contradictions and absurdities soe obvious to the first sight His labour to declaime against persecution is not matter of fact and the impertinencie of it hath been already sufficiently detected The king sayes Many things are required of him nothing offred in requitall And the Libeller demaunds What could satiate the desires of this man who being King of England and Master of almost two millions yearely was still in want And yet the Masters in the new state affirme in their declaration that the constant Revenue of the Crowne exceeded not a hundred thousand pound a yeare And why should not the King expect contributions from his subjects aswell as al his Predecessours still had And why will this man deny him supplies that soe often obtrudes his wants and he will have the King content with Rebells Charitie and allowes them to take al from him when they list as the subjects money this is the supreame honour and Revenue that the king ought to content himselfe with It was for honours sake that they put the King vpon the giving part not that it belonged to him of right for he sayes all lawes are in the hands of the Parliament and King-shipp it selfe He sayes it and yet we must beleive him that England was a Monarchy if the Majestie were not in the king how was it other then a republique and it was for honours sake that they have been subjects these many hundred yeares wherefore would he have the world beleive warrs were made betweene competitours for the Crowne of England was it only to be a king in a play but we finde that what Rebells can attaine by power they will assert for right and they which have had soe many denialls and have professed conscientious subjection at last come to say it was for honours sake and of forme not necessitie that they were subjects The Libeller proceedes to shew that Monarchy cannot permit the requisites necessary to societie That the will of one man in Government is contrary to freedome And why not the will of five hundred to the freedome of the rest as much as that one These men thinke that their clamour against the power of one man hes a greate influence vpon the ignorant people which might have had some beleife before they had tryed their new Masters If we looke vpon the most ancient stories of the world we finde the people both in peace and warr commaunded by one man nature teaching the necessitie of one generall in an Army and the Government which God himselfe appointed to his people was by one man and as moyses was at first soe were his successours and the kings after Saul and David and this Libeller can speake nothing of this power of one man but must censure and vilifie Gods owne institution he offers nothing against Monarchy but what hes equall opposition to Parliament and all formes of Government for the peoples good for which he sayes the king hath his rights will assoone become a pretence for Rebellion against any Rulers as kings His denyall that the King is not greater then his Parliament is only opposinge his bare word to all sense and reason for doth the greater petition the lesse and yet the Parliament constantly petition the king He sayes the King can doe noe wrong And have not they then that pretend he had done wrong committed disobedience and wrong The King can doe noe right but in his Courts And if they be his Courts and his deputies and doe all in his name doth it not follow that it is his doing And though the kings sitt not ordinarily in their Courts yet they have often sate in severall Courts and in Parliament the King himselfe gives orders as appeares by the Presidents of all times and wherefore did the Parliament preferre their petition of right to the King and importuned his answeare if he had noe power to doe right but by his Courts But what concernes the administration of Justice by deputies is not peculiar to England but to all other Kingdomes Without his Courts he is noe King And yet they are his Courts and cannot sitt but by his graunt If the King doe wrong in the highest degree he must doe it as a Tyrant not as a King of England But he is still King of England though a Tyrant and if subjects may judge their King the ordinary acts of soveraigntie wil be wrong in the highest degree If he cannot as one greater give oft to the Parliament as the Libeller supposes and that it may be termed the Courtesie of England to aske any thing of the King They would not have importuned the Acts that have passed this Parliament nor have vsed their Iron flaile to obteine them and by his rule subjection is noe more the Courtesie of England then all other Countreyes We never forced him to part with his conscience but it is he that would have forced vs to part with ours and doth he that refuses the demaund of another force his conscience that demaunds Doth the Kings denyall force his subjects consciences because they force themselves to Rebell and enforce him to say what they will have him The Authors descant vpon the Kings words of the incommunicable Iewell of his conscience discovers how he hath exposed his owne to the flatterie and slaverie of his Masters and had he thoughts of conscience he would not have valued it at the basest price The breeding of Most kings hath ever been sensuall and most humoured He speakes it of his owne sense and inclination to such base offices Kings have greatest cause to avoyde such breeding and persons of such condition The kings dissent from his whole kingdome is a supposition of that which never was and were impossible ever to happen but should it happen they that are governed must submitt to the governour and that by all the Rules of divine and humane law The Libeller saying the king preferrs his love of truth before the love of his people the Kings words are the love I have of my peoples place hath greate influence vpon me but the love of truth and inward peace hath more And who thinkes not that it ought to have soe For his search of truth he had gone amisse if he had rested on those propounders which the Libeller prescribes him And that vnaccountable Prerogative which the Libeller sayes is the truth he loves would have been judged a truth by the Libeller if he had reteined either feare of God or love to his Countrey It is our ill hap that three kingdomes should be pestred with one conscience which scrupled to graunt what the Parliament advised him But it was the miserie of the three kingdomes that a faction of depraved men that had cast away conscience should oversway the Parliament and demaund graunts for their owne ambition against the kingdome These scruples to many he sayes seeme pretended to others vpon as good grounds may seeme reall And to this it seemes the Libeller inclines for noe reason wil
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
all men see that in all places of Government much is left Arbitrary to the Governour and it was evident to the world that the Earle of strafford did nothing in an Arbitrary manner without President of his Predecessours and the Judges in Courts of equitie might be aswell made Cryminall for proceeding in an Arbitrary manner as he That he had endeavoured to subvert fundamentall lawes was a supposition not a fact and if the Image breaker looke over the Articles where with he was charged at his Tryall he will finde nothing of such a Cryme To subvert Parliaments and incense the King against them was not as much as vrged against him as his Tryall that Article being declined by his accusers in regard of knowne falshood and that the Earle of strafford advised the King to call the former Parliament That he had endeavoured to make histolitie betweene England and scotland was a legend devised for vulgar temper not rationall consideration for both Kingdomes being vnder one King they must be Rebells in either Kingdome that make warr against one another without him and what dreamer can fancy that any Minister of state that were affected to the Kings designes as this libeller supposes the Earle of strafford to be would stirr vp hostilitie betweene the nations They have not yet adventured to charge the Earle of strafford with stirring vp the scotch hostilitie and if he endeavoured to resist them is that to make hostolitie be tweene the nations It hath been the practice of these Rebells to stile men incendiaries and malignants that opposed their Rebellion and such evill Counsellours that advised any course to prevent their attemps and the following confusion but though this vaine delusion were cast abroade among the people it was never offred as a charge against the Earle That he had councelled the King to call over that Irish Army of Papists which be had ounningly raysed to reduce England as appeared by good Testimony then present at the consultation is vnseasonably remembred by the libeller after those Rebells whome he serves have severall times drawne in forraigne Armies into England reduced the nation to serve an vsurped power set vp an Arbitrary Government subverted the fundamentall lawes and destroyed both King and Parliament It may astonish Knowing men to reade this Author objecting Capitall offences to the Earle of strafford and numbring vp for instance the same Actions himselfe desends soe as it cannot be an humane errour but hellish-fury that hurles him into such mad contradictions and its worth the observing that to this particular he adds as appeared by good Testimony then present at the consultation well Knowing that the Testimony was not only single but subject to most just and apparent exception in regard of knowne enmitie and former prevarication in severall examinations vpon oath and it no way helpes a false Testimonie that he knew the truth or that he was present at a fact whereof he makes an vntrue relation and if the Earle of strafford had councelled the King to make vse of the Jrish Army in either Kingdome in case of Rebellion how comes that to be an offence though that was not the truth that he spake of England nor the Army raysed against England and is it a commendable cunning to rayse an Army against a Rebellion His reference to 28 Articles directs vs how to know that he trusts on number more then weight and those Articles remaine a Testimonie to posteritie of the ridiculous pretences which effected such mischeife He sayth the Commons by farr the greater number-cast him and yet is so absurdly impudent to charge the King with singularitie of conscience and alledge presently a part of the lower-house of the same opinion The Lords he sayth after they had been satisfied in a full discourse by the Kings solicitour and the opinions of many Iudges delivered in their house agreed likewise to the sentence of Treason Those Lords that condemned the Earle of strafford might be satisfied by terrour of the Tumults and their owne corrupt passions never by law nor reason It s well knowne that the Lords and Commons were assaulted and threatned by the vnruly rabble of the Citie and Suburbs if they condemned him not they had not freedome in their coming or going to the house or sitting there There was no one judge that gave his opinion for the sentence against him and the Sollicitours discourse was very strong against the present Rebells wholy impertinent to the case of the Earle of strafford and shewed his owne deceite and the sottishnes of them that relyed on what they vnderstood not Diverse lords for sooke the house having not libertie to be present soe farr were the lords from being satisfied That which he calls a sentence of Treason was an act of power it being a Bill to take away his life but an exception of all men els from being proceeded against for the same matters in ordinary Justice and this very Action soe scandalous in it selfe and soe greivous to many that consented to it must be dreft out with a shamelesse commendation to accuse the King for his repentance of a fact which soe much afflicted him That the people vniversally cryed for justice is noe wonder if we consider former examples and the had a President in the people of the Iewes that cryed Crucifie If we beleive this libeller telling vs how light and violent they are in their motions or if we looke vpon the acts of a powerfull faction then prevayling with them that could easily make them cry what was put in their mouth we may easily judge the injustice of their cry and their ignorance of the cause and a sober author would have hated to borrow an Argument of Justice from popular outcryes which are the most evident proofe of injustice and oppression of innocence He sayes none were his friends but Courtiers and Clergimen the worst at that time and most corrupted sort of men Court ladies not the best of women His fer friends and many Enemies render the proceedings against him more then suspected and men may easily beleive that in such a condition furie was the accuser and malice and cowardise the judge The confining his friends to Court and Church is the effect of the libellers engagement of schisme and Rebellion who holds such loyaltie and affection to the King and conscientious reverence to the Church for the markes of greate offenders If multitude of Ennemies be a Testimony of guilt the best men will become the worst of sinners But having noe friends as he sayes it adds much to the right of his cause that soe many who were neither Courtiers nor Clergymen nor any way obliged by him or the Court should in discharge of their conscienc declare their dissent to that bloody law though they were thereby objected to popular fury His impertinent rayling at Courtiers and Clergymen argues his malice not Cryme in them His mention of Court ladies was for want of matter and their activitie
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
of Kings be an Act of Justice whereto must mankinde be reduced but to be Tigers or Devills in destroying one another And they cannot deny but what may be done to a King may be done to any other schisme and Rebellion are inseperable Companions and as this Author defames the Kingly Government so the Church may not escape his fury for rather then it shall have any estimation he will have a long tradition of Idolatry before those good Emperours but if he had vouchsafed to reade the story and depended not vpon his spirits he would have found that not tradition but an impious Rebellion stirred vp against a good Emperour brought the superstitious Images into the Church and that the good Emperour with stood the bringing in of them not brake them downe after long Tradition and thence he might have told vs what kinde of reformation must be expected from popular fury and that as then by Tumultuous violence superstition was established so now in England confusion and prophanenes This Image breaker thinkes he may aswell vsurpe an Emperours surname as his Masters their Kings power and Estate and while he magnifies the good Emperours corrects himselfe least the people thence thinke on their reverence to their King For he sayes the people exorbitant and excessive in all their motions are prone oft times not to a Religious only but to a Civill kinde of Idolatrie in Idolizinge their Kings though never more mistaken in the object of their worshipp heeretofore being wont to repute for saints those faithfull and coragious Barons who lost their lives in the field making glorious warrs against Tyrants for the common libertie Never time can better witnes this truth then the present that the people are exorbitant and excessive in all their motions nor ever man that put pen to paper could more improperly lay it on their score then this Author that takes on him to defend the most exorbitant and excessive motions of the people that any Kingdome hath felt the power of his Masters being founded on those motions and if the people yet see not their errour they cannot longer be deceived having such a Testimonie as this Author a man without exception in that point and its likely they begun to see how they were made instruments of their owne slavery that this Author gives so severe a Character of the people If they be prone to a Religious Idolatrie as the Author sayes they are they are very vnfit Reformers of the Church and for that Civill kinde of Idolatrie in Idolizing their Kings that is in an eminent degree of obedience for such appeares his meanings it wil never prove sin to them and the contrary vice Rebellion is more frequent and more dangerous to their salvation and many will goe to heaven with this Civill kinde of Idolatrie when Rebells and despisers of Dominion wil be excluded The Author should have done well to tell what this Civill kinde of Idolatrie is if it differs from true obedience and whether it may not be given to others aswell as Kings I beleive if there be such a Civill kinde of Idolatrie the worst degree of it is in the reverence borne to King killers and common destroyers of their Countrey as the stories of all times testifie Rebells never wanted pretentions but libertie and Justice were the common Maske of such Monsters so this man wil have the world beleive the pretences of Rebells and that Rebellion was allwayes the lawfull side and thence those faithfull and couragious Barons that had broken their faith and Alleagiance to their King Trayterously armed the multitude for private revenge and ambition must be sainted those whome the cleere evidence of law judged Traytours and their warrs Rebellion must be the patrons of common libertie I thinke the Author will hardly finde a Calender of such saints if he receive a Connonization at such a rate it will deserve farlesse credit then the Gregorian Calender but he is not like to finde a Calender of saints for his purpose vnles it be filled with such faithles Traytours It hath been said of Politicians that they love the Treason and hate the Traytour but these new Masters saint the Traytours make Treason the Canon of their Religion Some men have pitied men of parts whose passions have carried them into vnwarrantable Actions but never till this age did Christians adore such saints Rebellion is dearer to this Author then Religion and he will rather commend superstitious Actions of a blinde age and the very dreggs of Popery against which he professeth so greate Zeale then want an ingredient to the varnish of that horrid sin and rather then that shal be discountenanced Popery and Judaisme it selfe shal be admitted There were a people that Idolized Todes and vipers and all venemous creatures and these men have resumed that Idolatry that will have the most cruell and destructive impieties to make men saints He instances in two particulars Simon de Montfort Earle of Leicester against Hen. 3. and Thomas Plantagenet Earle of Lancaster against Edward 2. For the first of these he was by the Testimony of the stories of that age the most ingrate full Rebell that any state hath harboured a man overloaden with his Masters favours matcht to his sister intrusted with his secretts and his forces yet this man whome neither benifitts affection nor trust could oblidge nor keepe from thrusting the King from his Throne assuminge the Government to himselfe for the common libertie as the Author will have it is enrolled for a saint If there were any so exorbitant and excessive in their motions to saint such a faithlesse wretch the Author will hardly finde any so much mistaken in his Civill Kinde of Idolatry to their Kings but whence comes Hen 3 to be a Tyrant of whome the stories report so much mildnes and hardly so greate an errour as the vnadvised advancement of that Rebell Montfort But it is very vsuall with these men that wherever they finde an Example of Rebellion there the King is a Tyrant and all such Presidents as were conveyed to our times to shew vs the mischeife and wickednes of Rebellion are produced as authorities for the committing of it and Garnetts straw wil be a Miracle and he a saint the Assassins of Kings glorious Champions for common libertie For the secound the stories are very silent of any common libertie pretended by the Earle of Lancaster or any Tyrany against that King but it matters not what truth there be in an assertion so a King be made the Criminall and though the mistake of such as held the Earle of Lancaster for some time a saint were ridiculous to that very age yet this Author will have it a lesse errour then the keeping of the fifth Commaundement and the people that vsed a Civill Kinde of Idolatry to their good Emperour that had the famous surname of Iconoclastes more mistaken in the object of their worshipp then such as Idolized the
deepe engagements to his Allies abroade the supplies the then Parliament gave him were two Subsidies he then desired an addition only of fortie thousand pound which was refused him If any man shall say now that the King called not that Parliament of his owne inclination because he was discontented to be so dealt with by them knowing men will hardly beleive him such men as are justly displeased with factions in Parliament might truly affect them when they are rightly disposed and this Sentence which Iconoclastes holds so inauspicious imports not that which his false Augurie Prognosticates for though his Majest received provocations and causes of dislike from severall Parliaments it followes not that he could have no intention to call one when there was a probabilitie of removing the causes of former disorders which his Majest expresses in his ensuing discourse The inclination of a Prince is best knowne by those next about him or by the current of his Actions These neerest this King were Courtiers and Prelates and it was their Continuall exercise to dispute and preach against them For the Actions of others Iconoclastes would thinke them a weake proofe of his intentions though the persons were very neere him and though there were preaching and disputes against the proceedings of some Parliaments it s no proofe of the Kings intentions nor theirs that vsed them against the right vse of Parliaments and the proceedings of some Parliaments might give just occasion to men to say the King they hoped would have no more neede of them and it is a very greate happinesse of any state not to neede them the necessitie of them proceeding from want and danger and there was a time when people held Parliaments a burthen to hem and those in Parliament claimed it that they were not bound to attend the Parliament above fortie dayes and our owne stories tells vs of an indoctum Parliamentum and insanum Parliamentum And doth Iconoclastes thinke that all such as were out of love with such Parlaments had no affection to any This was he sajes but the Coppy which his Parasites had industriously taken from his owne words and Actions who never called a Parliament but to supply his necessities Such as have observed the inclinations of persons neere his Majest finde non greater Parasites then such as proved Traytours to him and Parasites are not wanting to other powers as wel as Kings for we finde by this Author what men will do to please their Masters eyther by offitiousnes to their persons or the performance of villanie against others This Author spends his mouth in vaine following his common place of Parasites and Courtiers when the Actions he mentions are so farr from reflecting vpon his Majest as they leave the blemish vpon the Relatour That his Majest had necessities when he called a Parliament is knowne to all the causes of them but that he was ready all wayes to heare and redresse the just greivances of his people could never yet be contradicted by the experience in any Parliament al though the Author say having Supplied these he suddenly and nominiousty dissolved it without redressing any one greivance of the people But if the Parliaments never presented to him on greivance to be redressed which he denyed where lies the ignominie It seemes the Author takes not the petition of right to be of that nature for that was graunted by the King and that concession of his was then judged as greate an Act to the redresse of greivances as ever King of England graunted his people His Majest summoned three Parliaments before the short Parliament at the beginning of these troubles and in non of these were there any greivances presented by the Parliament to the King to be redressed but that petition of right vnles a Remonstrance against the Duke of Buckingham be reckned in that number and if the people had just greivances to be redressed they had just cause of complaint against those Conventions and of late repentance for their credulitie that depended so much on them that so little regarded their Sufferings If we looke vpon the length of time wherein these Parliaments sate wee shal finde sessions concluded diverse good lawes made in the like space of time in the Raignes of former Kings and whoever lookes to the journalls of the houses in these Parliaments of his late Majest or whoever was present in them must confesse that those that governed in the lower house minded nothing lesse then the redresse of greivances or making of lawes which were formally talked of to entertaine time while private annimosities and personall revenges were made the sole busines of importance in the space of fower moneths no one greivance was prepared to be presented to his Majest and Iconoclastes heapes vp vntruths without respect to the apparence of their detection for this first Parliament was so far from being suddenly dissolved after the King was supplyed that the greate Plague not permitting them to sit longer at west minster his Majest adiourned them to Oxford and in another Parliament after the supply given him there was a second meeting which might have had a longer continuance if it had insisted on the redresse of greivances but whence takes he the occasion to say Ignominiously dissolved Where was the Ignominie Had not his Majest a legall right to do it And if the houses would not agree in the redresse of greivances and supply of the necessities of the Kingdome their continuance would prove ignominious not their dissolving Sometimes chusing rather to misse of his subsidies or to rayse them by illegall courses then that the people should not still misse of their hopes to be releived by Parliaments Iconoclastes in his Preface talked of laying parallel actions to words and heere he vses words of actions that never were for among those Parliaments of his late Majest where can he finde a number to make vp his Sometimes vsing a language as if the King had called as many Parliaments as he had raigned yeares And where can he finde that the King chose to misse his subsidies that the people should not be releived by Parliaments Two of the Parliaments are already mentioned In the third where he had non he was so farr from chusing to misse of his subsidies if he might have had them that his reiterated Messages to the then house of Commons to prepare their greivances that he might apply just remedies to them sufficiently prove that nothing was wanting of his part to have received the subsidies and releived the people It s well knowne that his Majest had at that time a warr with Spaine and France and that nothing but inevitable necessitie on his part could have made him decline the obtaining of subsidies from that Parliament And after the house of Commons had declared that they would supply him in such a way and in so ample a measure as should make him safe at home and feared abroade they agreed vpon the number
eyther to be absent or silent But what good man had not rather want any thing the most desired for the publique good then attaine it by such vnlawfull and irreligious meanes which is sayes the libeller had not rather sit still and let his Contrey be Tyranized then like men demaund their rights and liberties And that is the people ought when they thinke fit to Rebell against their Governours and say their lawes are deceitefull and their Government Tyranicall This is the artificiallest peice of finenes to perswade men to be slaves that the Court could have invented Is it not Scripture that we may not doe evill that good may come of it And what other thing doth the King say or this libeller make the artificialest finenes of the Court Traytours perswade men that they demaund their right while they seeke only to oppresse the right of all men by a lawles vsurpation and noe man can doubt but such as Rebell will make pretences and not spare the lawes of God by prophane interpretations nor the Actions of their Rulers by false representations The morall of this lesson would better serve the teacher and it is the libellers sense What good man had not rather want a boundles and arbitrary power and those fine flowers of the Crowne called Prerogatives then for them to vse force and perpetuall vexation to his faithfull subjects nay to wade for them through blood and Civill warr And have not these Rebells waded through blood and Civill warr to place theise Prerogatives flowers of the Crowne vpon themselves and continue force and perpetuall vexation vpon the people of England to set vp a boundles arbitrary power The Kings just Prerogatives and flowers of his Crowne were of absolute necessitie for his peoples safetie they could be a vexation to noe faithfull subjects This libeller hath inherited Cains lurce a restles motion and discord within himselfe that heere talkes of faithfull subjects and by and by will allow none to be subjects nor faithfull but the King is their officer and noe oaths binde them to him The King sayes who were the cheife Demagogues to send for those Tumults some alive are not ignorant he sayes the King cannot coine English as he could money t is beleived this wording was above his knowne stile and ortography and accuses the whole composure to be conscious of some other author And this learned observation vpon the word Demagogue deserves the Laurell Why is demagogue amore hob goblin word then Pedagogue And why should the one be above the kings knowne stile ortography more then the other And why may not the king make an English word current as well as another There are very many whose knowne stile and ortography is beneath the Kings that could have transcribed Demagogue out of many English Authors without offending against ortography If these Demagogues were men of reputation with the rabble it adds not to their reputation with knowing men nor lessens the guilt nor danger of those tumults but rather made them more mischeivous the baser sort of people have such most in reputation as are neerest to their owne condition being strangers to vertue and true worth The King sayes complaints were made yet noe redresse could be obtained To this he returnes the Parliaments complaint of danger and that it cheered them to see some store of their friends and in the Roman not pettifogging sense their Clients soe neere about them Though he sometimes vse the names of Justice and Patriotts and love of Countrey yet he affects nothing more nor prayses any thing soe much as seditious contrivances and exploits and to defend the Tumults while he would deny there were any and the seditious Gracchy Catilnie and other conspiratours against the Roman Senate shal be commended for what were these Clients in the Roman sense but a powerfull number of such persons as were readie to fire the state at the commaund of their Patron The Senate never made vse of such Clients but the power of private men by them became the ruine of that stare and he hath given himselfe a full answeare why the Parliament complained not of the Tumults when he boasts that they were cheered to see them The Parliament and people demaunded Iustice for those assaults if not murthers meaning those pretended brawles at the Courtgate If any had demaunded Justice they might have had it for what should hinder the procedings of noe Court were shutt but by the Rebells And it is not Poeticall fury but Bedlam distraction so compare the hurts done in a fray ptrovoked by an vnruly rabble to the sheddinge of the blood of Nabaoth and the murther of the king to the revenge of Nabaoths blood Their choise of the place for that execrable Act before the kings Pallace gate is only an evidence of the pride and malice of their hearts and of their selfe condemning consciences that contrived Circumstances to disguise their crueltie with a counterfaite of Justice The king complaines that he found noe declarations of the Bishopps could take place against the Tumults To this he askes was that worth his considering that foolish and selfe vndoing declaration of twelue Cypher Bishopps who were immediately appeacht of Treason for that audacious declaring Surely it was worth the considering in reguard of the Justice of the declaration and the Injustice towards those Bishopps and there can hardly be produced a more impudent Act by an assembly of men that would allow tumults to offer violence to their members and charge their members for complaining of the injury with Treason And as they proceeded without shame or truth soe they make it their mirth that they could by such a ridiculous meanes effect soe greate a villanie That declaration which he calls foolish and self vndoing will stand a perpetuall Monument of the vertue and courage of these Bishopps and the infamy of those Cipher Lords that committed them And if the Bishopps were pulled by their Rocheâ—â—s as he admitts was not this a just cause in feare in his Majest And doth this pulling by the Rochetts amount to nothing but petitioning This libeller sayes the Bishopps deserved another kinde of pulling And noe doubt he would have justified their murther in the streetes aswell as the Kings since and that must not have been the blood of Nabaoth He would inferr that the King had noe cause of feare because he came the next day after his going to the house of Commons into the Citie without a guard The King beleived at that time the Citie was not soe totally debaucht but that he might finde some that would guard him against the disloyaltie of others and those humble demeanours which he mentions are well knowne to be most insolent provocations of base people and though at that time the infection was not soe venemous as it grew afterwards yet the king found disloyaltie very apparent Though the King might have feared in reguard of his owne guiltines yet he knew the
neither was this which he calls noe meane matter a conference about the Rebellion and this peculiar right which this Libeller accuses the King for parting with not to Papists peculiarly but subjects in generall the accusers of the Earle of Strafford charged him for asserting to the King and that inconsiderable Rent was in their judgment excessive these are the colours of Justice and truth which these Rebells put on their Calumnies They departed not till within two moneths before the Rebellion Rebells ordinarly disgiuse their intentions and therefore such might frequent the Court as the faction in Parliament pretended affection and dutie while they plotted to destroy the King and now the Libeller resorts to his Scotch Author who he sayes declares What should move the King to those close meetings he that beleives Sanders Carries and other Papists in their virulent forgeries against Queene Elizabeth may likely give credit to the Libeller and his friend the Scotchman and take vp infamous Libells for true stories The Libeller flies from hence to one of his common haunts the designe of bringing vp the English and Scotch Army and thinkes it noe repetition which he had soe often obtruded and he inferrs that because the King could not prevayle with them he betakes himselfe to the Irish who had in readines an Army of eight thousand Papists and a Committee heere of the same Religion But what to doe to kill one another If the King sought to make vse of the Irish that rebelled he might more advantagiously have done it then by cutting one anothers throates and had they intended him assistance they would not have consumed themselves against his subjects there and how could he transport that Army from Ireland that was disbanded before ever the Rebellion brake foorth and the Committee departed two moneths before He tells vs from his friend the Scotchman that there were they who thought now was the time to doe service for the Church of Rome against the Puritant Parliament It s very likely there were they who thought the Puritan faction in Parliament had done more to the advantage of the Church of Rome by the embroyling of England then ever had been done since the reformation and they might well thinke it a fit time to attempt any designe against the Kingdome And did not the Libeller thinke that there are among the vulgar such capacities as receive legends and Romanses for true stories he would not soe grossely produce such discourses of five Counties given to the Irish and fower offred to the Scotch And of like stuffe is his mention of the Kings attempt to pervert the Scotch Army from their way homeward and the plot which he hath taken from his Scotch Colleague to remove out of the way such as were most likely to withstand or not further his defignes With this libertie of invention doe theis Traytours seeke to maske their villany That a Commission vnder the greate seale of Scotland commaunded this Rebellion Was taken vp after the pretence of the greate seale of England was detected of falsitie and as this greate seale of Scotland hath asmuch vntruth soe it hath noe more colour there being noe possibilitie for the King to vse that seale not at all in his power to such a Commission The sending of the Ld. Dillon is of the same stampe what the Irish did is easily graunted but the falshoods of this Libeller and his friend the scotchman are no misteries of iniquitie but open and detected cheates one quotes the authoritie of the other as if they were strangers mett by chance and make Libelling their worke to distract the people and yet from these devices the Libeller will conclude that the King cannot be doubted to be Author or instigatour of that Rebellion It had been ridiculous to cite a gazett but a branded stigmaticke infamous If his reason be moved by such Arguments t is the lesse wonder that his language and practice is soe corrupt and he may reckon himselfe among that rabble of the vulgar he soe much despises These Testimonies likelyhoods evidences and apparent Actions which he mentions in the declaration of July 1643. Are of as litle credit as his friend the Scotchman And there is not a more evident conviction of malefactours then their declarations against the king are of the guilt of those that contrived them setting foorth their dutie which the dissembled and condemning their actions which they disavowed It is not credible that the Irish Rebells would be soe farr from humanitie as to slander him being soe well received by him at Oxford If a man had wanted an proofe of the Libellers absurditie he might heere be furnished by himselfe that drawes an Argument from the humanitie of the Irish whose barbaritie and Treacherie is soe greate a part of his accusation against the king They who were received at Oxford vpon offer of submission were very farr from pretence of such a Commission and it may be aswell concluded they had a Commission at Oxford as before because they were there and aswell concluded that they never Rebelled as that they made noe salfe pretences of their Rebellion The king neede not bring proofes against a groundles accusation that containes not any evidence of fact and a single denyall by al lawes is preferred before such a charge and it is as likely that the Rebells in Ireland should pretend his Seale as those in England his authoritie noe man doubts of the invaliditie of a Rebells pretence This Chapter is not without witnes of his good affection to the Rebells which he collects from that the king sayes they were lesse in fault then the Scotts from whome they might alledge to have fetched their imitation making no difference sayes the Libeller betweene men that rose necessarily to defend themselves which noe Protestant Doctrine ever disallowed against them who threatned warr and those who began a voluntary causeles Rebellion If the Irish made warr not to be restrained from their Religion had they not the same cause the same pretence of defending themselves as the other pretended for refusing the Common prayer booke and expelling Bishopps Where lies the odds Is it Protestant Doctrine that they may defend themselves and Papists may not and that Protestants may Rebell for Religion Papists may not That were very much to the credit of Religion but the Libeller will not acknowledge the protestants nor their Doctrine who maintaine it to be vnlawful for subjects to defend themselves against the supreame power though Tyranically abused and there is noe neede to fly to the Parliaments authoritie if subjects may take Armes against their king vpon pretence of defending themselves The Libeller well knowes the just indignation the Protestants abroade have expressed for this scandall the king names not the Scotts but thinkes that their blame must needes be greater whose Actions the Irish had to alledge for their imitation by how much protestant principles are more against Rebellion then those of Papists
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
vnderstanding of the nature and consequence of the things graunted and as his Majest professed a cleerer information after these Actions had passed him soe he evidently saw that they were more against his subjects good then his owne and that insteede of preventing an Arbitrary power it would have introduced an arbitrary licence and confusion into the Kingdome and such men as preferre the bondage of popular confusion or the licentious insolence of many Lords are eyther inchanted with a witch craft of Rebellion or stupidly benummed with a senseles Lethargy With what Zeale the Libeller reproves the abuse of Scripture when he exclaimes as if it offended his conscience we may perceive by the allusion he makes saying Ireland was as Ephraim the strength of his head meaning the Kings Scotland as Iudah was his law giver but over England as over Edom he meant to cast his shooe Hath this man reverence to Scripture or the Author of it He comes againe to accuse the King for persecuting the consciences of Religious men a knowne vntruth yet soe much beloved by the Libeller as he seemes impatient to misse the repetition of it and with this he joynes his reproving the Kings profession of being an Enemy of those that forced the conscience because he had made a warr and lost all rather then not vphold the Bishopps It is an Argument that he esteemed his conscience that lost all for it But the Libeller sayes they were persecuting Bishopps The King vpholding Bishopps vpholds not persecution or abuse and the Libellers confounding the office ill exercise of it makes knowne his want of Argument The falshood of their Calumnies against the Bishopps is sufficiently manifested to the world that after soe many vehement outcryes they have not proved on such act of persecution done by any one of them not the presons but the office lawe were the persecution in this mans judgment The King obtruded new Ceremonies vpon vs vpon the Scotts a new Liturgie There were noe new Ceremonies obtruded by him in England and this horrid Rebellion to take away the Ceremonies and Government legally established and continually practised vnder the name of innovations detects both the fraude and outrage of their proceedings The new leiturgie offred the Scots by advice of their Bishopps and Clergie was an act befitting the care of a King and noe man will beleive that it was an offence te their consciences who made noe conscience of blood and Rebellion vpon pretence of their conscience which the world sees was an hipocriticall straining at a straw and swallowing a Camell and these tender conscience men have written their tendernes of conscience with the blood of their brethren which will remaine a memoriall of their dissembled sanctitie What hinderance of the search of truth he meanes is not vnderstood vnles he would have the dreames of mad sectaries confirmed by authoritie He would have the penalties of lawes thought persecution of the conscience and sectaries the Judges and sayes if himselfe meaning the King and his learned Churchmen were the obstinate part should Reformation suffer them to sit Lording like the greate whore And are sectaries Libells convictions of Kings and learned Churchmen and the clamours of malefactours a sentence against the Judge Such is the Government that must now rule the world and Reformation must be an Idoll in the hands of a seditious sectarie whereto the people must fall downe and such vnstable multitudes carried about with every winde of doctrine are likely to be those many waters on which the greate whore sits which hath for corruption and crueltie a greate resemblance vnto those false prophetts that now seduce the people These Clergimen were not to bedriven like sheepe but driven out like wolves But they are theeves and wolves that enter into the sheepefold by violence and stealth and the ambition and greedines of these wolves will finde occasion to sucke the blood and devoure the flesh of the sheepe The king sayes that he beleives the Presbiterie though proved to be the only institution of Iesus Christ were not by the sword to be set vp without his consent which is contrary saith the Libeller both to the doctrine and knowne practice of all Protestant Churches if his sword threaten those who of their owne accord imbrace it But then it cannot be sett vp by the sword vnles his sword threaten those that imbrace it And this jugler denies what the king sayes and yet in effect professes it and while he enrages the Tumults to sett vp their Presbiterie with the sword produces Arguments only for defence The reformed Churches professe to follow the ancients in suffering not associate themselves to bloody Sectaries in Rebelling And his next words impert that private men may not contend with Magistrates nor vse force against them Though Christ and his Apostles being to Civill affaires but private men contended not with Magistrates yet when Magistrates themselves and especially Parliament come to know Religion they ought to defend it against any King or Tyrant What is defence to the question in hand of setting vp Religion by the sword without the kings consent May an inferiour Christian Magistrate take Armes against his superiour a Pagan to sett vp Religion Is he not as much a private man as our Saviour and his Apostles where the Civill power hath not given him a right And as a Civill right is not imaginable soe the pretence of a power from Religion is execrable and false which will not permitt an vsurpation vpon the Civill right There may be a King where there is noe Parliament and it is noe more lawfull for an inferiour Migistrate or to Parliament who are but private men in regard of the Prince whose deputies they are to take the sword to sett vp Religion against the King their soveraigne then for any private men and were not the libeller distracted betweene evidence of truth and his owne corrupt inclinations he would not instance in the name of Magistrates and Parliament that but the line before pretended the power of the people to doe the same thing by the doctrine and practice of all Protestant Churches and would make them more publique persons then their Saviour and his Apostles he thinkes his reviling language of Tyrany and bloody Bishopps and the King their pupill are irrefragable Arguments in the judgment of his pubills There is a large difference betweene forcing men by the sword to turne Presbiterians and defending them who willingly are soe But then it is impious to force ment to be soe what those wretches did to the King for not being soe and for not consenting to impose it vpon the kingdome by a law the world knowes and the world is wittnes and they have robbed men of their possessions by the sword to sett vp this new Religion His charging Covetuousnes and ambition to be the events of Episcopacy is schismaticall malice for Episcopacie in the beginning of the Church was attended with povertie and
persecution but the libeller will make Martirdome their ambition and wants their Covetuousnes He will have that English Episcopacie hath markes of schisme whether we looke at Apostolicke times or reformed Churches if he had shewed wherein it had deserved an answeare but we see what Apostolicke times he meanes that will not allow any Church of the world from the time of the Apostles til the present age because the Church of England is not vniversall therefore all Sectaries may pretend themselves the Church For the authoritie of Scripture he needed not take paines to prove it The Church of England claimes not power over other Churches but to correct Schismatickes within her selfe The exposition of Scripture may not be received from arrogant Sectaries against the judgment of the vniversall Church the King might very well reject such reasons as they which offered them had soe lately before disavowed and pretended themselves scandalized with the imputation of such opinions The greatest number of these pretended Reformers professed detestation of the opinion of lawfullnes in taking Armes against their Prince of the opinion of the vnlawfullnes of Episcopacy booke of Common prayer and Ceremonies and who now would dispute with such men maintaining these renounced opinions with such bloody vehemencie It is not for the King to defend the Church otherwise then the Church would be defended And what is the Church in the libellers sense nothing but the crew of John of Leydons saints and must the King follow them against the Church these are the Divill 's factours to sett vp an Idoll Religion These deceivers talke of the power of the keyes in whose power holy things are as if the keyes that Christ gave to his Disciples are transmitted to this distempered crew that pretend a power of their owne giving Their Blasphemous pretence of enthusiasmes hath been the wonder and scorne of wise men and that 's the spirit which must not be fettered with a negative voyce But may it not be fettered by the Parliaments negative voyce and why is it more fettered by the kings then theirs That which he calls Tyranicall and presumptuous in the king wich the same breath justifies in the Parliament and yet complaines of Tyrany vpon the conscience Such consciences are senseles of Tyrany aswell as of sin having given themselves vp to the Empire of hell The kings negative voyce could impose nothing yet these desperate hipocrites say they were compelled to implore the aide of Parliament to remove it from their consciences And if the ground of their warr were to take away his negative voyce their pretence of defensive force appeares noe other then violence and persecution which they soe hipocritically complaine of such tender consciences as feele not falshoods and Rebellion must be mercilesse destroyers of Religion and Government as these have proved The King had cause to seeke aide against Rebellion and oppression but that 's noe warrant for Traytours to linke themselves by conspiracies to performe it and the King might justly wonder at their confident boasting of Gods assistance as if they had the certaintie of some Revelation and flying to the Scotts succours while they were soe furnisht with provisions for warr And now after all the Libellers rayling at Episcopacie Copes surplisses he will not permitt Arch Presbiterie Classicall Provinciall and diocesine Presbitery claiming Lordly power and superintendencie to be imposed vpon them Heere 's Babell confounded and they that were linkt in disloyaltie must part for Presbitery and independencie and will not see the evill spiritt that first combined them in Rebellion and now divides them to fight one against another A Determination by the best divines in Christendome in a full and free synod is he sayes an improbable way and every true Church hath wherewithall from heaven to be compleate and perfect within it selfe And why doth he tell vs that no Church denominated by a particular name bindes our faith or obedience and hath any Romanist affirmed more for their infallibilitie then he ascribes to every one of his Parlours and wherefore is English protestant a Schismaticall name as he affirmes and that the whole nation is not to be thought soe raw as to neede the helpe of other nations But what is the whole nation to every conventicle are theis seperaists the whole nation And why would he bind the Kinge to other reformed Churches If the primitive Christians had been of his opinion Generall Councells had been of litle vse the Disciples at Antioch needed not have sent to Jerusalem for advice in a question But these men thus shuffle and pretend the sufficiencie of a nation intend only the perfection of their Parlour congregations and allow noe sufficiencie in Church or nation that submits not to their insolent prescriptions He sayes the King accuses pietie with want of loyaltie because he sayes in vaine doe men hope to builde their pietie on the ruines of loyaltie The King rightly determines that pietie is but pretended where loyaltie is despised as such doe that thinke it safe to renounce all fidelitie to their lawfull King and his family and depend on the faith of perjured villaines vpon pretence of pietie as he perswades the Scotts to doe Vpon the COVENANT HE seemes desirous to be short in this Argument being a point which he is loath to touch till he see the successe of some attempts and he would not willingly be out of hope of the Scotts nor venture to displease them by his glosses To the mention of the Bishopps possession heere since the first plantation of Christianitie in this Island and vniversall prescription since the Apostles till this last centurie he sayes But what availes the most primitive antiquitie against the plaine sense of Scripture which if the last Centurie have best followed it ought in our esteeme to be the first But where is the plaine sense of Scripture against antiquitie It s very plaine that these Sectaries noe more esteeme the present century then the ancient nor more the scripture then either of them but take a libertie to vent their owne fanaticall and arrogant fancies for Scripture and reject all ordinary meanes vpon pretence of a lying spiritt His Majest meant not to oppose antiquitie to Scripture but where the practice of antiquitie is consonant to Scripture It s impious to reject the Communion of the first age All helpes of interpretation are fetters to the proud Schismatickes and this Libeller that so lately obtruded the Example of the reformed Churches in the case of Epicopacie quickely scornes the Classicall Provinciall and diocesine Presbiterie and the last Century hath only seene the ascent of these Locusts and he only likes that part of the last Century wherein they crept soorth and they would willingly have the credit to be a part of other Churches though they are in truth Enemies to them all We may with farr better reason beleive the interpretations and practice of the primitive Church then any moderne