declaration in your favoures as yee alleadge Of OBEDIENCE due by Subjects to AVTHORITIE 5. The poynt touching Royall Authoritie is not so full of thornes and rockes as yee giue out if men would bee pleased vnpartiallie to holde the playne and patent way layde before vs by holie Scripture and by Orthodoxe Antiquitie and by manie Eminent Divynes in the reformed Church and learned Politickes which wee shall heere make manifest after the vindication of those three famous Theologues Whitaker Bilson and Rivet whom yee would haue the Reader to esteeme favourers of your opinion 6. Doctor Whitakers wordes agaynst William Raynold translated into English out of the Latine Edition at Oppenheme Anno 1612. Pag. 51. are these Hee relateth the tumults and troubles which were raysed for Religion in Germanie France and Boheme as if that one thing were sufficient to condemne them because once they did oppose themselues and resisted the violence offered to GOD'S Trueth and to themselues Where-as notwithstanding Fayth Oath and publicke Edicts and finallie the Lawes themselues gaue them warrand to doe the same I will not say more of this matter which is nowayes pertinent to the present purpose especiallie seeing not onlie their just Apologie but also the Edicts of the Princes themselues haue liberated them from the cryme of rebellion By these words of Doctor Whitaker which yee haue cited the Reader may easilie perceaue that hee doeth nowayes mayntayne or allowe taking of Armes by Subjects without warrand of the publicke Lawes and approbation of the Prince but excuseth what was done in those warres by the allowance of the Lawes and Edicts of Princes 7. So also Doctor Bilson in his Booke entituled The true difference betwixt Christian Subjection and vnchristian Rebellion printed at Oxford Anno 1585 Pag. 382. in the wordes cited by you declareth evidentlie that hee speaketh of such Republickes States as haue defences warranded by fundamentall Covenant in that Governement But what is that Doctors mynde concerning the duetie of Subjects in a free and absolute Monarchie is evident by his owne words in that same booke Pag. 380 where disputing agaynst a Jesuit hee sayeth Warre for the Catholicke Religion is both lawfull and honourable you say you must adde of the Subjectes agaynst their Prince or else you range cleane besides our question Wee stryue not what causes may leade Christian Princes to make Warre on their Neyghboures but whether it bee lawfull or tollerable for the Subject to beare Armes agaynst his naturall and absolute Prince You proue which is nothing to our purpose But Sir in this enterpryze the person must bee respected as well as the cause Bee the cause never so just if the person bee not authorized by GOD to draw the Sword they bee no just nor lawfull Warres Private men may not venter on Warres vnlesse they bee directly warranded by him that hath the Sword from GOD. And agayne in that same booke Pag. 502 Our Saviour for teaching his that they should bee brought before Kings and Rulers and put to death and hated of all men for His Name sake addeth not as you would haue it and hee that first rebelleth but hee that endureth to the ende shall bee saved and agayne Not with violence restrayne them but in patience possesse your owne soules This is the way for all Christian Subjects to conquer Tyrants and this is the remedie provyded in the New Testament agaynst all persecutions not to resist powers which GOD hath ordayned lest wee bee damned but with all meeknesse to suffer that wee may bee crowned And Pag. 513. hee showeth that manifolde formes of Common-Wealthes make diverse men speake diverslie of the Magistrates sword And Pag. 518. hee pleadeth that the Subjects in England haue not that lawfull warrand to draw the sword without consent of their Prince as the Germanes haue without consent of the Emperour and this discourse hee prosecuteth in some following pages 8. The same is the meaning of Doctor Rivet as wee take it in his Commentarie vpon the PSALME 68 where he distinguisheth betweene an absolute Principalitie and such a Principalitie as is onlie Conditionall Pactionall Conventionall Of this second sort are to bee vnderstood his words of just and necessarie defence But of the absolute Principalitie speaking in that same place hee recommendeth to Subjects rather suffering of Martyrdome And this to bee his meaning appeareth more clearlie by his last declaration concerning this question in his late Treatise entituled Jesuita Vapulans where beeing pressed by an adversarie hee handleth this question of purpose In the meane tyme wee wonder verie much that yee haue not directlie answered to these remarkeable wordes of Doctor Rivet alleadged by vs in our Replye wherein hee playnlie averreth that the doctrine of Buchanane Knox and Goodman concerning Subjects resisting their lawfull Princes is not approved by anie sound Protestant Wee expected from you a full and particular Answere and now agayne we would gladlie heare whether yee approue the judgement of Rivet concerning that doctrine of these wryters or not 9. Thus having vindicated these three divynes which yee alleadge for you wee come now to those Testimonies which wee promised for clearing of the playnnesse of the way touching Authoritie First it is evident by holie Scripture that it is vnlawfull for Subjects in a Monarchicall estate such as is this Kingdome of Scotland to take Armes for Religion or for anie other pretence without warrand and power from the Prince and Supreame Magistrate For the Scripture teacheth vs that the SWORD belongeth onlie to the KING and to them who are sent by him ROM 13. 1. PET. 2.13.14 That wee ought to keepe the King's commandement and that in regarde of the Oath of GOD ECCLES 8.2 And that wee should bee subject not onlie for wrath but also for conscience sake because the Powers that bee are ordayned of GOD Who-so-ever there-fore sayeth S. PAVL resisteth the Power resisteth the ordinance of GOD And they that resist shall receaue to themselues damnation ROM 13. In the wordes of the Apostle S. PAVL there is a remarkable opposition betwixt Subjection and Resistance 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 implying that all militarie 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 whether Defensiue or Offensiue if it bee agaynst the Superiour Power which GOD hath set over vs is forbidden In lyke manner we reade MATTHEW 26.52 that all they that take the Sword shall perish with the Sword Now certayne it is that in a Free Monarchie Subjects haue not the Sword from GOD except by the hand of the King to whom onlie GOD hath immediatelie given it And therefore who-so-ever taketh the Sword without his warrand hath just reason to feare the foresayde warning of our Saviour Manie other places of Scripture might bee adduced to this purpose which for brevitie wee omit and doe proceede in the next rowme to some testimonies of ancient Fathers other wryters 10. Tertullian in his Apologeticke Chap. 30. and 33. and 37.
also by the examples adduced by CALVIN namelie the Lacedaemonian Ephori the Romane Tribunes and the Athenian Demarchi When the Ephori were set vp in Lacedaemon the Kinges of Lacedaemon were but Kinges in name and had not the Supreame power as it is confessed by the Learned So when the Tribunes had their full power in Rome the Supreame power was in the people and in lyke manner it was in Athens when the Demarchi had power Therefore from this no-thing can bee inferred for the lawfull resistance of Subjectes to a Monarch or King properlie so called Fourthlie CALVIN applying this to the Kingdomes that nowe are sayeth no more but that peradventure the three Estates assembled in Parliament haue that fame power which the fore-mentioned Ephori c. had Heere it is to bee marked that hee sayeth onelie peradventure it is so which can bee no warrand to a man's conscience in a matter of so great importance For hee that resisteth his Superiour by force of Armes should not onelie thinke that peradventure hee hath power but should bee assuredlie perswaded that hee hath power so to doe When there is no more said but that peradventure such a thing is it may bee as reasonablie sayde Peradventure such a thing is not Neyther doeth hee giue this power even peradventure but to the the three Estates assembled in Parliament Hence the learned RIVET speaking of CALVIN his mynde in this place sayeth that hee giveth no power to people over Monarchs properlie so called The same also is observed concerning CALVIN his mynde by Albericus Gentilis in his third Royall Dispute 20. The same doctrine also is delivered by King JAMES of blessed Memorie in his Booke entituled The true Law of free Monarchies by Hugo Grotius in his first Booke de jure belli pacis CAP. 4. by Leonhartus Hutterus in his common places Loc. 32. CAP. 3. Iohannes Gerhardus in the 6 TOM of his common places in his Treatise de magistratu politico NVM 483. where hee discourseth accuratelie of this matter Zepperus in his 3 Booke de Politia Ecclesiastica in the last Section of the 13 Chapter PAG. 573. Edit Herborn 1595. Albericus Gentilis in his regall disputations disput 3. de vi civium in Regem semper injusta Iohn Bishop of Rochester in his worke written agaynst Bellarmine de potestate Papae in rebus temporalibus LIB 1. CAP. 8. CLASS 2. Where hee adduceth a clowde of manie moe Authors M. Antonius de Dominis in his Booke called Ostensio errorum Francisci Suarez CAP. 6. § 27. Ioannes Angelius Werdenhagen I. C. in his Politica generalis LIB 3. CAP. 10. QUEST 14. 21. By these Testimonies wee intende not to lay vpon you or anie of our Countrey-men anie imputation or to take vpon vs to giue sentence concerning their proceedinges but onlie beeing invited heereto by your last Answeres wee thought it our duetie to signifie to the Reader that manie Ancient and late Famous Wryters are not of that opinion eyther to thinke the question touching Authoritie so full of Rockes and Thornes as you call it or yet to favour such a defensiue taking of Armes as you thinke to bee alleadged by Whitaker Bilson and Rivet 22. Now to prosecute what remayneth of your Answere whereas yee say that when yee justifie your Covenants and Conventions yee meane not onlie the last and most remote endes but the nearest and immediate wee pray you tell vs what yee meane by the nearest and immediate ende if yee meane the object it selfe which the Schoole-men call finem intrinsecum proximum then the lawfulnesse and equitie of the matter vowed and promised in the Covenant is all one with the goodnesse of the ende of it Whence wee inferre that seeing the matter promised by you in this your Covenant to wit your Mutuall Defence agaynst all persons none excepted is in our judgement vnlawfull and forbidden by a lawfull Authoritie the ende of your Covenant is meerelie evill but if by the nearest ende yee meane any thing which is diverse from the object then wee still affirme agaynst the last part of your first Answere to our second DEMAND that Conventions and Covenants all other actions are to bee esteemed judged of first or principallie by the equitie of the object and then by the goodnesse of the ends of it whether they bee fines proximi or fines remoti 23. Wee doe not joyne with the Papistes blamers of our Reformation as yee seeme to beare vpon vs because they hate and oppugne our reformed Religion which wee loue and defende Neyther doe wee take vpon vs to censure the proceedinges of our Reformers but wee stryue by the grace of GOD so to carrie in our owne tyme and to walke wyselie in a perfect way as our adversaries the Papistes may get no advantage to pleade for their vnwarrantable doctrine and practises by anie pretence of our example THE III. DVPLY IN your third Answere passing lightlie from our REPLYE yee fall into some vnexpected digressions concerning the Service Booke and our thoughts thereof we esteeme it a matter beyond the compasse of humane judicatorie to sit vpon the thoughts of other men As for those outward expressions which yee alleadge vpon some of vs of not seeing erroures in that Booke or groaning for it yee shall vnderstand that such multiplicitie of Popish erroures as was alleadged by some of you to bee in that Booke was invisible to some of vs. Altho to enter in a particular examination or consideration of everie poynt and sentence in that Booke is not now tyme nor place Neyther did anie of vs professe groaning for that Booke in particular but for an vniformitie of Divyne Service throughout this Nationall Kirke and a more perfect forme than wee yet haue that the publicke Service were not permitted to the severall judgements and private choyse of everie Minister and Reader Which also was thought convenient by the Nationall Assemblie of the Kirke of Scotland holden at ABERDENE Anno 1616. 2. Whether that Service Booke now discharged contayneth anie Innovation of Religion or anie thing contrarie to the Protestant Religion as yee alleadge wee doe not dispute now But we doe assuredlie belieue the pietie and sinceritie of his Majesties intention ever to haue beene and still constantlie to bee as it is graciouslie declared by his Majesties late PROCLAMATION And wee are certaynlie perswaded that his Majestie hath given order to discharge all the Actes of Counsell made anent the Canons and Service-Booke and are crediblie informed that They are discharged by Act of Counsell at Holie-Rood-House the fift of Julie last according to the order given by his Majestie Also wee see no such just cause of Feare as may import your alleadged Necessitie of Covenanting seeing his Majestie will not presse anie thing of that nature but in such a fayre and legall way as shall satisfie all his loving Subjectes and that hee neyther intendeth innovations in Religion nor Lawes
telleth vs that the ancient Christians in his tyme altho having an heathen and persecuting Emperour did honour him as chosen of GOD and second from GOD and first after GOD and did choose rather to suffer than to make resistance by force of Armes altho they lacked not number and strength to doe it 11. The lyke example haue we in that renowned Thebaean Legiō of 6666 Christian Souldioures called Agaunenses from the place of their suffering who without making resistance as they had strength of hand to haue done suffered themselues rather to bee slayne for their Christian Profession by the Officers of Maximian the Emperour executors of his cruell commandement agaynst them This fell out in the 18 yeare of Diocletian as Ado Viennensis wryteth in his Chronicle which was the yeare of GOD 297 as Cardinall Baronius reckoneth in his Annalls And of that their Christian cowrage and pious resolution Venantius Fortunatus an ancient Bishop of Poictiers hath left vnto vs these Encomiasticke lynes in the second Booke of his Poëms Biblioth Patr. Tom. 8. Edit 4. Pag. 781. Queis positis gladiis sunt arma è dogmate Pauli Nomine pro CHRISTI dulcius esse mori Pectore belligero poterant qui vincere ferro Invitant jugulis vulnera chara suis 12. Gregorie Nazianzen in his first Oration speaking of the Persecution by Julian the Apostate when the Christians were moe in number and stronger in might of hand to haue made open resistance if they had in their consciences found it agreeable to their Christian Profession declareth playnlie that they had no other remedie agaynst that Persecution but patient suffering for CHRIST with gloriation in CHRIST 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 13. S. Ambrose having receaved imperiall commandement to deliver the sacred Houses or Churches to bee possessed by the Arians declareth what hee thought convenient to bee done in such a case to wit neyther to obey in that which hee could not performe with a good conscience nor yet to resist by force of Armes His wordes to the people CONCIONE 1. contra AVXENTIVM are these Why then are yee troubled I shall never willinglie leaue you If I bee compelled I can not gayn-stand I may bee sorie I may weepe I may sigh Agaynst Armes Souldiours the Goathes also my Teares are Armes For such are the Guardes of a Priest Other-wayes I neyther ought nor may resist And in the second Booke of his Epistles and 14 Epistle to his Sister Marcellina speaking of that same purpose hee sayeth I shall not fortifie my selfe with a multitude of people about mee Wee beseech O EMPEROVR we fight not I may not deliver the Church but I ought not make resistance 14. Such also was the doctrine and practise of manie other great Lightes which shyned in the dayes of Julian the Apostate and in the dayes of the Arrian Emperoures and Gothicke Arrian Kinges 15. S. Augustine wryting of a lawfull Warre acknowledgeth that onlie to bee lawfull which hath authoritie from the Prince For it is much to bee regarded sayeth hee for what causes and by whose authoritie men vndertake Warres But that naturall order which is accommodated to the peace of mortall men requireth this That the authoritie and counsell of vndertaking Warre bee in the power of the Prince 16. The imperiall Lawes doe say the same ff Ad legem Juliam majestatis Leg. 3. Eadem lege tenetur qui injussu Principis bellum gesserit delectumve habuerit exercitum comparaverit Et Cod. vt armorum vsus inscio Principe interdictus sit Nulli prorsus nobis insciis atque inconsultis quorumlibet armorum movendorum copia tribuatur These are the words of the Emperoures Valentinian and Valens Et Cod. de re militari Leg. 13. Nemo miles Nemo miles vel sibi vacet vel aliena obsequia sine nutu principali peragere audeat c. 17. BODIN in his first Booke de Republica cap. 10. Num. 155 156. Pag. 244. Edit Latin 4. Vrsell Anno 1601. reckoneth among the proper rights of Majestie the right and power to make Warre and this hee showeth to appertayne in a free Monarchie to the Prince onelie 18. To this meaning sayeth Peter Martyr As concerning the efficient cause it is certayne that Warre may not bee made without the authoritie of the Prince For Paull sayeth that hee beareth the Sword therefore hee may giue it to whom hee willeth and may take it from whom hee willeth Loc. Com. Class 4. Cap. 16. § 2. And a little after to wit § 7. hee reciteth and commendeth a saying of Hostiensis to the same purpose 19. CALVIN in the fourth Booke of his INSTITVTION in the last Chapter of that Booke disputeth the Question at length and by manie strong Argumentes evinceth and concludeth that it is no-wayes lawfull for Subjectes to resist their Prince by force of Armes whether the Prince bee Godlie and just or vngodlie and vnjust in his conversation and commaundementes and that no-thing remayneth to Subjectes in such a case but to obey or suffer Where vnderstand that Fleeing is a sort of Suffering Neyther are his wordes subjoyned in the 31 Sect. to wit I speake allwayes of private men c. contrarie to this For first CALVIN in this Dispute indifferentlie vseth the names of private men and Subjectes And therefore in the 33 Sect. at the beginning of it hee tearmeth those of whose duetie hee disputeth Subjectes And in-deede who-so-ever is a Subject is also in respect of the supreame Ruler a private man Although Magistrates who are vnder the King bee publicke persons in respect of their inferioures yet being considered with relation to him that is Supreame 1. PET. 2.13 they are but private As in Dialecticke an intermediate genus altho in respect of the inferiour species it bee a genus yet in relation to the superiour genus it is but a species All POWER OF GOVERNING is so subjected to the supreame Power that what-so-ever is done agaynst the will of the supreame Ruler is destitute of that Power and consequentlie is to bee esteemed for a private act For as wee are taught by the Philosophers ORDER can not bee but with a reference to that which is first Hence KING IAMES in his Booke Of the true Law of free Monarchies PAG. 206. affirmeth that all the people are but private men the authoritie beeing allwayes with the Magistrate Secondlie this is manifest from the verie wordes of CALVIN in that same 31 Sect. for there hee excepteth none from the necessitie of obeying or suffering when Kinges command thinges vnjust but onelie popular Magistrates appoynted for restrayning the licentiousnesse of Kinges Nowe where such Magistrates are erected it is certayne that a King in such a Common-wealth hath not the supreame power For if hee had the supreame power none could force him since an Inferiour can not force his Superiour This can not bee done but onelie by him who is Superiour or at least aequall Thirdlie this is cleare