Parliament requires we must all be slaves a proper inference and vpon this he concludes that petitioning was but forme because he doth not like the Kingly Government It cannot be soe absurd to binde the King to a blinde obedience as to confine the Parliaments reason to the will of one man Much more absurd to bind the King and leave subjects vnconfined That the King did nothing but what was opposite to his professed interest cannot be supposed but in his concessions to the late Parliament and we finde by sad experience that nothing is more ruinous to the Kingdome then a power in the Parliament over the King and they have been soe farr from a power to confine the exorbitancie of Kings that those illegall conventions which acted the Tragedies of some Kings were but the stales to vsurpers and moulded to their will That the King called them young statesmen he imputes to arrogance Doubtles the King might have said much more then what he did that most part of these propounders were young statesmen Is there a man in England that doubts it if he regard either age or experience how they have governed themselves and the Kingdome all men see who from soe greate tranquilitie have turned it into a lamentable combustion and despised the Kingdomes interest both at home and abroade that Phaetons miscarriage was never soe answeared by the practice of any rash and precipitate medlers in affaires of state as these vsurpers and as they drove furiously with Iehu soe they practized his hipocrisie that loved the Kingdome better then the commaunds of God and departed not from the sins of Jeroboam though he pretended Zeale for the Lord and that omen of confusion from such fury and madnes his Majest prayed God to divert but the Libeller is pleased with his owne prognostickes and makes augury a warrant for any villany though the wickednes of his Masters may give just occasion to thinke their vengeance fleepes not He comes now to dictate law and tumbling of his repetitions that the Parliament sit not as subjects but superiours called not by him but by the law And doth not this man know the Parliament sayes all this is false and that they are his subjects and called by his writ Surely this Libeller takes pleasure in outfacing all truth otherwise he would not vse such absurd and palpable falsities and that after himselfe had said the king was trusted with the summoning and dissolving of Parliaments Vnreasonable desires might be vnexpected by the king and denyed Wee may see that Iehues fury and Phaetons rashnes were not ill remembred to these men that held the enforcing of old lawes repairing of injuries moderate desires of reformation soe contemptible that nothing but the rooting vp of the foundation of Government could be a remedie for the kingdome whose greate prosperitie was their greatest greivance and all those good lawes which he commends were vseles and to noe purpose That they which came to the Parliament had no authoritie to redresse greivances but to desire the redresse was acknowledged a truth by the late Parliamēt befor their insolēce was confirmed by the kings concessions That their Fathers made as vast alterations to free themselves from ancient Popery is much mistaken for whoever lookes into the reformation of Religion in England shall finde that it moved from the head and that the Parliament conformed themselves vnto the Counsells taken by the king and made not the alterations the Libeller supposes Alterations were made where corruptions had entred into doctrine or practice but it was very farr from esteeming the primitive Church a time of superstition and plucking vp by the rootes what ever was planted in the first ages of the Church Sectaries are not to be judges of what varies from Scripture their opinions arising from disobedience must needes be full of errour and schisme and his Majest had good reason to preferre the doctrine and practice of the primitive Church before any moderne opinion of reformation and as all the pregnant and solid reasons of the Churches beyound the seas wrought lesse with the faction in Parliament then the Tumults and rabbles soe farr lesse with this Libeller that defends a schisime from them all vnder the divided Conventicles of Independancy and a crew of ignorant and irreligious Hobgoblins that eate the fat of robbery and oppression And he heere pretends the example of all the reformed Churches against Episcopacie and afterwards confesses the Lutherans who are the greater part of a contrary practice The falshood giddines of their oracles are more ridiculous thē ever were the superstitious pilgramages of blinde votaries he that thus reprehends the kings oppositiō to the change of Church Government while he strives for innovation exclaimes against it as a Cryme for he sayes they would vindicate the Government of the Church innovated corrupted he should have shewed from what time it was corrupted The king sayes such as were looked vpon before as factious in the state Schismaticall in the Church demaunded not only tollerations for themselves in their vanitie noveltie and confusion but alsoe an extirpation of that Government whose rights they had a minde to invade And the Libeller askes was this man ever likely to be advised who setts himselfe against his chosen Councellours and censures the Government of other protestant Churches as bad as any Papist Certainly such Councellours were very vnfitt to advise that were soe ill qualified such as the lawe judges offenders are incapable to judge of law that such were these demaunders is evident to al men that know the lawes and Government of England There are noe Protestant Churches that thinke their Government censured if others differ from it in any particular but they will hold it a Schismaticall insolence in any to endeavour to alter a Government well setled vpon pretence to introduce another against the will of the king It imports not any contempt of the kingdome if such as they chose be found either defective or false and to engage the kingdome in all the impieties that men act which are chose by them is as absurd as vainely pretended by the Libeller who will make a faction prevalent by Tumults and sedition to be the kingdome and the king should have had his kingdome in greate contempt if he had taken such a faction for the kingdome He drawes an Argument from the penaltie of being a Christian vnder the heathens and a Protestant vnder Papists And surely had they sought to introduce their Religion with the destruction of the Civill state such a fact would have merited the name of treason but their course was contrary to these Sectaries who sought only to enjoy the libertie of their conscience not to enforce others That our saviour comming to reforme his Church was accused of an intent to invade Caesars right as good a right as ever the Prelate Bishopps had the one being gotten by force the other by spirituall vsurpation Helpes not the Sectaries
falsification will not sticke to slander thoughts and offer conjectures for convertions such as were most zealous in his Majest cause had a sobrietie vnblemishable by a Traytours malice and were not only free from druken distemper but brutish insolence and brazen impudence which the Rebells rather affect then repent of And is there not a just cause that the consciences of many should grow suspitious and corrected by the pretentions of the misnamed Parliament now proved false and vnintended What 's become of their making a glorious King lawes of the land priviledges of Parliament Doth not every man see they are all in the dirt among the Libellers Ceremonies But they never pretended to establish his Throne without our Libertie and Religion nor Religion without the word of God nor to judge of lawes by their being established but to establish them by their being Good and necessary They never pretended that his throne was inconsistent with libertie or Religion nor to judge of lawes otherwise then by being established But who must be the Dictatours the Parliament which is crumbled into a close Committee and state Counsell or any rabble that shall say this or that law is not good and therefore to be repealed though established he ought to have concluded that they never pretended priviledge of Parliament further then the subterranean junto or the Tumults should judge necessary To pray and not to governe is for a Monke not a King But is prayer inconsistent with Government Those men will accuse the King for being a Christian and have as litle love to prayer as obedience a monke will better governe then such a man pray who is constant to malice falshood and this man that sayes to governe by Parliament justifies his Rebellion to take away Kinglie Government His legislative Parliament and oppressed lawes cannot be admitted where other answeare is wanting but the Libeller hath long since thrust the force of them out of doores by his many prevarications confining them all in the Cabinet of his owne braine which must determine whether they be good and necessary He is constant to Iohn of Leidens principles that must take away other mens goods for doubt of ill vsing them and because the King sayes he feared the temptation of an absolute Conquest therefore it was pious and friendly in the Parliament to resist him Their pietie and friendshipp were much alike and the Libellers Riligion might come in for a share It s very probable that this warr had never been if the Act for continuance of the Parliament had not been consented to by the King and that Act might stopp the mouth of any reasonable man from saying there was such a power in the two houses as the Libeller dreames of that desired that Act from the King and it was never heard in our story that ever Parliaments made warr against Kings as Tyrants or otherwise for how could they make awarr that neither could nor ever did pretēd to sit longer then their King pleased the immodestie ingratitude of the present Rebells have farr exceeded the worst Examples He is obstinate to his principles and feares to attribute any thing to the Kings concessions or denyall and had he graunted lesse in all probabilitie himselfe and the Kingdome had suffred lesse It cannot be doubted but the Libeller will invert whatever the King sayes and it is a greate adventure that he sayes the sins of their lives not seldome fought against them and wee have greate cause to beleive their prosperitie did noe lesse that continue hardned in soe execrable a cause The King sayes he desires not any man should be further subject to him then all of vs should be subject to God And this Mountebanke holds this a sacriledge worse then Bishopps lands for he sayes he desires asmuch subjection as is due to God and so desires noe lesse then to be a god And is subjection to Princes in the Lord subjection to them as God And doth the King desire otherwise that would have them noe otherwise obey him then that they might obey God renouncing all obedience that consists not with obeying God but sale worke must be slight and the Libeller would not exceede his hire The Rebells desiring the Kings acquittall of them for the blood of the warr confirmes their guilt not their innocence Though God impute not to any man the blood shedd in a just cause in respect of the ground and reason of doing it yet there may be temptations vnto naturall infirmitie in acting a just cause and the King was not without a sense of such danger therefore the Libeller wretchedly beggs an argument of his guilt from his prayer not to have blood imputed to him Vpon the REFORMATION Of the Times NOveltie and perturbation are justly condemned not only by Christians but morall men and it is a noveltie taken vp only by Sectaries that would confine all Religion to their owne frensy and reject the vniversall consent of all times and places and not only boasting of the truth of their owne delusions but obtruding them vpon the world threatning fire and sword to gainsayers and yet they will pretend the example of our Saviours publishing his gospell and pretend like reason for their fanaticke conceites as for his divine revelations and miraculous Testimonies and because reformation may be necessary therefore they conclude it must be as often as these that are carried about with every winde of doctrine shall thinke fitt they would reduce Christianitie to a cloud without water tossed to fro with the breath of private opinion The first reformers in the time of Pope Adrian pretended not a reformation of the vniversall Church and a rejection of whatever was received by the primitive as those men now neither did they presume to enforce others to their perswasion and though noveltie and perturbation were objected to them yet they still deprecated that guilt and it is a most vnchristian and prophane disposition to desregard lawes established and Religion setled vpon presumption of private opinions and these of men neither learned discreete nor honest There is greate difference betweene a clamour and an vndeniable truth and we may not thinke that popular compliance dissolution of all order and Government in the Church schisme vndecencies confusions sacrilegious invasions contempt of the Clergy and their Leiturgie and diminution of Princes are lesse odious because Papists objected them or that any pretended reformation introduced by these detestable practices can be acted or approved by Christians All men are wittnes that the present Sectaries are guiltie of all these The former reformers did not give occasion for such aspersions that desired only the libertie of their owne consciences from the practice and beleife of errours newly enjoyned and anciently rejected in the Church or els followed the orderly reformations which Princes and states authorised in their owne Dominiōs but these new reformers obtrude their dictates vpon all the world and will dispose of all Kingdomes with
part of them not in the right it had been more his modestie to have doubted their seeing him more oft in the wrong The libeller prescribes modestie to the king insolence impudence to subjects that the Rule of their Rebellion If the king had not governed his Actions by good advice nor seene the often Levitie and precipitation of a Major part he should have doubted of their seeing him in the wrong however they owne him dutie as their king he no submission to them That the King ought to graunt the peoples rights and liberties because of right demaunded it being his dutie not his bountie to graunt these things But it is the subjects miserie aswell as their madnes to demaund the kings rights as their owne and we know that the demaunds of Rebells are for themselves and to take away the peoples rights aswell as loyaltie and wee finde that there were such as the king mentions whome noe fountaine of Royall bountie was able to overcome and for whome the comparision of hidropike thirst was very favourable being more insatiate then guslers in a wine sellar and neerer the nature of horse leaches and swine The King confesses a rationall soveraigntie of soule and freedome of within every man and yet with an implicite repugnancie would make vseles that freedome of will in all other men but himselfe That cannot be by vsing the libertie of his negative voyce for are the wills of other men captivated because they cannot doe as they will because the king will not doe what they will have him and because men are subject to Government is freedome of will denyed them Them that yeilde him the obedience meaning the king he pronounces worthy to be slaves which he inferrs from these words of the King the he deserves to be a slave who captivates the rationall soveraignetie of soule and libertie of his will to compulsion And how can the libeller draw any such conclusion from these words Lawes that restraine Actions doe not captivate the will nor doth he consent to have his will captivated that submitts to Government But he captivates his will that Acts what another directs him though he judge it evill and in such case a law may not be obeyed though violence may not be vsed against the law-maker What that Freedome is which cannot be denyed him as a King because it belongs to him as a man a Christian the Libeller sayes he vnderstands not if it be his negative voyce it concludes all men who have not such a negative as his against the whole Parliament to be neither men nor Christians And aswell he might have said that because every man ought to have freedome in giving his vote in Parliament therefore every man ought to be there The Libeller neede not be ashamed to confesse ignorance that blushes not at such fooleries The king argues that he could not be debarred of that as a king which belonged to him as a man and a Christian which was libertie of will in giving his vote and by what Logicque could the Libeller thence conclude that all that have not a negative voyce to what the Parliament propounds are noe men nor Christians If the king have not a negetive voyce he hath noe voyce every members of Parliament hath a voyce affirmative negative and they deny that to the king in denying his negative voyce which they allow all that have any voyce He demaunds what was he himselfe all this while that we denyed it him as a King He had the freedome of his will when he gave noe vote against it but all the world sayes that you were Traytours in the deniall His naturall libertie of will was not taken from him by your Trayterous violence though his right to vse it in his kingly office were Rebelliously withstood If a King be prohibited the vse of his reason in his Government he is denied that which belongs to him as a man and a Christian and these impudent Traytours are soe cauterized that they scoffe at their Lewde villany asking whether he did not enjoy the libertie of his will when they had imprisoned and deposed him He askes might not the King have enjoyed both reason and conscience governinge vs as free men by what lawes we our selves would be governed And how could he governe if you make the lawes he might be governed And who shall governe when every man is a law-maker and he could not enjoy reason nor conscience governing by lawes he approved not It was not the inward use of his reason and conscience that would content him Doubtles it ought not being a King but sayes he to vse them both as a law over all his subjects in whatsoever he declared as a King to like or dislike The King were noe King if his subjects might make lawes without him and his reason and conscience ought to be his lawes in governing and he justly said It were better to be without the Title of King if it should carry with it such a vassallage as not to suffer him to vse his reason and conscience in what he declared as a King to like or dislike which vse of reason sayes the libeller most reasonles and vnconscionable is the vtmost that any Tyrant ever pretended over his vassalls Tyrants were never esteemed by their pretences but by their Actions it shewes that these men knew not what Tyrany was who make a just right of all Governours the vse of reason Tyrany and that which never king was thought fitt to be denyed though Tyrants abused it Tyrany is in the abuse of power not in the rule of Government In all wise nations the Legislative power and the judiciall execution of that power have been distinct But never devided being allwayes subordinate one to the other the judiciall execution depending on the Legislative He makes an assumption If then the king be only sett vp to execute the law he ought noe more to make or forbidd the making of any law then other inferiour Iudges But if the king be set vp to make law by the advice of his Councell the Parliament can they make lawes without him but this Libeller that would be thought soe strong at Arguments talkes himselfe into contradictions and allowes the king neither the one power nor the other for he affirmes the king cannot judge and make lawes he must not and what will he conclude sure that his owne nation is not wise nor himselfe honest or rationall He cannot reject a law offred him by the Commons no more then make a law-which they reject And hath it sense that because a man cannot doe an Act without the advice of another therefore he must doe what that other advises The man dictates and would be beleived though the Commons never did nor could offer a law to the king for he wel knowes it must passe the Lords before it come to the king but he was loath to mention the Lords least it should cry downe the noyse
Queene with Crymes fot assisting her husband they wil be assured that not feare of Delinquencie but their barbarous crueltie might more alienate her disadvantage Religion Them who accused her he sayes well enough knowne to be the Parliament the King censures for men yet to seeke their Religion whether doctrine discipline or good manners And soe doth the whole world whatever name the Libeller give such men who are well enough knowne to be a Trayterous faction The name of true English Protestants is a meere schismaticall name And why Are there not severall confessions in the Protestant Churches doe they hold one another Schismatickes for that reason How often hath this Libeller named the best reformed Churches is not that as much a name of schisme he is ignorant in the nature of schisme though he be soe well practised in it and its strange he would observe a Schismaticall name from the title of a nation and not from his title of Independencie that produceth as many titles and distinctions as there be Parishes or Parlours The King ascribes rudenes and barbaritie worse then Indian to the English Parliament To the Libellers Parliament he very well may He sayes the King ascribes all vertues to his wife vndervaluing the greate Councell of his Kingdome in comparison of one woman And not only he but all good men abominate that wicked Councell which vsed such rudenes and barbaritie towards her and from hence the Libeller tells vs there are examples of mischeife vnder vxorious Magistrates and Feminine vsurpation And must Magistrates therefore have noe wives or noe affections to them And the examples of feminine vsurpation are more frequent in Republican Tribunes then Monarchs The king sayes her tarrying heere he could not thinke safe among them who were shaking hands with Allegiance to lay faster hold on Religion The Libeller sayes that he taxes them of a dutie rather then a Cryme it being just to obey God rather then man And is periury and the breach of Alleagiance obedience to God and doe men obey God that breake on Commaundement vpon pretence to keepe another The Scripture tells vs he that breakes one Commaundement is guiltie of all but these are they that say they love God and yet hate their brother hate and kill their King Gods vicegerent The libeller sayes it was the fault of their courage that they had not quite shaken of what they slood shaking hands with It s like their conscience and Religion were not the cause they did not but the Libeller was not of their Councell for the time required they should keepe their maske longer He is offended at the Kings prayer that the disloyaltie of his protestant subjects may not be a hindrance to her love of the true Religion and sayes that he never prayes that the dissolutenes of his Court the Scandalls of his Clergie vnsoundnes of his owne judgment Lukewarmenes of his life letter of compliance to the Pope permitting his nuntio heere may not be found farr greater hindrances All these put togeather are farr short of the scandall of the disloyaltie of his subjects The Court dissolutenes is made a common place of scandall not veritie in respect of the application there being not such excesses in his Majest Court that deserved a speciall observation and the restraint of dissolutenes was more observable then the Cryme As to the scandalls of his Clergie though we must beleive that offences wil come yet the scandall of the present disloyaltie was more offensive to those of different Religion then any disorders in Civil conversation and the injustice of the Rebells towards the Clergie hath shewed the vntruth of the scandalls that were cast vpon them though their malice traduced persecuted them their proofes could not convict them of the scandall supposed His Majest owne judgment cannot be overcast by a Rebells malice and his examplary life cannot be stained by a Libellers pen. His letter to the Pope was noe complaince nor could it give offence to protestant or hope to Papist these Rebells that comply with Turkes and infidells least of all thinke it a compliance The Libeller well knowes there was noe nuntio in England and if the King should have denyed the Queene the exercise of her Religion whereto he was bound by the Articles vpon the match he had given greater scandall by breaking the Articles then by permitting her the repaire of persons in matters of her Religion But sayes the Libeller they must not sit still that is not Rebell and see their Religion snatcht away But they have Rebelled to snatch away Religion He sayes It s knowne that her Religion wrought more vpon him then his vpon her and his favouring of Papists and hatred of Puritans made men suspect shee had perverted him Noe doubt suspitions were industriously raysed and carrefully nourisht against the King though they beleived them not that made vse of them The King was not bound to destroy all Papists and could not deny them the protection of a King he had just reason to suspect those bloody Puritans whose inclinations he descerned to that wickednes they have since avowed From his suppositions he ascends to his exclamations What is it that the blindenes of hipocrisie dare not doe It dares pray and thinke to hide that from the eyes of God which it cannot from the open view of men We finde this very frequent in this Author and in this very Period that in contempt of God men charges the King with Crymes he not only knew false but which are soe knowne vnto the whole word and conclude against his owne narrations and others view Vpon his repulse AT HULL and the fate of the HOTHAMS HE makes an introduction that Hull was the Magazine of Armes which the king had bought with money illegally extorted from his subjects He thinkes that if goods be ill gotten its lawfull for him and his Sectaries to rob him that possesses them els to what vse is it mentioned with what money the King bought these Armes But had the king noe meanes to procure Armes but by illegall exaction sure that will conduce litle to the Apollogy of this breaker that Calumniates the King soe much for seeking meanes from his subjects for publique safetie Next he sayes these Armes were bought to be vsed in a causeles and most vnjust Civill warr against Scotland What was the warr in Scotland to Hothams taking of Hull or seizing the Magazine when the warr was ended Rayling will neither make the warr vnjust nor the mention of it heere any way extenuate the vsurpation but shewes the barrennes of his matter by his repeated insignificant falshoods The Queene he sayes was gone to Holland to sett to sale the Crowne Iewells a Cryme heeretofore counted Treasonable in Kings It s like such a Treason as he makes to buy a Magazine of Armes to resist an invader he should have done well to have told when this heeretofore was It s likely they that held it
for our saviour was innocent of that false accusation declaring his kingdome not to be of this world acknowledged Caesars right bidding the people to give vnto Cesar the things that were Cesars but this mans prophanes would have the accusation true and lawfull to invade Cesars right from the false accusation of our saviours and blasphemously avowes invading of the Bishopps rights because one better then cesars for to what other purpose doth he compare the rights of Cesar and the Bishopps vnlesse to justifie their dealinge with the Bishopps And accuse our saviour for intending the lyke to Caesar The right of the Prelate Bishopps was gotten by spirituall vsurpation Could any Jew Turke or Pagan speake more reproach fully against Christiaintie that the calling of those men who were soe eminent for suffering and Martidome and gathering the Christian Church throughout the world was a spirituall vsurpation The objection or to his Majest repeating the arguments from law antiquitie Ancestours prosperitie and the like was very improper from him whose repititions of Tyrany slavery single voyce consent of the kingdome and such like have blotted soe greate a part of his booke and he that would binde the king to follow the Example of other Churches will exclude antiquitie and the primitive Church and authorise the schisme of innovating Sectaries because Papists have vsed Arguments against them The king sayes had he two houses sued out their livery from the wardship of Tumults he could sooner have beleived them But sayes the Libeller it concerned them first to sue out their livery from his encroaching Prerogative The law allowes noe livery from Royall Prerogative but judges them Rebells that seeke it The Character sett on them that hunt after faction with their hounds the Tumults the Libeller hath justified by his defence It s noe shame for a King to be a pupill to the Bishopps whose calling it is to give him spirituall Councell but it were madnes to be a laquay to such mē who take vpon them to judge of the callings in the Church of God which have noe calling to it much more to a rabble whome the Libeller himselfe holds extravagant That nimrod was the first that hunted after faction could never be told by the Bishopps much lesse that he was the first that founded Monarchy The Bishopps could have named a more ancient foundation in Adam and Noah They finde the hunters after faction by Tumults of a latter dale Corah and his Company that Rebelled against Moses and Sheba that spake to the Tumults what part have we in David or portion in the sonne of Jesse and they finde them in the cursed Jewes that hunted by the Tumults against our Saviour In Demetrious and his Craftsmen against the Apostles and in Alexander the Copper Smith against St. Paul and that 's the game which Rebells in all times hollowed to and the Mungrell sort never faile them and these that hunt with such hounds preserve beasts of prey to devoure the quiett profitable Certainly Parliaments made lawes before Kings were in being which must have better authoritie then his reason to prove We finde kings making lawes before ever we reade of Parliaments in Commonwealths we finde their law makers were single men as Licurgus Solon and diverse others The kings holding his Crowne by law doth not imply another law maker then the king who first made that law wherevnto the whole people were subject but he that soe lately blamed repetitions vnseasonably falls into his old rode of disputing against Monarchy which he pretends to decline It hath been anciently interpreted the presaging signe of a future Tyrant to dreame of copulation with his Mother Heere is a conceite pluckt in by head and shoulders Whereof was it a signe in Junious Brutus that was directed by the oracle to kisse his Mother his succeeding act was the expulsion of the kings and change of the Government was that lesse then Tyrany or not soe presaged by the oracle aswel as a dreame Parliaments can be noe Mothers to kings that are created by kings The king is by the law of England Father of the Countrey the life and soule of the law but the Libeller will finde out a step Mother an Athalia to destroy the seede Royall and sett her meestuous broode vpon the throne for these dreames were the delusions of some prime Rebells and could not allude vnto just Title but conceites are growne low when such dreames must be fetcht in for reasons And from his dreames it is not strange he should fancie allusions which himselfe sayes are ordinary of the King to the sun of force to swell vp Caligula to thinke himselfe a God And because these Rebells can not be Gods they will be Devills The King sayes these propositions are not the joint and free desires of both houses next that the choise of many members was carried by faction He sayes Charles the fifth against the Protestants in Germany laid the fault vpon some few And what is that to the faction in England If they be not the joint desires of both houses as it was not ought the King to take it for the advice of Parliament and forbeare to shew the fraude because Charles the fifth said the like vpon another occasion The Court was wont to tamper with Elections and he sayes noe faction was then more potent And yet he affirmes they prevayled not where then was their potencie Because the king sayes he cannot swallow such Camells of sacriledge and Injustice as others doe The Libeller sayes he is the Pharisee up and downe is not as other men are Is it Pharisaisme to professe with the Prophett David the dislike of them that follow superstitious vainties Because the Pharisee swallowed Camells be such men Pharisees that professe they will not because the Sectaries pretended conscience of Ceremonies like the Pharisees washing the outside while they devoure the Estates of other men without remorse are they not Pharisees and are they only that professe they cannot swallow such Camells Pharisees this is a new found Pharisee The three Realmes all most perished for want of Parliaments Wee have seene how neere perishing they are by a Parliament which hath committed more Injustice since it began then all our stories have remembred for five hundred yeares before The Libeller hath found out a new kinde of sacriledge for he endures not to have Church robbing called sacriledge and that is to bereave a Christian conscience of libertie for the narrownes of his owne conscience And by what Engine is this sacriledge committed doth he that abstaines for conscience sake bereave another mans conscienc of libertie He thinkes to take away superfluous wealth from the Clergie is not sacriledge for that serves as an excuse for their theft in taking from others what they pretend ill vsed wee may see the love these Sectaries have vnto the goods of the Church that extenuate their impietie by pretending that such men most oppose that
troubles yet the rigour of the English Rebells drew on that necessitie and the Kings comming to the Scotts might worke if there were any remainders of loyaltie to devide those who were only joyned by an vnlawfull and dissembled confederacie and it had not been an Act of malice but prudence to resolve vpon such an hope for friends they could not be that are contemned for an hireling Army paid not in Scotch come but English silver jeered with their Brotherly assistance and monthly pay and a right vnderstanding of the disaffection to the English Rebells towards them might recall them to their dutie to the king and withdraw them from their disloyall combination The scotts needed not armies to defend their libertie consciences which were never invaded the charges were not out of charity to them but for the necessitie of those who sent for the scotch assistāce he il pretēds a cause for the scotts mistrust of the king in that case where a ground of suspitiō could not be imagined judges others by his own obduratiō that loyaltie once broken is rather tempted to a finall shipwracke then preserved by an opportunitie to recover it Providence doubtles is never cousened but deceivers though they falsifie their faith to others must expect that as their falshood was permitted soe it will receive its detection and demeritts The man thinkes much that their profest loyaltie who fought against their King should be called a riddle and as it was a very darke one to generall vnderstanding soe if they had preserved the Kings person being in their power they had given some solution doing what they said of their loyaltie not what their former Actions imported And doth not the Libeller say its ridiculous that they whose profest loyaltie led them to direct armes against the Kings person should thinke him violated by theit murther of him which he calls Justice who vnderstands not that so necessitous may be the state of Princes that their greatest danger may be in their supposed safetie and their safetie in their supposed danger But he would have that the only way for the Kings preservation was to sacrifise his reason honour conscience not to have run such hazards though his Majest left his force he resolved not to leave his conscience and change an outward for an intestine warr and Rebells desist not from their violence whether he strive or yeilde If he contend he is bloody if he yeilde he is wily if he offer reason he is obstinate If he acknowledge he is guilty and thus the players of a Rebell game having irrecoverably lost honour conscience play on still to gaine power increase guilt The words of a King are full of power by the law and that law is not like the Nazarites locke of sampson but an anointing they have from God which is inseperable though Rebells like the faithles harlot cut of his force and Armies yet the right of his power is inseperable and if these Traytours had looked to precept or Example they might have found that a Kings word had power and their persons reverence without respect to the merit of their Actions David pretended not that Saul had not authoritie of law when he persecuted him without a cause when Sauls life was in his power The King appeales not vnto Libellers and common pasquills to judge of his reason such ' as are offended at the name or estimation of reason are likely to have a small part in it Monuments of his reason appeare as thinly in his Actions and writting as could be expected from the meanest parts bred vp in the middest of soe many wayes extarordinary to know something Surely the Monuments of the Libellers irrationall assertions appeare very thicke in this whole discourse and men may be amazed at his folly that makes him run into soe many absurdities to avoyde the confession of truth how often hath he objected to the King that his breeding could not enable him to judge of matters and heere would advance his breeding to abase his parts but such as reade the Kings booke and his will see Monuments enough of his Majest reason and the Libellers absurditie and impudence The Kings deliberations touching his leaving Oxford though mature yet foreseene to be of doubtfull event and therefore vainely observed by the Libeller to contradict his prayer Though I know not what to doe yet mine eyes are towards thee Wicked men contemne Princes and God causeth them to wander in the wildernes where their is noe way The punishments vpon Princes are most frequent for the wickednes of the people whereby they come to confusion and have many rulers but it was a willfull falsification of the Libellers to cite a Text as spoken of Princes that was altogeather applyed to the people Psalme 107. Vpon the SCOTTS Delivering the KING to the ENGLISH THis objecting of selling the King by the Scotts is soe fowle an infamy as befists none to vindicate but themselves In the meane time the Libeller thinkes he may say with the high Priests to Judas confessing his sin of betraying our saviour what is that to vs and he would have the infamy only rest on the seller none on the buyer and its like will as he professes disagree with the King to the worlds end and will out babble all law truth and reason that such as fought to change the Government destroy the lawes fought for them and he may babble to the worlds end and not be beleived against the evidence of the fact and that miror before his face wherein he sees all that acted which he denies renders him not only a denyer of principles but common sense the Traytours decree of non addresses was what they ever intended though they had not a confidence to act it presently and from that example of disloyaltie the Libeller others made a change of principles to sute with such monstrous productions It s probable the Libeller would be ever answearing fruiteles repetitions for his answeares are noe other and yet he thinkes himselfe not liable to censure for his stall repetition in the lines before of the kings being vnalterable in his will would have been our Lord averse from Parliament and reformation If the Libeller retained any estimation of Davids heart he would not soe often have reproached the vse of Davids words And we have good reason to beleive that he that suffred Davids troubles was supported with a measure of Davids spirit while his persecuters exercised on him the malice of Davids Enemies And were not this Libeller possessed with an evil spirit he would not borrow matter of sport from stealing Davids spirit nor reproach and slander from Pamelaes prayer which may be vsed more warrantably then reproved but he is drawne very dry that make such vse of a scoffe Vpon the DENYING him the attendance of his CHAPPLAINES A Chapplaine is a thing diminitive and inconsiderable And the man would be ignorantly witty vppon
for decision of controversies but it s a sorry inference that Counsellours in his affaires should have power over his person As the Parliaments right is circumscribed by lawes in regarde of the subject soe it cannot be imagined absolute over the King By what the Libeller hath said he might well conclude that kings are oblidged to doe justice but that the people or particular persons may judge their king by any law divine or humane he hath not offred a colour soe barren is he in an Argument which he calls over copious Who should better vnderstand their owne lawes and when they are transgresed then they who are governed by them and whose consent at first made them Certenly he might very wel have answeared himselfe that they which governed by such lawes and whose consent at first made them better vnderstand them and when they are transgressed then they that are governed and it is a course very agreable to these mens confusion that the suiter should teach the judge The Libeller askes who have more right to take knowledge of things done within a free nation then they within themselves And surely they will not be free long from destroying one another where that 's the libertie for there wil be as many Transgressours and as many lawes as there are opinions He goes about to answeare the taking the oath of Alleagiance and supreamacy And to this his answeare is very ready that these oaths were to his person invested with his Authoritie and his Authoritie was by the people given him conditionally vnder law and oath And if his Authoritie had been conditionall their oaths could not be absolute as they are This guift and condition they imagine were engraven in Seths Pillars and they have been long enquiringe for a Cabballisticke Rabbyn to finde out the Characters How the kings hereditary succession is become a conditionall guift must have better evidence then Aphorismes of confusion never law contained either the guift or condition nor was there ever such impudence before theis Traytours that avowed because they swore faith to their kings person invested with his Authoritie they might take away his Authoritie and not breake their oath And it were a prophane oath aswell as vaine that should be voyde at the will of the taker The kings oath added nothing to his right being only an obligation of his conscience noe condition annexed to his right and if he never tooke the oath his subjects obedience is noe whit diminished and a king by inheritance needes not admittance the death of his predecessour puts him in possession this is the knowne law of England The Couquerour tooke on oath at his Crowninge and other times that made noe condition to his Government There is not only reason but absolute necessitie for the avoyding of confusion ruine of mankinde that the subject be bound to the king though the kinge faile in his dutie for the destruction of Government is more sinfull and inconvenient to humane societie then any evill that can come by a kings misgovernment He proceedes to answeare objections touchinge the Covenant wherein we shall not much insist but to detect the shifts of Malefactours to elude the evidence of truth They were accused by the King and his partie to pretend libertie and reformation but to have noe other end then to make themselves greate and to destroy his person and Authoritie for which reason sayes the Libeller they added the third Article to preserve the Kings person and Authoritie in defence of Religion priviledge of Parliament and liberties of the Kingdome And to shew with what ingenuitie he dealt in seeking to avoyde that just accusation the Libeller tells vs that they added that cause for a shew only and they intended not to preserve the Kings person further then it might consist with their opinions touchinge Reformation extirpatinge of Prelacy preservinge liberties of Parliament and Kingdome and in this very clause they called the world to be wittnes with their consciences of their loyaltie and yet made the preservation of their Kings person and Authoritie arbitrary by their owne opinions and while this Libeller would have their Rebellion a defensive warr he forbeares not to tell the world that they resolved the Kings destruction to attaine their ends The sixth Article gives asmuch preservation and defence to all that enter into the league as to him And it seemes more for they have dealt with none of them as with him and he sayes if the Covenant were made absolute without respect to these superiour things it was an vnlawfull vow and not to be kept It is agreed that vnlawfull vowes are not to be made nor kept but it is an vnlawfull vow to destroy the Kinge in order to his supposed ends yet they feare not to vow the destruction of any that oppose them though the honour and innocence of the persons were without the reach of lawes and they will exempt neither callings nor integritie from their lawles Injustice and that appeared by his glosse vpon the fourth Article of the Covenant to bring persons offending to tryall and condigne punishment all that should be found guiltie of such Crymes and delinquencies whereof the King by his letters and proofes afterward was found guiltie in what they thought him at the taking of the Covenant to be over ruled only by evill Counsellours And had not he avowed all that ever his letters conteyned in his former declarations and hath the Libeller forgotten that the imputation of Crymes to evill Counsellours was but a Ceremony and are not his foregoinge words that their ends reformation and extirpatinge Prelacy were to be preferred before the preservation of the Kings person and authoritie This last age hath produced a generation that pretend they doe God service when they scorne all his lawes and Religion and hold forth their execrable villanies to the world as gratefull and well pleasinge sacrifices to God and make ostentations of their perjuries and Blaspheamies as services to him The nullities and vsurpation of those Monster judges that made themselves cut-throates of the King needed not the Kings exceptions to avoyde their illegallitie being soe apparent what the King did or said to of them wil remaine to his honour and the Libellers infamy that glories in the misfortunes of Princes sayinge it was learnt from his graund-mother It s a sad fate to haue his Enemies both accusers parties and Iudges The Libeller sayes what malefactour might not pleade the like if his Crymes have made all men his Enemies But there were hardly ever such malefactours vnles they who tooke vpon them to judge the Kinge He that is an Enemy before judgment cannot be a judge of the Cryme and he that is an Enemy to a Malefactour vncondemned is not fit to condemne him and such as are Enemies to Government and are common destroyers cannot be judges That they of the powder plot might have pleaded the same when their judges knew not their persons nor their