lead him to own a meer democracy which is the worst of Governments as the only lawful Government he placeth and fixeth the unpunâ—shable Soveraignty there Kings and Parliaments may be according to him punished by the people but they have a Power attended with impunity from men if they erre God must amend that onely we see where we are and that the resolution of all supreme Power is upon the people under God according to these mens tenets the rabble of the multitude against King and all Nobles and Rulers are instated in the Soveraignty under God yea Napht. goes further giving to any part of meer private persons power over King and all Magistrates and Nobles to judge depose and punish them or the major part of the people if there be strength enough and that uncontrollably upon their own judgement of discretion as we have heard and will hear further But now ventum est ad triarios we come to the great Guns whereby Napht. and his witnesses L. R. and the Apol. strives to batter down Gods order and to make soveraign Powers in the case of abuse of Power punishable by their inferiors and subjects a thing which all the Lords and Superiors in Scotland had need to look to for with as good reason may their tennents and vassals be exhorted to rise against them and take order with them when they think they do them wrong as subjects may be exhorted to rise against their King Lex Rex harps much upon the Covenant betwixt the King and the people and betwixt both together with God quest 14. and 40. asserting That the King is only a King conditionally and Covenant-wise that this Covenant giveth the people a coactive Power over the King to punish him if he fail in his duty and that if it be not performed on his part although it be but a tacite and implicite Covenant the people for their part are loosed from the Covenant These and many such Doctrines consequent on these he hath in these questions But Naph out-stripes his leader for albeit he also harpes upon that supposed Covenant p. 19. p. 30. and elsewhere laying much of the stresse of resistance against and revenge upon the King abusing his power upon that rotten foundation Yet he goes a greater length then L. R. doth for L. R. takes the Covenant as the warrand for the body of the people with their Rulers of inferior degree to resist and punish the King but Napth pleads the Covenant for any party of meer private persons to rise against resist throw down King and all Magistrates Supreme and Subordinate and in their Phineas-like motions to use the vindicative punishing reforming Power of the Sword especially in case of defection in matter of Religion such as he thinks the cause now to be And the great stresse of the business is still laid upon these Covenants tacite and virtual or expresse and it is pleaded the people or any part of the people have by that Covenant a joynt obligation with the King and all Magistrates lying upon them to use a vindicative and reforming Power in case of defection in Religion yea even against all back-slidden Rulers and the plurality of an apostate Nation There is a two-fold Covenant they talk of as the foundation of all humane Societies 1. the religious joynt Covenant between the King or Soveraign and people with God 2. The civil Covenant betwixt the King and the people Concerning the former it is Naph mind p. 18. That albeit the care of Religion toward God in a vindicative and punishing way and reforming it c. lyeth upon the King or Magistrates mainly he should have said onely for none can produce a commission but the Powers ordained of God for using the vindicative punitive and reforming Sword about which the question is now but only the Magistrate Yet there is a joynt obligation lying upon the people and every party thereof to vindicate and reform Religion in a publick punitive way even against all Magistrates and Nobles if they be the principal perverters and patrons of abominations and against the plurality of the people for sayes he 18. p. Idolatry perjury c. ought by all meanes n. b. to be suppressed restrained and severly punished So that if any part of the people do think the Magistrates all of them or the plurality of the people Patrons of abominations as in the present case he challenges them to be any private party that think they have power enough may slee to the vindicative punishing and reforming Sword and fall upon all Rulers and others whom they think to be in a defection and will boldly say that in truth they are so This is the mans fine Doctrine he conceals not his own intentions and his parties upon the account of the Apostasie which they now fansie to fall with bloody cruelty on all Magistrates and people too who stand in their way he shews his bloody teeth but God will knock out the teeth of this sanguinary Faction as he hath done Yea Naph runs yet higher for upon the conceit of setting up Government for Truth and Relâ—gion and Gods Worship as the main ends P. 16. he asserts The cessation of the obligation to the Government when there is a perversion in that great design of it and a returning of people to their primaeve liberty as he often speaks to erect Governments to their mind and to combine with whom they will as before we heard Concerning these things we say 1. That albeit it be Gods holy will that in erections of Civil Government his Truth sincere Worship and Glory in these should be mainly minded and intended by men and it is mens duty so to do yet it is clear that in many places de facto it is not so although men profess in the general aiming at Truth and right Worship yet there are aberrations in the particular 2. Albeit there be in the point of Truth and the Worship of God which de jure should be principally cared for in Government a notable perversion and swerving that doth not at all invalidate the Authority or Government nor break the obligation thereunto although it be injurious to favourers of Truth and right Worship For God so far regards the keeping of humane Societies in tolerable order that albeit the great duties of advancement of his Truth and Worship be not minded by Rulers yet he will not have the Common-wealths where justice between man and man is maintained for his Glory although Religion not minded as it ought to be casten loose nor will have men think themselves loosed from obligation to the Government albeit there be perversion in the managing thereof as to Religion for neither must they be heard who hold That civil Dominion is grounded on Grace nor they who say That infidel heretical or excommunicate Magistrates fall from their power or that the Subjects obligation to them ceaseth 3. It shall be easily granted that the people and every one of the
to them yet hath he not made his Providence the Rule of our actions to warrand us being private Persons to punish them but we must go to the Law and Testimony to seek the Rules of our actions And whatever action is not according to this there is no light in it it is but a work of darkness for all the fair colours men can set upon it albeit God visit the sins of Parents upon Children yet that gives no warrand to Children to offer violence to their Parents for their sins But yet the Libeller cannot so leave the matter but after many ranting and rambling words which it were a pain to ripe up nor is it our purpose minding onely to notice his abuses of Scripture and impertinent reasonings he comes at length to his great reserve pag. 30. and sayes If all these things do not satisfy as indeed they are soon pleased who will be satisfied by him he hath yet four or five particulars that will make all sure for his position which he hath been labouring to underprop viz. That any private persons may against all Magistrates and the great body of the Common-wealth take and use not only the self defending but vindicative punishing and reforming Sword And 1. he saith That the reason of delivering the Kingdom to the People and not to the King with the Law it self Deut. 17.14 no way contradicted or repealed by the manner of the Kingdom and in effect of Tyranny fore told by way of disswasive 1 Sam. 8.10 doth make much for his position But 1. the man utters here a gross untruth For God doth not in the Text deliver the Kingdom to the People and not to the King as he saith he doth only before hand instruct the People anent the right way of setting of a King over them when it should come to pass that they should do so and leaves in his Word instructions for the King that shouâ—d be set over them how to behave himself That the Kingdom is here delivered to the People to be managed by them as well as to the King or with reserve of Power to them to use violence upon and against the King if he should deviate from the rules there set down as this man contends is most false the People had not so much Power as to choose the person that was to be King God reserved this for himself 15. ver Thou shalt in any wise set him King over thee whom the Lord thy God shall choose neither ever did they choose a King but onely accepted of the Kings chosen and given them by God and designed to them by his extraordinary Embassadours as is clear first in Saul and after in David and his Family the chosen Royal Family Neither were the People to look on their Kings as their servants or vassals or creatures as such men use to write but as set over them Thou shalt set him over thee not under thee whom the Lord thy God shall choose neither had they power over the King but the King by Gods Ordinance had Power over them 2. Were it so that the Kingdom or the Power of managing it were delivered to the People which is most false yet this makes nothing to this Libellers position giving Power to any party of private Persons amongst People to punish all Magistrates and the major part of the people too if they be strong enough whatever was granted to the People here was granted to the body not to this or that party of private persons 3. It is very true the place 1 Sam. 8.10 and not 1 Sam. 10.10 as he mis-cites both this and the former Scripture neither contradicts nor repeales that Law Deut. 17.14 but agrees notably with it But it is false that onely the Tyranny of a King is there spoken of by way of meerly disswasive Moses and Samuel do very well agree together the one shews what a King should do ex officio and de jure the other what a King may do by the power he hath and yet not be obnoxious to punishment from Subjects The one shews what a good King should do the other what a People should suffer of an evil King without attempt of violence upon him The one sets forth Gods approbative Law and instructs Kings in their kingly duties the other sets down the permissive Law of the King shewing the reach of his Power if he should abuse it without punishment from man The doing of such things 1 Sam. 8.10 was in effect tyrannical not approven by God but if the King came to abuse his Power so far he had a permissive Law for him that it was not free to his Subjects to punish him As albeit the Lord approveth not Divorce or a mans putting away of his wife yet by a permissive Law husbands amongst Gods People had liberty Deut. 24.1 to put away their wives without being obnoxious to humane punishment for that cause albeit God reserved the punishment of the hard-hearted husbands to himself So the Lord gives no approbation to over-imperious or tyrannical facts of Princes yet if they abuse their Power he will reserve them unto dreadful punishments by his own hand but will not have the hands of their Subjects to be upon or against them As parents do evil in correcting their children for their pleasure Heb. 12.9 10. and have no moral approven power from God so to do yet it is a sort of right of parents that if they so do their children may not use violence upon them or rise to destroy them but be in a reverent subjection to them But this great Theologue tells us That it is only the manner of Tyranny that is here set down by Samuel And that meerly by way of disswasive to disswade them from seeking a King Ans 1. It is true the fact is the manner of Tyranny but the permissive power without punishment from Subjects is the just right of all Lawful Kings of whom as it may be said Nil paenas metuunt nulla quia lege tenentur So to them if they deboard and abuse their power it may be said Si genus humanum mortalia temnitis aâ—ma At sperate deos memores fandi atque nefandi 2. Let it be so that Samuel in setting forth the manner or Law of the King intended to disswade the people from insisting in their petition for a King yet that was not his only nor his main intention his main intention is to shew the People their duty under a Kings oppression though it was not his duty to oppresse them to shew them I say what they behoved to suffer under a King beyond measure imperious without resistance for he is not now teaching the King his duty This is clear for otherwise to what purpose should he have written the manner of the King in a Book and laid it up before the Lord after the King is set over them 1 Sam. 10.25 when there was no place for repentance no remedy no use of
his Acts of violent resistance and vindication of liberty according to the Covenant And in reference to the case of the Nation in these Times the man is so far transported as to teach the people That their liberty is so far lost that they are reduced to the condition of a most insupportable and unnatural conquest which should be a most just cause and provocation to all ingenuous Spirits and good Patriots to undertake the asserting of their own liberty upon the greatest peril Page 116. And that the pressures and grievances of the Nation by reason only of that Court of Commission for executing the Laws anent Church matters do far exceed all the pressures and injuries of that Spanish inquisition whereupon the United Provinces have justified and approved their revolt from the King of Spain Page 126. So that this mans design is clear from his words to dissolve and confound this Kingdom to move them who will be taken in his snare to renounce Allegiance to the King to revolt from him as having better cause then the United Provinces had to revolt from the King of Spain to combine themselves in new Societies to their own mind they being now relapsed into their primaeve liberty and the obligation to the Government being loosed and that every man and every Party as they find themselves strong enough should upon their own discretive judgement of what is their due civil Liberty as well as what is right Religion and upon their greatest peril undertake not only violent resistance of all powers above them but valiant vindication of Religion and Liberties and reforming what they think amisse vi armis even to the punishing all and whatsoever person that will oppose them in their way The particulars shall be after spoken to but now more generally we consider his fundamental Doctrines of confusion That the true ends of instituting civil Government are the true happiness of People here and hereafter and the glory of God and that Magistrates and Governours are oblieged to prosecute these ends no judicious Christian will question All the question is anent the Duty of the fearers of God in the case of the perversion of the ends of Government by these in whose hand it is whether when this perversion is manifest the band and tye to the Government ceaseth as to the persons injur'd thereby and whither this be the case as matters are now stated that private persons or any number of them are for the present suppos'd perversions of the ends of Government disoblieged from all tyes to the same and relaps'd into their primaeve liberty and priviledge to combine in Societies which are to their mind as at first they did associate themselves in the political bodies whereof now they are members for their own good and preservation As for the general position or affirmative resolution to the former question it is undoubtedly both unchristian and unreasonable When was there at any time greater perversion and straying from the ends of Government then was in the times of many of the holy Prophets of God and in the times of Christ his holy Apostles and the primitive Christians who were both replenish'd with much light to know their duties and much zeal to act for the honour of God against all perils and dangers whatsoever lying in their way Government was perverted by manifest Idolatry and horrid Tyranny many monsters of men possessing the thrones of Soveraignty yet look over all the sacred Writings of the holy Prophets look to the history of the life and actions of Christ and his Apostles or to the history of the great Lights of the primitive Church for many hundreds of years and see if any of the teachers taught such doctrine that in case of the manifest perversion of the ends of Government people did relapse into their primaeve liberty and priviledge to combine with whom they pleased to forsake the union with these political bodies with which they were conjoyn'd or that they were liberated from the obligation and band to the civil order and Government under which they were or if that was the sense of any of the godly zealous Christians and fearers of God in these times who alwayes keeped themselves pure from sinning against God refusing obedience unto mens unlawful Commandments but the Doctrine of these new Christians never came in their hearts that they should make secessions from the civil Societies wherein they lived so long as they keep'd within the bounds over which such or such Government was and account all their obligation to abused Government dissolved Yea upon the contrary as there are never to be found amongst the people fearing God any such rentings of the States and Common-wealths they lived in approven of God or injoyn'd by his Prophets in his name So in reproving sins and menacing judgements against these in Authority albeit they grievously abused their places yet the Prophets Apostles and Christ also studied to preserve respects to the Soveraignty and Powers set over People and while they warn'd all from the highest to the lowest to amend their wayes they guarded against seditious dissolutions of the Common-wealth on any pretext never prescribing rebellion and revolting the greater sin as the cure of Tyranny or irreligiousness in the Actings of Powers What abusers of Government and perverters of the ends thereof were Tiberius Claudius Nero Domitian c. yet Christ will have Caesars due given him and his Apostles presse subjection to them Honor to be given them Tribute to be paid to them Prayers to be made for them not for destroying them and their Government but for preserving their Persons and sanctifying their hearts that they might govern rightly and peaceably a Prayer Point-blank contrary to endeavours to disturbe their Kingdoms by seditious courses to dissolve and dissipate them and to take vengeance on their persons So that they must needs be the disciples not of Christ or Paul or Peter but of Judas of Galilee and of Theudas Acts 5.36 37. who upon account of perversion of Government teach any part of the people to dissolve and confound the Societies whereof they are members and that the obligation being loosed from the Government they may break off from it and erect themselves in new Combinations and Societies with whom they think best If this may passe for good divinity the grand enemy shall never want opportunity of casting Fire-balls in humane Societies and working confusion and every evil work But as this position is very dissonant from Religion so it is no less to sound reason for it hath a clear tendency to the breaking and crumbling in pieces of all humane political Societies all Commonwealths and Kingdoms of the World which no wit of Man can preserve from dissolution if once this Principle be drunk into the hearts of People and sink there For by this mans opinion the judgement of the perversion of the ends of Government in tyranny oppression c. is alwayes put over to the
exemption and impunity as to subjects of the person invested with Soveraignity and Majesty Gods law natures light and sound reason are all for this that the person or persons invested with soveraign Majesty having the Legislative-power the Jurisdictional-power the Coerecive and Punitive-power originally in himself must enjoy exemption and impunity as to subjects actings against them The contrary tenet overthrows the order of God and nature and precipitates humane Societies in a gulf of endlesse confusions 3. This hath been the constant sense of the generation of the righteous and the antient Christians and great lights of Gods Church whom none will call flatterers of Princes but such as have lost their fore-heads Tertul. apol contra gentes imperatores sunt in solius Dei potestate a quo sunt secundi post quem primi ante omnes Deos super omnes homines And a little after Majestatem Caesaris soli Deo subjicio So ad Scapulam Imperator omnibus major est dum solo deo est minor So Optat. contra Parmenian super imperatorem non est nisi solus Deus qui fecit imperatorem And Jerom. epist ad Rusticum speaking of Davids words Ps 51. Against thee against thee onely have I sinned sayes he spake so quia Rex erat alium non timebat And Ambrose in Apol. Davidis cap. 4. 10. speaking of the same words sayes Rex utique erat nullis ipse legibus tenebatur he means as to fear punishment from man quia liberi sunt Reges a vinculis delictorum neque enim ullis ad paenam vocantur Legibus tuti Imperii potestate homini ergo non peccavit qui non tenebatur obnoxius There is no doubt but David was sensible both of the horrid injury he had done to Vriah the occasion of that Psalm and of the scandal he had given to Gods people in which sense he might be well said to sin against both But in this word against thee thee only have I sinned As he minds to acknowledge that God onely was conscious to his sin in committing it So also he shews that this above all touched his conscience that he had violated Gods Law and shews that he is touched with his terrors as his only Judge though as Diodat on the place sayes well as he was a King he was exempted from the punishment of man and not obnoxious to humane Tribunals And excellent Mr. Calvin in that 20. Ch. of the 4. Book of his institut S. 2 7. Assumptum in Regiam Majestatem violare nefas est nunquam nobis seditiosae istae cogitationes in mentem veniant tractandum esse pro meritis Regem S. 29 Personam sustinent voluntate Domini cui inviolabilem Majestatem ipse impressit insculpsit And if Princes be tyrannous nostrum non est hujusmodi malis mederi c. and so S. 31. fully to our purpose it is a wonder how many who pretend respect to Calvin as he is indeed most worthy of respect should dare to violate the Sacrosanct Maiesty of Kings if they will but read over that Chapter wherein he speaks most notably against the seditious Doctrines of our times as if he had been living in them 4. It is not denyed that the King is bound before God to rule his people according to the Law of God of reason and nature yea and to take his direction in Government from the rational Laws of the Kingdom which are deductions from or determinations of the Law of God reason and nature to particular circumstances agreed to by the consent and with the good liking of his people It is too grosse a saying Regi quicquid libet licet a good King will turn the word and say Regi quod licet supposing it expedient libet he will make use of good Laws as his instruments in governing the people and account it his honour and a thing greatly becoming his Majesty to do nothing contrary to Law in the ordinary course of his Government and not at all stray there-from but when great reason urges an equitable interpretation of the Law and respect to the end and aim of it when precise cleaving to the rigidity of the letter thereof might make summum jus summa injuria It is a royal thing for a King to live by the same good Laws which are given by him to the people and it is of efficicious influence upon them to move them to walk in their duties orderly Rex tenetur servare Leges si non ut Leges tamen ut rationes But if the supreme Power should deviat we maintain that as a sure truth which this man proudly and traiterously jeers at That impunity as from Subjects necessarily attends Soveraignity and supreme Majesty which hath this inseparable priviledge of exemption from violence by Subjects by the Law of God Reason and Nature whatever sort the Government be Monarchical or Polyarchical For no man can be judged or punished but by a Judge above him and the Supreme hath none such otherwise he were not Supreme To teach contrary to this is but to confound Gods Order and dissipate humane Societies by continual rebellions Yet this inviolableness of the sacred persons of Kings and supreme â—owers invested with Soveraign Authority from God thus asserted should be so far from licensing or incouraging them to do what they list that they have the greater cause to walk with holy fear within the boundaries of Gods Law and their own just Laws for the more immunity they have from mens violence which must be granted unless all things be turned into confusion the sadder punishments they shall have from God if they debord The sixth Chapter of the Book of Wisdom though it be Apocrypha is well worthy to be read by Kings and Potentates and to be trembled at for the matter is very agreeable to Gods Word The heaviest vengeances that are recorded in History sacred and profane have come upon flagitious and tyrannous Kings their exemption from mens hands reserves them to fall into the hands of the living God which is a fearful thing who besides the wrath that is to come sometimes calls for forreign scourges upon them sometimes suffers an evil spirit of rebellion to go out amongst their own Subjects who though they do wickedly in stretching forth their hands against the sacred head of the Lords Anointed yet it is ordinary for the great God to do the work of his holy Justice by wicked hands and when men are serving their own lusts and crossing his revealed will for which vengeance attends them yet they may be in these actions serving his Providence and his Justice against wicked Powers albeit they think not so nor comes it into their minds or hearts But Potentates should remember the word Potentes paâ—ce debent uti potestate sua ut semper eam retinere possint But the Libeller will have the memorable instance of the times whereof he now speaks Naph P. 30. of casting away the Carcases and
insurrections against Kings as false Prophets do now albeit they had as great cause as ever people had under some of their Kings and were in capacity probable enough to crush them they never suggested to them that their obligations to subjection unto their Kings being but conditional they were set free when they became so extreamly wicked idolatrous c. nor did ever Godly people although they strived to keep themselves pure and to gain-stand in their private capacities the evils of the times think themselves free to use violence against Powers above them had this been their duty no doubt Gods Prophets would plainly and down-right have told them of it without circumlocutions but this they never did either that was no duty or the Prophets were not faithful in not admonishing them of their duty When at first that people sought a King from Samuel they resolved not to take him conditionally si bene regnaverit but with all the faults that might follow him neither reserved they Power to coerce him which had it been in their thoughts would easily have answered and weakned Samuels terrifying disswasive for they could have said we take him only as King on condition of his good behaviour otherwise we will take order with him but would have one as other Nations had Kings about them of whom Buchanan says they were not legitimi Reges but tyranni in his language because not under Law coaction And so also they behaved themselves toward them not using them as they deserved but forbearing violence against them although they were very evil Princes many of them But yet further it is pressed that such an Oath and Covenant betwixt King and People was in use then because Eccles 8.2 It is said I counsel thee to keep the Kings commandment and that in regard of the oath of God Therefore there was say they an Oath or Covenant betwixt King and People Ans 1. The most that can be made of this place is as Diodat in his note thereupon affirms that the subjects swore the oath of Allegiance and Obedience to the King upon the ground whereof they were to obey him it was at most foedus unilaterum as they call it in the Schools but it imports not mutual engagement of the King to them or that he swore to them much less that the Oath they made to him was conditional with a reserve of Power to punish him for his deviations which in this same King that writes this were very great albeit we grant all such oaths to Kings to be understood salvo jure Dei salva Deo obedientia 2. We do not see ground to assert that ordinarily amongst that people there were oaths of fidelity and obedience given to their Kings whatever was done in the extraordinary cases above mentioned far lesse that Kings engaged to them by oath ordinarily both the King ruled without such an oath and the people obeyed without such an oath or engagement Neither is there in Deut. 17. or Sam. 8. or any where else such a rule set in the institution or constitution of the King that any such matter should be done Nor hear we in the History of this same King Solomon who writes this that when he entred to the Throne either he swore to the people or they to him unlesse perhaps 2 Sam. 29.24 may import this as to Solomon Junius translation of this Text wherein he is followed by Cartwright may well passe praestitutum Regis observa sed pro ratione juramenti Dei i. e. Keep the Kings Commandment so far as it may be keeped retaining fidelity to God to whom absolute and illimited obedience is sworn So not the motive of obedience to the King because of the oath sworn to him is here imported but only the measure and moderation of our obedience due to him so as it may consist with the duty sworn to God our obedience to the King is here cautionated saith Cartwright dummodo non pugnet cum juramento quo divino imperio obstricti sumus we are to obey him 3. We may hold close to our own translation and yet not be necessitate to grant so much to be spoken of here as an oath of the people to the King let be a mutual Oath and Covenant betwixt King and People neither of which was in ordinary use amongst that people nor mentioned in sacred Scripture as ordinary For they were all bound by oath to obey all Gods Commandments this was the oath of God and amongst his Commandments this was one that they should obey the King in the Lord and obey all the Kings lawful Commandments in regard of their general oath and engagement to God to obey all his commandments they were bound to obey the Kings Command under God and in subordination to him albeit they never took any particular oath to obey the King and dealt not covenant-wise with him And thus the sense runs fairly I counsell thee to keep the Kings commandment and that in regard of or propter the oath of God because thou hast sworn to obey God obey the King in all lawful things for this is the will of God The motive of obedience is taken not from any particular oath made to the King but from the general oath made to God engaging in all things to obey him But yet this business of the civil Covenant is not at an end for it is urged L. R. P. 97. that this Covenant tyes the King be it tacite or expresse not to God only but to the people and brings him by reciprocation of bands to be under a Law-obligation to be subject to the peoples censure and punishment in case of failing as well as they are subject to to him in case of failing and that all covenants and contracts betwixt man and man bring the covenanters under a law and claim before men if the contract be broken And that the King becoming bound to the people he comes under action and claim by them if he fail and is punishable as they are if they fail And that the King and they have a mutual coactive power one over another and are mutually Magistrates one to another and the people if the King fail may judge him in their tribunal of necessity and that there needs no judge on earth between them more then between two Nations independent one upon another when they warr together And that in reformations of things amisse especially in Religion people may extraordinarily intrude in the Magistrates office and not only reform themselves actibus elicitis but reform others actibus imperatis And that people by vertue of this supposed covenant may when they see cause formally and effectively excercise upon their Kings that royalty which they have in themselves virtually and fountally Much of that sort of stuffe is to be found quest 14.40 and every where in that Book And it is lamentable that while they who labour to preserve Gods order in the world should be branded as flatterers
and Parasits of Princes such flatterers of People to their own confusion and destruction should with their writings have such entertainment and countenance But yet it must be said that L. R. is far more tolerable then Naph for what he grants only to the body of the people or the inferior Rulers and Nobles with the people in acting against the King Napht. extends in favours of any party of meer private persons amongst the people against all Magistrates supreme and subordinate and affirms what the whole body with inferior Magistrates may do against a King deviating from his duty any small part of meer private persons if they have strength enough may by vertue of the Covenant do the same against all Magistrates supreme and subordinate not only as to resistance but as to revenge and punishing them A few notes shall be sufficient upon the former Doctrine and then the matter shall be at an end 1. Where a Covenant is made between a King and a People a King I say that is truly such a one it s granted that the Covenant on the Kings part binds him not only to God in relation to the people as the object of his duty but doth bind him to the people formally yet not so as if he be deficient in his duties they are enstated in a power above him to sit as his Judges or that they are loosed from all duty to him and free to do him violence If a Father swear to do his fatherly duty to his Child that makes not the Child his Superior to punish him if he fail when a Minister is admitted to teach a people he swears to them to be dutiful but they are not therefore made his Superiors to punish him if he fail It is a most false assertion that goes alongs that whole Book that a right is given by the covenant sworn to the inferiors and subjects in the politick Society to judge and punish their superiors in case of failing No man can lawfully be judged and punished whatever contract be by another then his lawful Judge that is above him in that Society whereof he is a part L R. Pag. 100.101 2. There is a very great difference between these who are in different political Societies when they break their Contracts or Covenants one with another and betwixt the head and body or members of one and that same civil Society God having allowed lawful Wars allows seeking of reparation or repelling of wrongs done by one Nation to another by force of the Sword when no rational means can bring the doers of the wrong to do right and there being no other remedy he himself the Lord of hosts and God of armies sits Judge and Moderator in that great business and in the use of War is appealed to as Judge there being no common Judge on earth to sit on the causes of these independent Nations But God having set and established in one particular and political Society or Nation his own Ordinance of Magistracy to which every soul must be subject and all subject to the Supreme he hath not put the punishing Sword in any hand but in the hand of the Magistrate his Sword-bearer Rom. 13. Nor hath allowed liberty to meer private persons to manage it against the supreme Magistrate no nor to inferior Magistrates as to him who in respect of the supreme Majesty are but private persons whatever they be toward their inferiors The Magistrates chiefly the Supreme are by their official power above the whole Nation and as absurd it is to say they are above the powers which God hath set over them as L R. p. 460. saith Thrasonically he hath proved unanswerably as to say that every Parish is above the Minister in an Ecclesiastical way though he have official power over them all or that every Lord in Scotland have their Tennents and Vassals above them a thing which the Nobles of Scotland had need to look to For certainly the Principles which lead to subject Kings to people lead clearly and by undoubted consequence to subject them to their Vassals and to all under them yea and all Masters to Servants and Parents to Children and to confound and invert the order of all humane Societies This truth we must cleave to that in one and that same civil Society where God hath appointed Rulers and ruled Subjects cannot without sacrilegious intrusion and contempt of God snatch the Sword out of the Magistrates hand to punish him with it though in some particulars he abuse it Neither can a War intended for this end by meer private persons be lawful against their head or heads nor can any forraign War be managed without a lawful Authority on the Part of the undertakers 3. It is a very false assertion That the people gave the Kingdom to David only conditionally if he did such and such duties to them and if not reserving power to dethrone him L. R. p. 97. God having set David upon his holy hill as his King and not only made him King by his Providence but express designment special command and word none on earth were left at liberty to undo what God would have done and appointed to be 4. It is very weakly reasoned L. R. p. 97. That because Gods people may humbly plead with himself upon the account of his own fidelity in promising or as this man sayes have action of Law and jus quoddam a bold enough expression against God to plead with him that therefore the Kings Covenant gives the people ground of civil action against him to coerce or punish him It had been better said that upon this ground they might humbly plead with him supplicat and reason with him as Gods Deputy bearing the impress of his Majesty and Soveraignty on earth But as God cannot otherwise be pleaded with upon account of his promise wherein he is bound not so much to us as to his own fidelity to evidence it reddit ille debita nulli debens and cannot be pleaded with by force or violence So his Deputies on earth on whom under himself he hath stamped inviolable Majesty whatever they be as Calvin writes in the place often cited are not to be pleaded with by strong hand and force howsoever in somethings they miscarry a thing not competent to the Majesty of God For he hath not in his Word given any commission to any of their Subjects to rise violently against them or use the punishing Sword upon them If this commission can be produced we have no more to say but Good is the Word of the Lord but till this be seen we shall cleave to Rom. 13. that makes the Magistrate the only Sword-bearer of God to avenge or punish however perhaps he hath his aberrations in using it If this man can shew a Superior on earth to use the Sword upon the Soveraign Magistrate people shall have fair liberty to plead their claim or law-suit as he calls it before him But who will judge it more
piece of holy policy meet for that time to gather together the scattered people of God who might be tempted otherwise to other courses they were now coming to be his Subjects who were not so before but were under another King and fit it was to give them security touching his good mind toward them they having so long stood it out in arms against him But the question is what was the nature the matter and import of that Covenant The Scripture sayes not it was such a Covenant as these men would have I shall rule you rightly if you obey me dutifully otherwise not upon the Kings part And upon the peoples part We shall obey you and be subject to you if ye rule us rightly otherwise we will not but use our co-active power upon you to dethrone and destroy you and punish you That there was any such conditional Covenant expressed or meant is far from the truth David neither minds to admit them to be his Subjects conditionally or to subject himself to their co-active power nor minde they to offer themselves to be his Subjects in such terms On the contrary it appeareth clearly in the Text that they recognosce his right of reigning over them is from God and that he was not subject to be removed by them see 2 Sam. 5.2 1 Chr. 11.2 3. They say The Lord said to thee thou shalt feed my people Israel and shalt be Captain or Ruler over them And it is added Therefore they came c. and anointed him King over Israel according to the Word of the Lord by Samuel They humbly declare him King whom God had constituted whom they could not lawfully reject and it is impious to think that they recognoscing Gods constitution of him yet should fancy a Paction or Covenant giving them co-active superiority over him to remove him when they thought meet though God had set him on the Throne by a special appointment All the Covenant that can be supposed here is upon the peoples part an engagement to humble subjection and homage And upon the Kings part a Covenant of indempnity for former oppositions to him wherein they had need to be comfortably secured or at most we shall not repugne if it be called a Covenant both of protection and right ruling of them yet so as not subjecting himself to their censures or co-action or that they should be his Subjects only upon that condition being otherwise free to fall upon him The Covenant may be to mutual duties and yet on neither side conditional but absolute each party oblieging themselves to their own duty absolutely but not on condition that the other party do their duty As if a man bind himself by oath to give me one hundred pounds and I bind my self again by oath to him to give him one hundred pounds without conditional provision that he pay me the money he promised me Albeit he should fail in his oath and not pay me yet must not I fail in mine but must pay him because my oath is separate from his and independent upon it and hath a separate obligation absolute which no failing of the other party to me can loose Indeed the case is otherwise when there is a reciprocal contract of things to be done by one party upon condition of some things to be done by the other as in Covenants of Peace between Nations there the breach of condition by one party looses the promise of the other which was only conditionally made But subjection is not engaged to Kings conditionally but absolutely albeit obedience to God be reserved when any active obedience contrary to him is called for Again for the other instance of the Covenant which Jehoiadah made between King Joash and the people 2 Chr. 13.2 3. 2 Kings 11.17 this was also made upon an extraordinary occasion for ordinarily we never hear of any such Covenants amongst Gods people and their Kings and extraordinaries cannot Found ordinary Rules Athaliah had murthered all the royal Seed 2 King 11. 2 Chr. 23. except Joash who was kept secret six years in the house of the Lord while the usurper possessed the Kingdom Now when the godly Priest Jehoiadah the Kings Tutor saw a fit time he ingaged the principal men in Covenant of fidelity to the King 2 King 11.4 and shewed them the Kings Son This was a necessary piece of holy Policy when the Usurper and her faction had so long strengthned themselves to engage the chief men to special fidelity to him And after that 12.17 He brought forth the Kings Son and put the Crown upon him and gave him the Testimony and they made him King and anointed him and they clapt their hands and said God save the King and Jehoiadah made a Covenant betwixt the Lord and the King and the people and that they should be the Lords people between the King also and the people Joash was then but seven years old and not in capacity to make a Covenant with the people but his godly Tutor did preside in that business But two things to our purpose are remarkable 1. That he is Crowned and made King before the Covenant is made as is clear in the Text which crosses our Antimonarchists who assert the King cannot be made King untill he make the Covenant with the people and that he gets the Crown and royal Authority Covenant-wise and conditionally whereas here he is made King antecedently to any Covenant as the Text clears it 2. That albeit the matter of King and peoples Covenant with God be expressed viz. That they should be the Lords people yet it is not told us what the tenor of the Covenant betwixt King and people was nor what the King or Jehoiadah Covenanted in his name the young King of seven years old what could he say in Covenanting Jehoiadah was only President in the matter Diodat seems to say well that in this place Jehoiadah made the people swear alledgiance and fidelity to the King as before he had made the Rulers do vers 4. and no more he took an oath of fidelity of them But how shall it be cleared that it was conditional and with a reserve of coactive and punitive Power over him as these men will have it But passing from this let it be so which cannot be asserted with warrand that all the Kings of Judah made such conditional Covenants with the people as is supposed yet will any judicious man force the particular customes of that Nation on all Nations that might be best for that Nation that was not simply best their customs without a Law of God bearing a standing reason cannot be obligatory on others least we judaize too much But the constant practice of all the Prophets and people of God in that Kingdom when their Kings were very wicked idolatrous and tyrannous speaks clearly that they never had such thoughts of a liberty by vertue of covenant to fall with violence on their Kings The Prophets of God never taught them