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
such as inferre good affection to the Irish from such premises will easily make vaine or malitious rumours strong proofes The King sayes he hath the greatest share of dishonour and losse by what is committed The Libeller as before makes this noe Argument because every one that offends God or his neighbour hath the greatest share of losse and dishonour in the end and have they not worldly ends in offending God and if these ends were not sought by them they would not offend God He pretended before that this was a politique contrivance of the King and now he would have it an act without designe Doth he thinke that the malitious reports of him and his Scotchman are of weight to make a man suspected of an act directly tending to his owne vndoing and would the King instigate the Irish Rebellion for his owne ends to have the assistance of the Irish which by such engagement could not assist him Though presumptions are noe convincing proofes yet they are more credible then suspitions or reports It is a strong Argument for the peoples confidence in their King more then in other men because his interest lies cheifely in the common welfare of his subjects and it is hard to beleive that a King will knowingly doe any thing against that interest and to his owne losse and dishonour and whenever any have offended in that kinde the proofe of it hath been more apparent then the authoritie of rumours and Libells but heere the act it selfe cannot have any possibilitie of concurrence to the Kings ends It too notoriously appeares in another section which he Mangles but shall heere have it whole The King sayes t is thought by many wise men that the preposterous rigour and vnreasonable severitie which some men carryed before them in England was not the least incentive that kindled and blew vp into those horrid flames the sparkes of discontent which wanted not predisposed fewell for Rebellion in Ireland The Libeller sayes that these some men are the Parliament And if the Rebells had feed an Advocate he could hardly have dazled better Truly the Libellers too notoriously doth not amount to a dazling of any eyes from descerning his vaine confidence Does any thing heerein excuse a Rebellion that speakes only of what succeded it And if the kings censure of the proceedings of such as managed the busines against the Rebells shew an affection to the Rebells then certainely most Princes that have had warrs in Ireland were very guiltie of that affection that vsed like censures but what the king sayes heere was spoken in Parliament by diverse members who disadvised the preposterous severitie that was propounded and afterward proceeded in and it will rest an indelible blemish of a rash and vnadvised Councell in those men that in the beginning of a Rebellion would put a whole nation into despaire and feare of extirpation That their wonted oppressions as they conceived should rather have made them against the King then the Parliament is easily beleived for it s knowne to all the world they did rise against the king vpon pretence of regaining their nationall liberties from the English oppression as they called it and since the Libeller seeth soe apparent an Argument of their rising against the king its blinde madnes to suspect their rising for the king The Parliament then pretended to act for the king and that the Rebellion was against him not themselves but the man deserts his Arguments and falls to his old common place and will suspect the king because he vsed the Prelaticall Religion and to force it vpon others made Episcopall Ceremoniall and common prayer booke warrs Such men as made warrs and raysed Rebellion to take away the order of Bishopps Ceremonies and booke of Common prayer established by lawes in the Raignes of best Princes with the advice of the most eminent confessours and Martyrs of the age wherein they lived conformable to the Scripture and purest times of the Church declare to the whole world that they have neither shame truth nor Religion and are justly stigmatized for making not only Episcopall Ceremoniall and common prayer booke warrs but Antichristian and Diabolicall Rebellion That the Papists knew these warrs were their warrs may easily be beleived for they must needes apprehend advantage from the Rebellion But it s well knowne that the Papists are more jealous of Episcopacie Ceremonies and booke of common prayer as they stand reformed in the Church of England then of the Directory Extemporall devotions independent or Presbiterall platformes that have noe foundation in the Scripture or the doctrine or practice of the ancient Church but what is this to the preposterous rigour and vncharitable fury that he would justifie Does he meane that the extirpation of the Irish was the sole way to suppresse open Idolatry and is this what we may doe Evangecally to be their Reformers Is blood massacre Evangelicall reformation is kill and reforme the same thinge As that rigour observed by his Majest was altogeather vnpolitique soe if it were intended in order to Religion it was most abominable such Massacres being the designes of irreligious persecutours not Evangelicall Reformers who though they feare not their adversaries yet will not give them cause of scandall nor desperation and such as make destruction their Reformation shew they feare men whome they seeke to kill not God whome presumptuously and hipocritically they pretend to serve His instance of King James is as impertinent as scurrilous that after the powder plot King Iames durst never doe other then equivoiate and collegue with the Pope bis adherents Doth this viper beleive the Pope or his adherents had any such thoughts Was the writing against the the Pope a Colloguinge The many invectives of Popish writers against him signifie the plaine contrary besides the lawes made by him against Popish recusants shew that the Author was in one of his lunatique transes when he dreamt of that heckticke trembling The retarding and delayes of releife to Ireland against that Rebellion were soe apparently discovered to proceede from the faction in Parliament that there rests not the least colour to charge it vpon the King They converted the subjects money and other preparations for the releife of Ireland to the raysing of the Rebellion in England and they hindred the going over of a new governour into that kingdome because they would vse his helpe to their designes at home They were diffident to trust the King with an army and therefore refused his offer to goe in person against the Rebells It seemes they had litle compassion on that people that preferred their jealosies before their pittie it is a plaine Treason and encouragement to that Rebellion to pretend distrust of their King and shewes they sought their owne personall securitie before the remedie of that Rebellion the safetie of the kingdome His Majest might justly finde fault with those who threatned all extreamitie to the Rebells and they that exclude all mercy
the Libeller sayes concerning Gods graces is nothing to the question touching the vse of Leiturgies vnlesse he would have that in the publique congregation every person should have his prayer a part and bring that disorder which the Scripture forbidds Voluntary prayers are lesse subject to formall and superficiall tempers then set formes for in those hee who prayeth must consult first with his heart which in all likelihood may stirre vp his affections But he doth most commonly consult with his braine both for matter what is most pleasing and what most proper in expression and it is incident vnto most to fall into an affectation of their owne conceptions and abilities in these voluntary prayers rather then true devotion Affections grow lasy in set prayer and come not vp easily at the call of words But much more easily then in the labour for words and matter and those words are most emptie of devotion and prayer which are the ostentation of the presenters abilities who is apt to seeke satisfaction in contemplation of his owne parts and his fervour is greater in looking on himselfe then God Ostentation and formalitie may taint the best duties And why not then the best institutions and if vnpremeditated babling may be restrained without forbidding the spirit of God which is in his sense his extemporary prayer why may not lasines and formalitie be reprehended in such as vse the publique leiturgie without forbidding the vse of it but it is as himselfe sayes the Custome of hipocrites to take advantage at the least abuse of Good things that vnder that covert they may remove the goodnes of those things rather then the abuse Constancie attributed to the vse of set formes he calls the constancie of the Cuckoe to be allwayes vsing the same Leiturgie And what then are his best reformed Churches this shewes him one of those chattring birds that Abraham drave from his sacrifise and this wretch trembles not to compare the sett formes appointed by God himselfe in the Scripture to the Cuckoe and the vse of the Scripture is the constancy of the Cuckoe The booke for aught we know was composed by men neither learned nor godly But they are vngodly that without knowledge will suppose them neither learned nor Godly but was the Martirdome of many of them noe proofe of their Godlines And are there noe workes that prove the learning of those Composers doth this man thinke vpon the credit of the protestant Religion Noe doubt the spiritt helpes our infirmities but we have noe promise that the spiritt shall enable every Christian to compose prayers for the whole congregation neither doth the Libeller beleive that all his Ministers of the new Religion are soe endowed if he doe he hath few associates It is Gods promise that where two or three gathered togeather in his name shall agree to aske any thing it shal be graunted And how can they agree without a prescript forme is the agreement that all must follow the desires of one That there was a Leiturgie in the Church of the Jewes hath not been denyed by any learned man its apparent by the Titles of many of Davids Psalmes that they were vsed by the singers in the ordinary service of the Church That Christians vsed the Lords prayer and other sett formes cannot be denyed and the Libeller is much deceived in his computation of the time when Leiturgies begun for the Church never wanted them and we have seene by experience that true pietie followed the vse of Leiturgies disobedience and prophanes the rejection of them such as have rejected them have proved not only Truants but Apostates to all sanctitie What is said of Leiturgie is said of Directorie and soe farewell Presbiterian We finde that none make such presumptuous claime to Ministeriall guifts as ignorant and braineles persons that have noe Title by calling or endowment The King had noe reason to object that the Common prayer booke was rejected because it prayed soe oft for him for large and laborious prayers were made for him in the pullpits But it s well knowne that the Sectaries were neither large nor laborious in such prayers and it s justly doubted not sincere when they vsed them but would have men heare their hipocriticall formalitie not God to graunt what they seemed to pray for and all men can witnes what prayers were made for him in pulpits after the leiturgie was rejected al the largenes and labour appearing in their prayers was to reproach his person and procure him dishonour and miserie The King in his prayers presumes Leiturgies to be lawfull What should hinder praying that the Church and he might never want them And what sayes the Libeller could be worse prayed extempore he might have answeared himselfe that Prayer to want them was to call for Desolation vpon the Church Of the Differences in point of CHURCH GOVERNMENT THe Libeller sayes the Author in this Chapter discovers more of misterie and combination betweene Tyrany and false Religion then from any other hand would have been credible T is strange that soe obvious a truth should be incredible from any hand Was not Jeroboams new Religion the foundation of a Tyrany and have not all vsurpers in the Civill state pretended some false Religion Was not Mahometts wicked imposture and Tyraniall vsurpation bredd togeather and have not the present Tyrants introduced a false Religion to support their power Hath not schisme been joyned with the Rebellion We may have learnt both from sacred story and times of reformation that the Kings of this world have ever hated and instinctively feared the Church of God It s manifest Sectaries hate King and Church malefactours will complaine that Judges hate them for their vertues We finde in the ancient Church that Kings were the greate protectours and reformers of the Church and its strange that the Libeller if he had looked backe at all had not seene David Solomon Hezechiah Josiah and others The Kings of Israell politiquely opposed the true Church for feare the people should returne to the house of David and if we looke vpon Pagan Kings we finde Cyrus and Artaxerxes helping the establishment of the true Church This Libeller hath discovered a greate Misterie of Rebellion that having made such outcryes of Tyrany against his late Maj heere tells vs the Tyrany was Monarchy they would not be subject to the Kings of this world to such impostors is England now subject that kill Kings and make Tyrants and this blaspheamer stickes not to charge the Church of God and the Doctrines thereof with opposition to Civill Government and to commaund the destruction of Kings Because the doctrine seemes to favour Libertie and equalitie And are there not Republiques that oppose the true Religion True Religion presseth obedience falshood and imposture allwayes hold foorth licence to the people Is there through all the booke of God one word in favour of this Rebell libertie and equallitie And did not God plant his Church at first
the Divill as in their donation Let it be produced what good hath been done by synods since the reformation It s like not the good he meanes to authorise all manner of Lewde sects and Lunaticke opinions But synods are customary and have their set times in all the reformed Churches and if there be fraude and packing in synods as he sayes whence come Parliaments that are of like constitution to be free Is there a priviledge of Parliament to change nature and that the members cannot be guiltie of fraude faction and Treason There is not only fraude and packing by insinuations conspiracies and corruptions of the vulgar but violence and confusion to Church and state by tumultuary reformations and what is this doctrine of rejecting synods but the justifying of all licentious violence and Lewde Rebellion to introduce mens private opinions The pulling downe of Church windowes and Crosses which were but Civill not Religious markes defacing the Monuments and inscriptions of the dead mentioned by the King are the effects of a popular and deceitefull reformation in the account of all true protestants That Protestants were accused by Papists as these are charged by the King will not parallell guilt nor hide the present Actions of these Traytours from view and detestation The Libeller doth very preposterously produce the Example of Iob whose sinceritie was accused to God as a protection for the hipocrisie of Sectaries while himselfe acts the part of him that accused Job to God and omits not the traducing of all proofes of pietie Religion and Justice in the late King But the infirmities of best men and scandalls of hipocrites in times of reforming can lay noe just blemissi vpon the integritie of others nor purpose of reformation Noe man sayes it did but if the Reformation it selfe be a noveltie pretending not the consent of any times but their owne opinions of places of Scripture different from all others if that which is offred in the name of reformation be in it selfe confusion and scandalous imputing Antichristianisme to all the Churches of God that were before them and that the way of introducing it be with presumption blood and Rebellion we cannot thinke that any promoters of such an vnchristian deformitie can have any integritie or Religion and they are not blemished with the Crymes of others but their owne They that have no publique place nor authoritie to reforme the Church cannot be excused of presumption if they meddle with it and such busy bodies are moved with Carnall selfe seeking and private ambition not sense of dutie If any thing grew worse and worse in the Church of England it was the encrease of Sectaries who would cover their hipocrisie with censure of superiours and lawes These Reformers pretend to reforme lawes not corruptions for though they talke of the time of the Kings Raigne they pretend to reforme nothing that was particularly worse in his time then before and he might aswell have asked why Queene Elizabeth in her fortie yeares raigne had not reformed as peevishly talke that his Majest should not reforme in twentie yeares when it was held strange that the Schismatickes should be soe distempered to pretend a necessity of reformatiō there being greater neede of strengthning what was established It is a Diabolicall Method to change the order of the Church by destruction of the Civill state just reformation never opposes lawfull authoritie in setting vp a Governmēt over others Though Christians might reforme themselves they allwayes judged it an abomination to impose their Religion vpō the state they lived in Private reformations are of Christian right but publique are the prerogative of supreame power and though Princes ought to serve God in the first place the people are not to destroy Princes in the first place they may worshipp God though they be persecuted they cannot truly if they take the sword to subdue them that are in authoritie and they feare not God that feare not their King our feare of God bindes vs to vse noe violence against our King nor vpon others our Alleagiance to our King being a part of our dutie to God and as the Apostle convinces those that hate their brother not to love God soe in vaine doe they pretend to feare God that offer violence to their King Can a Christian breake all the lawes of the second table vpon pretence of keeping the first And did not he that Commaunded to have noe other Gods but him commaund the honour of Father Mother May a private Christian robb and kill because persons are not of his Religion The scripture sajes he that is guiltie of the breach of one commaundement is guiltie of all and though Christians may not obey Commaunds contrary to the commaund of God they may not vse violence force but these are the Pharisees that teach men by making a vow vpon pretence of Gods service to disobey Parents which our Saviour soe much condemnes Christs Kingdome is spiritual in the hearts of the faithful not in a papall consistory nor a congregationall pullpitt they were best Christians that obeyed not wicked commaunds but detested by all Christians that vsed violence against their Pagan Governours and the reformed Churches may see what Communion can be had with those that professe those best Christians that were least subject to their King The King of Spaine may professe to have his Kingdome from Christ whatever his Religion be he hath a just Civill right which none ever doubted to acknowledge but these hell bred Sectaries that allow noe right but what is founded on their will his repetition of the Letter to the Pope vpon this occasiō shewes he is vnder a famine of reason that makes the Kings constācy to the doctrine of the Church of England to proceede from his letter to the Pope calling it enmitie to the true Church are any soe madd to thinke that the Pope was pleased with the doctrine of the Church of England Did the Libeller thinke there were a God would he write soe willfully against his owne vnderstanding that the King engaged himselfe to hazard life Estate for the Roman Religion he would then thinke that God were neere him writt downe those words which he will one day require an account of The King prayed against his hipocrisie and Pharisaicall washings whose prayer is thou who must give truth for hipocrisie suffer vs not to be miserably deluded by Pharisaicall washings Poeticall licence will not wash away willfull slander and malicious falsification but this man makes hipocrisie and Pharisaicall washings his cheife study and hates the prayers of others for his conversion from such wickednes Vpon his LETTERS taken and DIVULGED THE Publication of the Kings Letters had quite contrary effects to these which the publishers intended and insteede of discovering matter to their advantage cast shame on their false aspersions whereby they sought to withdraw the affections of his people from him they sett foorth both his judgment and affections opposite
the hearts of Rebells must necessarily make the words of the wise the wayes of the inst matter only of contempt and derision and such as have once broken the bounds of modestie thinke it dishonour to have shame and repentance and will advance their confusions insteede of order their Blasphemies for zeale their sacriledge for reformation their Tyrany for law and all the hell they feare is the losse of their vsurped power and the restoring of just right and their jealosies of loosing their owne greatenes provokes them still to an increase of their lewdenes making truth and right the object of their spite and persecution These debaucht Rebells proclaime that there is noe good but Rebellion noe worke of God but submission to it and repentance for opposing it If the Church of England be Antipapall how comes it to bo a schisme And why hath the libeller so continually made vp his discourses with inclinations to Popery Independencie knowes noe schisme for if it allow every meeting its libertie where is the schisme It s a Rule that noe Scripture nor ancient Creede bindes our faith to any Church denominated by a particular name But he rejects what was received by the vniversall Church What doth that contradict the Kings advice to his Son of his esteeme of the Church of England if he beleive as he did vpon good ground that it was agreeable in doctrine to the word of God It is apparent that these Sectaries are seperated from all Churches of the world and that Government which they call Catholique had neither precept nor practice in any Church being newly crept out of hell to persecute the Church Noe man was ever bid to be subject to the Church of Cornith Rome or Asia but to the Church without addition And why doth he deny to be subject to the Church without addition was there never Church before this day heere we have the builders of Babell none vnderstand what another sayes were not those that lived in those Churches of Corinth Rome Asia commaunded to be subject to the Governours of those Churches Is it not the Apostles Commaund to obey those that have the oversight of them and may every man despise their new independent congregations seeke for a Church without addition and where then will he finde him We may imagine what manner of state such Church reformers will erect and what it is they call reformation that looke vpon all Churches as schismes because not rent into as many parts as particular persons These schismatickes pretend the Church of England allmost growne Popish and yet nothing altered from the first reformation while they disguise their meaning by pretending popery to gett the vulgar vnawares to favour their dissembled zeale they demaund to have the Reformation vnestablished And the restraint of their Rebellion is Pharaohs prohibition to the Israelites that sought leave tosacrifise to God It was a greate testimony of the Kings zeale to the Church of God that he forewarned his Sonne to suppresse errours schismes his owne experience having taught him that these doggs and evill workers are the greatest evills to Church and state and these destroyers that are the reproaches of Religion the Scabbs and biles to be Church allow noe protestant Churches to be communicated with that are not tainted with the same putrifaction that hath corrupted them For the Civill state the kings precepts tend to the preservation of Civill libertie and it was farr from our Fathers to thinke that any humane lawes were immutable but further that lawes should be altered at the will of a mutable multitude and that their King should be excluded from the judgment of the reasons for a change He falls from the question touchinge repeale of lawes and talkes of saving the Kingdome we may better trust the King with saving the Kingdome then any number of men we can picke out whose private fortunes may be saved though the kingdome be lost The Turkes Iawes and Moores enjoy vnder the Turkish Government what their industrie and labour have made their owne If that be true the Libeller is much out of the way to thinke it a reproach to Civill Government to compare it to the Turkes what Civill libertie doth the freest nation claime more and what doe these Masters of the new Republique pretend to allow more Doe they not plainely tell the people they ought to have noe more then they will give them Thus he will defend the Turke Jew and Moore rather then be an Englishman There is noe doubt but the libertie of the subject depends on the Regall power in the first place There is noe libertie without Government and where the Government is regall the subject must maintaine it or be a Traytour and give vp his libertie for a prey to ravenous vsurpers That the King suffred it to be preached in his owne hearing that the subject had noe propertie of his goods but all was the Kings right Is a mainfest vntruth yet they which make advantage of such inventions practise what they reproach for doth not that thing they call a Parliament consisting of a few contemptible persons professe that all the goods of the subjects are at their disposing By the lawes of England noe act can be a law without the king though both houses propounded it and in that negative voyce of the kings the people reposed their libertie which they would not wholly intrust to a Major part of one or both houses The power of the whole nation is vertually in the Parliament But there is noe vertue in it without the king And is it vertually in such a part of the Parliament as either the Army or the Tumults shall picke out The Libeller hath borne wittnes for the kings Martirdome though he intended the contrary and while he names the Rebells war in their owne defence cannot avoyde to tell the world the Rebellion was to take away the Kings negative voyce and establish lawes at their owne will Every man will beare wittnes that it is Martirdome to die rather then burne incense to Idolls or Devills and he that refuses to introduce schisme and disorder into the Church and committ sacrilegious pillage of Church goods and is persecuted to death for his refusall is noe lesse a Martir then he that suffers for denying an Idolatrous worshipp and this is not to die for Religion because establisht but that establishment which we ought to preserve and all the painting dawbing of these Artisans of Rebellion will not deface that Martirdome which their owne wicked hands have testified There are no reformed Churches that have abolisht the Decalogue so long a king that dies by a wicked Rebellion for not consenting to Trayterours demaunds is judged a Martir by the best reformed Churches but he does not looke before he leape that brings in the Romish Priests executed for that which had been established for he might have knowne they were executed by lawes in force and for doing what noe
Reformers and there were never any but those Sectaries soe shamelesse to deny the Authoritie of antiquitie or charge it in this particular with an aberration from Scripture and many learned men living vnder Presbitery acknowledge the dignitie of Bishopps above Presbiters in the times of the Apostles The Libeller likes any limitations in the Covenant dangerous to the king soe much of the Covenant as concernes the casting out of Bishopps but he will sweare and forsweare comformitie to the Church of Scotland or any other That this Covevant had former practice vnles in the french League cannot be shewne The Libeller would have the Israelites entring a new into a Covenant with Asa their King to be a new Covenant when it was only a renewing of their promise of obedience to God noe Articles of their owne devising and as that was with the King soe he hath found one without a King for the Jewes after the captivitee tooke solemne oath to walke in the Commaundements of God without consent demaunded of that King who was then their Master and they had the Authoritie of that King But did they take an oath to vse violence against that King if he consented not to them or was the Covenent to walke in Gods Commaundements a new Covenant This is like their pulpitt proofes That Protestant Churches have made Leagues or Covenant against their King Or imposed their confessions with Civill penalties vpon refusers without their Prince is a notorious slander for the protestation it was confined to established law the Covenant to destroy law and what was established by it the protestation to defend the Doctrine the Covenant to destroy the Government which is comprehended in the Doctrine and this the Libeller holds needes noe reconcitement There is noe doubt but the Examples of Asa and Esra were approved by Scripture but they are farr from the Examples of the present Covenant and if the Libeller approve the taking of the Covenant how doth he satisfie himselfe in the breach of it he hath found out away for he may aswell breake that as his oath to his King and obligation to former lawes which he sayes are Conditionall and that condition to be expounded by every man at his pleasure He proceedes to shew the strength of the Covenant and yet he will keepe it one way and his brethren of another name and sect another way If he Covenant oblidge to contrary courses it cannot be a Rule of Reformation and as it clashes with former oaths to God and the king rightly vnderstood soe the clashing of these that devised it shewes that the spiritt of peace was not desired by the contrivers of that Covenant That the Kings booke is replenished with Popish Arguments must be spoken in a Corner not publiquely with any modestie for the Protestants throughout the world know the contrary and will disavow this Covenanting power to be a part of their Religion The salvoes cautions and reservations vsed in taking the Covenant were the arts of the deceitefull composers and it s well knowne it was an artifice vsed to perswade men to take it that they might vse the libertie of their owne sense and the Libeller willing to say some thing in detraction of the King vpon every occasion as if it were a sin to vse truth and ingenuitie transposes words of the Kings which were vsed in reproofe to additions of his owne as if the King approved these shuffling cautions who he well knowes detested both the Covenant and them and shewed the inniquitie of these deceites and we have seene that these Cautions have made Covenanter and anticovenanter Presbiterian and independent Rebell The Libeller likes well the povertie of the Ministers of the gospell And although the primitive povertie of Churchmen was very glorious yet the Christian Laitie were never soe sordid to thinke a liberall patrimony vnfit for them and Religion hath litle power where the Clergie are trencher chaplaines to gluttons feasts These men that judge povertie a curse to themselves hold it Christs legacie to the Ministers If there were any legacie povertie was to all Christians aswell as Clergie but we see that notwithstanding these professions their Levites now hold more pluralities without remorse then ever were knowne and shame not to contradict their former declamations but it is the calamitie of the Church that greedy doggs devoure her patrimony and barking detractours traduce her Clergie Vpon the many JEALOSIES c. TO wipe of Iealosies and scandalls the best way had been by cleere actions or till Actions could be cleered by evident reasons Cleere Actions nor evident reasons will stopp the mouth of malicious slanderers nor abate the industrie of conspiratours in raising jealosies But these which his Majest complained of were tempered only to vulgar capacitie and were long since hist at by all knowing men who saw apparently they were not the opinions of the devisers but artifices of deceite and the progresse of this Rebellion hath cleered al mistakes and taken away al credit from these fopperies It is very late for the Libeller to call to his aide the petitions and addresses composed by the faction in Parliament when himselfe accuses them for want of wisedome and integritie and whoever reades these addresses will easily finde not only cause to suspect the truth of what they say but plaine proofe of falshood and hipocrisie That the whole Parliament conspired against the King he never said and the author well knowes that it was a potent faction only to whome the King imputes this injurie though their being elected to that place is no exemption from a possibilitie of errour Cryme and we have seene it beyound doubt that this faction conspired to blow vp the peoples affections towards him and batter downe their loyaltie by the Engnies of fowle aspersions and have acted what the powder plot intended The King offers not to purge himselfe by any other Arguments then such whose proofe is visible to all the world and the silliest people see how they were cheated by factious Artists The Kings Arguments are not only demonstrable to the best but obvious to common vnderstandings and it cannot be expected that such as are resolute in wicked courses will aske forgivenes or have it The world knowes the King when he wrote this expected the Rebells crueltie but feared it not and there was not cause to vse insinuations which were not to be divulged till his death Tyrants and vsurpers are forced to flatter but it s a wicked slander to charge him with flatterie that is feareles of crueltie This Libeller prophanely descants on Scripture as he doth apparently vpon the Kings misfortunes for vpon the Kings saying that he could willingly be the Ionah for restoring his peoples tranquillitie if he did not foresee that by the divided interests of their and his Enemies as by contrary windes the storme of their miseries would rather be encreased then allayed The Libeller sayes these mindes were never heard of in the
inflicting of just penalties on their bodies and Estates according to the lawes was the dutie of the Magistrate to whome the execution of them belonged although the indulgence they found from his Majest in mitigating the penalties of law was a greate cause of their insolence and that Calamitie they have brought vpon the kingdome and if the lives of these men be sought into their pride impudence calumnie lying perjurie covetuousnes and crueltie declare their lives farr from innocent The man now breakes out into a thankesgiving for the successes of their Rebellion and though these hipocrites despise the thought of a Church and have noe Communion with any Church ancient or moderne yet the resistance of them is warr against the Church Noe Papist could speake more scandalously against reformation then that Episcopacie was the constant practice of all Christian Churches till of late yeares Tumult pride faction and covetuousnes invented new modells vnder the Title of Christ Government It neede not be observed againe how the Libeller is affected to the reformation that despises all but his owne Babell and Tumults factions pride and covetuousnes the causes of some new modells touches not soe many as he supposes there being soe many of the reformed Churches that receive not these new modells but whoever they be that obtrude them as Christs Government Scepter and Religion they will be marked with the same names that are heere mentioned by the greatest number if not all of the reformed Churches The Apostles were not properly Bishopps next Bishopps were not Successours of Apostles in the function of Apostleshipp If the Apostles were not properly Bishopps he should have told how they were improperly Bishopps for by his caution properly he admits they were someway Bishopps and the Bishopps therein their Successours though not in that part of the Apostleshipp which concerned speciall guifts and the Testimonie of Christs conversation on earth whereof they were eye wittnesses If they were Apostles they could not be precisely Bishopps and why not precisely if Bishopps They could not be Apostles his reason is because that of Apostle was vniversall extraordinary and immediate the other ordinary fixed and particular charge and inspection The calling of the seventie disciples was vniversall extraordinarie and immediate and yet they were noe Apostles and because callings were at first extraordinary must not they whose office it was to provide Successours to themselves and others in the Church of God ordaine others into their functions and is it an Argument that because when the Church was gathered men had particular care of certaine Churches therefore they were not of the same calling with others that preceeded them in gathering these Churches and the latitude of territorie in the exercise of a mans calling doth not make difference in the function It is against reason and Charitie to suppose an ignorance and deviation of the ancient Church taught by the Apostles in a point that destroyed the calling of such as were to reproach the gospell and the suddennesse is not imaginable in the introduction of Prelacy vnles by Apostolicall constitution in regard of the vniversalitie and the Author cannot name any manifest corruption so sudden and vniversall after the Apostles though he pretend many The Ecclesiasticall Historie proves it cleerely to be false that noe example since the first age for 1500 yeares can be produced of any setled Church wherein were many Ministers and congregations which had some Bishopps over them And his proofe is out of Sozomen who he sayes wrote above 1200 yeares agoe and his Testimony that in the Churches of Cyprus and Arabia they had Bishopps in every village what then he sayes what could these be more then Presbiters Yes they were Bishopps for doth any man doubt that Bishopps and Presbiters were not distinct in Sozomens time who soe frequently mentions it and the Libeller complaines of the corruption of introducing them in the ages foregoing there are many Councells before Sozomen which were vniversally received and in them subordinate of Presbiter to Bishopp is the vndeniable practice of the Church and the quantitie or quallitie of Townes or Territories wherein Bishopps were placed noe way proves the lessening of their order neither can it be collected because Bishopps were in small villages that therefore they were noe other then Presbiters but heerein the Libeller shewes his malicious oppsition to truth in abusing Sozomen who having said that Churches had several customes instances that though there were many Citties in Scithia there was one Bishopp only over all and in other Countreyes Bishopps were in villages not every village he might aswell conclude noe Presbiters in Scithia as none but Presbiters in Arabia and Cyprus The same Author tells the like of other nations and that Episcopall Churches did not condemne them Wherefore should they condemne them It s like they would if they had taken vpon them to exercise the calling of Bishopps being but Presbiters for that was long before condemned by the Canons He makes a large leape from sozomen to fower hundred yeares agoe and the he sayes many westerne Churches in France Piedmont and Bohemia admitted not of Episcopacy among them and yet the doctrine and practice of these Churches published by themselves is that they had Bishopps continue them stil this the libeller might see in their own bookes If we might beleive what Papists have written of the Waldenses he findes in a booke written 400 yeares since that those Churches in Piedmont held the same doctrine since the time that Constantine with his mischeivous donations poysened Thus the exploded forgery of constantines donation is made authenticke to reproach the Church Sylvester and the whole Church This is the Schismaticall Charitie to the first Christian Emperour and the whole Church but the man might have remembred that Bishopps by his owne confession were long before the time of Constantine and if we beleive the waldenses themselves they had Bishopps in their Churches who held the same doctrine and Government and the antiquitie of the waldenses proves that they had Bishopps otherwise they had beē condemned by the ancient Church as Aerius was for if there had been any Churches differing from vniversal practice in the time of Constantine it is not imaginable that they had been vnobserved wee finde noe mention of their dissent but from the Papacie and that long after The famous Testimonie of St. Jerome whereto he referrs the rest is farr from declaring openly that Bishopp and Presbiter are the same thing but the contrary is manifest in him for what proofe can there be drawne from saint Jerome that Bishopps Presbiters were the same thing who saies that befor schisme by instigatiō of the devil entred into the Church that one said I am of Paul another of Apollo another of cephas al things were governed by the common counsel of the Presbiters and who will thinke that there were no distinct orders because things were governed by the
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
in an apparent inequallitie and subjection both in the state Civill Ecclesiasticall And this broode of Sectaries have heeretofore complained that the doctrines were traduced as opposite to Monarchy And neither Libertie nor equallitie is sought for to the people but to betray them to the power of these deceivers who are growne to that impudence to pretend doctrines of confusion and Rebellion to be the true Religion The Church as ancient prophesies foretold should dissolve all their power Dominion Few sects professing Christ have appeared more Turkish then these present of England they fancie an earthly Kingdome for the Church as Mahomett his Paradise and then that themselves are the true Church and shall have Dominion ever all and avow their intention to destroy all Kings and whoever submitt not to them But certenly Kings vnderstood not any such prophesies nor feared such pretenders who make prophesies to agree with their owne wicked Actions and ambitions desires His first instance is in Pharaohs oppressing of the Israelites And doth he beleive that Pharaoh knew their doctrines or prophesies the man might have learnt more from the Text that being strangers they might over power him and thence grew his persecution not from the libellers imaginary doctrine He makes a strange leape that passes by all stories els and would prove his position by his owne authoritie and expects that his libell against the King shall make good his position that Kings ever feared and hated the true Church a strong way of disputing to prove that kings hated and feared the true Church because the King did soe and to prove the King did soe because kings did soe this is a stout Champion There neede no answeare to his bawling of the kings suspition of men most Religioâ—s for time hath tryed that they were Rebellious and wicked Traytours vnder the Masque of Religion He could not vse violence as Pharaoh did and therefore chuses a more misticall way of Antichristian fraude and like Balak to hire against a nation of Prophetts other esteemed Prophetts and to meare out the Church by a false Ecclasiasticall Policie The Summe is to supresse Sectaries and prevent Traytours is this Ecclesiasticall Policie but where is this Misterie of Kings hating the true Church is there noe true Church of God where there is Government And what proportion hath this supposition of his to the kings proceedings Did he erect Bishopps or was there any Religion established or publiquely profest which he opposed but only false and hipocriticall factionists which outwardly professing the established Religion sought for gaine and pride secretly to draw disciples after them to the disturbance subversion of the Church There needes not any thing be said to his rayling his corruption being apparent by objecting it to the calling of Bishopps and hates it for the remedy against schisme which the Church had by them The King bestowed livings according to the law and the Policie was not his but the ancient constitution of the Church and this Monster that reproaches the retaining any thing in Leiturgie or Government practised by the ancient Church is not ashamed to charge the king with breach of Canons and the ancient practice of the Church in conferring Ecclesiasticall dignities and the peoples right in Elections was never pretended in England and justly and anciently forbidden in the Church neither doe any Canons in force support that pretence That influence which the king sayes is necessarie for the Prince to have vpon Churchmen noe man that beleives the Scripture will thinke vnfitt but how can the Libeller make good that the many Emperours and Kings that imbraced the Christian Religion hated and feared it for soe they must by his grounds And how can he conclude from Pagans hatred to Religion that it was only from their kings when as the stories are soe plentifull in setting downe the madd rage of the multitude the truth is seditious innovatours know that their hopes and strength lie to seduce the silly people and that it is the interest of governours to prevent their lewde endeavours and thence proceede their declamations against Rulers and their proclamations of Libertie and that which they cal the Bishopps Tyrany is only their office to take away schisme and schisme is the way to Rebellion The Libellers judgment touching callings founded on Scripture reformation or graces of the Bishopps and others is of the same authoritie as the determinations of Traytours touching loyaltie and heretickes touching sound doctrine and his end never agrees with his beginning but in rayling and incongruitie for but now he made it the Kings Policie to hire the Bishopps now it is the Bishopps Policie to worke that perswasion in the King of noe Bishopp noe King the man well knowes that noe Bishopp noe king was the perswasion of King James who found it true by his owne experience without the helpe of Bishopps and vet soe sottish doth this Libeller presume his readers that makes the dependence which Bishopps have only of the king the cause of such perswasions yet in their owne subtill sense they were of another minde how theÌ„ could their dependence be a cause of their perswasion or was their sense subtill and grossely mistaken Thus those blattering devills that in the beginning of the Parliament charged the Bishopps to be Antimonarchicall thereby to conceale their malice against the king now make it their Cryme to favour Monarchy He hath found a very strong proofe as he would have it out of the Historie of the Councell of Trent that Bishopps are most potent when Princes are weakest that argues not their dependence vpon Princes nor that aversion to Bishopps is not aversion to Princes it was spoken of Bishopps depending on the Pope not on Princes and such Clergy men as have their dependence on Pope or people wil never wish that the king should be potent to master their dependencie From this the King sett himselfe to the removall of those men whose doctrine he feared would be the vndoing of Monarchy And needed he the Councells of Bishopps to provide for his safetie against such men And is that the evill interest of Tyrany and Episcopacie to prevent the designes of Traytours Who were Traytours if they were not that would vndoe Monarchy The doctrine and designes of the schismatickes are heereby apparent to be against Monarchy and yet the prevention of such conspiracies is the Tyrany and the corrupt Councells of Bishopps which the hipocrites cry out on Noe temporall law could touch the innocencie of their lives And had they innocency that plotted the vndoing of Monarchy vnder which they lived and could not the law touch it Their disobedience to lawes was a Cryme inconsistent with innocence and must necessarily be punished by the lawes they disobey and that which he calls persecution of their consciences and laying scandalls before them was only the requiring of their obedience to Acts of Parliament whose authoritie he soe frequently cryes vp and the