithfull Ministers to such a proceeding is a sufficient Divine Commission to satisfie Conscience if no sinister private ends but meer zeal of Gods glory and detestation of Idolatry be the onely Motives to such their proceedings Thus we read God stirred up Baacha exalted out of the dust and made him a Prince over the house of Israel who slew king Nadab and smote all the house of Jeroboam till he left him not any that breatned because of the sins of Ieroboam which he sinned and which he made Israel sin by his provocations wherewith he provoked the Lord God of Israel to anger who going on after in Ieroboams sins God threatens to out off all his house and make it like the house of Ieroboam which was actually executed by Zimri who slew his Soveraign King Elah son to Baacha With all the house of Baacha and left not one that pissed against the wall neither of his kinsfolks nor of his friends according to the word of the Lord which he spake against Baacha byâ— â—chu the Prophet Which act of Zimri though a just judgement in regard of God on the family of Baacha for their Idolatry was notwithstanding reputed Treason in Zimri because he did it not out of Conscience or zeal against Idolatry being and continuing an Idolater himself but onely out of ambition to usurp the Crown without the peeples consent whereupon all the people made Omri King and then going all to the Royall Palace set it on fire and burnt Omri in it both for his sins Idolatries and Treason which he wrought We read expresly that after the time that Amaziah did turn away from following the Lord they for this conspired a conspiracie against him in Ierusalem and he fled to Lachish but they sent to Lachish after him slew him there and they brought him upon horses and buried him with his fathers in the City of Iudah Then all the people of Iudah took Uzziah who was 16 years old and MADE HIM KING in the room of his father Amaziah and he did that which was right in the sight of the Lord. So Zachariah Shallum Pekahiah Pekah four evill Kings of Iudah successivly acquiring the Crown by murther and reigning evilly in Gods fight were all slain by Gods just judgement on them of one another and Hoshea In few words God himself ever annexed this condition to the Kings of Israel and Iudah that they should serve and fear him obey him Laws keep his Covenant otherwise if they did wickedly for sake him or commit idolatry he would destroy forsake and cast them and their seed off from being Kings When therefore they apparently violated the condition the whole State and people as Gods Instruments lawfully might and sometimes did by Gods speciall direction remov depose and sometimes put them even to death for their grosse iniquities and idolatries and when they did it not it was not as many think for want of lawfull Soveraign Authority remaining in the whole State and people as I shall fully manifest in the Appendix but out of a defect of zeal out of a generall complying with their Kings in their abominable idolatries and sins which brought War Captivity ruine both on their Kings their Posteritie the whole Nation and Kingdoms of Iudah and Israel as the Sacred Story plentifully relates All which considere this object on proves not onely false but fatall to the Obiectors cause who might with more discretion have forborn then forced such an answer to it which I hope and desire
all Ministers being of Gods owne institution by one and the same commission is one and the same But the regall power and jurisdiction of all Kings and Monarchies in the world is not equall nor the same for some have farre greater authority then others there are many different sorts of Kings in the world some onely annuall others for life others hereditary others at will deposible at the peoples pleasures when ever they offended Such were the Kings of the Vandalls in Africk of the Gothes in Spaine cum ipsos deponerent populi quoties displicuissent such the Kings of the Heruli Procopius Gothicorum Of the Lombards Paulus Warnafredi l. 4. 6. Of the Burgundians Ammianus 11. lib. 28. Of the Moldavians Laonichus Chalcocandylas the King of Agadis among the Africans Joannis Leo lib. 7. Of the Quadi and Jazyges in excerptis Dionis with sundry others hereafter mentioned Some elective others successive some conditionall others absolute as I have plentifully mentioned in the Appendix Therefore they are not of divine ordination in the objectors sense Fiftly If Kings were of divine ordination in this sense then their kingdomes and people upon their Elections Institutions and Coronations could not justly prescribe any conditions oathes or covenants to them upon promise of performance whereof they onely accept of them to be their Kings refusing else to admit them to reigne over them and such conditions oathes covenants would be meere nullities since men have no power at all to detract from Gods owne divine institutions or to annex any conditions or restrictions to them But our Antagonists themselves dare not averre that Kingdomes and Nations upon their Kings Coronations Institutions and elections may not lawfully prescribe conditions oathes and limitations to them upon promise of performance whereof they onely submitted to them as their Soveraignes it being the received practise of our owne of all or most other Kingdomes whatsoever especially elective ones and confirmed by divine Authority 2 Chron. 10. 1. to 19. Therefore they are not of divine institution in the objected sense Sixthly All Lawyers and most Orthodox Divines determine that Kings have no other just or lawfull royall Authority but that which the Lawes and customes of their Kingdomes allot them and that the Law onely makes them Kings from which if they exorbitate they become Tyrants and cease to be Kings Their Royall authority therefore is of humane institution properly not Divine from their people who both elect constitute them Kings and give them all their regall Authority by humane Lawes enacted not from God as the onely efficient cause Seventhly All Kingdomes Monarchies Policies are mutable and variable in themselves while they continue such yea temporary and alterable into other formes of Government by publicke consent if there be just cause without any immediate command or alteration made by God himsele or his divine authority There being no positive Law of God confining any Nation whose humane earthly condition is still variable to a Monarchicall or any other constant forme of government only much lesse for perpetuity without variation Therefore they are not of divine institution in this sense Eightly St. Peter expressely defines Kings and Monarchies in respect of their institution to be humane creatures or institutions 1 Pet. 2. 13. Submit your selves to every ORDINANCE OF MAN for the Lords sake whether it be to the King as supreame c. And they are common to Pagans who know not God as well as to Christians Therefore they are not simply divine but humane Ordinances Ninethly Our Antigonists will yeeld that other formes of Government whether Aristocraticall Oligarchicall Democraticall or mixt of all three are not absolutely and immediately of divine institution nor yet Dukes Principalities with other inferior Rulers though the Apostle in this Text makes them all equally Gods Ordinance and Divine Therefore Monarchy Kings and Kingdomes are not so Tenthly The very Text it selfe seemes to intimate that Royalties and higher powers are not of God by way of originall or immediate institution or command for the Apostle saith not that all powers whatsoever were originally instituted and ordained by God himselfe but There is no power but of God The powers that be are not were at first ordained or rather ordered of God that is where powers and Governments are once erected by men through Gods generall or speciall providence there God approves and orders them for the good of men 2. If Monarchies and Kings themselves be not of divine institution and Gods ordinance in the former sense as is most apparent Aristotle Plato all Politicians grant Then they are so onely in some other sense in what I shall truely informe you First They are of God and his Ordinance by way of imitation as derived from Gods owne forme of Government which is Monarchicall Whence he is called The only God God alone the King of Kings and Lord of Lords Secondly By way of approbation He approves and allowes this kinde of Government where it is received as well as other formes Thirdly by way of direction he gives divers generall rules and directions to Kings and to other Rulers and Magistrates also as well as them in his sacred word how they ought to demeane themselves towards him and their Subjects and likewise to Subjects how they should carry themselves towards their Kings and all other Rulers and Governours temporall or spirituall in which sense they may be properly said to be ordered and ordained too of God Fourthly By way of speciall providence and incitation God excites and moves some people to make choyce of Kings and Monarchicall formes of Government rather than others and to elect one man or family to that dignity rather than others yea his providence mightily rules and swayes in the changes the elections actions counsels affaires of Monarchies Kingdomes Kings States to order them for his own glory the Kings the Subjects good or ill in wayes of Justice or Mercy as is evident by Dan. 2. 21. c. 4. 17. 25. Hos 13. 11. Jer. 27. 5 6 7. Isa 45. 1 2 3. c. 10. 5. to 20. Psal 110. 5. Psal 113. 7 8. Job 12. 18. to 25. Dan. 5. 26. 28. The genuine drift of all these Texts Fifthly Kings may be said to be of God and his Ordinance because they and so all other Rulers Judges Magistrates as well as they in respect of their representation and the true end of Government are said to be Gods to be Gods Ministers and Vicegerents to sit upon Gods Throne and ought to reigne to judge for God and to rule Gods people according to Gods Word with such justice equity integrity as God himselfe would Governe them Exod. 22. 28. 2 Chron. 9. 8. Rom. 13. 4 5. 2 Sam. 23. 3. Psal 78. 72 73 74 2 Sam. 5. 2. Prov. 8. 15 18. Psal 82. 1. 1 Cor. 8. 5. Isa 32. 1. c. 9. 7. c. 16. 5. Deut. 1. 17. Sixthly Ill Kings and Tyrants may be said
to the assertion of the Apostle very ill applied saying The spirituall man is iudged of no man 1 Corinth 2. 15. Not meant of Bishops or Clergie-men but Saints alone endued with Gods Spirit not of judging in courts of iustice but of discerning spirituall things and their own spirituall Estates as the Context resolves Thus and much more this Prelate who notwithstanding this text of the Romanes pleads an exemption of all Bishops and Priests from the kings secular power by Divine Authority and arrogates to Priest and Prelates a iudiciary lawfull power over Kings themselves to excommunicate and censure them for their offences And to descend to later times even since the the Reformation of Religion here Iohn Bridges Dean of Sarum and Bishop of Oxfort even in his Book intituled The supremacy of Christian Princes over all persons thorowout their Dominions in all causes so well Ecclesiasticall as spirituall printed at London 1573. p. 1095. writes thus But who denies this M. Saunders that a godly Bishop may upon great and urgent occasion if it shall be necessary to edifie Gods Church and there be no other remedy flee to this last censure of Excommunication AGAINST A WICKED KING Making it a thing not questionable by our Prelates and Clergie that they may in such a case lawfully excommunicate the King himself And Doctor Bilson Bishop of Winchester in his True difference between Christian subiection and unchristian Rebellion dedicated to Queen Elizabeth her self printed at Oxford 1595. Part. 3. Page 369. to 378. grants That Emperours Kings and Princes may in some cases be Excommunicated and kept from the Lords Table by their Bishops and grants That with Hereticks and Apostates be THEY PRINCES or private men no Christian Pastor nor people may Communicate Neither finde I any Bishop or Court Doctor of the contrary opinion but all of them readily subscribe hereto If then not onely the ill Counsellors and Instruments of Kings but Kings and Emperours themselves may thus not onely be lawfully iustly resisted but actually smitten and excommunicated by their Bishops and Clergy with the spirituall sword for their notorious crimes and wickednesses notwithstanding this inhibition which Valentinian the Emperour confessed and therefore desired that such a Bishop should be chosen and elected in Millain after Auxentius as he himself might really and cordially submit to him and his reprehensions since he must sometimes needs erre as a man as to the medicine of souls as he did to Ambrose when he was elected Bishop there why they may not likewise be resisted by their Laity in the precedent cases with the temporall sword and subjected unto the censures of the whole Kingdoms and Parliaments transcends my shallow apprehension to conceive there being as great if not greater or the very self-same reason for the lawfulnesse of the one as of the other And till our Opposites shall produce a substantiall difference between these cases or disclaim this their practice and doctrine of the lawfulnesse of excommunicating Kings and Emperours they must give me and others liberty to conceive they have quite lost and yeelded up the cause they now contend for notwithstanding this chief Text of Romaves 13. the ground of all their strength at first but now of their ruine The tenth Objection is this that of 1 Pet. 2 13 14 15 16. Submit your selves to every ORDINANCE OF MAN for the Lords sake whether it be to The King AS SVPREAME or unto Governours as unto them that are sent by him to wit by God not the King as the distribution manifests and Rom. 13. 1 2 3 4. For the punishment of evill doers and for the praise of them that doe well c. Feare God Honour the King wee must submit to Kings and honour Kings who are the supream Governours therefore we may in no case forcibly resist them or their Officers though they degenerate into Tyrants To which I answer that this is a meerin consequent since the submission here injoyned is but to such Kings who are punishers of evill doers and praisers of those that do well which the Apostle makes the Ground and motive to submission therefore this text extends not to Tyrants and oppressours who doe quite contrary We must submit to Kings when they rule well and justly is all the Apostle here affirms Ergo wee must submit to and not resist them in any their violent courses to subvert Religion Lawes Liberties is meet non-sence both in Law Divinity and common Reason If any reply as they doe that the Apostle vers 18 19 20. Bids servants 〈◊〉 subject to their Masters with all feare not onely to the good and gentle but also to the froward For this is thank-worthy if a man for conscience towards God endure griefe suffering wrongfully c. Ergo this is meant of evill Magistrates and Kings as well as good I answer 1. That the Apostles speaks it onely of evill Masters not Kings of servants not subjects there being a great difference between servants Apprentices Villaines and free borne subiects as all men know the one being under the arbitrary rule and government of their Master the other onely under the just setled legall Government of their Princes according to the Lawes of the Realme Secondly this is meant onely of private personall iniuries and undue corrections of Masters given to servants without iust cause as vers 20. For what glory is it if when yee be BVFFETED FOR your faults c. intimates not of publike iniuries and oppressions of Magistrates which indanger the whole Church and State A Christian servant or subiect must patiently endure private undue corrections of a froward Master or King Ergo whole Kingdomes and Parliaments must patiently without resistance suffer their kings and evill Instruments to subvert Religion Lawes Liberties Realms the proper deduction heen is but a ridiculous conclusion Secondly This Text enjoynes no more subjection to kings then to any other Magistrates as the words Submit your selves TO EVERY ORDINANCE of Man Or unto Governors c. prove past all contradiction And vers 6. which bids us Honour the King bids us first in direct tearmes HONOVR ALL MEN to wit All Magistrates at least if not all men in generall as such There is then no speciall Prerogative of irresistability given to kings by this Text in injurious violent courses more then there is to any other Magistrate or person whatsoever God giving no man any Authority to injure others without resistance especially if they assault their persons or invade their Estates to ruine them Since then inferiour Officers and other menmay be forcâ—bly resisted when they actually attempt by force to ruine Religion Lawes Liberties the republike as I haue proved and our Antagonists must grant by the self-same reason kings may be resisted too notwithstanding any thing in this Text which attributes no more irresistability or authority to Kings then unto other Magistrates Thirdly Kings are here expresly called AN ORDINANCE OF
the Romans and Italians being forsaken of the Emperour Constantine when they were invaded by Aistulfus King of the Lumbards Elected Charles the Great for their Emperour and created a new Empire in the West distinct from that of Constantinople in the East which Bishop Bilson himselfe concludes they might lawfully doe in point of conscience So Childerick being unfit to governe and unable to repulse the enemies of the French which invaded his territories thereupon by the advise of Pope Zachary and of a whole Synod and Parliament in France they deposed Childericke and elected Pipin for their King who was both able and willing to protect them Vpon this very ground the Emperours Charles the third and Wenceslius were deposed as being unable and unfit to defend and governe the Empire and others elected Emperors in their steeds Thus Mahomet the blinde King of Granado was in the yeare 1309. deposed by his owne Brother Nobles and Subjects who were discontented to be governed by a blinde King who could not lead them to the warres in person And Ethodius the 2 d king of Scotland being dull of wit given to avarice and nothing meete to governe the Realme thereupon the Nobles tooke upon them the governmeÌ„t appointing Rulers in every Province so continued them all his reigne leaving him nothing but the bare title of a King not depriving him thereof out of the respect they gave to the family of Fergusius but yet taking away all his regall power And not to multiply cases or examples of this nature Andrew Favine in his Theatre of Honour out of the Chronicle of Lauresheâ—m and Aimonius in his 4 th Booke of the History of France relates a notable resolution given by the Parliament Estates of France in this very point In the yeare 803. Lewes the Debonnaire king of France holding his Parliament in May there came thither from strange Provinces two Brethren kings of Vuilses who with frank free good will submitted themselves to the judgement of the said Parliament to which of them the kingdome should belong The elder of these two brethren was named Meligastus and the younger Celeadraus Now albeit the custome of the said kingdome adjudged the Crowne to the eldest according to the right of Primegeniture allowed and practised by the Law of Nature and of later memory in the person of the last dead King Liubus father to the two contendants yet notwithstanding in regard that the Subjects by universall consent of the kingdome had rejected the elder brother FOR HIS COWARDISE AND EVILL GOVERNMENT cum secundam ritum ejus gentis commissum sibi Regnum parum digne administraret and had given the Crown to the younger brother FOR HIS VALOVR DISCREETE CARRIGE after full hearing of both parties BY SENTENCE of PARLIAMENT the Kingdome was adjudged to the younger Brother statâ—it ut junior frater delatam sibi à Populo suo pot flatem haberet c and thereupon the eldest did him homage with oath of Alleigance in the said Parliament and submitted to this sentence And upon this very ground in some of our ancient British and Saxons Kings Reignes when the right heire to the Crowne was an infant unable to defend his kingdome and people against invading enemies the Crowne hath commonly descended to the Vncle or next heire of full age who was able to protect them and repulse their enemies till the right heire accomplished his compleat age as I have elsewhere manifested If then a Kingdome by generall consent may elect a new King to defend and preserve it in case of invasion and eminent danger of ruine by forraigne enemies when their present King either cannot or will not doe his duty in protecting them from their enemies and exposeth them for a prey to their devastations as these examples and authorities conclude they may though I will not positively determine so Then certainely by equall semblable and greater reason subjects may lawfully take up necessary defensive Armes against their Kings when they shall not onely desert but actually invade and wage warre against them destroy and wast them in an open Hostile manner and handle them as cruelly as the worst of enemies such a wilfull unnaturall Hostile invasion being farre worse than any cowardly or bare desertion of theÌ„ when they are invaded by a forraign enemy And if Kings in case of sottishnesse or Lunacy may be lawfully deposed from their kingdomes by common consent of their Realmes when they are altogether unfit or unable to governe as Bâ—shop Bilson asserts and I have manifested else where then much more may they be lawfully resisted by force without guilt of Treason or Rebellion when they wilfully and maliciously contrary to their oath and duty cast off their Royall governments the protection of their subjects and wage open warre against them to enslave or ruine them If a Father shall violently and unjustly assault his sonne a husband his wife a master his servant a Major or other inferior Officer a Citizen to murther maime or ruine them They may in such a case by the Law of Nature God man resist repulse them in their owne defence without any crime at all as dayly practise experimentally manifests yea they may sweare the peace against them and have a Writ de securitate Pacis in such cases Therefore by the selfesame reason they may resist the King and his Army in like cases there being no more humane nor divine Law against resistance in the one case than in the other Finally it is the resolution of John Bodin and others who deny the lawfulnesse of Subjects taking up Armes against their Soveraigne Prince or offering violence to his person though he become a Tyrant That if a Soveraigne Prince or King by lawfull election or succession turne a Tyrant he may lawfully at his Subjects request be invaded resisted condemned or slaine by a forraigne Prince For as of all Noble acts none is more honourable or glorious then by way of fact to defend the honour goods and lâ—ves of such as are unjustly oppressed by the power of the more mighty especially the gate of Iustice being shut against them thus did Moses seeing his brother the Israelite beaten and wronged by the Egyptian and no meanes to have redresse of his wrongs So it is a most faire and magnificall thing for a Prince to take up Armes to releive a whole Nation and people unjustly oppressed by the cruelty of a Tyrant as did the great Hercu'es who travelling over a great part of the world with wonderfull power and valour destroyed many most horrible monsters that is to say Tyrants and so delivered people for which he was numbred among the gods his posterity for many worlds of yeares after holding most great Kingdomes And other imitators of his vertue as Dio Timoilion Aratus Harmodius Aristogiton with other such honourable Princes bearing Titles of chastisers and correctors of Tyrants And for that onely cause
Tamerlain Emperour of the Tartars denounced warre unto Bajazet King of the Turkes who then besieged Constantinople saying That he was comming to chastise his Tyrannie and to deliver the afflicted people and vanquishing him in battle routed his Army and taking the Tyrant prisoner he kept him in chains in an Iron Cage till he dyed Neither in this case is it materiall that such a vertuous Prince being a stranger proceede against a Tyrant by open force or fiercenesse or else by way of justice True it is that a valient and worthy Prince having the Tyrant in his power shall gaine more honour by bringing him unto his tryall to chastise him as a murtherer a manqueller and a robber rather than to use the Law of Armes against him Wherefore let us resolve on this that it is lawfull for any stranger Prince to kill a Tyrant that is to say a man of all men infamed and notorious for the oppression murder and slaughter of his subjects and people And in this sort our Queene Elizabeth ayded the Low-Countries against the Tyrannie and oppressions of the King of Spaine and the King of Sweden of late yeares the Princes of Germany against the Tyranny and usurpations of the Emperor upon their sollicitation If then it be thus lawfull for Subjects to call in forraigne Princes to releeve them against the Tyrannie and oppressions of their kings as the Barons in King Iohns time prayed in ayde from Philip and Lewis of France against his tyrannie and those Princes in such cases may justly kill depose or judicially condemne these oppressing Kings and put them to death I conceive these whole kingdomes and Parliaments may with farre better reason lesse danger and greater safety to themselvs their Kings and Realmes take up defensive Armes of their owne to repulse their violence For if they may lawfully helpe themselves and vindicate their Liberties from their Kings encroachments by the assistance and Armes of forraigne Princes who have no relation to them nor particular interest in the differences betweene their kings and them which can hardly be effected without subjecting themselves to a forraigne power the death or deposition of the oppressing King much more may they defend and releeve themselves against him by their owne domesticke Forces if they be able by generall consent of the Realme because they have a particular interest and ingagement to defend their owne persons estates liberties which forraigners want and by such domesticke Forces may prevent a forraigne subjection preserve the life of the oppressing Prince and succession of the Crowne in the hereditary line which forraigne Armies most commonly endanger And certainely it is all one in point of Reason State Law Conscience for Subjects to relieve themselves and make a defensive warre against their Soveraigne by forraigne Princes Armes as by their owne and if the first be just and lawfull as all men generally grant without contradiction and Bracton to l. 2. c. 16. I see no colour but the latter must bee just and lawfull too yea then the first rather because lesse dangerous lesse inconvenient to King and Kingdome From Reasons I shall next proceed to punctuall Authorities Not to mention our ancient Brittons taking up of armes by joint consent against their oppressing tyrannizing Kings Aâ—chigallo Emerian and Vortigern whom they both expelled and deposed for their tyranny and mis-government nor our Saxons ray sing defensive Forces against King Sigebert Osfred Ethelred Beornard Coolwulfe and Edwyn who were forcibly expelled and deprived by their Subjects for their bloody cruelties and oppressions which actions the whole Kingdome then and those Historians who recorded them since reputed just and honourable and no Treason nor Rebellion in Law or Conscience being for the Kingdomes necessary preservation and the peoples just defence which Histories I have elsewhere more largely related Nor yet to insist long on the fore-mentioned Barons warre against king Iohn and Henry the 3 d. for regaining establishing preserving Magna Chaâ—ta and other Liberties of the Realme which our Kings had almost utterly deprived them off I shall onely give you some few briefe observations touching these warres to cleare them from those blacke aspersions of Rebellion Treason and the like which some late Historians especially Iohn Speed to flatter those Kings to whom they Dedicated their Histories have cast upon them contrary to the judgement of our ancienter Choniclers and Matthew Paris who generally repute them lawfull and honourable First then consider what opinion the Prelates Barons and Kingdome in generall had of these Warres at first Anno 1414. in a Parliament held at Pauls the 16. yeare of King Iohns raigne Steven Langton Archbishop of Canterbury produced a Charter of King Henry the First whereby he granted the Ancient Liberties of the Kingdome of England which had by his Predecessors beene oppressed with unjust exactions according to the Lawes of King Edward with those emendations which his Father by the counsell of his Barons did ratifie which Charter being read before the Barons they much rejoyced and swore in the presence of the Archbishop that for these Liberties they would if need required spend their blood which being openly done in Parliament they would never have taken such a publike solemne Oath had they deemed a Warre against the King for recovery or defence of these their Liberties unlawfull and no lesse then Treason and Rebellion in point of Law or Conscience After this the Barons assembling at Saint Edmondâ—bury conferred about the said Charter and swore upon the high Altar That if King Iohn refused to confirme and restore unto them those Liberties the Rights of the Kingdome they would make Warre upon him and withdraw themselves from his Allegiance untill he had ratified them all wâ—th his Charter under his great Seale And further agreed after Christmas to Petition him for the same and in the meane time to provide themselves of Horse and Furniture to be ready if the King should start from his Oath made at Winchester at the time of his absolution for confirmation of these Liberties and compell him to satisfie their demand After Christmas they repaire in a Military manner to the King lying in the new Temple urging their desires with great vehemencie the King seeing their resolution and inclination to warre made answer That for the matter they required he would take consideration till after Easter next In the meane time he tooke upon him the Crosse rather through feare then devotion supposing himselfe to bee more safe under that Protection And to shew his desperate malice and wilfulnesse who rather then not to have an absolute domination over his people to doe what he listed would be any thing himselfe under any other that would but support him in his violences he sent an Embassage the most base and impious that ever yet was sent by any free and Christian Prince unto Miramumalim the Moore intituled the great King of Affrica Morocco and Spaine wherein