whose Delinquences are so much the more hainous execrable and censurable as their persons honours and places are more eminent should so farre countenance justifie or patronize them onely in the King the Supreame fountaine of Iustice ad tutelam Legis corporum bonorum erectus as Fortescue and Sir Edward Cooke resolve Cujus Potestas Iuris est non Injuriae cum sit author Iuris non debet inde injuriarum nasci occasio unde Iura naseuntur as Bracton and Fleta determine as not to permit the Subjects under paine of Rebellion and high Treason by force of Armes upon expresse command and direction of the whole Kingdome in Parliament so much as to defend their Persons Goods Estates Houses Wives Children Liberties Lives Religion against the open violence of the King himselfe or his Malignant plundring murthering Papists Caveleers When as Kings of all others as Bracton For escue and Mariana prove at large both by Oath and Duty ought to be more observant of and obedient to the Laws of God and their Realmes which are no respectors of Persons then the very meanest of their Subjects That Precept then of Paul Rom. 13. 1. 2. 3. Let every Soule be subject to the higher Powers c. And the Statute of 25. E. 3. c. 2. with other obsolete Acts which declare it High Treason to levy Warre against the King in his Realme must needs be intended of and quallified with these subsequent just limitations sutable to their genuine sense and meaning to wit That as long and so farre foorth as Kings justly and uprightly doe execute their just Royall power conferred on them by God and their people according to the Law of God and their Realmes to the Protection encouragement and praise of all their good Subjects and the deserved punishment onely of Malefactors they must and ought to be cheerefully obeyed and quietly submitted to as Gods owne Ministers without the least resistance private or publike neither ought any private men upon any private injuries of their owne authority to raise up in Armes against them seeing they are publike Magistrates in whom all the Kingdome have an interest without the generall assent and authority of the whole State and Kingdome or of both Houses of Parliment which represents it But if Kings degenerate into Tyrants and turne professed enemies to their Kingdomes Parliaments People by making open Warre against them by spoyling murthering imprisoning maiming sacking destroying or putting them out of their Protections without any just or lawfull grounds endeavouring by force of Armes to subvert their Lawes Liberties Religion and expose them as a prey to their mercilesse blood-thirsty Souldiers or bring in Forraigne Forces to conquer them our present case I dare confidently averre it was never the thought nor intention of Paul or the Holy Ghost much lesse of our Nobles Prelats and Commons in Parliament which enacted these Lawes who so oft tooke up Armes aswell offensive as defensive against our Kings in such like cases heretofore to inhibit Subjects Kingdomes Parliaments especially by direct Votes and Ordinances of both Houses under paine of damnation high Treason or Rebellion by defensive Armes to resist Kings themselves or any of their Cavalliers and if this question had beene put to Paul Peter or any of those Parliaments which enacted these objected Lawes Whether they ever meant by these Precepts or Statutes totally to prohibite all Subjects by generall assent in Parliament to take up such defensive Armes or make any forceable resistance against their Kings or their Armies in such cases of extremity and necessity as these under the foresaid penalties I make little question but they would have clearely resolved that it was never so much as within the compasse of their thoughts much lesse their plaine intention to prohibite such a resistance in this or such like cases but onely according to the precedent exposition of their words and that they never imagined to establish in the world any Vnresistable Lawlesse Tyranny or any such spoile or butchery of Kingdomes of Subjects execrable to God and man in all persons all ages which have resisted them even unto blood but rather totally to suppresse them There being scarce any more pregnant Text against the Tyranny the boundlesse Prerogatives the illegall proceedings of Kings and Higher Powers in all the Scripture then that of Romans 13. 1. to 7. if rightly scanned as Pareus and others on it manifest Therefore the Parliaments and peoples present defensive Warre and resistance against their seduced King and his Malignant Popish Cavalliers is no violation of any Law of God of the Realme but a just necessary Warre which they have to the uttermost endeavoured to prevent and no Treason no Rebellion at all within the meaning of any Law or Statute unlesse we should thinke our Parliaments so mad as to declare it high Treason or Rebellion even for the Parliament and Kingdome it selfe so much as to take up Armes for their owne necessary preservation to prevent their inevitable ruine when they are openly assaulted by Royall armies which none can ever presume they would doe being the very high way to their owne and the whole Kingdomes subversion Fiftly admit the King should bring in Forraigne forces French Spanish Danes Dutch or Irish to destroy or Conquer his Subjects Parliament Kingdome as some such forces are already landed and more expected dayly and should join himselfe personally with them in such a service I thinke there is no Divine Lawyer or true hearted Englishman so void of reason or common understanding as to affirme it Treason or Rebellion in point of Law and a matter of Damnation in Conscience or true Divinity for the Parliaments Subjects Kingdome to take up necessary defensive armes for their owne preservation in such a case even against the King himselfe and his army of Aliens but would rather deeme it a just honourable necessary action yea a duty for every English man to venture his life and all his fortunes for the defence of his owne dearest Native Countrey Posterity Liberty Religion and no lesse then a glorious Martyrdome to dye manfully in the Field in such a publicke quarrell the very Heathens generally resolving that Dulce decorum est pro Patria mori Et mortes pro Patria appetitae Non solum gloriosae Rhetoribus sed etiam beatae videri solent In a case of this quallitie Whence that noble Romane Camillus professed to all the Romanes in a publike Oration Patriae deesse quoad vita suppetat alijs turpe Camillo etiam NEFAS EST. And is not there the selfe same equity and reason when the King shall raise an Army of Popish English or Irish Rebels Malignants Delinquents and bring in Forraigners though yet in no great proporation to effect the like designe If armed forceable resistance be no Treason no Rebellion in Law or Conscience in the first it can be no such crime in our present
execute them as common enemies to the kingdomes peace and welfare even by the knowne Common Law and Statutes of the Realme and seife Delinquents notwithstanding any royall Commission or personal commands they may or can produce Fourthly it is most certaine that every Subject by the very Common Law of the Realm yea Law of Nature as he is a member of the State and Church of England is bound both in duty and conscience when there is necessary occasion to Array and Arme himselfe to resist the invasions and assaults of open enemies of the Realme especially of Forraigners as is cleare by infinite * Presidents cited by the Kings owne Councell and recited by Judge Crooke in his Argument concerning Ship-money in both the Houses two Remonstrances and Declarations against the Commission of Array and the Answer of the first of them in the Kings name all newly Printed to which I shall referre the Reader for fuller Satisfaction and by the expresse statutes of 1 E. 3. c. 5. 25. E. 3. c. 8. and 4. H. 4. c. 13. The reason is from the Originall compact and mutuall stipulation of every member of any Republicke State or Society of men for mutuall defence one of another upon all occasions of invasion made at their first association and incorporation into a Republike state kingdome Nation of which we have a pregnant example Iudg. 20. 1. to 48. If then the King himselfe shall introduce forraigne Forces and enemies into his Realme to levie war against it or shall himself become an open enemie to it the Subjects are obleiged by the self-same reason law equity especially upon the Parliaments command to Arm themselves to defend their Native Country Kingdome against these forraigne and domesticke Forces and the King himselfe if he joyne with them as farre forth as they are bound to doe it upon the Kings own Writ and Commission in case he joyned with the Parliament and Kingdome against them the necessary defence and preservation of the Kingdome and themselves and of the King onely so farre forth as he shewes himselfe a King and Patron not an enemie of his Kingdome and Subjects being the sole ground of their engagement in such defensive warres according to this notable resolution of Cicero Omnium Societatum nulla est gratior nulla carior quà m ea quae cum Republica est unicuique nostrum Cari sunt pareâ—tes cariliberi propinqui familiares SED OMNES OMNIVM CARITATES PATRIA VNA COMPLEXA EST pro qua quis bonus dubit tâ—mortem oppetere si ei sit prosuturus Qâ—o est detestabilior illorum immanitas qui lacerant omni scelere Patriam nâ—a sunditus delenda occupati sunt fuerunt and seeing kings themselves as well as Subjects are bound to hazard their lives for the preservation of their Kingdomes and peoples safeti and not to endanger the ruine of the Kingdome and people to preserve their owne lives and prerogatives as I have elsewhere manifested it cannot be denyed but that every Subject when the King is unjustly divided against his Kingdome Parliament and People is mere obleiged to joyne with the kingdome Parliament and his Native dearest Countrey who are most considerable against the King than with the king against their and rather in such a case than any other because there is lesse neede of helpe and no such danger of ruine to the whole Realme and Nation when the King joynes with them against forraigne invading enemies as there is when the king himselfe becomes an open intestine Foe unto them against his Oath and Daty and the Peoples safety being the Supremest Law the Houses of Parliament the most Soveraigne Authoritie they ought in such unhappie cases of extremitie and division to oversway all Subjects to contribute their best assistance for their necessary just defence even against the king himself and all his Partisans who take up Hostile Armes against them and not to assist them to ruine their owne Country Kingdome Nation as many as now over-rashly do Fifthly I conceive it cleare Law that if the King himselfe or his Courtiers with him shall wrongfully assault any of his Subjects to wound rob or murther them without just cause that the subjects without any guilt of Treason or Rebellion may not onely in their owne defense resist the King and his Courtiers assaults in such a case and hold their hands as Doctor Ferne himselfe accords but likewise close with and disarme them and if the King or his Courtiers receive any blowes wounds in such a case or be casually slaine it is neither Treason nor Murder in the Defendants who had no Treasonable nor murtherous intention at all in them but onely endeavoured their own just defence attempting nothing at all against the kings lawful Royall authority as is cleare by all Law Cases of man slaughter se defendends and to put this out of question I shall cite but two or three cases of like Nature It hath been very frequent with the Kings of England France and other Princes for triall of their man hood to runne at Iousts and fight at Barriers not onely with forraigners but with their owne valiantest Lâ—rds and Knights of which there are various Examples In these Martiall disports by the very Law of Armâ—s these Subjects have not onely defended themselves against their kings assaults and blowes but retorted lance for lance stroke for stroke and sometimes unborsed disarmed and wounded their Kings our King Henry the eight being like to be slaine by the Earle of Suffolke at a Tilting in the 16. yeare of his reigne and no longer since then the yeare 1559. Henry the 2 d King of France was casually slaine in a loust by the Earle of Mountgommery his Subject whom hee commanded to Iust one bout more with him against his will whose Speare in the counter-blow ran so right into one of the Kings eyes that the shivers of it peirced into his head perished his braine and slew him yet this was Iudged no Treason Fellony nor offence at all in the Earle who had no ill intention If then it hath ever beene reputed lawfull and honourable for Subiects in such militarie exercises upon the challenges of their kings to defend themselves couragiously against their assaults and thus to fight with and encounter them in a martiall manner though there were no necessity for them to answer such a challenge and the casuall wounding or slaying of the King by a Subiect in such a case be neither Treason nor Fellony then much more must it be lawfull by the Law of Armes Nature and the kingdome for the Parliament and subjects in a necessary just unavoydable warre to defend resist repulse the kings and his Cavaleers-personall assaults and returne them blow forblow shot for shot if they will wilfully invade them and if the king or any of his Forces miscarry in this action they must like King Henry the 8 th when endangered by
THE THIRD PART OF THE SOVERAIGNE POWER OF PARLIAMENTS and KINGDOMES Wherein the Parliaments present Necessary Defensive Warre against the Kings offensive Malignant Popish forces and Subjects taking up Defensive Armes against their Soveraignes and their Armies in some Cases is copiously manifested to be Just Lawfull both in point of Law and Conscience and neither Treason nor Rebellion in either by inpregnable Reasons and Authorities of all kindes Together With a Satisfactory Answer to all Objections from Law Scripture Fathers Reason hitherto alledged by Dr. Ferne or any other late opposite Pamphleters whose grosse Mistakes in true Stating of the present Controversie in sundry points of Divinity Antiquity History with their absurd irrationall Logicke and Theologie are here more fully discovered refuted than hitherto they have been by any Besides other particulars of great concernment By WILLIAM PRYNNE Utter-Barrester of Lincolnes Inne 2 Sam. 10. 12. Be of good courage and let us play the men for our People and for the City of our God and the Lord doe what seemeth him good Esther 9. 1 2. 5 10. In the day that the enemies of the Jewes hoped to have power over them the Jewes gathered themselves together into their Cities through out all the Provinces of King Ahashuerus to lay hand on those that sought their lives and no man could withstand them for the feare of them fell upon all people Thus the Jewes sinote all their enemies with the stroke of the sword and slaughter and destruction and did what they would with those that hated them but on the spoile laid they not their hand It is this eighth day of May 1643. Ordered by the Committee of the House of Commons in Parliament for Printing that this Booke Intituled The third Part of the Soveraign Power of Parliaments and Kingdomes be Printed by Michael Sparke senior John White Printed at London for Michael Sparke Senior 1643. TO HIS EVER-HONOVRED NOBLE KINDE FRIENDS THE Right Honourable Lord Ferdinando Fairfax the Right Worshipfull Sir William Waller and Sir William Bruerton Knights Commanders in Chiefe of the Parliaments Forces in severall Counties Deservedly Renowned Worthies YOUR Incomparable Valour Zeale Activity Industry for the preservation of Your Dearest Country Religion Lawes Liberties and the very being of Parliaments all now endangered by an unnaturall generation of Popish and Malignant Vipers lately risen up in Armes against them in diverse parts of this Realme and those many miraculous Victories with which God hath beene lately pleased to Crowne your cordiall endeavours to promote his glory and the Publicke safety as they have justly demerited some gratefull generall Acknowledgements from the whole Representative Body of the State so they may in some sort challenge a private gratulatory Retribution from Me who have formerly had the happinesse to participate in your Christian Affections and now reape much Consolation by your Heroick Actions Having therefore seasonably finished this Third part Of the Soveraigne Power of Parliaments and Kingdoms copiously Vindicating the Lawfulnesse Iustnesse of the Parliaments present Necessary Defensive Warre in which you have had the Honour to be imployed not onely as Chiefe but which is more as most successefull Commanders in your severall Countries in point both of Law and Conscience and fully wiping off those blacke Aspersions of TREASON and REBELLION which the opposite party really guilty of these crimes against both King and Kingdome as I have elsewhere manifested and here lightly touched have out of Malice Ignorance or both conjoyned most injuriously cast upon your Loyall honourable proceedings which rejoyce the soules of all true Philopaters who cordially affect their Country or Religion I could not without much ingratitude yea injustice have published it to the world but under the Patronage of your ever-honored resplendent names who have so valorously so successefully pleaded this Cause already in the Field that it needs the lesse assistance from the Presse My many inevitable interruptions and straites of time in its contexture which may happily detract something from its perfection shall I hope derogate nothing from your Honourable Friendly acceptation whom I have thus conjoyned in the Dedication because the Parliament hath united you in their present Warlike employments and God himselfe joyntly honoured you with successe even to admiration among the Good indignation amidst Malignants envy with the Malicious and I trust to an active sedulous emulation in all your Fellow Commanders imployed in other Quarters in the selfesame Cause Your present busie publike and mine owne private Imployments prohibite me to expatiate Wherefore earnestly beseeching the Glorious Lord of Hosts to be ever mightily present with your severall Noble Persons Forces and to make you alwayes eminently active Valorous Victorious as hitherto he hath done till Peace and Truth Tranquillity and Piety by your severall triumphant Proceedings shall once more lovingly embrace and kisse each other in our divided unreformed sinfull Kingdomes And till the effect of these just warres You manage shall be quietnesse and assurance to us and our Posterities after us for ever I humbly recommend your Persons Proceedings to his protection who can secure you in and from all dangers of warre and rest Your Honours Worships most affectionate Friend and Servant WILLIAM PRYNNE To the Reader Christian Reader I Who have beene alwayes hitherto a Cordiall Desirer endeavourer of Peace am here necessitated to present Thee with a Discourse of Warre to justifie The Lawfulnesse of the Parliaments present taking up of necessary Defensive Armes Which neither their Endeavours nor my with many others Prayers could with any safety to our Priviledges Persons Religion Liberty Realmes now forcibly invaded by his Majesties Popish and Malignant Cavallieres hitherto prevent or conjure downe To plead the Justnesse of a Warre of an unnaturall Civill warre the worst of any of a Warre betweene the Head and Members may seeme not onely a Paradox but a Prodigie in a Land heretofore blessed with an aged uninterrupted Peace And Lucans Bella per AEmathios plusquam civilia Campos c. now most unhappily revived among us being but Historicall and Poeticall may passe the world with lesse admiration and censure than this harsh Peece which is both Legally Theologically like the Subject matter Polemicall But as the ayme the end of all just War is and ought to be onely future setled Peace so is the whole drift of this Military Dissertation not to foment or protract but end our bloody Warres which nothing hath more excited animated lengthened in the Adverse party than a strong conceite if not serious beliefe that The Parliaments Forces neither would nor lawfully might in point of Law or Conscience forcibly resist or repulse their invasive Armes without danger of High Treason and Rebellion which Bug-beare I have here refuted removed and the In-activity the much admired slownesse of many of our Forces in resisting in preventing their vigorous Proceedings which a little timely vigilance and diligence had easily controlled It is a more than
all presidents in former ages in High affront of the priviledges honour power of the Parliament and Fundamentall knowns Lawe of the Realme Since which time his Majestie having contrary to his former Proclamations and frequent Printed solemne Declarations entertained not onely divers Irish Popâ—sh Rebels but likewise English and Outlandish Papists in his Army and given Commissions to sundry Arch Popish Recusants to Arme themselves and raise Forces against the Parliament and Kingdom now in the field in all the Northerne parts Wales and other places and that under the Popes owne consecrated Banner as many report in defiance of our Protestant Religion designed by the Popish Party both at home and abroad to no lesse then utter extirpation in England as well as in Ireland if not in Scotland too as some of them openly professe the Parliament are hereupon necessitated to augment and recrute their forces as for the precedent ends at first so now more especially for the necessary defence of the Protestant Religion established among us by law against which they and all others who are not wilfully blinded visibly discerne a most apparant desperate conspiracie which though not cleerely perceived but onely justly suspected at first doth now appeare all circumstances and agents considered to be the very Embrio and primitive cause of this deplorable warre against which the Parliament and subjects are now more necessitated and engaged to desend themselves then ever seeing they have by all possible meanes endeavored to prevent this warre at first and since to accommodate it though in vaine upon just reasonable and honorable safe termes for King and Kingdome The sole Question then in this case thus truely stated will be Whether his Majestie having contrary to his Oath Duty the fundamentall Laws of God and the Realme raised an Armie of Malignants Papists Forraigners against his Parliament Kingdome People to make an Offensive warre upon them to murther rob spoyle deprive them of their peace liberties properties estates to impose unlawfull taxes by force upon them protect Delinquents and evill Councellors against the Parliaments Iustice and violently to undermine our established Protestant Religion the Common-wealth of England legally assembled in Parliament and all Subjects in such cases by Command and direction from both Houses of Parliament may not lawfully and justly without any Treason or Rebellion in point of Law and Conscience take up defensive Armes to preserve the Priviledges of Parliament their Lawes lives liberties estates properties Religion to bring Delinquents and ill Councellours to condigne punishment and rescue his seduced Majestie out of their hands and power though he be personally present with them to assist and countenance them in this unnaturall destructive warre And under correction notwithstanding any thing I ever yet heard or read to the contrary I conceive affirmatively that they may justly do it both in point of Law and Conscience I shall begin with Law because in this unhappie controversie it must direct the conscience First I have already proved in Judgement of Law the Parliament and Kingdome assembled in it to be the Soveraigne power and of greater authority then the King who is but their publike Minister in point of civill Iustice and Generall in matters of warre as the Roman Kings and Emperours were and other forraigne Kings of old and at this day are The Parliament then being the highest power and having principall right and authority to denounce conclude and proclaime warre as I have manifested in the debate of the Militia may not onely lawfully resist but oppugne suppresse all Forces raised against it and the Kingdomes peace or welfare Secondly the principall end of the Kingdomes originall erecting Parliaments and investing them with supreame power at first was to defend not onely with good Lawes and Councell but when absolute necessitie requires as now it doth with open force of Armes the Subjects Liberties Persons Estates Religion Lawes Lives Rights from the encroachments and violence of their Kings and to keepe Kings within due bounds of Law and Iustice the end of instituting the Senate and Ephori among the Lacaedemonians the Senate and Dictators among the Romans the Forum Suprarbiense and Justitia Aragoniae among the Aragonians of Parliaments Dietts and Assemblies of the estates in other forraigne Kingdomes and in Scotland as I shall prove at large in its proper place This is cleare by the proceedings of all our Parliaments in former ages Especially in King Iohns Henry the third Edward the 1. 2. 3. and Richard the seconds Raignes by the latter Parliaments in King Iames his raigne yea of 3. Caroli the last dissolved Parliament and this now sitting whose principall care and imployment hath beene to vindicate the Subjects Liberties properties lawes and Religion from all illegall encroachments on them by the Crown and its ill Instruments by the forecited resolutions of Bracton Fleta the Myrror of Iustices Vowell Holinshed the Councell of Basill and others that the Parliament ought to restraine and bridle the king when he casts off the bridle of the Law and invades the Subjects Liberties especially with open force of Armes in an Hostile manner and by the constant practise of our Ancestors and the Barons Warres in maintenance of Magna Charta with other good Lawes and Priviledges confirmed by Parliament If then the Parliament be instrusted by the Kingdome with this Superlative power thus to protect the Subjects Liberties properties Lawes persons Religion c. against the kings invasions on them by policie or violence they should both betray their trust yea the whole kingdome too if they should not with open Force of Armes when Policy Councell and Petitions will not doe it defend their owne and the Subjects Liberties persons priviledges c. against his Majesties offensive Armies which invade them intending to make the whole kingdome a present booty to their insaciable rapine and a future vassall to his Majesties absolute arbitrary power by way of conquest I reade in Bodin that the Roman Senate being no way able to restraine Caesar tooke their refuge to that ancient Decree of the Senate which was commonly made but in dangerous times of the Common-wealâ— Videant Consules caeteri Magistratus ne quid detrimenti capiat Respublica Let the Consulls and other Majestrates fore see that the Common-weale take no harme With which decree of the Senate the Consulls being armed sodainely raised their power commanding Pompey to take up Armes and raise an Army against Caesar to oppose his violent proceedings by force who after his conquest of Pompey refusing to rise up to the Consulls Pretors and whole Senate out of his pride through his ill Councellors advise and talking with them as if they had beene but private men he so farre offended both the Senate and people that to free the Republicke from his Tyranny and preserve their hereditary Liberties they conspired his death and soone after murthered him in the Senate-house where they gave him
no lesse than 23. wounds And Hieronimus Blanca assures us that the Suprarbiense Forum Iustitia Aragoniae or States of Aragâ—n erected to withstand the tyrannie and encroachments of their kings may by the Laws of their Realme assemble together and RESIST THEIR KING WITH FORCE OF ARMES as oft as there shall bee neede to repulse his or his Officers violence against the Lawes For when they erected this Court they said It would be little worth to have good Lawes enacted and a middle Court of Iustice betweene the King and people appointed if it might not be lawfull to take up Armes for their Defence when it was needfull being agreeable to the very Law of nature and reason Because then it will not be sufficient to fight with Counsell For if this were not so and the State and Subjects in such cases might not lawfully take up armes all things had long ere this been in the power of Kings Therefore no doubt our Parliament and State as well as others may by the very Law of Nature and fundamentall institution of Parliaments now justly take up Defensive armes to preserve their Liberties Lawes Lives Estates Religion from vassallage and ruine Thirdly Our owne Parliaments Prelates Nobles and Commons in all ages especially in times of Popery as well in Parliament as out have by open force of armes resisted suppressed the oppressions rapines vnjust violence and armies of their Princes raised against them Yea incountred their Kings in open Battells taken their persons Prisoners and sometimes expelled nay deposed them from their Royall authority when they became incorrigible open professed enemies to their kingdomes their Subjects seeking the ruine slavery and desolation of those whom by Office Duty Oath and common Iustice they were bound inviolably to protect in Liberty and peace as the premised Histories of Archigallo Emerian Vortigern Segebert Osred Ethelred Bernard Edwin Ceolwulfe King John Henry the 3 d. Edward 1. and 2. Richard the 2 Henry the 6 th our British Saxon English Kings and other examples common in our owne Annalls plentifully manifest Neither are their examples singular but all Kingdomes generally throughout the world in all ages have done the like when their Kings degenerated into Tyrants of which there are infinite precedens in History which actions all ages all Kingdomes have alwaies reputed lawfull both in point of Policy Law Religion as warranted by the very Lawes of Nature Reason State Nations God which instruct not onely particular persons but whole Cities and Kingdomes for their owne necessary defence preservation the supportation of humane Societie and Libertie to protect themselves against all unlawfull violence and Trranny even of their Kings themselves or their Ministers to whom neither the Lawes of God Nature Man nor any civill Nation ever yet gave the least authority to Murther Spoile Oppresse enslave their Subjects or deprive them of their lawfull Liberties or Estates which resistance were it unlawfull or unjust as many ignorant Royallists and Parasites now teach some few oppressing tyrannizing wilfull Princes might without the least resistance ruine murther enslave the whole world of men overthrow all setled formes of civill government extirpate Christian Religion and destroy all humane Society at their pleasures all which had beene effected yea all States and Kingdomes totally subverted long agoe by ambitious Tyrannizing lawlesse Princes had not this Lawfull Naturall Hereditary power of resisting and opposing their illegall violence inherent in their Parliaments States Kingdomes restrained and suppressed their exorbitances of this kinde Now that this necessary Defensive opposition and resistance against open Regall Hostile violence which hath beene ever held lawfull and frequently practised in all Kingdomes all ages heretofore as just and necessary should become sodenly unlawfull to our Parliament and Kingdome onely at this instant seemes very unreasonable unto me Fouthly It is the expresse resolution of Aristotle Xenophon Polibius Pope Elutherius in his Epistle to our first Christian King Lucius King Edward the Confessor in his established Lawes c. 17. the Councell of Paris Anno 829. and Isiodor cited by it Iohn Bodin Iohn Mariana and generally of all forraigne Divines and Polititians Pagan or Christian yea of Bracton Fleta Fortescue and King Iames himselfe that a King governing in a setled Kingdome ceaseth to be a King and degenerates into a Tyrant so soone as hee leaves to rule by his Lawes much more when he begins to invade his Subjects Persons Rights Liberties to set up an Abitrary power impose unlawfull Taxes raise Forces and make Warre upon his Subjects whom he should Protect and rule in peace to pillage plunder waste and spoile his Kingdome imprison murther and destroy his people in an hostile manner to captivate them to his pleasure the very highest degree of Tyranny condemned and detested by God and all good men The whole State and Kingdome therefore in such cases as these for their owne just necessary preservation may lawfully with force of Armes when no other course can secure them not onely passively but actively resist their Prince in such his violent exorbitant tyrannicall proceedings without resisting any kingly lawfull royall Authority Vested in the Kings person for the kingdomes preservation onely not destruction because in and as to these illegall oppressions tyrannicall actions not warranted but prohibited by the Lawes of God and the Realme to whom he is accountable and by whom he is justly censurable for them he is no lawfull King nor Majestrate but an unjust oppressing Tyrant and a meere private man who as to these proceedings hath quite denuded himselfe of his just Regall authority So that all those wholsome Lawes made by the whole State in Parliament for the necessary preservation and defence of their Kings Royall Person and lawfull Soveraigne power the suppression of all Insurrections Treasons Conspiracies and open Warres against them whiles they governe their people justly according to Law as all good Princes are obliged to doe by oath and duty or the open violent resisting of their Lawfull authority and Commands to which all Subjects both in point of Law and Conscience ought cheerfully and readily to Submit will yeeld no publike Countenance Encouragement or Protection at all to Kings in their irregall tyrannicall oppressions or violent courses especially when they turne professed publike enemies to their people proclaime open Warre against them invade their Lawes Liberties Goods Houses Persons and exercise all acts of Hostilitie against them as fatre forth as the most barbarous Forraigne Enemies would doe It being against all common sence and reason to conceive that our Parliaments Lawes which strictly inhibit and punish the very smallest violations of the publike peace with all kinds of Oppressions Robberies Trespasses Batteries Assaults Bloodsheds Fraies Murthers Routs Riots Insurrections Burglaries Rapes Plunderings Force-able Entries Invasions of the Subjects Liberties or Properties in all other persons and greatest publike Officers whatsoever
case Sixtly I would demand of any Lawyer or Divine What is the true genuine reason that the taking up of offensive armes against or offering violence to the person or life of the King is High Treason in point of Law and Divinitie Is it not onely because and as he is the head and chiefe member of the Kingdome which hath a Common interest in him and because the Kingdome it selfe sustaines a publike prejudice and losse by this War against and violence to his Person Doubtlesse every man must acknowledge this to be the onely reason for if he were not such a publike person the levying War against or murthering of him could be no High Treason at all And this is the reason why the elsewhere cited Statutes of our Realme together with our Historians make levying of Warre deposing or killing the King by private persons High Treason not onely against the King but the REALME and Kingdome to Witnesse the Statutes of 5. R. 2. c 6. 11. R. 2. c. 1. 3. 6. 17 R. 2. c. 8. 21. R. 2. c. 2. 4. 20. 3. H. 5. Parl. 2. c. 6. 28. H. 8. c. 7. 1. Mar. c. 6. 13. Eliz. c. 1. 3. Iaco. 1. 2. 3. 4. and the Act of Pacification this present Parliament declaring those persons of England and Scotland TRAITORS TO EITHER REALME who shall take up Armes against either Realme without common consent of Parliament which Enact The levying of Warre against the Kingdome and Parliament invading of England or Ireland treachery against the Parliament repealing of certaine Acts of Parliament ill Counselling the King coyning false Money and offering violence to the Kings person to take away his Life to be high Treason not onely against the King and his Crowne but THE REALME TO and those who are guilty of such crimes to bee High Traitors and Enemies TO THE REALME as well at to the King Hence Iohn of Gaunt Duke of Lancaster being accused in a Parliament held in 7. R. 2. by a Carmelite Frier of High Treason for practising sodainely to surprise the KING and seize upon his Kingdome the Duke denied it as a thing incredible upon this very ground If I should thus said he affect the Kingdome Js it credible after your murder which God forbid that the Lords of this Kingdome could patiently endure me Domini mei ET PATRIAE PRODITOREM being a Traitor both of my LORD and COUNTREY Hence in the same Parliament of 7. R. 2. John Walsh Esquire Captaine of Cherburg in France was accused by one of Navarre DE PRODITIONE REGIS REGNI Of Treason against the King and Kingdome for delivering up that Castle to the Enemies And in the Parliament of 3. R. 2. Sir John Annesley Knight accused Thomas Ketrington Esquire of Treason against the King and Realme for betraying and selling the Castle of Saint Saviour within the Isse of Constantine in France to the French for a great summe of money when as he neither wanted Victuals nor meanes to defend it both which Accusations being of Treasons beyond the Sea were determined by Battle and Duels fought to decide them Hence the great Favourite Pierce Gaveston Tanquam Legum subversor Hostis Terrae Publicus Publicus Regni Proditor capite truncatus est and the two Spensers after him were in Edward the second his Raigne likewise banished condemned and executed as Traitors to the King and Realme ET REGNI PRODITORES for miscounselling and seducing the King and moving him to make Warre upon his people Hence both the Pierces and the Archbishop of Yorke in their Articles against King Henry the fourth accused him as guilty of High Treason and a Traitor both to the King Realme and Kingdome of England for Deposing and murthering Richard the second And hence the Gunpouder Conspirators were declared adjudged and executed as Traitors both to the KING REALME for attempting to blow up the Parliament House when the King Nobles and Commons were therein assembled If then the King shall become an open enemie to his Kingdome and Subjects to waste or ruine them or shall seeke to betray them to a Forraigne Enemy which hath beene held no lesse then Treason in a King to doe who by the expresse resolution of 28. H. 8. cap. 7. may become a Traitor to the REALME and thereupon forfeit his very right and title to the Crowne it can be no Treason nor Rebellion in Law or Theologie for the Parliament Kingdome Subjects to take up armes against the King and his Forces in such a case when he shal wilfully and maliciously rent himselfe from and set himselfe in direct opposition against his Kingdome and by his owne voluntary actions turne their common interest in him for their good and protection into a publicke engagement against him as a common Enemy who seekes their generall ruine And if Kings may lawfully take up armes against their Subjects as all Royallists plead after they reject their lawfull power and become open Rebels or Traitors because then as to this they cease to be Subjects any longer and so forfeit the benefit of their Royal protection By the self-same reason the bond and stipulation being mutuall Kings being their Subjects Liege Lords by Oath and Duty as well as they their Liege people When Kings turne open professed Foes to their Subjects in an Hostile Warrelike way they presently both in Law and Conscience cease to be their Kings de jure as to this particular and their Subjects alleagiance thereby is as to this discharged and suspended towards them as appeares by the Kings Coronation Oath and the Lords and Prelats conditionall Fealty to King Steven so that they may justly in Law and Conscience resist their unlawfull assaults as enemies for which they must onely censure their owne rash unjust proceedings and breach of Faith to their People not their Peoples just defensive opposition which themselves alone occasioned Seventhly It must of necessity be granted that for any King to levie warre against his Subjects unlesse upon very good grounds of Law and conscience and in case of absolute necessity when there is no other remedy left is directly contrary to his very Oath and duty witnes the Law of King Edward the Confessor cap. 17. and Coronation Oathes of all our Kings forementioned To keepe PEACE and godly agreement INTIRELY ACCORDING TO THEIR POWER to their people Contrary to all the fundamentall Lawes of the Realme and the Prologues of most Statutes intirely to preserve and earnestly to indeavour the peace and welfare of their peoples persons goods estates lawes liberties Contrary to the main tenor of all Sacred Scriptures which have relation unto Kings but more especially to the 1 Kings 12. 21. 23. 24. and 2 Chron. 11. 1. 2. Where when King Rehoboam had gathered a very great army to fight against the ten Tribes which revolted from him for following his young Counsellors advice and denying their just request and crowned Ieroboam for their King
intending to reduce them to his obedience by force of armes God by his Prophet Shemiah expressely prohibited him and his army to goe up or fight against them and made them all to returne to their owne houses without fighting and to Isay 14. 4. 19. to 22. where God threatens to cast the King of Babilon out of his grave as an abhominable branch as a carcasse trodden under foot marke the reason Because thou hast destroyed thy Land and slaine thy People to cut off from Babylon his name and remembrance and Sonnes and Nephewes as he had cut off his peoples though heathens Yea contrary to that memorable Speech of that noble Roman Valerius Corinus when he was chosen Dictator and went to fight against the Roman conspirators who toke up armes against their Country Fugeris etiam honestius tergumque civi dederis quam pugnaveris contra patriam nunc ad pacificandum bene atque honeste inter primos stabis postulate aequa et ferte quanquam vel iniquis standum est potius quam impias inter nos conseramus manus c. If then a Kings offensive warre upon his Subjects without very just grounds and unevitable occasions be thus utterly sinfull and unlawfull in law and Conscience and most diametrally contrary to the Oath Office trust and duty of a King who by this strange metamorphosis becomes a Wolfe instead of a Shepheard a destroyer in liew of a Protector a publike Enemy in place of a Common friend an unnaturall Tyrant instead of a naturall King it followes inevitably that the Subjects or Kingdomes resistance and defensive warre in such a case both by the law of God of nature of the Realme must be lawfull and just because directly opposite to the only preservative against that warre which is unlawfull and unjust and so no Treason nor Rebellion by any Law of God or man which are illegall and criminall too Eightly It is the received resolution of all Canoniâ—â—s Schoolemen and Civill Lawyers That a defensive warre undertaken onely for necessary defence doth not propâ—ly deserve the nam of warre but onely of Defence That it is no lâ—vying of warre at all which implies an active offenâ—ive not passive defensive raising of forces and so no Treason nor offence within the statute of 25. E. 3. c. 2. as the Parliament the onely proper Iudge of Treasons hath already resolved in point of Law but a faculty onely of defence Cuilibet Omni Iure ipsoque Rationis Ductu Permissa c. permitted to every one By all Law or right and by the very conduct of reason since to propulse violence and iniury is permitted by the very Law of Nations Hence of all the seven sorts of warre which they make they define the last to be A just and Necessary War quod fit se et sua defendendo and that those who dâ—e is such a war caeteris paribus are safe Causa 23. qu. 1. and if they be slaine for defence of the Common-wealth their memory shall live in perpetuall glory And hence they give this Definition of a just Warre Warre is a Lawfull Defence against an imminent or praeceeding offence upon a publike or private cause concluding That if Defence be severed from Warre it is a Sedition not Warre Although the Emperour himselfe denounce it Yea although the whole World combined together Proclaime it For the Emperour a King can no more lawfully hurt another in Warre then he can take away his goods or life without cause Therefore let Commentatoâ—s bâ—awle eternally about Warre yet they shall never justifie nor prove it lawfull Nisi ex Defensione Legitima but when it proceeds from Lawfull defence all Warres being rash and unjust against those who justly defend themselves This Warre then being undertaken by the Parliament onely for their owne and the Kingdomes necessary defence against the Kings invasive Armies and Cavalliers especially now after the Kings rejection of all Honourable and safe termes of Peace and accommodation tendered to him by the Parliament must needs be just and lawfull and so no Treason nor Rebellion in point of Law or Conscience Since no Law of God nor of the Realme hath given the King any Authority or Commission at all to make this unnaturall Warre upon his Parliament his people to enslave their Soules and Bodies or any inhibition to them not to defend themselves in such a case These generall Considerations thus premised wherein Law and Conscience walke hand in hand I shall in the next place lay downe such particular grounds for the justification of this Warre which are meerely Legall extracted out of the bowels of our knowne Lawes which no professors of them can contradict First it is unquestionable that by the Common and Statute Law of the Land the King himselfe who cannot lawfully proclaime Warre against a Forraigne Enemy much lesse against his people without his Parliaments previous assent as I have elsewhere proved cannot by his absolute Soveraigne Prerogative either by verball Commands or Commissions under the great Seale of England derive any lawfull or just Authority to any Generall Captaine Cavalliers or person whatsoever without Legall Triall and Conviction to seize the Goods or Chattels of any his Subjects much lesse forcecibly to Rob Spoile Plunder Wound Beat Kill Imprison or make open War upon them without a most just and in vitable occasion and that after open kostilitij denounced against them And if any by vertue of such illegal Commissions or Mandats Assault Plunder Spoile Rob Beat Wound Slay Imprison the Goods Chattels Houses Persons of any Subject not lawfully convicted They may and ought to be proceeded against resisted apprehended indicted condemned for it notwithstanding such Commissions as Trespassers Theeves Burglarers Felons Murderers both by Statute and Common Law As is clearely enacted and resolved by Magna Charta cap. 29. 15. E. 3. Stat. 1. cap. 1. 2. 3. 42. E. 3. cap. 1. 3. 28. E. 1. Artic. super Chartas cap. 2. 4 E. 3. c. 4. 5. E. 3. cap. 2. 24. E. 3. cap. 1. 2 R. 2 cap. 7. 5 R. 2 ca 5. 1. H. 5. cap. 6. 11. R. 2. cap. 1. to 6. 24 H. 8. cap. 5. 21. Jacob. c. 3. Against Monopolies The Petition of Right 3. Caroli 2. E. 3. c. 8. 14. E. 3. ca. 14. 18. E. 3. Stat. 3. 20. E. 3. cap. 1. 2. 3. 1. R 2. cap. 2. And generally all Satutes against Purveyers 42. Ass Pl. 5. 12. Brooke Commissions 15. 16. Fortesoue c p. 8. 9. 10. 13. 14. 26. 1. E. 3. 2. 2. H. 4. 24. Br. Faux Jmprisonment 30. 28. 22. E. 4 45. a Tr. 16. H. 6. Monstrans de Faits 182 Stamford lib. 1. fol. 13. a. 37. a. The Conference at the Committies of both Houses 3 o. Aprilis 4 o. Caroli concerning the Right and Priviledge of the Subject newly Printed Cooke lib. 5. fol. 50. 51. lib. 7. fol. 36. 37. lib. 8. fol. 125. to 129. Iudge Crooks and Huttons Arguments against Shipmoney with divers
offered no kind of hurt or violence at all to his Majesties person then or since and now full sore against their wils Petitions endeavours for peace they are necessitated to continue this offensive warre for their owne and the Kingdomes necessary preservation The sole question is Whether this Act this Defensive Warre of the Parliament and their Forces be high Treason or Rebellion and who are the Traytors and Rebells in this case Certainly if I understand any Law or Reason the Parliament and their Forces are and must be innocent from these crimes and their opposite Popish Malignant Cavaleers the onely Rebels and Traytors as this Parliament the onely proper Judge of Treasons hath already voted and declared them in point of Law Seventhly it is Little â—s and other Law-bookes expresse resolutions That if a man grant to another the Office of a Parkership of a Parke for life the estate which he hath is upon condition in Law though not expressed that he shall well and lawfully keepe the Parke and doe what which to his Office belongeth to doe or otherwise it shall be lawfull for the grantor and his heires to remove him and grant it to another if he will and if the Parker negligently suffer the Deere to be killed or kill the Deere himselfe without sufficient warrant from his Lord it is a direct forfaiture of his Office If then a Keeper or Forrester cannot kill or negligently suffer his Deere to be killed no nor yet destroy the vert on which they should feed or suffer it to be destroyed without forfaiture of his Office even by a condition annexed to his Office by the very Common Law shall a King thinke you lawfully murther plunder and destroy his Subjects his kingdome without any forfaiture or resistance at all or will the Common Law of the Land in such a case which provides and annexeth a condition to the Office of a Parker not much more unite it to the royall Office of a King who is but a regall Keeper or sheepheard of men of Christians of free men not of slaves for the Subjects preservation and security Doth the Common-Law thus provide for the safety the Liberty welfare of our beasts yea our wilde beasts are our Deere so deare unto it and will it not much more provide for the security of our owne persons Lives Liberties estates shall not these be dearer to it than out Deere How many riged Lawes have beene anciently and of late yeares made against the killing the destroying of the kings the Subjects Deere in Forrests and Parkes for which some have lost their Liberties Lives members And shall not the Lawes for the preservation of the Subjects Lives Liberties estates be more inviolably observed more severely prosecuted May a Forrester Warrener or Keeper of a Parke lawfully beate and kill another in defence of his Deere and other game without any penalty or forfaiture at all enjoying the Kings Peace as before this fact by the expresse statute of 21. E. 1. Rastall Forrests 19. and Stamfords Pleas l. 1. c. 5. 6. And cannot a poore subject defend his owne person family house goods Libertie life against the kings Forces or Cavaleers without the danger of Treason or Rebellion if the king himselfe be present with them or they come armed with his unjust Commission Certainely this is a too absur'd irrationall beastiall opinion for any to beleeve It is our Saviours own doubled argument Mat. 6. 26. Luke 12. 24. Behold the fowles of the ayre and consider the Ravens for they neither sow nor reape neither have store-house nor borne yet your heavenly Father feedeth them ARE NOT YEE MVCH BETTER THEN THEY THEN FOWLES And Luke 12. 6. 7. Mat. 10. 29. 30. 31. Are not two sparrowes sold for a farthing and not one of them shall fall to the ground without your Father But the very haires of your head are all numbred Feare ye not therefore YE ARE OF MORE VALVE THEN MANY SPARROWES And the Apostle hath the like argument 1 Cor. 9. 9. 10. Doth God take care for Oxen Or saith he it not altogether for our sakes for our sakes NO DOUBT THIS IS WRITTEN c. Men are the Soveraigne Lords of all the Creatures of farre more excellencie and dignity then all or any of them especially Christian men whence the Apostle Paul gives this strict charge to the Elders of Ephesus belonging as well to kings as Ministers Act. 20. 28. Take heed therefore unto all the flocke over which the holy Ghost hath made you over-seers to feed the Church of God which he hath purchased with his owne blood and God himselfe hath given this expresse inhibition even to Kings themselves concerning his and their peoples safety most strangely inverted by flattering Divines quite contrary to the words and meaning Touch not mine anointed and do my Prophets no harm And shall not men then made after Gods owne Image men redeemed and purchased by the blood of Christ men made Kings and Priests to God their Father whom God himselfe hath expressely prohibited Kings themselves to touch or harme not be allowed liberty to defend their persons houses lives liberties without offence or Treason against Kings or any their Cavaleers assaults by the Law of God the Common or statute Law of the Realme when as their very Keepers Warreners Forresters may lawfully resist and slay them to without crime or punishment if they should offer but to kill to steale their Deere or Connies Are they not much better much dearer to God to Kings then foules then Sparrowes then Oxen then Deere and their lives their blood more precious then theirs surely the Scripture is expresse that precious in the sight of the Lord is the blood the death of his Saints and therefore he that sheddeth mans blood be he whom he will in an unlawfull way by man shall his blood he shed if not in a judiciall way yet by way of just defence as Christ himself expounds it Mat. 26. 52. ALL they that take the sword shall perish with the sword and Rev. 10. 10. He that killeth with the sword MVST BE KILLED WITH THE SWORD no doubt he may be killed by way of necessary defence then it immediately followes here is the patience and faith of the Saints that is Saints will and must patiently endure many pressures and wrongs from Tyrants and oppressors without resistance but if they once come to make warre with them as the seven headed beast there did v. 7. then both the faith and patience of the Saints themselves will binde their hands no longer but give them free liberty in such an extremity for their owne and the Churches preservation in their just defence to slay those seven headed beasts that shall assault them the very faith of Christ then teacheth them no other lesson but this he that leadeth into captivitie shall goe in o captitivitie and he that killeth with the sword must be killed with the sword
the Romans and Italians being forsaken of the Emperour Constantine when they were invaded by Aistulfus King of the Lumbards Elected Charles the Great for their Emperour and created a new Empire in the West distinct from that of Constantinople in the East which Bishop Bilson himselfe concludes they might lawfully doe in point of conscience So Childerick being unfit to governe and unable to repulse the enemies of the French which invaded his territories thereupon by the advise of Pope Zachary and of a whole Synod and Parliament in France they deposed Childericke and elected Pipin for their King who was both able and willing to protect them Vpon this very ground the Emperours Charles the third and Wenceslius were deposed as being unable and unfit to defend and governe the Empire and others elected Emperors in their steeds Thus Mahomet the blinde King of Granado was in the yeare 1309. deposed by his owne Brother Nobles and Subjects who were discontented to be governed by a blinde King who could not lead them to the warres in person And Ethodius the 2 d king of Scotland being dull of wit given to avarice and nothing meete to governe the Realme thereupon the Nobles tooke upon them the governmeÌ„t appointing Rulers in every Province so continued them all his reigne leaving him nothing but the bare title of a King not depriving him thereof out of the respect they gave to the family of Fergusius but yet taking away all his regall power And not to multiply cases or examples of this nature Andrew Favine in his Theatre of Honour out of the Chronicle of Lauresheâ—m and Aimonius in his 4 th Booke of the History of France relates a notable resolution given by the Parliament Estates of France in this very point In the yeare 803. Lewes the Debonnaire king of France holding his Parliament in May there came thither from strange Provinces two Brethren kings of Vuilses who with frank free good will submitted themselves to the judgement of the said Parliament to which of them the kingdome should belong The elder of these two brethren was named Meligastus and the younger Celeadraus Now albeit the custome of the said kingdome adjudged the Crowne to the eldest according to the right of Primegeniture allowed and practised by the Law of Nature and of later memory in the person of the last dead King Liubus father to the two contendants yet notwithstanding in regard that the Subjects by universall consent of the kingdome had rejected the elder brother FOR HIS COWARDISE AND EVILL GOVERNMENT cum secundam ritum ejus gentis commissum sibi Regnum parum digne administraret and had given the Crown to the younger brother FOR HIS VALOVR DISCREETE CARRIGE after full hearing of both parties BY SENTENCE of PARLIAMENT the Kingdome was adjudged to the younger Brother statâ—it ut junior frater delatam sibi à Populo suo pot flatem haberet c and thereupon the eldest did him homage with oath of Alleigance in the said Parliament and submitted to this sentence And upon this very ground in some of our ancient British and Saxons Kings Reignes when the right heire to the Crowne was an infant unable to defend his kingdome and people against invading enemies the Crowne hath commonly descended to the Vncle or next heire of full age who was able to protect them and repulse their enemies till the right heire accomplished his compleat age as I have elsewhere manifested If then a Kingdome by generall consent may elect a new King to defend and preserve it in case of invasion and eminent danger of ruine by forraigne enemies when their present King either cannot or will not doe his duty in protecting them from their enemies and exposeth them for a prey to their devastations as these examples and authorities conclude they may though I will not positively determine so Then certainely by equall semblable and greater reason subjects may lawfully take up necessary defensive Armes against their Kings when they shall not onely desert but actually invade and wage warre against them destroy and wast them in an open Hostile manner and handle them as cruelly as the worst of enemies such a wilfull unnaturall Hostile invasion being farre worse than any cowardly or bare desertion of theÌ„ when they are invaded by a forraign enemy And if Kings in case of sottishnesse or Lunacy may be lawfully deposed from their kingdomes by common consent of their Realmes when they are altogether unfit or unable to governe as Bâ—shop Bilson asserts and I have manifested else where then much more may they be lawfully resisted by force without guilt of Treason or Rebellion when they wilfully and maliciously contrary to their oath and duty cast off their Royall governments the protection of their subjects and wage open warre against them to enslave or ruine them If a Father shall violently and unjustly assault his sonne a husband his wife a master his servant a Major or other inferior Officer a Citizen to murther maime or ruine them They may in such a case by the Law of Nature God man resist repulse them in their owne defence without any crime at all as dayly practise experimentally manifests yea they may sweare the peace against them and have a Writ de securitate Pacis in such cases Therefore by the selfesame reason they may resist the King and his Army in like cases there being no more humane nor divine Law against resistance in the one case than in the other Finally it is the resolution of John Bodin and others who deny the lawfulnesse of Subjects taking up Armes against their Soveraigne Prince or offering violence to his person though he become a Tyrant That if a Soveraigne Prince or King by lawfull election or succession turne a Tyrant he may lawfully at his Subjects request be invaded resisted condemned or slaine by a forraigne Prince For as of all Noble acts none is more honourable or glorious then by way of fact to defend the honour goods and lâ—ves of such as are unjustly oppressed by the power of the more mighty especially the gate of Iustice being shut against them thus did Moses seeing his brother the Israelite beaten and wronged by the Egyptian and no meanes to have redresse of his wrongs So it is a most faire and magnificall thing for a Prince to take up Armes to releive a whole Nation and people unjustly oppressed by the cruelty of a Tyrant as did the great Hercu'es who travelling over a great part of the world with wonderfull power and valour destroyed many most horrible monsters that is to say Tyrants and so delivered people for which he was numbred among the gods his posterity for many worlds of yeares after holding most great Kingdomes And other imitators of his vertue as Dio Timoilion Aratus Harmodius Aristogiton with other such honourable Princes bearing Titles of chastisers and correctors of Tyrants And for that onely cause
Tamerlain Emperour of the Tartars denounced warre unto Bajazet King of the Turkes who then besieged Constantinople saying That he was comming to chastise his Tyrannie and to deliver the afflicted people and vanquishing him in battle routed his Army and taking the Tyrant prisoner he kept him in chains in an Iron Cage till he dyed Neither in this case is it materiall that such a vertuous Prince being a stranger proceede against a Tyrant by open force or fiercenesse or else by way of justice True it is that a valient and worthy Prince having the Tyrant in his power shall gaine more honour by bringing him unto his tryall to chastise him as a murtherer a manqueller and a robber rather than to use the Law of Armes against him Wherefore let us resolve on this that it is lawfull for any stranger Prince to kill a Tyrant that is to say a man of all men infamed and notorious for the oppression murder and slaughter of his subjects and people And in this sort our Queene Elizabeth ayded the Low-Countries against the Tyrannie and oppressions of the King of Spaine and the King of Sweden of late yeares the Princes of Germany against the Tyranny and usurpations of the Emperor upon their sollicitation If then it be thus lawfull for Subjects to call in forraigne Princes to releeve them against the Tyrannie and oppressions of their kings as the Barons in King Iohns time prayed in ayde from Philip and Lewis of France against his tyrannie and those Princes in such cases may justly kill depose or judicially condemne these oppressing Kings and put them to death I conceive these whole kingdomes and Parliaments may with farre better reason lesse danger and greater safety to themselvs their Kings and Realmes take up defensive Armes of their owne to repulse their violence For if they may lawfully helpe themselves and vindicate their Liberties from their Kings encroachments by the assistance and Armes of forraigne Princes who have no relation to them nor particular interest in the differences betweene their kings and them which can hardly be effected without subjecting themselves to a forraigne power the death or deposition of the oppressing King much more may they defend and releeve themselves against him by their owne domesticke Forces if they be able by generall consent of the Realme because they have a particular interest and ingagement to defend their owne persons estates liberties which forraigners want and by such domesticke Forces may prevent a forraigne subjection preserve the life of the oppressing Prince and succession of the Crowne in the hereditary line which forraigne Armies most commonly endanger And certainely it is all one in point of Reason State Law Conscience for Subjects to relieve themselves and make a defensive warre against their Soveraigne by forraigne Princes Armes as by their owne and if the first be just and lawfull as all men generally grant without contradiction and Bracton to l. 2. c. 16. I see no colour but the latter must bee just and lawfull too yea then the first rather because lesse dangerous lesse inconvenient to King and Kingdome From Reasons I shall next proceed to punctuall Authorities Not to mention our ancient Brittons taking up of armes by joint consent against their oppressing tyrannizing Kings Aâ—chigallo Emerian and Vortigern whom they both expelled and deposed for their tyranny and mis-government nor our Saxons ray sing defensive Forces against King Sigebert Osfred Ethelred Beornard Coolwulfe and Edwyn who were forcibly expelled and deprived by their Subjects for their bloody cruelties and oppressions which actions the whole Kingdome then and those Historians who recorded them since reputed just and honourable and no Treason nor Rebellion in Law or Conscience being for the Kingdomes necessary preservation and the peoples just defence which Histories I have elsewhere more largely related Nor yet to insist long on the fore-mentioned Barons warre against king Iohn and Henry the 3 d. for regaining establishing preserving Magna Chaâ—ta and other Liberties of the Realme which our Kings had almost utterly deprived them off I shall onely give you some few briefe observations touching these warres to cleare them from those blacke aspersions of Rebellion Treason and the like which some late Historians especially Iohn Speed to flatter those Kings to whom they Dedicated their Histories have cast upon them contrary to the judgement of our ancienter Choniclers and Matthew Paris who generally repute them lawfull and honourable First then consider what opinion the Prelates Barons and Kingdome in generall had of these Warres at first Anno 1414. in a Parliament held at Pauls the 16. yeare of King Iohns raigne Steven Langton Archbishop of Canterbury produced a Charter of King Henry the First whereby he granted the Ancient Liberties of the Kingdome of England which had by his Predecessors beene oppressed with unjust exactions according to the Lawes of King Edward with those emendations which his Father by the counsell of his Barons did ratifie which Charter being read before the Barons they much rejoyced and swore in the presence of the Archbishop that for these Liberties they would if need required spend their blood which being openly done in Parliament they would never have taken such a publike solemne Oath had they deemed a Warre against the King for recovery or defence of these their Liberties unlawfull and no lesse then Treason and Rebellion in point of Law or Conscience After this the Barons assembling at Saint Edmondâ—bury conferred about the said Charter and swore upon the high Altar That if King Iohn refused to confirme and restore unto them those Liberties the Rights of the Kingdome they would make Warre upon him and withdraw themselves from his Allegiance untill he had ratified them all wâ—th his Charter under his great Seale And further agreed after Christmas to Petition him for the same and in the meane time to provide themselves of Horse and Furniture to be ready if the King should start from his Oath made at Winchester at the time of his absolution for confirmation of these Liberties and compell him to satisfie their demand After Christmas they repaire in a Military manner to the King lying in the new Temple urging their desires with great vehemencie the King seeing their resolution and inclination to warre made answer That for the matter they required he would take consideration till after Easter next In the meane time he tooke upon him the Crosse rather through feare then devotion supposing himselfe to bee more safe under that Protection And to shew his desperate malice and wilfulnesse who rather then not to have an absolute domination over his people to doe what he listed would be any thing himselfe under any other that would but support him in his violences he sent an Embassage the most base and impious that ever yet was sent by any free and Christian Prince unto Miramumalim the Moore intituled the great King of Affrica Morocco and Spaine wherein
he offered to render unto him his Kingdome and to hold the same by tribute from him as his Soveraigne Lord to forgoe the Christian Faith as vaine and to receive that of Mahomet imploying Thomas Hardington and Ralph Fitz-Nicholas Knights and Robert of London Clerke Commissioners in this negotiation whose manner of accesse to this great King with the delivery of their Message and King Johns Charter to that effect are at large recited in Mathew Paris who heard the whole relation from Robert one of the Commissioners Miramumalim having heard at large their Message and the Description of the King and Kingdome governed by an annointed and Crowned King knowne of old to be free and ingenuous ad nullius praeterquam Dei spectans dominationem with the nature and disposition of the people so much disdained the basenesse and impiety of the Offerer that fetching a deepe sigh from his heart he answered I have never read nor heard of any King possessing so prosperous a Kingdome subject and obedient to him who would thus willingly ruine his Principality as of free to make it tributary of his owne to make it anothers of happy to make it miserable and to submit himself to anothers pleasure as one conquered without a wound But I have heard and read of many who with effusion and losse of much blood which was laudable have procured liberty to themselves modo autem audio quod Dominus vester miser deses imbellis qui nullo nullior est de libero servus fieri desiderat qui omnium mortalium miserrimus est After which he said That the King was unworthy of his Confederacie and looking on the two Knights with a sterne countenance he commanded them to depart instantly out of his presence and to see his face no more whereupon they departing with shame hee charged Robert the Clerke to informe him truely what manner of person King Iohn was who replied That he was rather a Tyrant then a King rather a Subverter then a Governour a Subverter of his owne Subjects and a Fosterer of Strangers a Lyon to his owne Subjects a Lambe to Aliens and Rebels who by his sloathfulnesse had lost the Dutchy of Normandy and many other Lands and moreover thirsted to lose and destroy the Kingdome of England An unsatiable Extortioner of money an invader and destroyer of the possessions of his naturall people c. When Miramumalim heard this he not onely despised as at first but detested and accursed him and said Why doe the miserable English permit such a one to raigne and domineer over them Truely they are effeminate and flavish To which Robert answered the English are the most patient of all men untill they are offended and damnified beyond measure But now they are angry like a Lion or Elephant when he perceives himselfe hurt or bloody and though late they purpose and endeavour to shake the yoake of the Oppressor from their necks which lie under it Whereupon he reprehended the overmuch patience and fearefulnesse of the English and dismissed these Messengers who returning and relating his Answer to King Iohn he was exceeding sorrowfull and in much bitternesse of Spirit that he was thus contemned and disapointed of his purpose Yet persisting in his pre-conceived wicked designe to ruine his Kingdome and people and hating all the Nobility and Gentry of England with a viperous Venom he sets upon another course and knowing Pope Jnnocent to be the most ambitious proud and covetous of all men who by gifts and promises would be wrought upon to act any wickednesse Thereupon he hastily dispatcheth messengers to him with great summes of Money and a re-assurance of his tributary Subjection which shortly after he confirmed by a new Oath and Charter to procure him to Excommunicate the Archbishop of Canterbury and the Barons whom he had formerly favoured which things he greedily desired that he might wrecke has malice an them by Dis inheriting Imprisoning and Spoiling them being Excommunicated Which things when he had wickedly plotted he more wickedly executed afterwards In the meane time the Barons foreseeing that nothing was to be obtained but by strong hand assemble an Army at Stamford wherein were said to be two thousand Knights besides Esquires and marched from thence towards Oxford where the King expected their comming to answer their demands And being come to Brackley with their Army the King sends the Earle of Pembroke Mariscall and the Archbishop of Canterbury with others to demand of them what were those Lawes and Liberties they required to whom they shewed a Schedule of them which the Commissioners delivered to the King who having heard them read in great indignation asked Why the Barons did not likewise demand the Kingdome and swore he would never grant those Articles whereby himselfe should be made a Servant So harsh a thing is it to a power that is once gotten out into the wide libertie of his will to heare againe of any reducing within his Circle Vpon this answer the Barons resolve to seize the Kings Castles constitute Robert Fitz-walter their Generall entituling him Mariscall of the ARMY of GOD and of HOLY CHVRCH A Title they would never have given their Generall or Army had they deemed this Warre unlawfull in Law or Conscience After which they tooke divers of the Kings Castles and are admitted into London where their number daily increasing they make this Protestation Never to give over the prosecution of their desire till they had constrained the King whom they held perjured to grant them their Rights Which questionlesse they would not have done had they not beleeved this Warre to be just and lawfull King Iohn seeing himselfe in a manner generally forsaken of all his people and Nobles having scarce 7. Knights faithfull to him another strong argument that the people and Kingdome generally apprehended this taking up armes against the King to regaine to preserve their hereditary Rights and Liberties to be lawfull counterfeits the Seales of the Bishops and writes in their Names to all Nations That the English were all Apostates and whosoever would come to invade them hee by the Popes consent would conferre upon them all their Lands and Possossions But this device working no effect in regard they gave no credit to it and found it apparently false the King seeing himselfe deserted of all and that those of the Barons part were innumerable cum tota Angliae Nobilitas in unum collecta quasi sub numero non cadebat writes Mathew Paris another argument of the justice of this cause and warre in their beliefes and consciences at last condescended to grant and confirme their Liberties which he did at Running-Meade in such sort as I have formerly related And though the Pope afterwards for his owne private ends and interest bribed by King Iohn who resigned his Kingdome to him and became his Vassall without his peoples consent which resignation was judged voide excommunicated the Barons withall their assistance Qui Iohaâ—nem illustrum Regim
Anglorum Cruce signatum ET VASALLVM ROMANAE ECCLESIAE an honourable Title indeed for a King pers quuntur molientes ei Regnum auferre which this Pope him selfe did but few yeares before giving his Crown and Kingdome it selfe to King Phillip of France which to save he sordidly resigned up to the Pope quod ad Romanam Ecclesiam dignoscitur pertinere Yet this Excommunication thus procured by bribery proceeding not out of Conscience to preserve the Kings due Rights but selfe-respects to support the Popes usurped interest and Title to the Realme and being a wicked plot of the King more wickedly executed by the Pope who as Matthew Paris writes was AD OMNIA SCELERA pro praemijs datis vel promissis cercus proclivis and the Londoners Barons with divers Prelates then contemning it as pronounced upon false suggestions and especially for this cause that the ordering of temporall affaires belonged not to the Pope Cum Petro Apostolo ejus Successoribus non nisi Ecclesiasticarum dispositio rerum a Domino sit collata potestas And using likewise these memorable Speeches in those blind daies against the Pope and his usurped Supremacy with liberty Vt quid ad nos se extendit Romanorum insatiata cupiditas Quid Episcopis Apostolicis Militiae nostrae Ecce successores Constantini non Petri non imitantur Petrum in meritis vel operibus nec assimulandi sunt in Potestate Prob pudor marcidi ribaldi qui de armis vel literalitate minime norunt jam toti mundo propter excom nunicationes suas volunt dominari ignobiles usurarij Simoniales O quantum dissimules Petro qui sibi Petri usurpant partem c. I conceive this Excommunication rather justifies then disproves the lawfulnesse of this their taking up of armes and the warre insuing it being but for their owne just defence when the King afterwards with fire sword and bloody barbarous Forraigne Forces wasted his Realme in a most inhumane tyrannicall maner Factus de Rege Tyrannus imo in bestialem prorumpens feritatem c. which necessitated the Barons for their own preservation and the Kingdoms devoted by this unnaturall Prince to Vassallage and utter desolation to elect Lewis of France for their King Who together with the Peeres and Estates of France assembled at Lions concerning this Election resolved it to be just and lawfull and the Barons Defensive Warres against and rejection of King Iohn for his Tyranny and oppressions to be just and honourable since they did but flee to these extraordinary remedies and seeke for justice abroad when they were denied it by him that should give it them in as ordinary way at home chosing a King in place of a Tyrant as Matthew Paris with the generall History of France written by Iohn de Serres and Englished by Edward Grimston more largely manifest Secondly the Lawfulnesse and justnesse of the Barons Warres in Defence of Magna Charta with other their Hereditary Rights and Liberties appeares most evidently by the resolution of all those Parliaments summoned by King Henry the 3 d. Edward the 1 0 2. 3. Richard the 2 d. and other our succeeding Kings which have many times even by force of Armes or Menaces and sometimes by faire termes caused these Kings by new Acts of Parliament to ratifie Magnae Charta the Charter of the Forest with other Fundamentall Liberties thus forcibly extorted from King Iohn at first and constrained them to confirme him with their Oathes and solemne publicke Excommunications to be published by the Bishops in their Dioâ—esse twice every yeare oft solemnly vowing and protesting both in and out of Parliament to defend these Lawes and Liberties with their estates armes lives blood which their ancasters had purchased with their blood as I have manifested in the two first parts of this Discourse All which they would no doubt have forborne had they deemed it high Treason or Rebellion in point of Law to take up armes against their Kings in defence or these Lawes and Privileges neither would our Kings and Parliaments in times of Peace have so frequently confirmed these Lawes and Immunities as just and necessary for the peoples welfare had they reputed their former purchases and confirmations by warre and armes no lesse then Treason or Rebellion And if it were neither Treason nor Rebellion in the judgements of our Ancestors and those Parliaments which procured and ratified Magna Charta to take up armes in defence thereof much lesse can it be Treason or Rebellion in the Parliament and Subjects now by Votes by Ordinances of both Houses with force of armes to preserve not only these their hereditarie Charters Lawes Priviledges but their very Lives Estates yea the Privileges and being of Parliaments themselves which are now invaded endangered What opinion the world had of the lawfulnesse of most of the Barons Warres in King Henry the 3 d. his Raigne against this troublesome persidious King in defence of their Lawes Liberties Estates appeares first by the Dialogue betweene Agnellus a Frier minorite one of King Henry his Counsell purposely sent to the Earle Marshall then in armes against the King and this Martiall Earle in the Abbey of Morgan Anno 1233. I will first relate the true state of that Warre and then their Dialogue concerning it King Henry by the ill counsell of Peter Bishop of Winchester removed all his English Officers Counsellors and Servants from his Court and put Poictovines and Forraigners in their places being ruled wholly by them withall he puts the English Garisons out of all his Castles and substitutes Forraigners in them which dayly arived both with Horse and armes in great multitudes and much oppressed the people calling them Traitors so that the power and wealth of the Realme was wholly under their Command The Earle Marshall seeing the Noble and Ignoble thus oppressed and the rights of the Kingdome like utterly to be lost provoked with a zeale of Iustice associating to himselfe other Noble men goes boldly to the King reproves him in the hearing of many For calling in those Poictovines by evill Counsell to the oppression of the Kingdome and of his naturall Subjects and likewise of Lawes and Liberties Humbly beseeching him hastily to correct these excesses which threatned the imminent subversion both of His Crowne and Kingdome which if he refused to doe he and the other Nobles of the Realme would withdraw themselves from his Counsell as long as he harboured those Strangers To which Peter of Winchester replyed That the King might lawfully call in what strangers be would for the Defence of his Kingdome and Crowne and likwise so many and such as might compell his proud and rebellious Subjects to due Obedience Whereupon the Earle Marshall and other Nobles departing discontented from the Court when they could get no other answer promised firmely one to another That for this cause which concerned them all they would manfully fight even to the separation of Soule
reports that Symon after his death grew famous by many miracles which for feare of the King came not in publicke Thus this Historian thus Robert Grosthead the most devout and learned Bishop of that age who most of any opposed the Popes Vsurpations and exactions determine of the justice and lawfulnesse of the Barons Warres Walter Bishop of Worcester concurring in the same opinion with Grosthead The same author Rishanger records that the Earle of Glocester a great stickler in these warres against the king with whom at last he accorded signified to the King by his Letters Patents under his seale that he would never beare Armes against the King his Lord nor against his Sonne Prince Edward NISI DEFENDO but onely in his Defence which the King and Prince accepting of clearely proves that defensive Armes against King or Prince were in that age generally reputed Lawfull by King Prince Prelates Nobles People I may likewise adde to this what I read in Matthew Westminster that Richard Bishop of Chichester the day before the battle of Lewis against King Henry and his sonne who were taken prisoners in it by the Barons and 20000. of their Souldiers slaine absolved all that went to fight against the King their Lord from all their sinnes Such confidence had he of the goodnesse of the cause and justnesse of the warre In one word the oath of association prescribed by the Barons to the King of Romans brother to King Henry the third in the 43. yeare of his Raigne Heare all men that I Richard Earle of Cornewall doe here sweare upon the holy Evangelists that I shall be faithfull and diligent to reforme with you the Kingdome of England hitherto by the councell of wicked persons overmuch disordered and be an effectuall Coâ—djutor TO EXPELL THE REBELLS and disturbers of the same And this Oath I will inviolaby observe under paâ—ne of losing all the lands I have in England So helpe me God Which Oath all the Barrons and their associates tooke by vertue whereof they tooke up armes against the Kings ill Councellors and himselfe when he joined with them sufficiently demonstrates their publicke opinions and judgements of the lawfulnesse the justnesse of their warres and of all other necessarie defensive armes taken up by the Kingdomes generall assent for preservation of its Lawes Liberties and suppression of those Rebels and ill Councellors who fight against or labour to subvert them by their policies In the third yeare of King Edward the 2 d this king revoking his great Mynion Piers Gaveston newly banished by the Parliament into Ireland and admitting him into as great favour as before contrary to his oath and promise the Barrons hereupon by common consent sent the King word that he should banish Piers from his company according to his agreement or else they would certainâ—ly rise up against him as a perjured person Vpon which the King much terrified suffers Piers to abjure the Realme who returning againe soone after to the Court at Yorke where the king entertained him the Lords spirituall and temporall to preserve he liberties of the Church and Realme sent an honourable message to the King to deliver Piers into their hands or banish him for the preservation of the peace Treasure and weale of the Kingdome this wilfull King denies their just request whereupon the Lords thus contemned and deluded raised an army and march with all speede towards New-Castle NOT TO OFFER INIVRIE OR MOLESTATION TO THE KING but to apprehend Peirs and judge him according to Law upon this the King fleeth together with Peirs to Tinemouth and from thence to Scarborough Castle where Piers is forced to render himselfe to the Barrons who at Warwicke Castle without any legall triall by meere martiall Law beheaded him as a subvertor of the Lawes and an OPEN TRAITOR TO THE KINGDOME For which facts this King afterwards reprehending and accusing the Lords in Parliament in the 7 th yeare of his Raigne they stoutly answered THAT THEY HAD NOT OFFENDED IN ANY ONE POINT BVT DESERVED HIS ROYAL FAVOVR for they HAD NOT GATHERED FORCE AGAINST HIM though he were in Piers his company assisted countenanced and fled with him BVT AGAINST THE PVBLICKE ENEMIE OF THE REALME Whereupon there were two acts of oblivion passed by the King Lords and Commons assembled in that Parliament Printed in the 2 d Part of old Magna Charta The first that no person on the Kings part should be questioned molested impeached imprisoned and brought to judgement for causing Pierce to returne from Exile or harboring councelling or ayding hiâ—â—ere after his returne The second on the Barons part in these words It is provided by the King and by the Archbishops Bishops Abbots Priors Earles Barâ—s and Commons of the Realme assembled according to our Command and unanimously assented and accorded that none of what estate or condition soever he be shall in time to come be appealed or challenged for the apprehending deteining or death of Peirsde Gaveston nor shall for the said death be apprehended nor imprisoned impeached molested nor grieved nor judgement given against him by us nor by others at our suite nor at the suite of any other either in the Kings Court or elsewhere Which act the King by his Writ sent to the Judges of the Kings Bench commanding that this grant and concord shall be firme and stable in all its points and that every of them should be held and kept in perpetuitie to which end he commands them to cause this act to be there inrolled and firmely kept for ever A pregnant evidence that the Barons taking up Armes then against this Traytor and enemie of the Realme in pursuance of the Act and sentence of Parliament for his banishment though the King were in his company and assisted him all he might was then both by King and Parliament adjudged no Treason nor Rebellion at all in point of Law but a just honorable action Wherefore their taking up Armes is not mentioned in this Act of oblivion seeing they all held it just but their putting Piers to death without legall triall which in strictnesse of Law could not be justified Now whether this be not the Parliaments and kingdomes present case in point of Law who tooke up armes principally at first for defence of their owne Priviledges of Parliament and apprehention of delinquents who seducing the king withdrew him from the Parliament and caused him to raise an Army to shelter themselves under its power against the Parliament let every reasonable man determine and if it be so we see this ancient Act of Parliament resolves it to be no high Treason nor Rebellion nor offence against the King but a just lawfull act for the kings the kingdomes honour and safety Not long after this the two Spensers getting into the kings favour and seducing miscouncelling him as much as Gaveston did the Lords and Barrons hereupon in the 14 th and 15 th yeares of his raigne confederated
the apprehension of such as have beene voted Traytors and Delinquents by Parliament and stand out in contempt against its justice for the defence of the Priviledges and Members of Parliament the Liberties and properties of the subject the fundamentall lawes of the Realme the Protestant Religion now indangered by Papists up in Armes in England and Ireland to extirpate it and the removing ill Counsellors from his Majestie to be no high Treason Rebellion or offence at all against the king but a just and lawful Act the very miscarriages wherof in the generall except in such disorderly Souldiers for whom martiall Law hath provided due punishments deserve a publike pardon both from King and Kingdome And to put this out of Question as no fancie of mine owne we have an expresse Act of Parliament resolving the taking up of Armes by the Queene Prince both but subjects and capable of High Treason in such a case as well as others the Nobles and people of the Realme against these two Spensers and other ill Counsellors about this king in the last yeare of his raigne though the King himself were in their Company and taken prisoner by the Forces raised against them for the necessary preservation reliefe and safety of the Queene Prince Nobles Kingdome to be no high Treason nor offence at all namely the statute of 1 E. 3. c. 1. 2. 3 which I shall recite at large Whereas Hugh Spenser the Father and Hugh Spenser the Sonne late at the suite of Thomas then Earle of Lancaster and Leycester and Steward of England by the common assent and vote of the Peers and Commons of the Realme and by the assent of King Edward Father to our Soveraigne Lord the King that now is AS TRAITORS ENEMIES OF THE KING OF THE REALME were Exiled disinherited and banished out of the Realme for ever And afterward the same Hugh by evill Councell which the king had about him without the assent of the Peeres and Commons of the Realme came againe into the Realme and they with other procured the said king to pursue the said Earle of Lancaster and other great men and people of the Realme in which pursuite the said Earle of Lancaster and other great men and people of the Realme were willingly dead and disinherited and some outlawed banished and disinherited and some disinherited and imprisoned and some ransommed and disherited and after such mischiefe the said Hugh and Hugh Master Robert Baldâ—cke and Edmâ—nd Earle of Arundell usurped to them the Royall power so that the king nothing did nor would doe but as the said Hugh and Hugh Robâ—rt and Edmond Earle of Arundell did councell him were it never so great wrong during which usurpation by duresse and force against the Will of the Commons they purchased Lands as well by fines levied in the Court of the said Edward as otherwise and whereas after the death of the said Earle of Lancaster and other great men our Soveraigne Lord the King that now is and Dame Isabel Queene of England his Mother by the Kings will and Common Councell of the Realme went over to France to treate of peace betweene the two Realmes of England and France upon certaine debates then moved The said Hugh and Hugh Robert and Edmond Earle of Arundell continuing in their mischiefe encouraged the king against our Soveraigne Lord the king that now is his sonne and the said Queene his wife and by royall power which they had to them encroached as afore is said procured so much grievance by the assent of the said King Edward to our Soveraigne Lord the King that now is and the Queene his mother being in so great jeopardy of themselves in a strange Country and seeing the Destruction Dammage Oppressions and Distractions which were notoriously done in the Realme of England upon holy Church Prelates Earles Barons and other great men and the Commonalty by the said Hugh and Hugh Robert and Edmond Earle of Arundell by the encroaching of the said royall power to them to take as good Councell therein as they might And seeing they might not remedie the same unlesse they came into England with an Army of men of warre and by the Grace of God with such puissance and with the helpe of great men and Commons of the Realme they have vanquished and destroyed the sayd Hugh and Hugh Robert and Edmond Wherefore our Soveraigne Lord King Edward that now is at his Parliament holden at Westmiuster at the time of his Coronation the morrow after Candlemas in the first yeare of his reigne upon certaine Petitions and requests made unto him in the said Parliament upon such Articles above rehearsed by the common councell of the Prelates Earles Barons and other great men and by the Commonalty of the Realme there being by his Commandment hath provided ordained and stablished in forme following First that no great man or other of what estate dignity or condition he be that came with the said king that now is and with the Queene his mother into the Realme of England and none other dwelling in England who came with the said king that now is and with the Queene In ayde of them to pursue their said enemies in which pursuite the King his Father was taken and put in ward and yet remaineth in ward shall not be molested impeached or grieved in person or goods in the kings Court or other Court for the pursuite of the said king taking and with holding of his body nor pursuite of any other nor taking of their persons goods nor death of any man or any other things perpetrate or committed in the said pursuite from the day the said king and Queene did arme till the day of the Coronation of the same king and it is not the kings minde that such offenders that committed any trespasse or other offence out of the pursuites should goe quit or have advantage of this statute but they shall be at their answere for the same at the Law Item that the repeale of the said Exile which was made by Dures and force be adâ—ulled for evermore and the said Exile made by award of the Peeres and Commons by the kings assent as before is said shall stand in his strength in all points after the tenure of every particular therein contained Item that the Executors of the Testament of all those that were of the same quarrell dead shall have actions and recover the Goods and Chattels of them being of the said quarrell whose executors they be as they of the same quarrell should c. Certainely here was an higher pursuite and levying warre against the King and his evill Councellors then any yet attempted by this Parliament and a warre rather offensive then defensive in which the king himself was both taken and detained Prisoâ—r and then forced to resigne his Crowne to his sonne yet this is here justified as a necessary just and lawfull warre by an Act of Parliament never yet repealed and all that bare Armes
the honour of God the Salvation of the King for if the Kingdome perish or miscarry the king as king must needs perish with it the maintenance of his Crowne supported onely by the maintenance of the kingdomes welfare and the Salvation and common profit of all the Realm and this being one of the first solemne judgements if not the very first given in Parliament after the making of the statute of 25 E. 3. which hath relation to its clause of levying war must certainely be the best exposition of that Law which the Parliament onely ought to interpret as is evident by the statute of 21. R. 2. c. 3. It is ordained and stablished that every man which c. or he that raiseth the people and riseth against the King to make warre within his Realme and of that be duly attainted and judged in the Parliament shall be judged as a Traytor of High Treason against the Crowne and other forecited Acts and if this were no Treason nor Rebellion nor Trespasse in the Barons against the king or kingdome but a warre for the honour of God the salvation of the king the maintenance of his Crowne the safety and common profit of all the Realme much more must our Parliaments present defensive warre against his Majesties ill Councellors Papists Malignants Delinquents and men of desperate fortunes risen up in Armes against the Parliament Lawes Religion Liberties the whole Kingdomes peace and welfare be so too being backed with the very same and farre better greater authority and more publike reasons then their warre was in which the safety of Religion was no great ingredient nor the preservation of a Parliament from a forced dissolution though established and perpetuated by a publike Law King Henry the 4 th taking up Armes against King Richard and causing him to be Articled against and judicially deposed in and by Parliament for his Male-administration It was Enacted by the Statute of 1. Hen 4. cap. 2. That no Lord Spirituall nor Temporall nor other of what estate or condition that he be which came with King Henry into the Realme of England nor none other persons whatsoever they be then dwelling within the same Realme and which came to this King in aide of him to pursue them which were against the Kings good intent and the COMMON PROFIT OF THE REALME in which pursuit Richard late King of England the second after the Conquest was pursued taken and put in Ward and yet remaineth in Ward be impeached grieved nor vexed in person nor in goods in the Kings Court nor in none other Court for the pursuites of the said King taking and with-holding of his body nor for the pursuits of any other taking of persons and cattells or of the death of a man or any other thing done in the said pursuite from the day of the said King that now is arived till the day of the Coronation of Our said Soveraigne Lord Henry And the intent of the King is not that offendors which committed Trespasses or other offences out of the said pursuits without speciall warrant should be ayded nor have any advantage of this Statute but that they be thereof answerable at the Law If those then who in this offensive Warre assisted Henry the 4 th to apprehend and depose this persidious oppressing tyrannicall king seduced by evill Counsellors and his owne innate dis-affection to his naturall people deserved such an immunity of persons and goods from all kinds of penalties because though it tended to this ill kings deposition yet in their intentions it was really for the common profit of the Realme as this Act defines it No doubt this present defensive Warre alone against Papists Delinquents and evill Counsellors who have miserably wasted spoiled sacked many places of the Realme and fired others in a most barbarous maner contrary to the Law of Armes and Nations and labour to subvert Religion Laws Liberties Parliaments and make the Realm a common Prey without any ill intention against his Majesties Person or lawfull Royall Authority deserves a greater immunity and can in no reasonable mans judgement be interpreted any Treason or Rebellion against the king or his Crowne in Law or Conscience In the 33. yeare of king Henry the 6 th a weake Prince wholly guided by the Queene and Duke of Somerset who ruled all things at their wills under whose Government the greatest part of France was lost all things went to ruine both abroad and at home and the Queene much against the Lords and Peoples mindes preferring the Duke of Sommerset to the Captain ship of Calice the Commons and Nobility were greatly offended thereat saying That he had lost Normandy and so would he doâ— Calice Hereupon the Duke of Yorke the Earles of Warwicke and Salisbury with other their adherents raised an Army in the Marches of Wales and Marched with it towards London to suppresse the Duke of Sommerset with his Faction and reforme the Governement The king being credibly informed hereof assembled his Host and marching towards the Duke of Yorke and his Forces was encountred by them at Saint Albanes notwithstanding the kings Proclamation to keepe the Peace where in a set Battell the Duke of Somerset with divers Earles and 800. others were slaine on the kings part by the Duke of Yorke and his companions and the kingâ—â— a manner defeate The Duke after this Victory obtained remembring that he had oftentimes declared and published abroad The onely cause of this War to be THE ADVANCEMENT OF THE PUBLIKE WEALE and TO SET THE REALME IN A MORE COMMODIOVS STATE and BETTER CONDITION Vsing all lenity mercy and bounteousnesse would not once touch or apprehend the body of King Henry whom he might have slaine and utterly destroyed considering that hee had him in his Ward and Governance but with great honour and due reverence conveyed him to London and so to Westminster where a Parliament being summoned and assembled soone after It was therein Enacted That no person should either judge or report any point of untruth of the Duke of Yorke the Earles of Salisbury and Warwicke For comming in Warlike manner against the King at Saint Albanes Considering that their attempt and enterprise Was onely to see the Kings Person in Safeguard and Sure-keeping and to put and Alien from Him the publike Oppressors of the Common wealth by whose misgovernance his life might be in hazard and his Authority hang on a very small Thred After this the Duke and these Earles raised another Army for like purpose and their owne defence in the 37 and 38 yeares of H. 6. for which they were afterwards by a packed Parliament at Coventree by their Enemies procurement Attainted of high Treason and their Lands and Goods confiscated But in the Parliament of 39. H. 6. cap. 1. The said attainder Parliament with all Acts and Statutes therein made were wholly Reversed Repealed annulled as being made â—y the excitation and procurement of seditious ill disposed Persons for the
not have done in point of Law Iustice Honour Conscience had they beene Rebells or Traytors for standing on their guards and making defensive Warres onely for their owne and their Religions preservation but likewise by two severall publike Acts of Parliament the one in England the other in Scotland declaring the Scots late taking up Armes against him and his evill Counsellors in defence of their Religion Lawes Priviledges to be no Treason nor Rebellion and them to bee his true and loyall Subjects notwithstanding all aspertions cast upon them by the Prelaticall and Popish Party because they had no ill or disloyall intention at all against his Majesties Person Crowne and Dignity but onely a care of their owne preservation and the redresse of thâ—se Enormities Pressures grievances in Church and State which threatned desolation unto both If then their seizing of the Kings Fortes Ammunition Revenues and raising an Army for the foresaid ends hath by his Majesty himselfe and his two Parliaments of England and Scotland beene resolved and declared to be no Treason no Rebellion at all against the King by the very same or better reason all circumstances duely pondered our Parliaments present taking up Armes and making a Defensive Warre for the endes aforesaid neither is nor can be adjudged Treason or Rebellion in point of Law or Iustice In fine the King himself in his Answer to the 19. Propositions of both Houses Iune 3. 1642. Confesseth and calleth God to witnesse That all the Rights of his Crowne are vested in him for his Subjects sake That the Prince may not make use of his high and perpetuall power to the hurt of those for whose good he hath it nor make use of the name of publike Necessity for the gaine of his private Favourites and Followers to the detriment of his people That the House of Commons may impeach those who for their owne ends though countenanced with any surreptitiously gotten Command of the King have violated that Law which he is bound when he knowes it to protect and to protection of which they were bound to advise him at least Not to serve him in the Contrary let the Cavalleers and others consider this and the Lords being trusted with a Iudiciary power are an excellent screene and banke betweene the King and people to assist each against any Incroachments of the other and by just Iudgements to preserve that Law which ought to be the Rule of every one of the three Therefore the power Legally placed in both Houses Being more then sufficient to prevent and restraine the power of Tyranny by his Majesties owne Confession it must needs be such a power as may legally inable both Houses when Armes are taken up against them by the King or any other to subvert Lawes Liberties Religion and introduce an Arbitrary government not onely to make Lawes Ordinances and Assessements but likewise to take up Armes to defend and preserve themselves their Lawes Liberties religion and to prevent restraine all forces raysed against them to set up Tyranny else should they want not onely a more then sufficient but even a sâ—fficient necessary power to prevent and restraine the power of Tyranny which being once in armes cannot bee restraned and prevented repulsed with Petitions Declarations Lawes Ordinances or any Paper Bulwarkes and Fortifications or other such probable or possible meanes within the Parliaments power but onely by Armes and Militarie Forces as reason and experience in all Ages manifest From all which pregnant punctuall domesticke Authorities and resolutions of Ancient Moderne and present times I presume I may infallibly conclude That the Parliaments present taking up necessary Defensive Armes is neither Treason nor Rebellion in iudgement of Law but a iust and lawfull Act for the publicke benefit and preservation of King Kingdome Parliament Lawes Liberties Religion and so neither their Generall Souldiers nor any person whatsoever imployed by them in this War or contributing any thing towards its maintenance are or can be Legally indicted prosecuted or in any manner proceeded against as Traitors Rebels Delinquents against the King or Kingdome and that all Proclamations Declarations Indictments or proceedings against them or any of them as Traitors Rebels or Delinquents are utterly unlawfull iniust and ought to be reversed as meere Nullities It would be an infinite tedious labour for me to relate what Civilians and Canonists have written concerning Warre and what Warre is just and lawfull what not In briefe they all generally accord That no Warre may or ought to be undertaken cut of covetousnesse lust ambition cruelty malice desire of hurt revenge or for booty propter praedam enim militare peccatum est Whence Joh Baptist Luke 3. 14. gave this answer to the Souldiers who demanded of him what shall we doe Doe violence to no man neither accuse any man falsly and be content with your wages Ne dum sumptus quaeritur praedo grassetur Which prooves the Warres of our plundring pillaging Cavalleers altogether sinnefull and unjust And that such a Warre onely is just which is waged for the good and necessary defence of the Common-wealth by publike Edict or consent or to regaine some thing which is unjustly detained or taken away and cannot otherwise be acquired or to repell or punish some injury or to curbe the insolency of wicked men or preserve good men from their uniust oppressions which Warres ought onely to be undertaken out of a desire of Peace as they prove out of Augustine Gregory Isidor Hispalensis and others In one word they all accord That a necessary defensive Warre to repulse an Injury and to preserve the State Church Republike Freedomes Lives Chastities Estates Lawes Liberties Religion from unjust violence is and ever hath beene lawfull by the Law of Nature of Nation yea By all Lawes whatsoever and the very dictate of Reason And that aâ—nâ—cessary defensive Warre is not properly a Warre but a meere Defence against an unlawfull Violence And therâ—fore mâ—st of necessitie be acknowledge lawfull because directly opposite to and the onely remedy which Gâ—d and Nature have giuen men against Tâ—rannicall and unjust invasions which are both sâ—â—nâ—full and unlawfull And so can be no Treason no Rebellion no crime at all thouâ—â— our Princes or Parents be the unjust assailâ—nts Of which see more in Hugo Groâ—ius de Iure Belli l. 2. c. 1. I shall close up the Civillians and Câ—noâ—â—â—s Opinions touching the lawfulnesse of a Defensive Warre with the words oâ— Aâ—bericâ—â—â—entilis Professor of Civill Law in the Vniversitie of Oxford in Queene Elizabeths Raigne Who in his learned Booke De Jure Belli Pacis Dedicated to the most illustrious Robert Devoreux Earle of Essex Father to the Parliaments present Lord Generall determines thus Lib. 1. caâ— 13 pag. 92. c. Although I say there be no cause of warre from nature yet there are causes for which we undertake warre by the conduct of nature as is the cause of Defence and when warre is
all Ministers being of Gods owne institution by one and the same commission is one and the same But the regall power and jurisdiction of all Kings and Monarchies in the world is not equall nor the same for some have farre greater authority then others there are many different sorts of Kings in the world some onely annuall others for life others hereditary others at will deposible at the peoples pleasures when ever they offended Such were the Kings of the Vandalls in Africk of the Gothes in Spaine cum ipsos deponerent populi quoties displicuissent such the Kings of the Heruli Procopius Gothicorum Of the Lombards Paulus Warnafredi l. 4. 6. Of the Burgundians Ammianus 11. lib. 28. Of the Moldavians Laonichus Chalcocandylas the King of Agadis among the Africans Joannis Leo lib. 7. Of the Quadi and Jazyges in excerptis Dionis with sundry others hereafter mentioned Some elective others successive some conditionall others absolute as I have plentifully mentioned in the Appendix Therefore they are not of divine ordination in the objectors sense Fiftly If Kings were of divine ordination in this sense then their kingdomes and people upon their Elections Institutions and Coronations could not justly prescribe any conditions oathes or covenants to them upon promise of performance whereof they onely accept of them to be their Kings refusing else to admit them to reigne over them and such conditions oathes covenants would be meere nullities since men have no power at all to detract from Gods owne divine institutions or to annex any conditions or restrictions to them But our Antagonists themselves dare not averre that Kingdomes and Nations upon their Kings Coronations Institutions and elections may not lawfully prescribe conditions oathes and limitations to them upon promise of performance whereof they onely submitted to them as their Soveraignes it being the received practise of our owne of all or most other Kingdomes whatsoever especially elective ones and confirmed by divine Authority 2 Chron. 10. 1. to 19. Therefore they are not of divine institution in the objected sense Sixthly All Lawyers and most Orthodox Divines determine that Kings have no other just or lawfull royall Authority but that which the Lawes and customes of their Kingdomes allot them and that the Law onely makes them Kings from which if they exorbitate they become Tyrants and cease to be Kings Their Royall authority therefore is of humane institution properly not Divine from their people who both elect constitute them Kings and give them all their regall Authority by humane Lawes enacted not from God as the onely efficient cause Seventhly All Kingdomes Monarchies Policies are mutable and variable in themselves while they continue such yea temporary and alterable into other formes of Government by publicke consent if there be just cause without any immediate command or alteration made by God himsele or his divine authority There being no positive Law of God confining any Nation whose humane earthly condition is still variable to a Monarchicall or any other constant forme of government only much lesse for perpetuity without variation Therefore they are not of divine institution in this sense Eightly St. Peter expressely defines Kings and Monarchies in respect of their institution to be humane creatures or institutions 1 Pet. 2. 13. Submit your selves to every ORDINANCE OF MAN for the Lords sake whether it be to the King as supreame c. And they are common to Pagans who know not God as well as to Christians Therefore they are not simply divine but humane Ordinances Ninethly Our Antigonists will yeeld that other formes of Government whether Aristocraticall Oligarchicall Democraticall or mixt of all three are not absolutely and immediately of divine institution nor yet Dukes Principalities with other inferior Rulers though the Apostle in this Text makes them all equally Gods Ordinance and Divine Therefore Monarchy Kings and Kingdomes are not so Tenthly The very Text it selfe seemes to intimate that Royalties and higher powers are not of God by way of originall or immediate institution or command for the Apostle saith not that all powers whatsoever were originally instituted and ordained by God himselfe but There is no power but of God The powers that be are not were at first ordained or rather ordered of God that is where powers and Governments are once erected by men through Gods generall or speciall providence there God approves and orders them for the good of men 2. If Monarchies and Kings themselves be not of divine institution and Gods ordinance in the former sense as is most apparent Aristotle Plato all Politicians grant Then they are so onely in some other sense in what I shall truely informe you First They are of God and his Ordinance by way of imitation as derived from Gods owne forme of Government which is Monarchicall Whence he is called The only God God alone the King of Kings and Lord of Lords Secondly By way of approbation He approves and allowes this kinde of Government where it is received as well as other formes Thirdly by way of direction he gives divers generall rules and directions to Kings and to other Rulers and Magistrates also as well as them in his sacred word how they ought to demeane themselves towards him and their Subjects and likewise to Subjects how they should carry themselves towards their Kings and all other Rulers and Governours temporall or spirituall in which sense they may be properly said to be ordered and ordained too of God Fourthly By way of speciall providence and incitation God excites and moves some people to make choyce of Kings and Monarchicall formes of Government rather than others and to elect one man or family to that dignity rather than others yea his providence mightily rules and swayes in the changes the elections actions counsels affaires of Monarchies Kingdomes Kings States to order them for his own glory the Kings the Subjects good or ill in wayes of Justice or Mercy as is evident by Dan. 2. 21. c. 4. 17. 25. Hos 13. 11. Jer. 27. 5 6 7. Isa 45. 1 2 3. c. 10. 5. to 20. Psal 110. 5. Psal 113. 7 8. Job 12. 18. to 25. Dan. 5. 26. 28. The genuine drift of all these Texts Fifthly Kings may be said to be of God and his Ordinance because they and so all other Rulers Judges Magistrates as well as they in respect of their representation and the true end of Government are said to be Gods to be Gods Ministers and Vicegerents to sit upon Gods Throne and ought to reigne to judge for God and to rule Gods people according to Gods Word with such justice equity integrity as God himselfe would Governe them Exod. 22. 28. 2 Chron. 9. 8. Rom. 13. 4 5. 2 Sam. 23. 3. Psal 78. 72 73 74 2 Sam. 5. 2. Prov. 8. 15 18. Psal 82. 1. 1 Cor. 8. 5. Isa 32. 1. c. 9. 7. c. 16. 5. Deut. 1. 17. Sixthly Ill Kings and Tyrants may be said
some to be Apostles some Prophets some Evangelists c. So that by their determination Ministers are more Gods Ordinance and more jure Divino then Kings yea but few years since they all professed themselves to be as much if not more Gods anointed then Kings and some of our Archest Prelates made publike challenges in the open Court That if they could not prove their Lordly Episcopacy to be Iure Divino they would presently burn their Rochets and lay down their Bishopricks though they never made good their promises to doubt whether the Pope and his supreme Authoritie be iure Divino by Christs own immediate institution deserves a fagot in the Roman Church Yet notwithstanding all this Divine Right and institution our Opposites will grant That if Popes Archbishops Bishops Priests Ministers preach false Hereticall doctrines oppresse wound slay rob plunder the people committed by God to their cares or attempt with force to subvert Religion Laws Liberties or commit any capitall offences they may not onely with safe conscience be resisted repulsed by their people but likewise apprehended arraigned deprived condemned executed by Lay Iudges as infinite examples in our Histories manifest and the example of Abiathar the High Priest 1 Kings 2. 26 27 And if so then why not Kings as well as they or other temporall Magistrates notwithstanding any of the obiected Texts Either therefore our Opposites must grant all Bishops Priests Ministers yea all other Magistrates whatsoever as irresistable uncensurable undeprivable uncondemnable for any crimes whatsoever as they say kings are which they dare not do or else make Kings as resistable censurable deprivable and lyable to all kindes of punishments by their whole Kingdoms consent in Parliament as far forth as they notwithstanding all the former Objections which quite subverts their cause Thirdly Kings and Kingdoms are not so Gods Ordinance as that they should be universall over all the world and no other Government admitted or so as any one Nation whatsoever should be eternally tyed to a Monarchiall Government without any power to alter it into an Aristocracy or other form upon any occasion or so as unalterably to continue the Soveraign power in one family alone as not to be able to transfer it to another when the whole State shall see just cause Hereditary Kingdoms being but Offices of publike trust for the peoples good and safety as well as elective most of them were elective at first and made hereditary onely either by violent usurpation or the peoples voluntary assents and institution and not by any immediate divine Authority and so alterable by their joynt assents as Zuinglius Buchanon Mariana observe and the Histories of most Kingdoms the experience of all ages evidence Which truths being generally confessed by all Polititians Historians Statists by many judicious Divines contradicted by no one text of Scripture that I have met with which our Opposites have objected hitherto they will finde all Monarchies upon the matter to be meer humane Institutions alterable still by that humane Power which did at first erect them and subordinate still thereto as the Creature to its Creator and to be Gods Ordinance onely in regard of speciall providence and the like as other inferiour Magistrates Rulers are who may be justly resisted altered removed censured notwithstanding the objected Text. From which whiles some men earnestly presse that every soul by Gods own Ordinance ought to be subject to some publike civill power which others safely deny fince the Patriarks the first families of most Nations and Countries were not so and all Nations all people before setled publike governments were erected which in many places are not very ancient since those whose Parents are dead and are not by them subjected to a Government are naturally free and none bound to part with their freedom to any other unlesse they see a necessitie a great advantage and that upon such terms and conditions as they deem meet they involve even Kings and Emperours themselves by Gods own Ordinance in a subiection to a superiour earthly civill power to wit to their Laws Parliaments Kingdoms which I have proved Paramount them collectively considered according to the common proverbe Omne sub Regno graviore Regnum est and that of Solomon concerning oppressing Kings and Judges He that is higher then the Highest considers and there be higher then they And so make kings not onely resistble by their whole Kingdoms the supreme Soveraign power but likewise subiect to their Realms superiour commands and uncapable to resist their lawfull power and Forces even in point of Conscience by vertue of this very Text. And so much for the fourth Question For the fifth and last What kinde of resistance of the Higher powers is here prohibited I answer briefly That resistance is here forbidden which is contrary to subiection or obedience as the words Let every soul be subject to the higher Powers coupled with the ensuing reason Whosoever therefore resisteth that is disobeyeth or is not subiect to the Power resisteth the Ordinance of God and they that resist shall receive to themselves damnation In the Greek there are two distinct words used 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Latine English French Dutch use them both as one without distinction The first word signifies properly disordered counter-ordered or ordered against as Paraeus Willet and others observe and it is thus used by the Apostle 2 Thess 3. 6 7 11 or disobedient 1 Tim. 1. 9. The later word signifieth properly to resist withstand or oppose in which sence it is used Matth. 5. 39. Luke 21. 1 5. Act. 6. 10. Rom. 9. 19. Gal. 2. 11. 2 Tim. 3. 1. Hebr. 12. 4. Iam. 4. 7. chap. 5. 6. 1 Pet. 5. 9. and applied indifferently both to a spirituall corporall and verball resistance of the Holy Ghost the Devill or men Since then the Apostle in this Text useth the Hebrew phrase Soul not Man Let every Soul be subject to the Higher Powers because as Haymo Tollet Willet Soto and most other Interpreters observe we ought willingly and cheerfully to submit to the higher Powers not only with our bodies but soules and spirits too I may hence cleerly inferre that the resistance of the higher Power hee prohibited as contrary to this subjection is not only that which is corporall and violent by force of armes as the Objectors glosse it but that likewise which is verball mentall spirituall in the soule it selfe without the body and no more then a meer passive resistance or not obeying For not to doe what the higher Powers enjoyn is in verity actually to resist to withstand them as not to doe the will not to yeeld obedience to the motions dictates of the Holy Ghost or devill is really to resist them even in Scripture phrase Yea corporall resistance or opposition by way of force is only an higher degree of resistance but not the onely or proper resistance here prohibited which
defensive Arms by subjects in certains cases Sleidan Hist lib. 8. 18. 22. David Chrytraus Chron. Saxoniae l. 13. p. 376. Richardus Dinothus de Bello Civili Gallico Religionis caeusasuscepto p. 231. 232. 225. 227 c. A book intituled De Iure Belli Belgici Hagae 1599. purposely justifying the lawfulnesse of the Low-countries defensive war Emanuel Meteranus Historia Belgica Praefat. lib. 1 to 17. David Paraeus Com. in Rom. 13. Dub. 8. And. Quaest Theolog. 61. Edward Grimston his Generall History of the Netherlands l. 5. to 17. passim Hugo Grotius de Iure Belli Pacis lib. 1. cap. 4. with sundry other forraign Protestant writers both in Germany France Bohemia the Netherlands and elsewhere Iohu Knokes his Appellation p. 28. to 31. George Bucanon De Iure Regni apud Scotos with many Scottish Pamphlets justifying their late wars Ioh. Ponet once B. of Winchester his Book intituled Politick Govern p. 16. to 51. Alber. Gentilis de Iur. Belli l. 1. c. 25. l. 3. c. 9. 22. M. Goodmans Book in Q. Ma. dayes intituled How superior Magistrates ought to be obeyed c. 9. 13. 14. 16. D. A. Willet his Sixfold Commentary on Romanes 13. Quaestion 16. Controversie 3. p. 588 589 590 608 c. Peter Martyr Com In Rom. 13 p. 1026. with sundry late writers common in every mans hands iustifying the lawfulnesse of the present defensive War whose Names I spare And lest any should think that none but Puritanes have maintained this opinion K. Iames himself in his Answer to Card. Perron iustifieth the French Protestant taking up Defensive Arms in France And Bish Bilson a fierce Antipuritane not onely defends the Lawfulnesse of the Protestants defensive Arms against their Soveraign in Germany Flaunders Scotland France but likewise dogmatically determines in these words Neither will I rashly pronounce all that resist to be Rebels Cases may fall out even in Christian Kingdoms where the people may plead their right against the Prince AND NOT BE CHARGED WITH REBELLION As wherefor example If a Prince should go about to subject his People to a forreign Realm or change the form of the Common-wealth from Impery to Tyrannie or neglect the Laws established by Common consent of Prince and people to execute his own pleasure In these and other caeses which might be named IF THE NOBILITY AND COMMONS IOYN TOGETHER TO DEFEND THEIR ANCIENT AND ACCVSTOMED LIBERTY REGIMENT AND LAWS THEY MAY NOT WELL BE COVNTED REBELS I never denied but that the People might preserve the foundation freedom and forme of the Common-wealth which they fore prised when they first consented to have a King As I said then so I say now The Law of God giveth no man leave but I never said that Kingdoms and Common-wealths might not proportion their States as they thought best by their publike Laws which afterward the Princes themselves may not violate By supertour Powers ordained of God Rom. 13. we understand not onely Princes BVT ALL POLITIKE STATES AND REGIMENTS somewhere the People somewhere the Nobles having the same interest to the sword that Princes have to their Kingdoms and in Kingdoms where Princes bear rule by the sword we do not mean THE PRIVATE PRINCES WILL AGAINST HIS LAWS BVT HIS PRECEPT DERIVED FROM HIS LAWES AND AGREEING WITH HIS LAWES Which though it be wicked yet may it not be resisted of any subject when derived from and agreeing with the Laws with armed violence Marry when Princes offer their Subjects not Iustice but force and despise all Laws to practise their lusts not every nor any private man may take the sword to redresse the Prince but if the Laws of the Land appoint the Nobles as next to the King to assist him in doing right and withhold him from doing wrong THEN BE THEY LICENCED BY MANS LAW AND NOT PROHIBITED BY GODS to interpose themselves for safeguard of equity and innoceucy and by all lawfull AND NEEDFVLL MEANS TO PROCVRE THE PRINCE TO BE RE FORMED but in no case deprived where the Scepter is Hereditary So this learned Bishop determines in his authorized Book dedicated to Queen Elizabeth point-blank against our Novell Court-Doctors and Royallists But that which swayes most with me is not the opinions of private men byassed oft-times with private sinister ends which corrupt their judgements as I dare say most of our Opposites in this controversie have writ to flatter Princes to gain or retain promotions c. But the generall universall opinion and practice of all Kingdoms Nations in the world from time to time Never was there any State or Kingdom under heaven from the beginning of the world till now that held or resolved it to be unlawfull in point of Law or Coscience to resist with force of Arms the Tyranny of their Emperours Kings Princes especially when they openly made war or exercised violence against them to subvert their Religion Laws Liberties State Government If ever there were any Kingdom State People of this opinion or which forbore to take up Arms against their Tyrannous Princes in such cases even for conscience sake I desire our Antagonists to name them for though I have diligently searched inquired after such I could never yet finde or hear of them in the world but on the contrary I finde all Nations States Kingdoms whatsoever whether Pagan or Christian Protestant or Popish ancient or modern unanimously concurring both in iudgement and constant practice that forcible resistance in such cases is both iust lawfull necessary yea a duty to be undertaken by the generall consent of the whole Kingdom State Nation though with the effusion of much blood and hazard of many mens lives This was the constant practise of the Romans Grecians Gothes Moors Indians AEgyptians Vandals Spaniards French Britains Saxons Italians English Scots Bohemians Polonians Hungarians Danes Swedes Iews Flemmins and other Nations in former and late ages against their Tyrannicall oppressing Emperors Kings Princes together with the late defensive Wars of the protestants in Germany Bohemia France Swethland the Low-countries Scotland and elsewhere against their Princes approved by Queen Elizabeth king Iames and our present king Charles who assisted the French Bohemians Dutch and German Protestant Princes in those Wars with the unanimous consent of their Parliaments Clergy people abundantly evidence beyond all contradiction which I have more particularly manifested at large in my Appendix and therefore shall not enlarge my self further in it here onely I shall acquaint you with these five Particulars First that in the Germanes Defensive Wars for Religion in Luthers dayes the Duke of Saxonie the Lantzgrave of Hesse the Magistrates of Magdeburge together with other Protestant Princes States Lawyers Cities Counsellors and Ministers after serious consultation coneluded and resolved That the Laws of the Empire permitted resistance of the Emperour to the Princes and Subjects in some cases that defence of Religion and Liberties then invaded was one of these caeses that the times were
would favour and bring to a good end SO HOLY AND NECESSARY AN ENTERPRIZE This their defensive Warre yet continuing hath been justified by many and in speciall maintained to be just and honorable BOTH IN LAW AND CONSCIENCE in a particular Book De jure Belli Belgici printed at the Hague with the States approbation 1599. to which I shall referre you Fifthly which comes neerest to our present case of any story I have met with Alphonso the 3. king of Arragon in the year 1286. through the ill advise of some bad Counsellors and Courtiers about him departed in discontent from the Parliament of the Estates of Arragon then assembled at Saragossa and posted to Osca because the Parliaments took upon them to make Lawes to reforme and order his Court his Courtiers which he denyed but they affirmed they had just right and power to doe Hereupon the businesse being put unto greater difficulty the Estates affirmed A Comitiis intempestive discedere Regi NEFAS ESSE That IT WAS A WICKED ACT FOR THE KING THVS VNSEASONABLY TO DEPART FROM THE PARLIAMENT NEITHER WAS SO GREAT A BREACH OF THEIR PRIVILEDGES AND RIGHTS TO BE PATIENTLY ENDVRED Whereupon they presently raised up the Name and FORCES OF THE VNION or Association formerly made and entred into between the Nobility Cities and people mutually to aid and assist one another to preserve the Peace and Liberties of the Realm even with force of Armes IT BEING LAWFVLL for the common cause of Liberty Non Verbis solum SED ARMIS QVOQVE CONTENDERE not onely TO CONTEND with words BVT ALSO WITH ARMES Vpon this king Alphonso desirous to prevent the mischiefs them present and incumbent by advise of his Privy Counsell published certaine good Edicts at Osca for regulating his Court Counsell Iudges Officers by which he thought to have ended all this Controversie but because they were promulged onely by the Kings own Edict not by the whole Parliament as binding Lawes they still proceeded in the Vnion till at last after various events of things this King returning to the Generall Assembly and Parliament of the Estates at Saragossa in the year 1287 condessended to their desires and confirmed the two memorable priviledges of the Vnion with the Soveraign power of the Iustice of Aragon which could controll their very Kings Of which see more in the Appendix I shall close up this of the lawfulnesse of a necessary defensive warre with the speech of the Emperour Alexander Seuerus recorded by Herodian l. 5. He who first infers injuries hath no probable colour but he that repulseth those who are troublesome to him EX BONA CONSCENTIA sumit fiduciam assumes confidence FROM A GOOD CONSCIENCE and good hope of successe is present with him from hence that he offers not injury but removes it Thus have I now at last waded thorow this weighty controversie of the lawfulnesse both in point of Law and Conscience of the Parliaments present and all other subjects necessary Defensive Warres against their Soveraigns who invade their lawes liberties Religion Government to subvert them by open force of Armes in which I have freely and impartially discharged my conscience not out of any turbulent seditious or disloyall intention to forment or perpetuate the present or raise any future destructive unnaturall warres between king Parliament and People or to countenance to encourage any tumultuous rebellious factious ambitious traiterous spirits to mutiny or rebell against their Soveraigns for private injuries or upon any false unwarrantable ends or pretences whatsoever let Gods curse and mens for ever rest upon all those who are in love with any warre especially a Civill within their own dearest Countries bowels or dare abuse my loyall sincere Lucubrations to any disloyall sinister designes to the prejudice of their Soveraignes or the States wherein they live but only out of a cordiall desire to effect such a speedy honourable safe religious semplternall peace between king and Parliament as all true Christian English hearts both cordially pray long for and endeavour by informing his seduced Majesty his evill Counsellors his Popish Malignant Forces that if they will still proceed unnaturally and treacherously to make war against their Native Countrey Religion Lawes Liberties and the Parliament which to doe I have elsewhere manifested to be no lesse then high Treason Rebellion against both King and Kingdome they may in point of conscience and Law too be justly opposed resisted repulsed even by force of Armes without any guilt of Treason Rebellion or feare of temporall or eternall condemnation as publike Enemies Rebels Traytors to the Realm whatevever they have hitherto been informed of to the contrary by temporizing Lawyers or flattering illiterate Court Divines and by assuring all such noble generous publike spirits who shall willingly adventure their lives or fortunes by the Parliaments command in the present necessary defensive warre for the ends premised that for this good service they shall neither in the Courts of Law nor Conscience incurre the least stain or guilt of Treason Rebellion sedition or any such like odious crime much lesse eternall condemnation the panick feare whereof frequently denounced against them by many sottish Malignants Royalists ill-instructed Lawyers and Theologasters hath frighted kept back and withdrawn multitudes from yea cooled corrupted many in this honourable publike duty service which they now owe of Right to God and their Countrey in which to be treacherous perfidious sloathfull negligent cold uncordiall or timerous as too many hitherto have been to the greater honour of those who haue been faithfull actiue Valiant and sincere especially now after so many late horrid treacheries most happily discouered and a new Couenant solemnly entred into demerits a perpetuall brand of infamy and reproach To dye fighting for ones dearest bleeding dying Countrey hath in all ages been honoured with a Crown of Martyrdome to liue or dye fighting against it hath ever deserved the most capitall censures ignominies and heaviest execrations Let both sides therefore now seriously ponder and lay all the premises close to their soules consciences and then I doubt not through Gods blessing but a happy peace will speedily thereon ensue Nation shall not lift up sword against Nation Countrey against Countrey Englishman against Englishman Brother against brother any more as now they doe neither shall they learn such an unnaturaall cursed kind of Civill Warre any more but beat their swords into Plow-shares and their speares into pruning hooks and greet one another with a kisse of holy peace and charity Which desired end and issue of these present bloudy warres God in his mercy hasten and accomplish to the joy of all our Soules I should now according to former engagements proceed to other remaining particulars but because this part hath already farre exceeded its intended bounds out of a desire to give full satisfaction in a point of highest present and future concernment every way I shall reserve the residue with the Appendix for another
Barbarous Inhumanity for any person not to put to his uttermost strength speedily to close up the mortall wounds of his bleeding dying Native Country but to protract its cure to enlarge encrease its deadly Ulcers Stabs Sores and make a lasting trade of Warre out of a sordid sinfull desire of Gaine of Plunder to raise a private fortune by the Republicks ruines a sinne of which some perchance are guilty is an unparalleld most unnaturall prodigious Impiety It was thought a great dishonour heretofore for men of Honour and Estates not to serve and defend their Country gratis as our own Lawbooks Histories plentifully manifest and shall such Persons now turne sordid Mercenaries stirre neither hand nor foot without their Pay and be more diligent to get their wages than discharge their Service God forbid It is Recorded of the Children of Gad and Reuben after they had recovered their inheritance on this side Jordan that they went all up armed before the Lord over Jordan at their owne free cost untill they had driven out all the enemies in it before them subdued the Land and setled their brethren of the other Tribes peaceably in it And shall not Englishmen of Estates doe the like for their Brethren now in these times of need when money the sinewes of Warre is almost quite shrunke up by reason of former Disbursements and want of Trade We read That the very Heathen Kings of Canaan when they came and fought in Taanach by the waters of Megiddo against the Israelites THEY TOOKE NO GAINE OF MONEY for their paines Such was their Noble-generosity which Deborah registers in her Song for their eternall Glory And we heare of divers Lords and Gentlemen in the Kings Army which serve against their Country gratis yea furnish out sundry Horse and Foote of their proper cost of few or none such there who receive any Pay And shall these be more free generous active in serving fighting against God Religion Lawes Liberties Parliament and their Country than those of like Ranke and quality on the Parliaments party are in warring for them O let not such anignoble unchristian Report be ever once justly told in Gath or published in the streets of Askelon lest the daughters of the Philistines rejoyce lest the sonnes and daughters of the uncircumcised triumph I know there are some Heroicke Worthies in the Parliaments Armies of whom I may truely sing with Deborah My heart is toward the Governours of Israel that offered themselves willingly among the people and who like Zebulon and Nepthali have freely jeoparded their lives unto the death in the high places of the field Blessed be their Endeavours and their Names for ever Honourable I shall now onely wish that others would imitate their laudable examples that so our long-lingring warres may be speedily and happily determined in a blessed pure pious secure honourable lasting Peace They are Tormentors not Chirurgions Executioners not true Souldiers who desire endeavour not speedily to close up and heale their dearest Countries bleeding festring wounds for which I have prepared this Treatise as a Soveraigne Balme to incarne and cicatrize them not ulcerate or inflame them It was the Prophets Patheticke expostulation The harvest is past the Summer is ended and we are not healed Is there no balme in Gilead Is there no Physitian there why then is not the health of the Daughter of my people recovered It may be Englands and Irelands expostulation now The Lord put it into the hearts of our great Physitians the King Parliament and Grandees of both Armies that they may now at last with bleeding melting hearts and spirits speedily poure forth such effectuall healing Balmes into these two dying Kingdomes deadly wounds as may effectually cure and restore them to more perfect health and vigor than they ever formerly enjoyed that so they may lose nothing but their putrid blood their proud dead flesh their filthy sanies and corrupt humours by their unnaturall stabs already received Towards the advancement of which much desired cure if these my undigested rude Collections interrupted with sundry inevitable interloping Distractions which may justly excuse their many defects may adde any contribution or satisfie any seduced or scrupulous Consciences touching this present Warre I shall deeme my labours highly recompensed And so recommending them to Gods blessing and thy charitable acceptation I shall detaine thee with no further Prologue Farewell THE SOVERAIGNE POVVER OF PARLIAMENTS KINGDOMES PROVING I st That the Parliaments present necessary Defensive Warre is Iust and Lawfull both in point of Law and Conscience and no Treason nor Rebellion HAving in the two former Parts of this Discourse dissipated foure chiefe Complaints against the Parliaments proceedings I come now in order in point of time and sequell to the 5 th Grand Objection of the King Royalists and Papists against the Parliament To wit That they have traiterously taken up Armes and levied warre against the King himselfe in his Kingdome and would have taken away his life at Keinton battell which is no lesse than Rebellion and High Treason by the Statute of 25. E. 3. c. 2. with other obsolete Acts and by the Common Law Which Obiection though last in time is yet of greatest weight and difficulty now most cryed up and insisted on of all the rest in many of his Majesties late Proclamations Declarations and in Anti-Parliamentary Pamphlets To give a punctuall Answere to this capitall Complaint not out of any desire to foment but cease this most unnaturall bloody warre which threatens utter desolation to us if proceeded in or not determined with a just honourable secure lasting peace now lately rejected by his Majesties party I say First that it is apparent to all the world who are not willfully or maliciously blinded That this Majesty first began this warre not onely by his endeavors to bring up the Northerne Army to force the Parliament confessed by the flight letters examinations of those who were chiefe Actors in it but by raising sundry forces under colour of a guard before the Parliament levied any Secondly that the Parliament in raising their forces had no intention at all to offer the least violence to his Majesties person Crowne dignity nor to draw any English blood but onely to defend themselves and the Kingdome against his Majesties Malignant invasive plundring Forces to rescue his Majestie out of the hands the power of those ill Councellers and Malignants who withdrew him from his Parliament to bring him backe with honour peace safety to his great Councell their Generall and Army Marching with a Petition to this purpose and to bring those Delinquents to condigne punishment who most contemptuously deserted the Houses contrary to Order Law the Priviledges of Parliament their owne Protestation taken in both Houses sheltring themselves under the power of his Majesties presence and Forces from the justice of the Houses and apprehension of their Officers contrary to
tilting blame themselves aloâ—e and have no other just legall remedie but patience it being neither Treason Rebellion nor Murther in the defensive party and most desperate folly and frenzie in any Prince to engage himselfe in such a danger when beneede not doe it I reade of Charles the first of France that he fell sodainely destracted upon a message he recâ—ived from an old poore man as he was marching in the head of his Army and thereupon thinking himselfe bâ—trayâ—d encountred his owne men and slew two or three of them ere they were ware of him woâ—nding others Whereupon they closing with him disâ—rmed and led him away foâ—ceably keeping him close shut up like à Bedlaâ— till he recovered his sensâ—s I thinke no man in his right wits will deeme this their action Treasonable or unlawfull neither did the king or any in that age thus repute it If then a King in an angry franticke passion for Ir. brevius furor est shall take up Armes against his loyall Subjects and assault their persons to murther them and spoyle their goods if they by common consent in Parliament especially shall forcibly resist disarme or restraine his person till his fury be appeased and his judgement rectified by better councells shall this be Treason Rebellion or Disloyaltie God forbid I thinke none but mad men can or will averte it It was a great doubt in Law till the statute of 33. H. 8. c. 20. setled it If a party that had committed any high Treasons when he was of perfect memory after accusation examination and confession thereof became madde or lunaticke whether he should bâ— tried and condemned for it during this distemper And some from that very act and 21. H. 7. 31. 36. Ass 27. 12. H. 3. For faiture 33 and Dower 183. Fitz. Nat. Br. 202. D. Stamford Pleas 16. b. and Cooke l. 4. f. 124. Beverlyes case which resolve â—hat a Lunaticke or Non Compos cannot be guilty of murtheâ— fel nâ—y â—â—petite Treason because having no understanding and knowing not what he doth he can â—ave nâ— follonius intention conceive that a reall mad-man cannot be guilty of high Treason though Sir Edward Cooke in Bevâ—rlies case be of a contrary opinion if he should assault or kill his king And I suppose few will deeme Walter Terrils casuall killing of King William Rufus with the glance of his arrow from a tree shot at a Deere high Treason neither was it then reputed so or he prosecuted as a Traytor for it because he had no malicious intention as most thinke against the King or any thought to hurt him But I conceive it out of question if a king in a distracted furious passion without just cause shall invade his subjects persons in an open hostile manner to destroy them it neither is nor can be Treason ner Rebellion in them if in their owne necessary defence alone they shall either casually wound or slay him contrary to their loyall intentions and those Statutes and Law-bookâ—s which judge it high Treason for any one maliciously and trayterously to imagine compasse or conspire the death of the King will not at all extend to such a case of meere just defence since a conspiracie or imagination to compasse or procure the Kings death can neither be justly imagined nor presumed in those who are but meerely defensive no more then in other common cases of one mans killing another in his owne inevitable defence without any precedent malice in which a Pardon by Law is granted of course however questionlesse it is no Treason nor murther at all to slay any of the kings souldiers and Cavaliers who are no kings in such a defensive warre Sixthly suppose the King should be captivated or violently led away by any forraign or domesticke enemies to him and the kingdome and carried along with them in the field to countenance their warres and invasions upon his loyallest Subjects by illegall warrants or Commissions fraudulently procured or extorted from him If the Parliament and Kingdome in such a case should raise an Army to rescue the King out of their hands and to that end encountring the enemies should casually wound the King whiles they out of loyalty sought onely to rescue him I would demaund of any Lawyer or Divine whether this Act should be deemed Treason Rebellion or Disloyalty in the Parliament or army Or which of the two Armies should in point of Law or Conscience be reputed Rebells or Traytors in this case those that come onely to rescue the King and so fight really for him indeed though against him in shew and wound him in the rescue Or those who in shew onely fought for him that they might still detaine him captive to their wills Doubtlesse there is no Lawyer nor Theologue but would presently resolve in such a case that the Parliaments Army which fought onely to rescue the King were the loyall Subjects and the Malignants army who held him captive with them the onely Rebels and traytors and that the casuall wounding of him proceeding not out of any malicious intention but love and loyalty to redeeme him from captivity were no trespasse nor offence at all being quite besides their thoughts and for a direct president It was the very case of King Henry the third who together with his sonne Prince Edward being taken Prisoner by the Earle of Leycester in the battle of Lewis and the Earle afterwards carrying him about in his Company in nature of a Prisoner to countenance his actions to the great discontent of the Prince the Earle of Glocester and other Nobles hereupon the Prince and they raising an Army encountred the Earle and his Porces in a battle at Eveshaâ— where the King was personally present slew the Earle Routed his Army and rescued the king in this cruell battell the king himselfe being wounded unawares with a Iavelin by those who rescued him was almost slaine and lost much of his blood yet in a Parliament soone after sommoned at Winchester Anno 1266. the Earle and his Army were dis-inherited as Traytors and Rebels but those who rescued them though with danger to his person rewarded as his loyall subjects And is not this the present case A company of malignant ill Councellors Delinquents Prelates Papists have withdrawne his Majestie from his Parliament raised an Army of Papists Forraigners Delinquents and Male-contents to ruin the Parliament Kingdome Religion Lawes Liberties to countenance this their designe they detaine his Majestie with them and engage him all they can on their side the Parliament out of no disloyall intention but onely to rescue his Majesties person out of their hands to apprehend delinquents preserve the Kingdome from spoyle and defend their Priviledges Persons Liberties estates religion from unjust invasions have raised a defensive Army which encountred these Forces at Edgehill where they say the King was present slew the Lord Generall Earle of Lindsey with many others and as they never intended so they
and Body After which they seeing more Strangers arrive with Horse and armes every day sent word to the King That hee should foorthwith remove Bishop Peter and all his Strangers from his Court which if he refused they all would BY THE COMMON CONSENT OF THE WHOLE REALM drive him with his wicked Counsellours out of the Realme and consult of chusing them a new King After these and some other like passages the King raysing an Army besiegeth one of the Earles Castles and not being able to winne it and ashamed to raise his Seige without gaining it he sent certaine Bishops to the Earle and requested him that since he had besieged his Castle and hee could not with Honour depart without winning it which he could not doe by force that the Earle to save his Honour would cause it to be surrended to him upon this condition That hee would restore it certainely to him within 15. dayes and that by advise of the Bishops he would amend all things amisse in his Kingdome for performance of which the Bishops became his Pledges and the King appointed a meeting at Westminster on a set day betweene Him and the Lords whereupon the Earle surrendred the Castle to the King upon Oath made by the Bishops that it should be restored at the day But the King refusing to deliver the Earle the Castle according to promise and threatning to subdue his other Castles the Earle hereupon raiseth his Forces winnes his Castle againe routs divers of the Kings Forraigne Forces at Gorsemond Monmouth and other places and invaded the lands of his Enemies Vpon this occasion Frier Agnellus or Lambe acquaints the Earle what the King together with his Counsell and Court thought of his proceedings to wit that the King said he had proceeded over traiterously and unjustly against him yet he was willing to receive him into favour if he would wholly submit himselfe to his mercy and that others held it not just safe and profitable for him to doe it because he had done wrong to the King in that before the King had invaded his Lands or Person he invaded and destroyed the Kings Lands and slew his men and if he should say he did this in defence of his body and inheritance they answered no because there was never any plot against either of them and that were it true yet he ought not thus to breake forth against the King his Lord untill hee had certaine knowledge that the King had such intensions against him ET EX TVNC LICERET TALIA ATTEMPTARE and from thenceforth he might lawfully attempt such things by the Courtiers and Friers owne Confessions Vpon which the Marshiall said to Frier Lambe To the first they say that I ought to submit my selfe because I have invaded the King it is not true because the King himselfe though I have beene ever ready to stand to the Law and judgement of my Peeres in his Court and have oft times requested it by many messengers betweene us which he alwaies denied to grant violently entred my Land and invaded it against all justice whom hoping in humility to please I freely entred into a forme of peace with him which was very prejudiciall to me wherein he granted that if on his part all things were not punctually performed toward me I should be in my pristine state before that peace conclnded namely that I should be without this homage and absolved from my allegiance to him as I was at first by the Bishop of Saint Davids Seeing then hee hath violated all the Articles of the Peace IT WAS LAWFVLL FOR ME According to my agreement to recover what was mine owne and to debilitate his power by all meanes especially seeing he endeavoured my destruction dis-inheritance and seizing of my Body of which I have certaine intelligence and am able to prove it if neede be And which is more after the 15 daies truce before I entred Wales or made any defence he deprived me of the Office of Marshall without judgement which belongs to me and I have enjoyed by Inheritance neither would he by any meanes restore mee to it though required Whence I have plainely learned that he will keepe no peace with me seeing since the Peace hee handles me worse then before Whereby I ceased to bee his Subject and was absolved from his homage by him Wherefore it was and is lawfull for me to defend my selfe and to withstand the malice of his Counsellors by all meanes And whereas the Kings Counsellors say it is profitable for me to submit to the Kings mercy because he is more rich and powerfull then I am It is true the King is richer and more potent then I but yet he is not more powerfull then God who is Iustice it selfe in whom I trust in the confirmation and prosecution of my right and of the Kingdomes And whereas they say the King can bring in Strangers of his kinred who are neither Scots nor French nor Welsh who shall make all his foes his Foot-stoole and come in such multitudes as they shall cover the face of the earth and that he can raise seven men to my one I neither trust in Strangers nor desire their confederaciei nor will I invoke their aide Vnlesse which God forbid inopinata immutabilis fuero compulsus necessitate I shall be compelied by a sudden and immutable necessity and I beleeve by his Counsells ill advise he will quickly bring in such multitudes of Strangers that he will not be able to free the Kingdome of them againe for I have learned from credible men that the Bishop of Winchester is bound to the Emperour that he will make the Kingdome of England subject to him which God in his providence avert And whereas they say That I may confide in the King and his Counsell because the King is mercifull credible c. It may well be that the King is mercifull but he is seduced be the Counsell of those by whom we feele our selves much hurt and he is Noble and credible whom God long preserve so as much as in him lies but as for his Counsell I say that no one promise made to me was ever yet kept and they have violated many corporall Oathes made to me and the Oathes they tooke for observing Magna Charta for which they remaine excommunicate and perjured Yea they are enjured concerning the faithfull Counsell which they have sworne to give to our Lord the King when as they have wilfully given him the Counsell of Achitophel against justice and corrupted the just Lawes they have sworne to keepe and introduced unusuall ones for which and for many other things for which neither God nor man ought to trust them or their complices are they not every one excommunicated Rumor de veteri faciet ventura timeri Cras poterunt fieri turtia sicut heri Falix quem faciunt aliena pericula cautum Whereas the said Counsellors of the King say that I invaded the Kings body at Gorsmund Castle before
the King had entred my Land and so I did injurie to the King for which I ought to implore his mercie least others should take example thence to raise up Armes against the King I answer that I was not there in person and if any of my Family were thereby chance they invaded onely the Family of the King not the person of the King which yet if they had done it were no wonder seeing the king came with his Army into my Land that he might invade me and oppresse me by all the meanes he could which may appeare to all by the tenor of his Letters by which hee made a generall assembly throughout England against my Army And since the premises objected against mee are false and it is true that the King hath treated me worse since the time I expected his mercy then any time before and doth yet use the same Counsell as then and since he endeavours precisely to follow their Counsels in all things by whose advise I suffer all the premised grievances I ought not to prostitute my selfe to his mercy Neither would this be for the Kings honour that I should consent unto his will which is not grounded upon reason Yea I should doe an injury to him and to Iustice which he ought to use towards his Subjects and to maintaine And I should give an ill example to all by deserting Iustice and the prosecution of right for an erronious will against all Iustice and the injury of the Subjects For by this it would appeare that we loved our worldly possessions more then Iustice it selfe And whereas the Kings Counsellours object that wee have combined with the Kings capitall enemies namely the French Scots Welsh out of hatred and dammage to king and kingdome That of the French is altogether false and that of the Scots and Welsh too excepting the king of Scots and Leoline Prince of Northwales who were not the kings enemies but faithfull friends untill by injuries offered them by the King and his Counsell they were by coertion against their wills alienated from their fidelitie as I am And for this cause I am confederated with them that we may the better being united then separated regaine and defend our rights of which we are unjustly deprived and in a great part spoiled Whereas the Kings Counsell propose that I ought not to confide in my Confederates because the King without any great hurt to his Land can easily separate them from my friendship Of this I make no great doubt but by this the iniquity of his Counsellors doth most of all appeare that in some sort they would cause the King to sustaine losse by those whom he specially calls capitall enemies to injure mee who have alwaies beene his faithfull Subject whiles I remained with him and yet would be so if he would restore to me and my friends our right Whereas the said Counsellors say that the Pope and Church of Rome doe specially love the King and kingdome and will Excommunicate all his adversaries which thing is even at the dores because they have already sent for a Legate It pleaseth mee well said the Marshall because the more they love the King and Kingdome by so much the more will they desire that the King should treat his Realme and Subjects according to justice And I am well pleased they should excommunicate the adversaries of the Kingdome because they are those who give Counsell against Iustice whom workes will manifest because Iustice and Peace have kissed each other and because of this where Iustice is corrupted Peace is likewise violated Also I am pleased that a Legate is comming because the more discreet men shall heare our justice by so much the more vilely shall the adversaries of Iustice be confounded In which notable discourse we see the lawfullnesse of a necessary defensive Warre yeelded and justified both by the King his Counsell and the Earle Marshall as well against the King himselfe if he invade his Subjects first as any of his Forces who assist him After which the Marshall slew many of his Enemies by an Ambuscado while they thought to surprise him and wasted and spoiled their goods houses lands observing this generall laudable rule which they made to doe no hurt nor ill to any one but to the Kings evill Counsellors by whom they were banished whose goods houses woods Orchards they spoiled burnt and rooted up The King remaining at Glocester heard of these proceedings of the Marshall but his forces being too weake he durst not encounter him but retired to Winchester with Bishop Peter confounded with over much shame leaving that Country to be wasted by his adversaries where innumerable carcases of those there slaine lay naked and unburied in the wayes being food to the beasts and birds of prey a sad spectacle to passengers which so corrupted the ayre that it infected and killed many who were healthy Yet the Kings heart was so hardned by the wicked councell he followed against the Marshall that the Bishops admonishing him to make peace with him WHO FOVGHT FOR IVSTISE he answered that he would never make peace with him unlesse comming with an halter about his necke and acknowledging himselfe to be a Traytor he would implore his mercy The Marshall both in England and Ireland professed that he was no Traytor that his warre being but defensive was just immutabiliter affirmant quod liâ—uit sibi de jure quod suum crat repetere posse Regis Consiliorum suorum modis omnibus quibus poterat infirmare William Rishanger in his continuation of Matthew Paris speaking of the death of Simon Monfort Earle of Leycester slaine in the Battle of Evâ—sham the greatest Pillar of the Barrons warres useth this expression Thus this magnificent Earle Symon ended his labors who not onely bestowed his estate but his person also for releiefe of the oppression of the poore for the asserting of Iustice and the right of the Realme he was commendably skilfull in learning a dayly frequenter of divine Offices constant in word severe in countenance most confiding in the prayers of Religious persons alwayes very respectfull to Ecclesiasticall persons He earnestly adheared to Robert Grosthead Bishop of Lincolne and committed his children to his education By his advise he handled difficult things attempted doubtfull things concluded things begun specially such things whereby he thought he might gaine desert Which Bishop was said to have enjoyned him as he would obtaine remission of his sinnes that he should undertake this cause for which he contended even unto death affirming that the peace of the Church of England could never be established but by them materiall sword and constantly averring THAT ALL WHO DIED FOR IT WERE CROWNED WITH MARTYRDOME Some say that this Bishop on a time laying his hand on the head of the Earles eldest sonne said unto him O most deare sonne thou and thy father shall both dye on one day and with one hand of death YET FOR JUSTICE AND TRVTH Fame
together to live and dye for justice and to their power to destroy the TRAITORS OF THE REALME Especially the two Spensers after which they raised an Army whereof they made Thomas Earle of Lancaster Generall and meeting at Sherborne they plunder and destroy the Spensers Castles Mannors Houses Friends Servants and marching to Saint Albanes with Ensignes displayed sent Messengers to the King then at London admonishing him not onely to rid his Court but Kingdome of the TRAITORS TO THE REALME the Spensers condemned by the Commons in many Articles to preserve the peace of the Realme and to grant them and all their followers Letteâ—s Pattents of indemnity for what they had formerly done Which the King at first denied but afterwards this Armie marching up to London where they were received by the City he yeelded to it and in the 15 th yeare of his Raigne by a speciall Act of Parliament the said Spensers were disinherited and banished the Realme formis-councelling the king oppressing the people by injustice a vising him to levie warre upon his Subjects making evill Iudges and other Officers to the hurt of the King and Kingdome â—ngâ—ossing the Kings eare and usurping his Royall authority as ENEMIES of the King and OF HIS PEOPLE and by another Act of Parliament it was then provided that no man should be questioned for any felonies or trespasses committed in the prosecution of Hugh â—e de pensers the father and sonne which Act runnes thus Whereas of late many great men of the Realme surmised to Sir Hugh le Despenser the sonne and Father many misdemeanors by them committed against the estate of our Lord the King and of his Crowne and to the disinheritance of the great men and destruction of the people and pursued those misdemeanors and attainder of them by force because they could not be attainted by processe of Law because that the said Sir Hughes had accroached to them the royall power in divers manner the said Grandees having mutually bound themselves by oath in writing without the advise of our Lord the King and after in pursuing the said Hugh and Hugh and their alies and adherents the said great men and others riding with banners displaied having in them the Armes of the king and their owne did take and occupie the Chattels Villages Mannors Lands Tenements Goods and likewise take and imprison some of the Kings leige people and others tooke some and slew others and did many other things in destroying the said Hugh and Hugh and their alies and others in England Wales and in the Marches whereof some things may be said Trespasses and others felonies and the said Hugh and Hugh in the Parliament of our Lord the King sommoned at Westminster three weekes after the Nativitie of Saint John Baptist the 15. yeare of his Raigne for the said misdemeanors were fore judged and banished the Realme by a vote of the Peeres of the Land and the foresaid great men in the said Parliament shewed to our Lord the King that the things done in the pursuite of the said Hugh and Hugh by reason of such causes of necessity cannot be legally redressed or punished without causing great trouble or perchance warre in the land which shall be worse and prayed our Lord that of all alliances trespasses and felonies they might be for ever acquitted for the preservation of peace the avoyding of warre and asswaging of angers and rancors and to make unitie in the land and that our Lord the King may more intirely have the hearts and Wills of the great men and of his people to maintaine and defend his Lands and to make warre upon and grieve his enemies It is accorded and agreed in the said Parliament by our Lord the King and by the Prelates Earles Barrons and Commons of the Realme there assembled by command of our Lord the King that none of what estate or condition soever he be for alliance at what time soever made by deed oath writing or in other manner nor for the taking occupying or detainer of Chattels towns Mannors Lands Tenements and good taken imprisoning or ransoming the Kings leige People or of other homicides robberies felonies or other things which may be noted as trespasses or fellonies committed against the peace of the king by the said great men their allies or adherents in the pursuite aforesaid since the first day of March last past till the thursday next after the feast of the assumption of our Ladie to wit the 19. day of August next ensuing be appealed nor challenged taken nor imprisoned nor grieved nor drawne into judgement by the King nor any other at the suite of any other which shall be in the Kings Court or in any place else but that all such trespasses and Felonies shall be discharged by this accord and assent saving alwaies to all men but to the said Hugh and Hugh action and reason to have and recover their Chattels Farmes mannors Lands tenements wards and marriages according to the Lawes and customes used in the Realme without punishment against the king or damages recovered against the party for the time aforesaid For which end they prescribed likewise a Charter of Pardon annexed to this Act according to the purport of it which every one that would might sue out which Charter you may read in old Magna Charta From which Act of Parliament I shall observe these three things First that this their taking up Armes to apprehend the Spensâ—rs as enemies to the King and kingdom and marching with banners displayd was not then reputed high Treason or Rebellion against the King though it were by way of offence not of defence and without any authority of Parliament for there is not one word of Treason or Rebellion in this Act or in the Charter of pardon pursuing it and if it had beene high Treason this Act and Charters on it extending onely to Fellonie and Trespasses not to Treasons and Rebellions would not have pardoned these transcendent Capitall crimes Secondly that the unlawfull outrages robberies and murders committed by the souldiers on the kings leige people and not on the two Spensers the sole delinquents were the occasion of this Act of oblivion and pardon not the Armed pursuing of them when they had gotten above the reach of Law Thirdly that though this were an offensive not defensive warre made without common assent of Parliament and many murthers robberies and misdemeanors committed in the prosecution of it upon the kings leige people who were no Delinquents yet being for the common good to suppresse and banish these ill Councellors enemies Traytors to King and Kingdome the King and Parliament thought it such a publicke service as merited a pardon of these misdemeanors in the carriage of it and acquitted all who were parties to it from all suites and punishments All which considered is a cleare demonstration that they would have resolved our present defensive warre by Authoritie of both Houses accompanied with no such outrages as these for
against the king and his ill Councellors yea they who pursued apprehended and imprisoned the king himselfe are as to this particular discharged by the king and whole Parliament from all manner of guilt of punishment or prosecution whatsoever against them Which consideration makes me somewhat confident that this King and the Parliament held in the 25. yeare of his Raigne ch 2. Which declares it high Treason to levie warre against the King in his Realme did never intend it of a necessary defensive warre against a seduced King and his evill Councellors especially by the Votes of both Houses of Parliament who doubtlesse would never passe any Act to make themselves or their Posteritie in succeeding Parliaments Traytors for taking up meere necessary defensive Armes for their owne and the Kingdomes preservation for that had beene diametraâ—ly contrary to this statute made in the very first yeare and Parliament of this King and would have lâ—yd an aspertion of High Treason upon the king himself the Queene his Mother their own Fathers and many of themselves who thus tooke up Armes and made a defensive kinde of warre upon King â—dward the 2 d taking him prisoner but onely to Rebellious insurrections of private persons without any publick authority of Parliament or the whole Kingdome in generall and of meere offensive warres against the King without any just occasion hostilitie or violence on the Kings part necessitating them to take up defensive Armes which I humbly submit to the judgement of those grand Rabbies and Sages of the Law and the Honorable Houses of Parliament who are best able to resolve and are the onely Iudges to determine this point in controversie by the expresse letter and provision of 25. Ed. 3. ch 2. of Treasons In the first yeare of king Richard the 2 d. John Mercer a Scot with a Navie of Spanish Scottish French ships much infested the Marchants and Coasts of England taking many prises without any care taken by the king Lords or Councell to resist them Whereupon Iohn Philpot a rich Merchant of London diligently considering the defect that I say not treachery of the Duke of I ancaster and other Lords who ought to defend the Realme and grieving to see the oppressions of the people did at his proper charge hire a thousand souldiers and set out a fleete to take the said Mercers ships with the goods he had gotten by Pyracie and defend the Realme of England from such incursions who in a short time tooke Mâ—rcer prisoner with 15. Spanish ships and all the Booties he had gained from the English whereat all the people rejoyced exceedingly commending and extolling Philpot for the great love he shewed to his Countrey and casting out some reproachfull words against the Nobles and Kings councell who had the rule of the kingdome and neglected its defence Whereupon the Nobility Earles and Barons of the Realme conscious of this their negligence and envying Philpoâ— for this his Noble praise-worthy action began not onely secretly to lay snares for him but openly to reproach him saying That it was not lawfull for him to doe such things without the advise or councell of the King and Kingdome quasi non licuisset benefacere Regi VELREGNO sine consilio Comitum Baronum Writes Walsingham as if it were not lawfull to doe good to the King or Kingdome without the advise of the Earles and Barrons or Lords of the Privie Councell To whom objecting these things and especially to Hugh Earle of Stafford who was the chiefe Prolocutor and spake most against it Iohn Philpot gave this answere Know for certaine that I have destinated my money ships and men to sea to this end not that I might deprive you of the good name and honour of your Militia or warlike actions and engrosse it to my selfe but pittying the misery of my Nation and Country which now by your sloathfulnesse of a most Noble kingdome and Lady of Nations is devolved into so great misery that it lyeth open to the pillage of every one of the vilest Nations seeing there is none of you who will put your hand to its defence I have exposed me and mine therefore for the Salvation of my proper Nation and frteing of my Country To which the Earle and others had not a word to reply From this memorable history and discourse which I have translated verbatim out of Walsingham I conceive it most evident that in the default of king and Nobles it is lawfull for the Commons and every particular subject without any Commission from the king or his Councell in times of iminent danger to take up Armes and raise Forces by Sea or Land to defend the king and his Native Country against invading enemies as Philpot did without offence or crime Then much more may the Houses of Parliament the representative body of the whole kingdome and all private Subjects by their Command take up necessary defensive Armes against the kings Popish and Malignant Forces to preserve the king Kingdome Parliament People from spoyle and ruine In the 8. yeare of King Richard the 2 d. there arose a great difference betweene the Duke of Lancaster the king his young complices who conspired the Dukes death agreeing sodainely to arrest and arraigne him before Robert Trisilian Chiefe Iustice who boldly promised to passe sentence against him according to the quality of the crimes objected to him Vpon this the Duke having private intelligence of their treachery to provide for his owne safety wisely withdrew himselfe and posted to his Castle at Ponfract storing it with Armes and Victualls Hereupon not onely a private but publicke discord was like to ensue but by the great mediation and paines of Ione the kings mother an accord and peace was made betweene them and this defence of the Duke by fortifying his Castle with Armes against the King and his ill instruments for his owne just preservation held no crime If such a defence then were held just and lawfull in one particular Subject and Peere of the land onely much more must it be so in both Houses of Parliament and the Kingdome in case the Kings Forces invade them In the 10 th yeare of King Richard the second this unconstant king being instigated by Michael de la Pole Robert Vâ—ere Duke of Ireland Alexander Nevill ARchbishop of Yorke Robert Trysilian and other ill Councellors and Traytors to the kingdome endeavoured to seize upon the Duke of Glocester the Earles of Arundell Warwicke Derby Notingham and others who were faithfull to the kingdome and to put them to death having caused them first to be indighted of High Treason at Nottingham Castle and hired many Souldiers to surprise them Hereupon these Lords for their owne just defence raised Forces and met at Harynggye Parke with a numerous Army whereat the King being much perplexed advised what was best for him to do The Archbishop of Yorke and others of his ill Councell advised him to gee forth and give
them battle but his wisest councellors disswaded him affirming that the King should gaine no benefit if hee vanquished them and should sustaine great dishonour and losse if he were conquered by them In the meane time Hugh Linne an old Souldier who had lost his senses and was reputed a foole comming in to the Councell the King demanded of him in jest what hee should doe against the Nobles met together in the said Parke who answered Let us goe forth and assault them and slay every mothers sonne of them and by the eyes of God this being finished THOU HAST SLAINE ALL THE FAITHFVLL FRIENDS THOU HAST IN THE KINGDOME Which answere though uttered foolishly yet wise men did most of all consider At last is was resolved by the mediators of Peace that the Lords should meete the King at Westminster and there receive an answere to the things for which they tooke Armes thither they came strongly Armed with a great guard for feare of ambuscadoes to intrap them where the Chauncellour in the Kings name spake thus to them My Lords our Lord the King hearing that you were lately assembled at Harenggye Parke in an unusuall manner would not rush upon you as he might have easily done had he not had care of you and those who were with you because no man can doubt if he had raised an Army he would have had many more men than you and pâ—rchance much blood of men had beene spilt which the King doth most of all abhorre and therefore assuming to himselfe patience and mildnesse he hath made choyce to convent you peceably and to tell him the reason why yoy have assâ—mbled so many men To which the Lords answered That THEY HAD MET TOGETHER FOR THE GOOD OF THE KING AND KINGDOME AND THAT THEY MIGHT PVLL AWAY THOSE TRAITORS FROM HIM WHICH HE CONTINVALLY DET AINED WITH HIM The Traytors they appealed were the foresaid ill Councellors and Nicholas Brambre the false London Knight and to prove this appeale of them true casting down their gloves they said they would prosecute it by Duell The King answered This shall not be done now but in the next Parliament with we appoint to be the morrow after the Purification of the blessed Virgin to which as well you as they comming shall receive satisfaction in all things according to Law The Lords for their owne safety kept together till the Parliament and in the meane timed feated the Forces of the Duke of Ireland raised privately by the Kings Command to surprise them The Parliament comming on the 11. yeare of Richard the second these ill councellors were therein by speciall Acts attainted condemned of High Treason and some of them executed and these defensive Armes of the Lords for their owne and the Kingdomes safety adjudged and declared to be no Treason but a thing done to the honour of God and Salvation of the King and his Realme witnesse the expresse words of the Printed Act of 11 R. 2. c. 1. which I shall transcribe Our Soveraigne Lord the King amongst other Petitions and requests to him made by the Commons of his said Realme in the said Parliament hath received one Petition in the forme following The Commons prayed that whereas the last Parliament for cause of the great and horrible mischiefes and perills which another time were fallen BY EVILL GOVERNANCE WHICH WAS ABOVT THE KINGS PERSON by all his time before by Alexander late Archbishop of Yorke Robert de Veere late Duke of Ireland Michael de la Pole late Earle of Suffolk Rober Trisilian late Iustice and Nicholas Brambre Knight with other their adherents and others Whereby the King and all his Realme were very nighâ— to have beene wholly undone and destroyed and for this cause and to eschew such perils and mischiefes for the time to come a certaine statute was made in the same Parliament with a Commission to diverse Lords for the weale honour and safeguard of the King his regalty and of all the Realme the tenour of which Commission hereafter followeth Richard c. as in the Act. And thereupon the said Alexander Robert Mighill Robert and Nicholas and their said adherents seeing that their said evill governance should be perceived and they by the same cause more likely to be punished by good justice to be done and also their evill deedes and purposes before used to be disturbed by the sayd Lords assigned by commission as afore made conspired purposed divers horrible Treasons and evils against the King and the said Lords so assigned and against all the other Lords and Commons which were assenting to the making of the said Ordinance and Commission in destruction of the king his Regalty and all his Realme Whereupon Thomas Duke of Glocester the kings Vncle Richard Earle of Arundle and Thomas Earle of Warwicke perceiving the evill purpose of the sayd Traytors did assemble themselves in forcible manner for the safety of their persons to shew and declare the said Treasons and evill purposes and thereof to set remedie as God would and came to the Kings presence affirming against the said 5. Traytors appealed of High Treason by them done to the King and to his Realme upon which appeale the king our Soveraigne Lord adjourned the said parties till this present Parliament and did take them into his safe protection as in the record made upon the same appeale fully appeareth And afterwards in great Rebellion and against the said protection the said Traytors with their said adherents and others aforesaid continuing their evill purpose some of them assembled a great power by letters and Commission from the King himselfe as Walsingham and others write to have destroyed the said Duke and Earles appellants and other the kings lawfull leige people and to accomplish their Treasons and evill purposes aforesaid Whereupon the said Duke of Glocester Henry Earle of Darby the sayd Earles of Arundell and Warwicke and Thomas Earle Marshall seeing the open Destruction of the King and all his Realme if the said evill purposed Traitors and their adherents were not disturbed which might not otherwise have beene done but with strong hand for the weale and safeguard of the King our Soveraigne Lord and of all his Realme did assemble them forcibly and rove and pursued till they had disturbed the said power gathered by the said Traytors and their adherents aforesaid which five Traytors be attainted this present Parliament of the Treasons and evills aforesaid at the suite and appeale of the said Duke of Glocester Earles of Darby Arundle Warwicke and Marshall That it would please our redoubled Soveraigne Lord the King to accept approve and affirme in this present Parliament all that was done in the last as afore and as much as hath beene done since the last Parliament by force of the statute Ordinance or Commission aforesaid and also All that the said Duke of Glocester Earles of Arundell and Wâ—rwicke did and that the same Duke and Earles and the said Earles of Derby and Marshall or any
accomplishment of their owne Rancor and Covetousnesse that they might injoy the Lands Offices Possessions and Goods of the lawfull â—ords and liege People of the King and that they might finally destroy the laid lawfull Lords and Liege People and their Issues and Heires for ever as now the Kings ill Counsellors and hungry Cavalleers seek to destroy the Kings faithfull Liege Lords and People that they may gaine their Lands and Estates witnesse the late intercepted Leâ—ter of Sir Iohn Brooks giving advise to thus purpose to his Majestie and this Assemblâ— was declared to be no lawful Parliament but a devillish Counsell which desired more the destruction then advancement of the Publike weale and the Duke Earles with their assistants were restored and declared to be Faithful and Lawful Lords and Faithful liege People of the Realme of England who alwaies had great and Fathfull Love to the Preferrement and Surety of the Kings Person according to their Duty If then these two Parliaments acquitted these Lords and their companions thus taking up Armes from any the least guilt of Treason and rebellion against the King because they did it onely for the advancement of the publike weale the setting the Realme in a better condition the removing ill Counsellors and publike oppressors of the Realme from about the King and to rescue his person out of their hands then questionlesse by their resolutions our present Parliaments taking up defensive armes upon the selfe-same grounds and other important causes and that by consent of both Houses which they wanted can be reputed no high Treason nor Rebellion against the King in point of Law and no just no rationall Iudge or Lawyer can justly averre the contrary against so many forecited resolutions in Parliament even in printed Acts. The Earle of Richmund afterward King Henry the seventh taking up armes against Richard the third a lawfull King defacto being crowned by Parliament but an Vsurper and bloody â—yrant in Verity to recover his Inheritance and Title to the Crowne and ease the Kingdome of this unnaturall blood-thirsty Oppressor before his fight at Boswell Field used this Oration to his Souldiers pertinent to our purpose If ever God gave victory to men fighting in a just quarrell or if he ever aided such as made warre for the wealth and tuition of their owne naturall and nutritive Countrey or if he ever succoured them which adventured their lives for the reliefe of Innocents suppression of malefactors and apparent Offenders No doubt my Fellowes and Friends but he of his bountifull goodnesse will this day send us triumphant victory and a lucky revenge over our proud Enemies and arrogant adversaries for if you remember and consider the very cause of our just quarrel you shall apparently perceive the same to be true godly and vertuous In the which I doubt not but God will rather ayde us yea and fight for us then see us vanquished and profligate by such as neither feare him nor his Lawes nor yet regard Iustice and honesty Our cause is so just that no enterprise can be of more vertue both by the Laws Divine and Civill c. If this cause be not just and this quarrell godly let God the giver of victory judge and determine c. Let us therefore fight like invincible Gyants and set on our enemies like untimorous Tygers and banish all feare like tamping Lyons March forth like strong and robustious Champions and begin the battaile like hardy Conquerors the Battell is at hand and the Victory approacheth and if wee shamefully recule or cowardly fly we and all our sequele be destroyed and dishonoured for ever This is the day of gaine and this is the time of losse get this dayes victory and be Conquerours and lose this dayes battell and bee villaines And therefore in the name of God and Saint George let every man couragiously advance his standard They did so slew the Tyrannicall Vsurper wonne the Field And in the first Parliament of his Raigne there was this Act of indemnity passed That all and singular persons comming with him from beyond the Seas into the Realme of England taking his party and quarrell in recovering his just Title and Right to the Realme of England shall be utterly discharged quit and unpunishable for ever by way of action or otherwise of or for any murther slaying of men or of taking and disporting of goods or any other trespasses done by them or any of them to any person or persons of this his Realme against his most Royall Person his Banner displayed in the said field and in the day of the said field c. Which battell though it were just and no Treason nor Rebellion in point of Law in those that assiâ—ted King Henry the 7 th against this Vsurper yet because the killing of men and seising their goods in the time of Warre is against the very fundamentall Lawes of the Realme they needed an Act of Parliament to discharge them from suits and prosecutions at the Law for the same the true reason of all the forecited Acts of this nature which make no mention of pardoning any Rebellions or Treasons against the King for they deemed their forementioned taking up of Armes no such offences but onely discharge the Subjects from all suites actions and prosecutions at Law for any killing or slaying of men batteries imprisonments robberies and trespasses in seising of Persons Goods Chattels What our Princes and State have thought of the lawfulnesse of necessary Defensive sive Warres of Subjects against their oppressing Kings and Princes appeares by those aides and succours which our Kings in former ages have sent to the French Flemmings Almaines and others when their Kings and Princes have injuriously made Warres upon them and more especially by the publike ayde and assistance which our Queene Elizabeth and King James by the publike advise and consent of the Realme gave to the Protestants in France Germany Bohemia and the Netherlands against the King of France the Emperour and King of Spaine who oppressed and made Warre upon them to deprive them of their just Liberties and Religion of which more hereafter Certainely had their Defensive Warres against their Soveraigne Princes to preserve their Religion Liberties Priviledges beene deemed Treason Rebellion in point of Law Queene Elizabeth King James and our English State would never have so much dishonoured themselves nor given so ill an example to the world to Patronize Rebells or Traitours or enter into any solemne Leagues and Covenants with them as then they did which have been frequently renued and continued to this present And to descend to our present times our King Charles himself hath not onely in shew at least openly aided the French Protestants at Ree and Rochel against their King who warred on them the Germane Princes against the Emperour the Hollanders and Prince of Orange to whose Sonne hee hath married his elstest Daughter against the Spaniard and entred into a solemne League with them which hee could
of Charity those that say care ought to be had of Citizens deny it of strangers these men take away community and society of mankinde Also Cicero which Lactantius both citeth and hath approved And the same Cicero It is a filthy opinion of them who referre all things to themselves filthy indeede for man is borne for society and it is his duty to helpe others and not live to himselfe onely and for this cause Cicero condemned the Philosophers because while they lacked one kinde of justice and as another holy man writes fulfilled indeede the greatest part of equity not to hurt any they offended against the other because they forsooke the society of life and so forsooke this part of justice to profit when thou canst Dost thou not see how the world it selfe the most beautifull of all workes doth binde it selfe with love we are bound by the Law of nature so sayes the interpreter of the Law to be profitable every way and the same men deliver an equall defence of their owne and of strangers but specially of confederates from whom we must keepe off an injury and that this defence is both of divine and humane law Plato thinkes he ought to be punished that keepes not back an injury offered to another Now that which Plato and these Interpreters say of private Citizens we may very well apply to Princes and people for what reason there is of a private man in a private City there is the same in the publicke and universall City of the world of a publique Citizen that is of a Prince of the people of a Prince As a private man hath relation to a private man so a Prince to a Prince saith Baldus A man is a Citizen to a man in the greater City and borne for mutuall succour saith Seneca And because we are one body if one member will hurt another member it is meete the others should helpe that which is hurt because it concerneth the whole even that which hurteth that the whole be preserved So men should helpe men for society cannot be preserved but by the love and safety of the people Vespatian cannot be approved who denies ayde I know not to whom upon this pretence because the care of other mens affaires appertained not to him for what good man is there who doth nothing but for his owne sake Cicero againe even to Lazius King of Persia that he is not therefore just because he doth nothing unjustly unlesse also he defended the unjustly oppressed and by that meanes they obtained helpe and bands of Souldiers against the Romans for it is not a strange thing amongst men for a man to defend the estates and safety of men Cicero had said the same he should have respect if not of the man yet of humanity which is due to every one from every one for this very cause because they are equally men and humane nature the common mother of all men commends one man to another It is a noble example of the barbarous King of Mauritania who when he heard that his enemie Alfonso king of Castile was pressed and almost oppressed by the Armies of his sonne hee sent a hughe masse of gold unto Alfonso he himselfe went over with a great Armie of Souldiers into Spaine judging it a most unworthy thing that his Sonne should expell his Father from his Kingdome adding withall that the victory obtained he would be an enemie againe unto the same Alfonso What doe I feare the Barbarians enemies also and bringing gifts That the deed of an enemy should be taken in the worst sence doth Guiceardine say truth that these things are not done of any but in hope of some profit The saying of Guicciardine is dispraised by noble Mountaygn in those his Noble examples I demand of what right it is It is a question if any be bound by Law to defend another when he can and they seeme commonly to deny this and the Law sometimes saith that we may without offence neglect other mens affaires but our proper question is if any can thus justly defend another wherein no man denieth just defence even for the defence of a stranger it is lawfull to kill another by the opinion which is approved of all Doctors yea the defence of him is approved that neglects to defend himselfe yea that refuseth to be defended by another whether a friend defend him or another even an enemie and thus it is called the rule of humanity and so a benefit to be conferred often times upon the unwilling So also there be many other definitions Also they conclude by an argument not firme enough that way in another question that a man may take money for defending another which he should receive dishonestly if he were bound to defend him by law for may not a servant get a reward from him whom yet notwithstanding he might not neglect without punishment neither is it dishonestly given nor dishonestly taken in way of thankefulnesse So it is not ill taken of a Citizen from a Citie nor by a sonne from a father for truely it is manifest that many things cannot be done without offence and therefore if done they are worthy of rewards yet not of punishment if they be not done Againe somethings on the contrary neglected indeed contract offence but reformed they merit not glory so Bernard to which I adde a meane that there be some things which being neglected contract offence and fulfilled deserve reward But also even in the Court of conscience they will have a man to be bound to defend a man But conscience is the will of a good man yea of the best but they deliver this also even in the way of honesty and we follow honesty here and that arbiterment but both in Civill and Canon Law against the rest Bartolus inclines thus Albericus Igneus Decius Alciatus Molineus so teach and Baldus elegantly that it is a fault to omit the defence of another of himselfe a treachery which also in another place he determines Plato is also of this mind and thus also Siracides free him to whom injury is done out of the hand of the injurious I also am of the same minde especially if which the forenamed interpreters adde defence be not made with the danger of the defender For no man is bound to put himselfe in danger no man is bound so to assist against a fire Otherwise thou hearest Constantine say that they which live by the rule of Gods Law account an injury done to another to be their owne Behold that thus also he ayded the Romans against Maxentius Heare againe Baldus his Lawyer he that defends not nor resists an injury is as well in fault as he that forsakes his parents or friends or Country and if these be true in private men how much more will they be in Princes These
gods have this Law none of us will crosse the desire of him that willeth but wee yeeld alwaies one to another Which being the fictions of very wise men are applyed unto Princes of the earth But even without any circumstance at all the Corinthians speake thus to the Athenians We doe plainely deny that any is forbidden to punish his owne for if thou shalt defend those that have offended even your owne Subjects will defend themselves from you Yet I thinke not Subjects of other men are altogether strangers from that neerensse of nature and union of Society you doe also cut off the unity of mankinde whereby life is sustained as excelently Seneca And if we make not Princes lawlesse tyed to no Lawes nor Conditions It is necessary that there be some to admonish them of their duty and may hold them fast bound which reason I expounded in the second Booke of Embassies Neither will I heere infer any confusion of kingdomes or any inspection of one Prince over another Prince neither doe I suffer those things to bee distinguished which are most firmely glued together by nature I meane that kinred with all among all Neither here otherwise may one Prince have inspection over another Prince but such as may happen by every other Warre wherein one Prince carries himselfe as a judge both of himselfe and of another If a question were among private men it were most unjust to goe to a Forraigne Prince about it Also if there arise a difference betweene a private man and his Soveraigne there are Magistrates appointed which may be sought unto But when the controversie is touching the Common-wealth there neither are nor can be any judges in the City I call that a publike matter when such and so great a part of the Subiects is moved that now there is need of Warre against those that defend themselves by Warre And as if those should come into part of the Principality of the publike and are Peeres to the Prince who can doe so much as hee Even as one King is said to be equall to another who can resist another offering wrong however greater and more powerfull although I say not these things of the Subjects themselves unlesse it be in respect of Forraigne Princes which will ayde the Subject against their Soveraigne and who can ayde them no otherwise then in a controversie as I have expounded of the Common-wealth f And indeede if the Subjects be used more cruelly and unjustly this opinion of defending is approved even of others who both bring that laudable example of Hercules the Lord of Tyrants and Monsters There is also the example of Constantine who ayded the Romans against Maxentius as I noted before We defend Sonnes against injust Fathers Adde now those golden Sayings of Seneca That being cut off whatsoever it was whereby he did cleave unto me the Society of humane right is cut off If he doe not impugne my Countrey but is burdensome to his owne and being bannished my Countrey doth vexe his owne yet so great naughtinesse of minde hath cut him off although it maketh him not an enemy yet hatefull unto mee And the reason of the duty which I owe unto mankinde is both more precious and more powerfull with me then that which I owne to one single man Thus verily or else we make all men forreigners to all Princes if we determine that they can doe according to their pleasure and lust Now what if the cause of the Subject be unjust The foresaid Authors deny that men ought to ayde uniust Forraigne Subjects least any by so ayding introduce the same Law into his owne Kingdome which the Corinthians did before Yea Aristotle thinkes that neither a wicked Father is to be loved nor assisted with helpe But this is false of a Father as I taught in a certaine Disputation perhaps it is more true that those may be defended of us by war who are unjust For if it be a just warre which is to repulse a wrong although they that repulse an injury have given occasion to the warre the same it seemes may be determined in the defence of others even of Subjects for the same reason Surely there is that iniquity in Warre that it will make the same man to pronounce law to himselfe in his owne cause or verily willing to pronounce it Vpon which pretence another Prince may bring ayde on the contrary side that things may more civelly be composed without warre And this is that which Pyrrhus did when he came to ayde the Tarentines against the Romanes he admonished them first that they would by their owne endeavour put an end to the Controversie although neither the Romans would not unjustly hearken unto the King or because they might deservedly suspect him as being sent for by enemies armed with enemies ready to fight for enemies and of kinne to enemies Hee that stands armed with another is said to bring helpe and ayde unto him neither is there neede to proove any thing against that at all Even he that armes himselfe is beleeved to thinke upon warre And if he that is the friend of an enemie bee excluded from being a witnesse much more from being a Iudge For it is easier if any be received for a witnesse then a Iudge The friend of my enemy is not presently ment my enemy as neither my friends friend is my friend but there is a great suspition of them both and of the friend of an enemy the more But I returne to the question We are bound both to defend justly unjust Sonnes against the cruelty of a Father or Servants against the cruelty of a Master and we laudably indeavour that by fury here is Warre no not wicked men should be chastened and punished for fury and warre have no measure And he that led by humanity or pitty or any other approved and just cause hath received another mans Servant is not bound by the Statute of a corrupt Servant and that reception is accompted in the nature of good c. Even he is commended who being angry with his servants committed them to be punished by another this commendation being added because he himselfe was angry Therefore a good Prince will have the Liberty of rage against his own Subjects to be taken from him being angry as a good Father as a good Master and he will alwaies judge That Kingdomes were not made for Kings but Kings for Kingdomes which is most true This also of Plato availeth that we ought to use Eloquence chiefely to accuse our friends to whom it is the best thus to be drawn from future evils And so I thinke that we may defend unjust Forreigne Subjects yet to this end onely for the keeping off immoderate cruelty and too severe punishment Seeing it is not inhumane to doe good to those that have offended Yet I dare affirme that this reason of bringing helpe doth seldome stand
their severall flights from the violence of the Egyptians Saul and Iezabel who sought their lives but likewise by Ioseph Mary and Christ himselfe who fled into Egypt to escape the hands and but chery of King Herod by Christs own direction to his Disciples Matth. 10. 23. But when they persecute you in this City flee yee into another and that Prediction of his Matth. 23. 34. Behold I send unto you Prophets and wise men and Scribes and some of them ye shall kill and crucifie and some of them shall you scourge in your Synagogues and persecute them from City to City which was really fulfilled Acts 8. 3. 4. c. 9. 1 2. c 11. 19. c. 13. 50 51. c. 14. 1 to 24 c. 17. 1. to 16. c. 22. 42. c. 26. 11. 12. c. 9. 24 25 26. 2 Cor. 11. 32. 33. Rev. 12. 6. Of which reade more in Tertullian his booke De Fuga in persecutione Hence then I argue thus That unjust violence of Princes and their Armies which Subjects with a safe conscience may decline and flee from when as they want power meanes or convenience to resist it they may no doubt lawfully resist even with force of Armes when they have sufficient meanes and conveniences to resist and cannot flee or submit thereto without the publicke ruine since the same justice and equity which enables them by flight or stratagem to decline unjust assaults of a superior power or its judgements doth likewise enable them to escape and prevent it with resistance when they cannot doe it by flight or other policie If then they may lawfully with a safe conscience hide flee or use lawfull policies to prevent the open injust violence of their kings and their Officers when not guilty of any capitall crime deserving censures because by the very light of nature and Law of Charity they are obliged to preserve themselves from unjust tyrannie and are no wayes bound to subject themselves to the cruelty the unjust assaults or oppressions of others then by the selfesame reason they may lawfully with force of Armes defend themselves against such violent unjust attempts which they are no way obliged to submit unto when as they cannot conveniently secure themselves and the publicke but by such resistance and should both betray their owne the publicke safety and Religion as the Subjects and Parliament should now do in case they did not resist by force of Armes to the utmost of their power and become worse than Infidels who have even thus oft provided for their owne and the Republickes securitie Fiftly God himselfe the fountaine oft justice the God of Order the preserver of humane society who detests of all tyranny cruelty oppression injustice out of his Philanthropie which brought the Sonne of his bosome from heaven to earth would never certainely in point of policy or conscience prohibit that which is the onely probable meanes and apparent remedy to prevent suppresse disorder tyranny cruelty oppression injustice yea confusion in the world and to preserve good order and humane society a truth so apparent that no rationall man can contradict it Therefore questionesse he never prohibited forcible necessary resistance of the highest powers and their instruments in cases of open unjust violence and hostile invasion made upon their people to ruine them or subvert their established government Laws Liberties Iustice Religion There being no other probable ordinary meanes left to any Kingdome Nation People to preserve their government lives Lawes Liberties Religion and to prevent suppresse or redresse tyrannie cruelty disorder confusion yea utter ruine when their Kings and Governors degenerate into Tyrants invading them with open force but onely defensive Armes prayers and teares alone without military opposition by force of Armes being no more able to defend a person City or Kingdome against Oppressing Princes and their Armies then against theeves Pyrates or common enemies whom they must and ought to resist as well with Armes as Orisons with Speares as well as Teares else they should but tempt the Lord and destroy themselves like those c Iewes and Gothes who would not fight upon the Sabbath and so were slaine by their enemies without resistance yea wilfully suffer the Common-weale to be subverted Religion extirpated Lawes trampled under feete their own posterities to be enslaved ruined without any opposition even in a moment For were it utterly unlawfull and no lesse than Treason or Rebellion in point of conscience for any subjects to take up Defensive Armes to resist the Kings army or forces consisting for the most part of Papists Delinquents deboist Athesticall persons of broken fortunes feared consciences and most irreligious lives I appeale to every mans conscience how soone these unresisted Instruments of cruelty would utterly extirpate our protestant Religion and common faith for which we are enjoyned earnestly to contend and strive Jude 3. Phil. 1. 27. 28. And shall we then yeeld it up and betray it to our adversaries without strife or resistance how sodainely would they ruin our Parliament Lawes Liberties subvert all civill order government erect an arbitrary Lawlesse tyrannicall Regency regulated by no Iawes but will and Iust how soone would they murther imprison execute our Noblest Lords Knights Burgesses best Ministers and Commonwealths-men for their fidelity to God their King and Country how many Noble families would they disinherite how many wives widdowes Virgins would they force and ravish what Cities what Countries would they not totally pillage plunder sack ruine consume with fire and sword how soone would our whole Kingdome become an Acheldama a wildernesse a desolation and the surviving inhabitants either slaves or beasts if not devils incarnate Yea how speedy might any private Officers Captaines Commanders by colour of illegall Commissions and commands from the King or of their Offices and all the notorious rogues and theeves of England under colour of being listed in the Kings Army if the people might not in point of Law or Conscience resist them with Armes who came armed for to act their villanies maliciously rob spoyle plunder murther all the Kings leige people without any remedy or prevention and by this pretext that they are the Kings Souldiers sodainely seise and gaine all the armes treasure forts ammunition power of the Realme into their possessions in a moment and having thus strengthned themselves and slaine the Kings faithfull subjects usurpe the crown it selfe if they be ambitious as many private Captaines and Commanders have anciently slaine divers Roman and Grecian Emperours yea sundry Spanish Gothish and Moorish Kings in Spain by such practises and aspired to their Crowns of which there are sundry such like presidents in most other Realmes to prevent redres which severall destructive mischiefes to People Kingdome Kings themselves God himselfe hath left us no other certaine proper sufficient remedy but a forcible resistance which all Kingdomes Nations throughout the world haue constantly used in such cases as I shall manifest more largely in the Appendix
King and Monarch every subject worse than a Turkish slave and exposed to as many uncontrolable Soveraignes as there are Souldiers in the Kings Army be their conditions never so vile their qualitie never so mean and the greatest Peeres on the Parliaments party must be irresistably subject to these new absolute Soveraignes lusts and wills Twelfthly if all these will not yet satisfie Conscience in the Lawfulnesse the justnesse of the Parliaments and peoples present forcible resistance of the Kings Captaines and Forces though Armed with an illegall Commission which makes nothing at all in the case because voyd in Law there is this one Argument yet remaining which will satisfie the most scrupulous malignant opposite Conscience That necessary forcible resistance which is Authorised and Commanded by the Supreamest lawfull power and highest Soveraigne Authority in the Realme must infallibly be just and lawfull even in point of Conscience by the expresse Resolution of Rom. 13. and our opposites owne confession who have no other Argument to prove the Offensive warre on the Kings part Lawfull but because it is commanded and the Parliaments and Subjects Defensive Armes Unlawfull but because prohibited by the King whom they salsely affirm to be the highest Soveraigne power in the Kingdome above the Parliament and whole Realme collectively considered But this resistance of the Kings Popish malignant invading Forces is Authorized and Commanded by the expresse Votes and Ordinances of both Houses of Parliament which I have already undeniably manifested to be the Supreamest Lawfull Power and Soveraignest Authority in the Realme Paramount the King himselfe who is but the Parliaments and Kingdomes Publicke Royall Servant for their good Therefore his Resistance must infallibly be just and Lawfull even in Point of Conscience Thus much for the Lawfulnesse in Court of Conscience of resisting the Kings unjustly assaulting Forces armed with his Commission I now proceede to the justnesse of opposing them by way of forcible resistance when accompanied with his personall presence That the Kings Army of Papists and Malignants invading the Parliaments or Subjects persons goods Lawes Liberties Religion may even in Conscience bee justly resisted with force though accompanied with his person seemes most apparently cleare to me not only by the preceeding Reasons but also by many expresse Authorities recorded and approved in Scripture not commonly taken notice of as First By the ancientest precedent of a defensive warre that we read of in the world Gen. 14. 1. to 24. where the five Kings of Sodom Gomorrah Admah Zeboiim and Zoar rebelling against Chedolaomer King of Nations after they had served him twelve yeeres defended themselves by armes and battle against his assaults and the Kings joyned with him who discomfiting these five Kings pillaging Sodom and Gomorrah and taking Lot and his goods along with them as a pâ—eâ— hereupon Abraham himselfe the Father of the faithfull in defence of his Nephew Lot to rescue him and his substance from the enemie taking with him 318. trained men of his owne family pursued Chedorlaomer and the Kings with him to Dan assaulted them in the night smote and pursued them unto Hoba regained all the goods and prisoners with his Nephew Lot and restored both goods and persons freely to the King of Sodom thereby justifying his and his peoples forcible defence against their invading enemies in the behalfe of his captivated plundred Nephew and Neighbors Secondly by the Example of the Israelities who were not onely King Pharaoh his Subjects but Bondmen too as is evident by Exod ch 1. to 12. Deut. 6. 21. c. 7. 8. c. 15. 15. c. 16. 12. c. 24 18. 22. Ezra 9. 9. Now Moses and Aaron being sent by God to deliveer them from their AEgyptian bondage after 430. yeares captivity under colour of demanding but three dayes liberty to goe into the wildernesse to serve the Lord and Pharoah notwithstanding all Gods Miracles and Plagues refusing still to let them depart till enforced to it by the slaughter of the Egyptians first borne as soone as the Israelites were marching away Pharaoh and the AEgyptians repenting of their departure pursued them with their Chariots and Horses and a great army even to the red Sea to reduce them here upon the Israelites being astonished and murmuring against Moses giving themselves all for dead men Moses sayd unto the people feare ye not stand still and see the Salvation of the Lord which he will shew to you this day for the AEgyptians whom you have seene to day ye shall see them againe no more for ever the Lord shall fight for you c. And hereupon God himselfe discomfited routed and drowned them all in the red Sea I would demaund in this case whether the Isralites might not here lawfully for their owne redemption from unjust bondage have fought against and resisted their Lord King Pharaoh and his invading Host accompanied with his presence had they had power and hearts to doe it as well as God himselfe who fought against and destroyed them on their behalfe If so as all men I thinke must grant unlesse they will censure God himselfe then a defensive warre in respect of life and liberty onely is just and Lawfull even in conscience by this most memorable story Thirdly by that example recorded Iudges 3. 8. 9. 10. where God growing angry with the Israelites for their Apostacie and Idolatry sold them here was a divine title into the hands of Cushan-Rishathaim King of Mesopotamia and the children of Israel served him 8. yeares Here was a lawfull title by conquest and 8 yeeres submission seconding it But when the children of Israel cryed unto the Lord the Lord raised up a deliverer to them even Othniel the sonne of Kenaz and the Spirit of the Lord came upon him and he went out to warre and the Lord delivered Cushan-rishatiam King of Mesopotamia into his hands and his hand prevailed against him so the land had rest 40. yeeres Loe here a just defensive warre approved and raised up by God and his Spirit in an ordinary manner only as I take it by encouraging the Instruments wherein a conquering King for Redemption former liberties is not onely resisted but conquered taken prisoner and his former dominion abrogated by those that served him as conquered subjects Fourthly by the example of Ehud and the Israelites Iudges chap. 3. 11. to 31 where we finde God himself strengthning Eglon King of Moab against the Israelites for their sinnes who thereupon gathering an Army smote Israel possessed their Cities so as the Israelites served this King 18. yeeres Here was a title by conquest approved by God submitted to by the Israelites yet after all this when the children of Israel cryed unto the Lord he raised them up a deliverer namely Ehud who stabbing Eglonn the King in the belly under pretext of private conference with him and escaping he therupon blew the trumpet commanded the Israelites to follow him to the warre slew ten thousand valiant men of
them no doubt they would and might lawfully have defended themselves else why did they joyne themselves in a body why retire to strong holds and places of advantage why twice urge David to kill Saul in cold blood when he did not actually assault him but came causually unawares within his danger Why did David himselfe say even when he spared his life when he was a sleepe 1 Sam. 26. 10. As the Lord liveth the Lord shall smite him or his day shall come to dye or he shall descend into battell and perish but that if he had given him battle he might have defended himselfe against him though Saul should casually or wilfully perish in the fight And why was David so importunate to goe up against him with King Achish to the battle wherein he perished 1 Sam. 29. were resistance of him in case he assaulted him and his Forces utterly unlawfull This precedent of David then if rightly weighed is very punctuall to prove the justnesse of a defensive warre of which more anon and no evidence at all against it Eleventhly by the practise of the 10 Tribes who after their revolt from Rehoboam for giving them an harsh indiscreet answere to their just demands setting up another King and Kingdome even by divine approbation Rehoboam thereupon raising a great Army to fight against and reduce them to his obdience God himselfe by Semaiah the Prophet sent this expresse inhibition to Rehoboam and his Army Thus saith the Lord ye shall not go up nor fight against your brethren returne every man to his house FOR THIS IS DONE OF ME Whereupon the obeyed the Word of the Lord and returned 1 Kings 12. 2 Chron. c. 10. and 11. After which long warres continued betweene these Kingdomes by reason of this revolt wherein the ten Tribes and Kings of Israel still defended themselves with open force and that justly as the Scripture intimates 2 Chron. 12. 14 15. though that Ieroboam and the Israelites falling to Idolaty were afterwards for their Idolatry not revolt defeated by Abiah and the men of Iudah who relied upon God 2 Chron. 13. Twelfthly by the example of the King of Moab and his people who Rebelling against Iehoram King of Israel and refusing to pay the annuall Tribute of Lambes and Rammes formerly rendred to him hereupon Iehoram Iehoshaphat and the King of Edom raising a great Army to invade them the Moalites hearing of it gathered all that were able to put on Armour and upward and stood in the border to resist them 2 King 3 4 to 27. And by the practise of the Edâ—mites who revolting from under the hand of Iudah made a King over themselves Whereupon Ioram King of Iudah going up with his Forces against them to Zair they encompassed him in their owne defence and though they fled into their Tents yet they revolted from Iudah till this day and Libnah too 2 Kings 8. 20 21. 22. Thirteenthly by the example of Samaria which held out 3. yeeres siege against Shalmazezer King of Assyria notwithstanding their King Hoshea had by force submitted himselfe and his Kingdome to him and became his servant 2 Kings 17. 3. to 10. c. 18. 9. 10. Fourteenthly by the practise of godly Hezechiah who after the Lord was with him and prospered him whethersoever he went REBELLED against the King of Assyria and served him not as some of his predecessors had done 2 Kings 18. 7. whereupon the King of Assyria and his Captaines comming up against him with great Forces and invading his Country he not only fortified his Cities and encouraged his people manfully to withstand them to the utter most but actually resisted the Assyrians even by divine direction and encouragement and upon his prayer God himself by his Angel for his and Jerusalems preservation miraculously slew in the Campe of the King of Assria in one night an hundred fourescore and five thousand mighty men of valour Captaines and Leaders so as he returned with shame of face to his owne Land 2 King c. 18. and 19. 2 Chron. c. 32. I say c. 36. and â—7 An Example doubtlesse lawfull beyond exception ratified by God himselfe and his Angel too Fifteenthly by the examples of King Iehoiakim and Jehoiakin who successively rebelling against the King of Babylon who subdued and put them to a tribute did likewise successively defend themselves against his invasions seiges though with ill successe by reason of their grosse Idolatries and other sins not of this their revolt and defence to regaine their freedomes condemned only in Zeâ—echia for breach of his oath whereby they provoked God to give them up to the will of their enemies and to remove them out of his sight 2 King c. 24. 25 2 Chr. 36. Ier. c. 37. 38 39. Finally by the History of the Maccabees and whole state of the Iews defensive wars under them which though but Apochryphall in regard of the compiler yet no doubt they had a divine Spirit concurring with them in respect of the managing and Actors in them I shall give you the summe thereof very succinctly Antioâ—us Epiphanes conquering Ierusalem spoyled it and the Temple set up Heathenish customes and Idolatry in it subverted Gods worship destroyed the Bookes of Gods Law forced the people to forsake God to sacrifice to Idols slew and persecuted all that opposed and exercised all manner of Tyranny against them Hereupon Mattathias a Priest and his Sonnes moved with a godly zeale refusing to obey the Kings Command in falling away from the Religion of his Fathers slew a Iew that sacrificed to an Idoll in his presence together with the Kings Commissary who compelled men to Sacrifice and pulled downe their Idolatrous Altar which done they fled into the mountaines whither all the well-affected Iewes repaired to them Whereupon the Kings Forces hearing the premises pursued them and warred against them on the Sabbath day whereupon they out of an over-nice superstition least they should prophane the Sabbath by fighting on it when assaulted answered them not neither cast a stone at them nor stopped the places where they were hid but said let us dye all in our innocencie heaven and earth shall testifie for us that your put us to death wrongfully whereupon they slew both them their wives and children without resistance to the number of a thousand persons Which Mattathias and the rest of their friends hearing of mourned for them right sore and said one to another marke their speech if we all doe as our brethren have done and fight not for our lives and Lawes against the Heathen they will now quickly roote us out of the earth therefore they decreed saying whosoever shall come to make battle with us on the Sabbath day we will fight against him neither will we doe all as our brethren that were murthered in their secret places Whereupon they presently gathered and united their Forces assaulted their enemies recovered their Cities Lawes Liberties defended themselves manfully
persons If any king shall unjustly assault the persons of any private Subjects men or women to violate their lives or chastities over which they have no power I make no doubt that they may and ought to bee resisted repulsed even in point of conscience but not slaine though many kings have lost their lives upon such occasions as Rodoaldus the 8. king of Lumbardy Anno 659. being taken in the very act of adultery by the adulteresses husband was slaine by him without delay and how kings attempting to murther private Subjects unjustly have themselves beene sometimes wounded and casually slaine is so rise in stories that I shall forbeare examples concluding this with the words of Iosephus who expressely writes That the King of the Israelites by Gods expresse Law Deut. 17. was to doe nothing without the consent of the high Priest and Senate nor to multiply money and horses over much which might easily make him a contemner of the Lawes and if he addicted himselfe to these things more than was fitting HE WAS TO BE RESISTED least he became more powerfull then was expedient for their affaires To these Authorities I shall onely subjoyne these 5. undeniable arguments to justifie Subjects necessary defensive wars to be lawful in point of conscience against the persons and Forces of their injuriously invading Soveraignes First it is granted by all as a truth irrefragable that kings by Force of Armes may justly with safe conscience resist repulse suppresse the unlawfull warlike invasive assaults the Rebellious armed Insurrections of their Subjects upon these two grounds because they are unlawfull by the Edicts of God and man and because kings in such case have no other meanes left to preserve their Royall persons and just authoritie against offensive armed Rebellions but offensive armes Therefore Subjâ—cts by the selfe-same grounds may justly with safe consciences resist repulse suppresse the unjust assayling military Forces of their kings in the case fore-stated though the king himselfe be personally present and assistant because such a war is unlawfull by the resolution of God and men and against the oath the duty of kings and because the subjects in such cases have no other meanes left to preserve their persons lives liberties estates religion established government from certaine ruin but defensive Armes There is the selfe same reason in both cases being relatives therefore the selfesame Law and Conscience in both Secondly It must be admitted without debate that this office of highest and greatest trust hath a condition in Law annexed to it by Littletons owne resolution to wit that the King shall well and truely preserve the Realme and do that which to such Office belongeth which condition our king by an expresse oath to all his people solemnely taken at their Coronation with other Articles expressed in their oath formerly recited is really bound both in Law and Conscience exactly to performe being admitted and elected king by the peoples suffrages upon solemne promise to observe the same condition to the uttermost of his power as I have a elsewhere cleared Now it is a cleare case resolved by Marius Salomonius confirmed at large by Rebussus by 12. unanswerable reasons the Authorities of sundry Civill Lawyers and Canonists quoted by hiâ— agreed by Albericus Gentiles and Hugo Grotius who both largely dispute it That Kings as well as Subjects are really bound to performe their Covenants Contracts Conditions especially those they make to all their Subjects and ratifie with an Oath since God himselfe who is most absolute is yet mostf firmly oblieged by his Oathes and Covenants made to his despicable vile ereatures sinfull men and never violates them in the least degree If then these conditions and Oathes be firme and obligatory to our kings if they will obstinately breake them by violating their Subjects Lawes Liberties Properties and making actuall warre upon them the condition and Oath too would be meerely voyde ridiculous absur'd an high taking of the Name of God in vaine yea a plaine delusion of the people if the whole State or people in their owne defence might not justly take up Armes to resist their kings and their malignant Forces in these persidious violations of trust conditions oaths and force them to make good their oath and covenants when no other means will induce them to it Even as the Subjects oath of homage and allegiance would be meerely frivilous if kings had no meanes nor coercive power to cause them to observe these oathes when they are apparently broken and many whole kingdomes had been much over seene in point of Policie or prudence in prescribing such conditions and oaths unto their kings had they reserved no lawfull power at all which they might lawfully exercise in point of conscience to see them really performed and duely redressed when notoriously transgressed through wilfulnesse negligence or ill pernicious advice Thirdly when any common or publick trust is committed to three or more though of subordinate and different quality if the trust be either violated or betrayed the inferiour trustees may and ought in point of Conscience to resist the other For instance if the custody of a City or Castle be committed to a Captaine Leutenant and common Souldiers or of a ship to the Master Captaine and ordinary Mariners If the Captaine or Master will betray the City Castle or ship to the enemie or Pirates or dismantle the City wals and fortifications to expose it unto danger or will wilfully run the ship against a rocke to split wrecke it and indanger all their lives freedomes contrary to the trust reposed in them or fire or blow up the City Fort ship not onely the Leiutenant Masters Mate and other inferiour Officers though subject to their commands but even the Common Souldiers and Marriners may withstand and forcibly resist them and are bound in Conscience so to doe because else they should betray their trust and destroy the City Fort ship and themselves too which they are bound by duty and compact to preserve This case of Law and conscience is so cleare so common in daily experience that no man doubts it The care and safety of our Realme by the originall politicke constitution of it alwayes hath beene and now is committed joyntly to the king the Lords and Commons in Parliament by the unanimous consent of the whole kingdome The king the supreame member of it contrary to the trust and duty reposed in him through the advise of evill Councellors wilfully betrayes the trust and safety of this great City and ship of the Republicke invades the inferiour Commanders Souldiours Citizens with an Army assaults wounds slayes spoyles plunders sackes imprisons his fellow trustees Souldiers Marriners Citizens undermines the walls fires the City ship delivers it up to theeves Pyrates murtherers as a common prey and wilfully runnes this ship upon a rocke of ruin If the Lords and Commons joyntly intrusted with him should not in this case by
force of Armes resist him and his unnaturall instruments there being no other meanes else of safety left them they should sinfully and wilfully betray their trust and be so farre from keeping a good Christian Conscience in not resisting by force that they should highly sinne against Conscience against their trust and duty against their naturall Country yea and their very Allegiance to the king himselfe by encouraging him in and consenting unto these proceedings which would make him not to be a king but Tyrant and destroy him as a king in the spoyle and ruine of his Kingdome thereby endangered to be consumed and tempt God himself as Pope Nicholas and Gratian resolve in these words If there be no necessity we ought at all times to abstaine from warres but if inevitable necessity urge us we ought not to abstaine from warres and warlike preparations for the defence of our selves of our Country and paternall Lawes no not in Lent least man should seeme to tempt God if when he hath meanes he provide not for his owne and others safety and prevents not the Detriments of holy religion Fourthly those injuries which Allies and other neighbour States or Princes may with good Conscience repulse with Armes from Subjects wrongfully oppressed invaded tyrannically by their Soveraignes or their wicked Instruments at or without the Subjects intreaty when they are unable to relieve themselves no doubt the Subjects themselves if able may with better reason and as good Conscience resist and repell because every man is nearer and more oblieged to defend and preserve himselfe and those of his owne Nation Religion blood then strangers are and may with lesse publick danger inconvenience and more speede effect it then Forraigners but Allies and Forraigne Neighbour States and Princes as Gratian oâ—t of the 5. Councell of Carthage Augustine Ambrose Hierom Anastatius Calistus and other Albericus Gentilis John Bodin a Huga Grotius and Generally all â—â—nonists Casuists Schoâ—lemen accord may in many cases with good conscience by forâ— of Arms repulse from Subjects wrongfully oppressed invaded and tyrannically abused the injuries offered them by their Soveraignes and that either at and in some cases without the Subjects intreaty Which they prove by Moses his slaying the AEgyptian that oppressed the Hebrew Exod. 2. 11. to 15. by Joshua his ayding of the Gibeonites against the five Kings that made war against them Josh 10. by the example of Jehoshaphat 1 Kin. 22. 2 Kings 3. Of the chiefe Captaines securing Paul with a gard of Souldiers against the Iews who had vowed his death Acts 23. by Abrahams rescuing Lot Gen. 14. by sundry ancieâ—t and late Examples in story Therfore Subjects themselves no doubt if able may with good reason and conscience lawfully resist and repell their Princes invading Forces though accompanied assisted with his personall presence Fifthly It is yeelded by all Divines Lawyers Canonists Schoolemen as Gratian Banâ—es Seto Lessius Vasquius Covaruviâ—s Aquinas Sylvester Bartolus Baldus Navarre Albericus Gentilis Grotius and others that private men by the Law of God and nature may in defence of their lives chastities principall members and estates lawfully resist all those who forcibly assault them to deprive them thereof yea and slay them to unlesse they be publicke persons of eminencie by whose slaughter the Commonweale should sustaine much prejudice whose lives in such cases must not be willingly hazzarded though their violence be resisted which is cleerely prooved by Iudges 11. 8. 15. to 18. 1 Sam. 17. 41. to 53. Deut. 22. 26. 27. since therefore all these are apparently indangered by an invasive warre and Army more then by any private assaults and no ayde no assistance or protection against the losse of life chastitie estate and other violences injuries which accompany wars can be expected from the Lawes or Prince himself the fountaine of this injustice or legall punishments inflicted on the malefactors whose armed power being above the reach of common justice and injuries countenanced abetted authorised by the Soveraine who should avenge and punish them every subject in particular and the whole state in Parliament assembled in generall may and ought in point of conscience joyntly and severally to defend themselves their neighbours brethren but especially their native Countrey Kingdome whose generall safety is to be preferred before the lives of any particular persons how great or considerable soever which may be casually hazarded by their owne wilfulnesse though not purposely endangered or cut off in the defensive incounter by those who make resistance And if according to Cajetan and other Schoolemen Innocents which onely casually hinder ones flight from a mortall enemie may be lawfully with good conscience slaine by the party pursued in case where he cannot else possibly escape the losse of his owne life because every mans owne life is dearer to him then anothers which he here takes away onely to preserve his owne life without any malicious murtherous intent though others doubt of this case or if innocent persons set perforce in the front of unjust assailants as by the Cavalleires at Brainford and elsewhere to prevent defence and wrong others with more securitie and lesse resistance may casually be slain though not intentionally by the defensive party as I thinke they may for prevention of greater danger and the publicke safety then certainely those of publicke place and Note who wilfully and unnaturally set themselves to ruine their Country Liberty Religion Innocent brethren who onely act the defensive part and voluntarily intrude themselves into danger may questionlesse with safe conscience be resisted repulsed in which if they casually chance to lose their lives without any malice or ill intention in the defendants it being onely through their owne default such a casuall accident when it happens or the remote possibility of it in the combate before it begins cannot make the resistance either unjust or unlawfull in point of conscience for then such a possibility of danger to a publike person should make all resistance unlawfull deprive the Republicke wholly of this onely remedy against tyrannicall violence and expose the whole common-weale to ruine whose weale and safety is to be preferred before the life or safety of any one member of it whatsoever Having thus at large evinced the lawfulnesse of Subjects necessary forcible resistance defensive wars against the unjust offensive Forces of their Soveraignes I shall in the next place answere the principall arguments made against it some whereof for ought I finde are yet unanswered These Objections are of foure sorts out of the Old Testament the New from reason from the example of the primitive Christians backed with the words of some Fathers I shall propound and answere them in order The first out of the Old Testament is that of Numb 16. Korah Dathan and Abiram for their insurrection against that very divine Authority which God himselfe
had delegated to Moses and Aaron without any injury or injustice at all once offered to them or any assault upon them Ergo marke the Non-sence of this argumentation no Subjects may lawfully take up meere necessary defensive Armes in any case to resist the bloody Tyrannie Oppression and outrages of wicked Princes or their Cavalleires when they make warre upon them to destroy or enslave them An Argument much like this in substance No man ought to rise up against an honest Officer or Captaine in the due execution of his Office when he offers him no injury at all Therefore he ought not in conscience to resist him when he turnes a theefe or murtherer and felloniously assaults him to rob him of his purse or cut his throate Or private men must not causelesly mutinie against a lawfull Magistrate for doing justice and performing his duty Ergo the whole Kingdome in Parliament may not in Conscience resist the Kings Captaines and Cavalleeres when they most unnaturally and impiously assault them to take away their Lives Liberties Priviledges Estates Religion oppose and resist justice and bring the whole Kingdome to utter desolation The very recitall of this argument is an ample satisfactory refutation of it with this addition These seditious Levites Rebelled against Moses and Aaron onely because God himselfe had restrained them from medling with the Priests Office which they would contemptuously usurpe and therefore were most severely punished by God himself against whose expresse Ordinance they Rebelled Ergo the Parliament and Kingdome may in no case whatsoever though the King be bent to subvert Gods Ordinances Religion Lawes Liberties make the least resistance against the king or his invading forces under paine of Rebellion High Treason and eternall condemnation This is Doctor Fernes and some others Bedlam Logicke Divinity The next is this Thou shalt not revile the Gods nor curse the Ruler of thy people Ex. 22. 28. Eccl. 10. 20. Curse not the King no not in thy thought and curse not the rich in thy bed-Chamber which is well explained by Prov. 17. 26. It is not good to strike Princes for equitie Ergo it is unlawfull for the Subjects to defend themselves against the Kings Popish depopulating Cavaleers I answer the first text pertaines properly to Judges and other sorts of Rulers not to Kings not then in being among the Israelites the second to rich men as well as Kings They may as well argue then from these texts that no Iudges nor under-rulers nor rich men whatsoever though never so unjust or wicked may or ought in conscience to be resisted in their unjust assaults Riots Robberies no though they be bent to subvert Religion Lawes Liberties as that the King and his Souldiers joyntly or severally considered may not be resisted yea these acute disputants may argue further by this new kinde of Logicke Christians are expresly prohibited to curse or revile any man whatsoever under paine of damnation Rom. 12. 14. Mat. 5. 44. Levit. 19 14. Numb 23. 7. 8. 2 Sam. 16. 9. Levit. 20. 9. c. 24 P 1. 14. 23. Levit. 20. 9. Prov. 20. 20. 1 Cor. 6. 10 1 Cor. 4. 12. 1 Pet. 2. 23. Jude 9. Ergo we ought to resist no man whatsoever no not a theefe that would rob us cut-throate Cavaleers that would murther us lechers that would ravish us under paine of damnation What pious profitable Doctrine thinke you is this All cursings and railings are simply unlawfull in themselves all resistance is not so especially that necessary we now discourse of against unlawfull violence to ruine Church and State To argue therefore all resistance is simply unlawfull because cursing and reviling of a different nature are so is ill Logicke and worse Divinity If the objectors will limit their resistance to make the Argument sensible and propose it thus All cursing and reviling of Kings and Rulers for executing justice impartially for so is the chiefe intendment of the place objected delinquents being apt to clamour against those who justly censure them is unlawfull Ergo the forcible resisting of them in the execution of justice and their lawfull authority is unlawfull the sequell I shall grant but the Argument will be wholy impertinent which I leave to the Objectors to refine The third Argument is this That which peculiarly belongs to God no man without his speciall authority ought to meddle with But taking up Armes peculiarly belongeth to he Lord. Deut 32. 35. Where the Lord saith vengeance is mine especially the sword which of all temporall vengeance is the greatest The Objector puts no Ergo or conclusion to it because it concludes nothing at all to purpose but onely this Ergo The King and Cavalleeres must lay downe their Armes and swords because God never gave them any speciall commission to take them up Or Ergo no man but God must weare a sword at least of revenge and â—hether the kings and Cavalleers Offensive or the Parliaments meere Defensive sword be the sword of vengeance and malice let the world determine to the Objectors shame The fourth is from Eccles 8. 2. 3. 4. I councell thee to keepe the Kings Commandment and that in regard of the Oath of God Be not hasty to goe out of his sight stand not in an evill thing for he doth whatsoever pleaseth him where the word of a king is there is power and who may say unto him what dost thou This Text administers the Opposites a double Argument The first is this All the Kings Commands are to be kept of all his Subjects by vertue of the Oathes of supremacy alleigance and the late protestation including them both Ergo by vertue of these Oathes we must not resist his Cavalleeres but yeeld our thoates to their swords our purses and estates to their rapines our chastities to their Lecheries our Liberties to their Tyrannies our Lawes to their lusts our Religion to their Popish Superstition and Blasphemies without any opposition because the king hath oft commanded us not to resist them But seeing the Oath and Law of God and those oathes of ours obleige us onely to obey the Kings just legall commands and no other not the Commands and lusts of evill Councellors and Souldiers this first Argument must be better pointed ere it will wound our cause The second this The king may lawfully do whatsoever pleaseth him Ergo neither are He or his Forces to be resisted To which I answer that this verse relates onely unto God the next antecedent who onely doth and may doe what he pleaseth and that both in heaven and earth Psal 135. 6. Psal 115. 3 Esay 46. 10. not to Kings who neither may nor can doe what they please in either being bound both by the Laws of God man and their Coronation Oathes perchance the oath of God here meant rather then that of supremacie or alleigance to doe onely what is lawfull and just not what themselves shall please But admit it
meant of Kings not God First the text saith not that a king may lawfully doe what he pleaseth but he doth whatsoever pleaseth him Solomâ—n himselfe committed idolatry built Temples for Idolatrous worship served his idolatrous wives Gods married with many idolatrous wives greivously oppressed his people c. for which God threatned to rent the kingdome from himself as he did the ten Tribes from his son for those sinnes of his David committed adultery and wilfully numbred the people and what King Jeroboam Manasseh Ahab other wicked Kings have done out of the pleasure and freedome of their lawlesse wills to the infinite dishonour of God the ruine of themselves their posterities Kingdomes is sufficiently apparent in Scripture was all therefore just lawfull unblameable because they did herein whatsoever they pleased not what was pleasing to God If not as all must grant then your foundation failes that Kings may lawfully doe whatsoever they will and Solomons words must be taken all together not by fragments and these latter words coupled with the next preceeding Stand not in an evill matter and then Pauls words will well interpret his Rom. 13. 4. But if thou doe that which is evill be afraid for he beareth not the sword in vaine for he is the minister of God a revenger to execute wrath upon them that doe evill So that the genuine sence of the place is and must be this Stand not in an evill matter for the king path an absolute power to doe whatsoever he pleaseth in way of justice to punish thee if thou continue obstinate in thy evill courses to pardon thee if thou confesse submit and crave pardon for them Ergo the king and his Cavalleeres have an absolute power to murther plunder destroy his Subjects subvert Religion and he and his Forces must not herein be resisted is an ill consequent from such good premises The third is this Where the word of a King is there is power and who may say unto him what dost thou that is expostulate with censure him for doing justly as Iob 34. 17. 18. 19. expound it Ergo the king or his Forces may not be resisted in any case they might rather conclude Therefore neither Kingdome nor Parliament nor any Subject or person whatsoever ought to demand of the king to what end or why he hath raised Forces and Armed Papists against the Parliament and Protestant Religion These Court-Doctors might as truely conclude from hence If the king should command us to say Masse in his Chappell or our Parishes to adorne Images to turne professed Masse-priests c. to vent any Erronious Popish Doctrines to pervert the Scriptures to support Tyrannie and lawlesse cruelty we must and will as some of us doe cheerefully obey for where the word of a King is there is power and we may not say unto him what dost thou If a King should violently ravish matrons defloure virgins unnaturally abuse youth cut all his Subjects throates fire their houses sacke their Cities subvert their liberties and as Bellarmine puts the case of the Popes absolute irresistible authority send millions of soules to hell yet no man under paine of damnation may or ought to demande of him Domine cur ita facis Sir what doe you But was this the holy Ghosts meaning thinke you in this place If so then Nathan was much to blame for reprehending king Davids Adultery Azariah and the 40. Priests who withstood King Vzziah when he would have offered incense on the incense Altar and thrust him out of the Temple telling him it pertaineth not to thee Vzziah to burne incense to the Lord c. Were no lesse then Traytors John Baptist was much over-seene to tell King Herod It is not lawfull for thee to have thy brothers wife The Prophet who sharpely reprehended Amaziah for his Idolatry and new altar 2 Chron 25. 15. 16. was justly checked by the king Eliiah was to be rebuked for telling Ahab so plainely of his faults and sending such a harsh message to King Ahaziah Elisha much to be shent for using such harsh language to King Jehoram 2 Kings 3. 13. 14. yea Samuel and Hanani deserved the strappado for telling King Saul and Asa That they had done foolishly 1 Sam. 13. 3. 2 Chron. 15. 9. The meaning therefore of this Text so much mistaken unlesse we will censure all these Prophets and have Kings not onely irresistible but irreprehensible for their wickednesse is onely this No man may presume to question the kings just actions warranted by his lawfull royall power this text being parallel with Rom. 13. 1. 2. 3. 4. What then Ergo None must question or resist his or his Cavalleers unjust violence and proceedings not the Parliament the supremest Iudicature and Soveraigne Power in the Kingdome is a ridiculous consequence yet this is all this Text doth contribute to their present dying bad cause The 5. is that usually objected Text of Psal 105. 14 15. Touch not mine annointed Ergo the King and his Cavaleers must not be so much as touched nor resisted I wonder they did not as well argue Ergo none must henceforth kisse his Majesties hand since it cannot be done without touching him neither must his Barber trim him nor his Bedchamber-men attire him for feare of high Treason in touching him And the Cavaleers must not henceforth be arrested for their debts apprehended for their robberies and murthers neither must the Chyrurgion dresse their wounds or pock-soars or otherwise touch them so dangerous is it to touch them not out of fear of infection but for fear of transgressing this sacred Text scarce meant of such unhallowed God-dammeeâ— Such conclusions had been more literall and genuine then the first But to answer this long since exploded triviall Objection not named by Dr Ferne though revived by others since him I say first that this Text concernes not kings at all but the true anoynted Saints of God their Subjects whom kings have been alwayes apt to oppresse and persecute witnesse Psal 2. 2. c. Act. 4. 26. 27. Act. 12. 1 2 3 with all sacred and Ecclesiasticall Histories ancient or moderne This is most apparent first because these words were spoken by God to Kings themselves as the Text is expresse Psal 105 14 15. 1 Chron. 16. 20 21. He suffered no man to do them wrong but reproved even KINGS for their sakes saying even to king themselves namely to king Pharaoh an king Abimâ—lech Gen. 12. 10. to 20. Chap. 20. and 26 1. to 17. 29 Touch not mine Anointed and do my Prophets no harm Therefore not meant of kings Secondly because these words were spoken directly and immediately of Abraham Isaac Iacob their wives and families as it is evident by Verse 6. the whole series of the Psalme which is Historicall the forecited Texts of Genesis to which the words relate the punctuall confession of Augustine and all other Expositors on this Psalm Now neither they
nor their wives nor their children clearly were actuall much lesse anointed Kings For first they lived long before the government of kings was erected among the Israelites of whom Saul was the first 2. They had no kingdom nor territories of their own when these words were uttered but were strangers in the Land going from one Nation and Kingdom to another sojourning obscurely like Pilgrims and Strangers upon earth in Egypt and Gerar under King Pharaoh Abimelech and other Princes not as kings but subjects and private men as Verse 12. 13. Gen. 12. and 20. and 26 Chap. 36. 7. Chap. 37. 1. Deut. 23. 7. Hebr. 11. 13. resolve Thirdly They were but very few men in number Verse 12. Genesis 34. 30. they were Masters onely of their own small families and that under forraign Kings therfore doubtlesse no kings at all Fourthly this was spoken of these Patriarchs Wives and Families as well as of themselves and they certainly were no kings unlesse you will have kingdoms consisting onely of kings and no subjects at all Verse 12. 14. Gen. 12. 15. to 20. Chap. 20. 2. to 17. Chap. 26. 11. Chap. 34. 30. Chap. 35. 6. Fifthly the Scripture no where calls them kings much lesse the Text which terms them expresly Prophets Touch not mine Anointed and do MY PROPHETS not properly so taken but largely that is My servants my chosen people as Verse 6. expounds it no harm The later Clause Do my Prophets no harm being an exact interpretation of the former Touch not mine Anointed that is My Prophets and Servants so far forth as to do them harm For in a common sence no doubt they might be touched without offence to God or them by way of imbracement assistance and the like Sixtly Though there were kings in Abrahams dayes or before as is evident by Gen. 14. 1 2 c. yet there were no anointed kings nor were kings ever called Gods anointed till Sauls dayes who was the first anointed King I read of 1 Sam. 10. 1. and the first king ever stiled The Lords Anointed 1 Sam. 12. 3 5. whereas Priests were anointed long before Exodus 30. 30. Chap. 40. 13 15. Therefore Anointed in the Text cannot be meant of kings or of persons actually anointed but onely of those Saints of God who were metapâ—â—rically and spiritually anointed having the gifts and graces of Gods Spirit Psal 28. 8 9. Hab. 3. 13. 2. Cor. 1. 21. 1 Iohn 2. 27. Eze. 16. 9. Isay 20. 27. This Text then being not meant of kings which are actually but of Christians onely spiritualy anointed in regard of which anointing as I have elsewhere largely manifested they are in Scripture not onely stiled Christians which in plain English is annoynted Acts 11. 26. c. 26. 26. 1 Pet. 4. 16. but Christ in the abstract 1 Cor. 12. 12. Ephes 4. 12 13. the Members Body Flesh and Bones of Christ 1 Cor. 12. 12 7. Ephes 1. 22. 23 c. 5. 29 30 31. Col. 1. 24. Yea Kings and Priests unto God the Father Exod. 19. 6. 1 Pet. 2. 5. Revel 1. 6. c. 5. 10. c. 20. 6. for whom God hath prepared a heavenly Kingdom wherein they shall reign with Christ for ever with an everlasting Crown of glory too Matth. 5. 3. c. 25. 34. Luke 6. 20. c. 22. 29. 30. Col. 1. 13. 2 Thess 2. 12. 1 Corinth 9. 25. 2 Tim. 2. 12. c. 4. 8. Heb. 12. 28. 2 Pet. 5. 4. 2 Pet. 1. 11. Iam. 2. 5. Revel 22. 5. The proper argument then that can be thence deduced by our Opposites is but this Non sequitur Kings themselves must not touch Gods spiritually anointed Saints and servants to do them harm Ergo if Kings do violently and unjustly make warre upon them not onely to harm but plunder murther destroy them utterly extirpate that Religion they professe and are bound to maintain they are obliged in point of conscience under pain of damnation not to resist Whereas the conclusion should be directly contrary Therefore they may lawfully with good conscience resist them to the uttermost in such cases For since God hath thus directly enjoyned Kings Not to touch or do them harm if Kings will wilfully violate this injunction they may with safe conscience by force of Arms withstand repulse their unjust violence and hinder Kings or their instruments from doing them that iniury which God himself prohibits else they should be accessories to their kings iniustice and authors of their own wrongs according to these received Maximes Qui non pohibet malum quod potest jubet Qui potest obviare perturbare perversos non facit nihil est aliud quam favere eorum impietati Nec caret scrupulo societatis occultae qui manifesto facinori desinit obviâ—re Qui definit obviare cum potest consentit used by Ambrose Hierome Augustine Isiodor Anastatius and Gratian who recites applies them to defensive wars And if our Opposites who pervert this Text by translating it from Subjects and Saints to Kings may in their erronious sence safely argue thence That if subiects take up Arme against their Princes contrary to this Text their Princes may by vertue of this precept iustly resist them with force and repulse their iniuries then by the true genuine sence thereof being meant of Subiects Saints not Kings if Kings will violently assault and make war upon Saints their Subiects to harm them they may with as good reason and conscience defend themselves against their Kings and ill Instruments as their Kings protect themselves in this sort against them and that by authoritie of this Text by our Opposites own argumentation Thirdly admit this Scripture meant of Kings yet what strength is there in it to priviledge them from iust necessary resistance If any it must rest in the word annointed but this will afford kings no such corporall priviledges as many fancie neither from lawfull resistance nor deposition nor sentence of death it self which I shall undeniably evidence to refute a commonly received errour For first it is apparent that the anointed here meant are such onely who are spiritually annointed either with the externall profession and ceremonies of Gods true religion or with the internall graces of the Spirit for neither Abraham Isaac Iacob nor their families nor any kings or Priests in their dayes for ought we finde were corporally annointed Besides the annointing here intended is that which is common to Priests and Prophets as Touch not mine annointed and do my Prophets no harm infallibly proves rather then that which is peculiar to kings Whence I thus argue That annointing which is common to subiects as well as kings and cannot secure any subiects who in the genuinesence of the Text are Gods annointed from iust resistance corporall violence legall censures or death cannot in or of it self alone secure kings from any of these no further then it secures subiects for the annointing being the same in both must have the self-same operation and immunities in
must pray to God to restore their health Ergo they must take no Physick but onely pray All men are expresly commanded to crie and call upon God in the day of trouble Ergo they must use no meanes but prayer to free themselves from trouble pretty Logick Reason Divinity fitter for derision then any serious Answer This is all this Text concludes and that grosly mistaken Speech of Saint Ambrose Christians weapons are Prayers and Tears of which anon iâ— its due place In one word prayer no more excludes resistance then resistance prayer both of them may and sometimes when defence is necessary as now ought to concurre so that our Court Doctors may as well argue as some Prelates not long since did in word and deed Ministers ought to pray and Gods House is an Oratory for prayer Ergo they must not Preach atleast â—ery seldom or make his House an Auditory for Preaching Or as rationally reason from this Text That Subjects must cry out to God against their kings oppressions Ergo they must not petition their Kings much lesse complain to their Parliament for relief as conclude from thence Ergo they may in no case resist the king or his invading Forces though they indeavour to subvert Religion Laws Liberties as the Doctor himself states the controversie whose arguments will hardly satisfie conscience being so voyd of reason sence yea science The eighth is this None of the Prophets in the old Testament reprehending the Kings of Israel and Iudeh for their grosse Iaolatry cruelty oppression did call upon the Elder of the people for the duty of resistance neither do we finde the people resisting or taking up Arms against any of their kings no not against Ahab or Manasseh upon any of these grounds Ergo resistance is unlawfull To which I must reply first That none of the Prophets did ever forbid resistance in such cases under pain of Damnation as our new Doctors do now Ergo it was lawfull because not prohibited Secondly that as none of the people were then inhibited to resist so not dehorted from it therefore they might freely have done it had they had hearts and zeal to do it Thirdly Iosephus resolves expresly That by the very Law of God Deuter. 17. If the King did contrary to that Law multiply silver gold and horses to himself more then was fitting the-Israelites might lawfully resist him and were bound to do it to preserve themselves from Tyrannie Therefore no doubt they might have lawfully resisted their Kings Idolatry cruelty oppressions Fourthly Hulderichus Zuinglius a famous Protestant Divine with others positively affirms That the Israelites might not onely lawfully resist but likewise deposeâ— heâ—r Kings for their wickednesses and Idolatries yea That all the people were justly punished by God because they removed not their flagitious idolatrous Kings and Princes out of their places which he proves by Ierem 15. where after the four Plagues there recited the Prophet subjoynes the cause of them saying Verse 4. I will give them in fury to all the Kingdoms of the Earth that is I will stirre up in fury all the kings of the earth against them because of Manasseh the son of Hezekiah king of Iudah for that which he did in Ierusalem This Manasseh had committed many wickednesses by Idolatrie and the stedding of innocent blood as we may see in the one and twentieth Chapter of the second of the Kings for which evills the Lord grievously punished the people of Israel Manasseh shed overmuch innocent blood untill he had filled Ierusalem even to the mouth with his sins wherewith he made Iudah to sinne that it might do evill before the Lord Therefore because Manasseh King of Iudah did these most vile abominations above all that the Amorites had done before him and made the Land of Iudah to sin in his undeanesse therefore thus saith the Lord God of Israel Behold I will bring evill upon Ierusalem and Iudah that whosever shall hear both his ears shall tingle c. In summe if the Iews had not thus permitted their King to be wicked WITHOVT PVNISMENT they had not been so grievâ—â—nsly punished by God We ought to pull and crost away even our eye that offends so a hand and foot c. If the Israelites had thus DE OSED Manassch by consent and suffrages of all or the greatest part of the multitude they had not been so grievessly punished of God So Zuinglius with whom even B. Rilson himself in some sort accords who in de ending interpreting his opinion câ—ntesseth That it is a question among the Learned What Soveraignty the whole people of Israel had over their Kings confessing that the peoples resouing Ionathan that he died not when Saul would have put him to dâ—â—th Davids speech to the peoâ—le when he purposed to reduce the Arke all the Congregations speech and carriage toward Rehoboam when they came to make him King with the pâ—ople speech to Ieremy Thou shalt die the death have perswaded some and might lead Zuingliâ—s to think that the people of Israel notwithstanding they called for a King yet REâ—ERVED TO THEMSELVES SVFFICIENT AVTHORITY TO OVERRVLE THEIR KING IN THOSE THINGS WHICH SEEMED EXPEDIENT AND NEEDFVLL FOR THE PVBLIKE WLLFARE else God would not punish the people for the kings iniquity which they must suffer and not redresse Which opinion if as Orthodox as these learned Divines and Iosephus averre it not onely quite ruines our Opposites Argument but their whole Treatises and cause at once But fiftly I answer that subjects not onely by command of Gods Prophets but of God himself and by his speciall approbation have taken up Arms against their Idolatrous Princes to ruine them and their Posterities A truth so apparent in Scripture that I wonder our purblinde Doctors discern it not For did not God himself notwithstanding his frequent conditionall Promises to establish the Kingdom of Israel on David Solomon and their Posterity for Solomons grosse Idolatry occasioned by his Wives tell Solomon in expresse terms VVherefore for as much as this is done of thee and thou hast not kept my Covenant and my Statutes which I have commanded thee I will surely REND THE KINGDOM FROM THEE and will give it to thy servant Notwithstanding in thy dayes I will not do it for David thy fathers sake but I will rend it out of the hand of thy son Did not the Prophet Abijah in pursuance hereof rending Ierohoams garment into twelve pieces tell him Thus saith the Lord the God of Israel behold I will rend the Kingdom out of the hand of Solomon and will give ten tribes to thee And I will take the Kingdom out of his sons hand and will give it unto thee even ten Tribes and I will take thee and thou shalt reign according to all that thy soul desireth and shalt be King over Israel and I will for this afflict the Seed of David y Yea
did not ALL ISRAEL upon Solomons death when Rehoboam his son refused to grant their iust requests at their coming to Sechem to make him king use this speech to the king What Portion have we in David neither have we inheritance in the son of lesse to your Tents ô Israel now see to thine own house David Whereupon they departed and fell away from the house of David ever after and made Iereboam King over all Israel And doth not the Text directly affirm Whenefore Rehoboam hearkned not unto the people for the cause was from the Lord that he might perform the saying which the Lord spake to Abijah unto Ieroboam the son of Nebat After which when Rehoboam raised a mighty Army to reduce the ten Tribes to obedience the Word of the Lord came to Shemaiah the man of God saying Speak unto Rehoboam and all the house of Iudah and Benjamin Thus SAITH THE LORD Ye shall not go up to fight against your brethren the children of Israel return every man to his house FOR THIS THING IS FROM ME They hearkned therefore to the word of the Lord and returned to depart according to the word of the Lord. Lo here a Kingdom quite rent a way from the very house of David yea a new King and kingdom erected by the People by Gods and his Prophets speciall direction and approbation for King Solomons Idolatry Who is such a stranger to the sacred Story but hath oft-times read how God anoynted Iehu King of purpose to extirpate and out off the whole house of K. Ahab his Lard for his and Iezabels Idolatry and blood-shed in flaying the Prophets and unjustly executing Naboth for his Vineyard in performance whereof he slew his Soveraign King Ioram Ahaziah King of Iudah Queen Iezabel all Ahabs posterity his great men his Nobles and all the Priests and Worshippers of Baal till he left none remaining according to the word of the Lord which he spake by his servant Elijah 2 Kings c. 9. 10. For which good service the Lord said unto Iehu Because THOV HAST DONE WELL in executing that which is right in mine eyes and hast done unto the house of Ahab according to all that was IN MINE HEART thy children of the 4. generation shall sit on the Thron of Israel This fact therefore of his thus specially commanded approved rewarded by God himself must needs be just and lawfull nor Treason nor Rebellion in Iehu unlesse the Opposites will charge God to be the author approver and rewarder of sin of Treason Neither will it serve their turns to Reply that this was an extraordinary example not to be imitated without such a speciall commission from heaven as Iehu had and no man can now a dayes expect For since God hath frequently injoyned all grosse incorrigible Idolaters especially those who are nearest and dearest to and most potent to seduce us to be put to death without any pitty or exception of Kings whose examples are most pernicious and apt to corrupt the whole Nation as the presidents of the Idolatrous kings of Israel and Iudah abundantly evidence if Kings become open professed Idolaters though private persons may not murther them and their families as Iehu yet the representative body or greater part of their Kingdoms as many Pious Divines affirm may lawfully convent depose if not judge them capitally for it and Gods putting zeal and courage into their hearts or exciting them by his faithfull Ministers to such a proceeding is a sufficient Divine Commission to satisfie Conscience if no sinister private ends but meer zeal of Gods glory and detestation of Idolatry be the onely Motives to such their proceedings Thus we read God stirred up Baacha exalted out of the dust and made him a Prince over the house of Israel who slew king Nadab and smote all the house of Jeroboam till he left him not any that breatned because of the sins of Ieroboam which he sinned and which he made Israel sin by his provocations wherewith he provoked the Lord God of Israel to anger who going on after in Ieroboams sins God threatens to out off all his house and make it like the house of Ieroboam which was actually executed by Zimri who slew his Soveraign King Elah son to Baacha With all the house of Baacha and left not one that pissed against the wall neither of his kinsfolks nor of his friends according to the word of the Lord which he spake against Baacha byâ— â—chu the Prophet Which act of Zimri though a just judgement in regard of God on the family of Baacha for their Idolatry was notwithstanding reputed Treason in Zimri because he did it not out of Conscience or zeal against Idolatry being and continuing an Idolater himself but onely out of ambition to usurp the Crown without the peeples consent whereupon all the people made Omri King and then going all to the Royall Palace set it on fire and burnt Omri in it both for his sins Idolatries and Treason which he wrought We read expresly that after the time that Amaziah did turn away from following the Lord they for this conspired a conspiracie against him in Ierusalem and he fled to Lachish but they sent to Lachish after him slew him there and they brought him upon horses and buried him with his fathers in the City of Iudah Then all the people of Iudah took Uzziah who was 16 years old and MADE HIM KING in the room of his father Amaziah and he did that which was right in the sight of the Lord. So Zachariah Shallum Pekahiah Pekah four evill Kings of Iudah successivly acquiring the Crown by murther and reigning evilly in Gods fight were all slain by Gods just judgement on them of one another and Hoshea In few words God himself ever annexed this condition to the Kings of Israel and Iudah that they should serve and fear him obey him Laws keep his Covenant otherwise if they did wickedly for sake him or commit idolatry he would destroy forsake and cast them and their seed off from being Kings When therefore they apparently violated the condition the whole State and people as Gods Instruments lawfully might and sometimes did by Gods speciall direction remov depose and sometimes put them even to death for their grosse iniquities and idolatries and when they did it not it was not as many think for want of lawfull Soveraign Authority remaining in the whole State and people as I shall fully manifest in the Appendix but out of a defect of zeal out of a generall complying with their Kings in their abominable idolatries and sins which brought War Captivity ruine both on their Kings their Posteritie the whole Nation and Kingdoms of Iudah and Israel as the Sacred Story plentifully relates All which considere this object on proves not onely false but fatall to the Obiectors cause who might with more discretion have forborn then forced such an answer to it which I hope and desire
or the Subjects and every man with safe conscience may chearefully serve in such a warre upon the Parliaments encouragement or command without guilt of treason or rebellion either in Law or Conscience For the third Question Whether Tyrants or unjust oppressing Magistrates as they are such be within the intendment of this Text and not to be resisted in any case I have fully cleared this before from the occasion scope and arguments used in this Chapter that they are not within the compasse of this Text as they are such and may be resisted in their Tyranny and oppressions notwithstanding this inhibition I shall not repeat but onely fortifie this Position with some new reasons and authorities First then that which is not the ordinance of God but rather of the Devill and the meere sinne and enormity of the Governour himselfe not of the Government is not within the intention of this Text and may lawfully bee resisted without any violation of it But Tyrants and unjust oppressing Magistrates as they are such are not Gods ordinance but rather the Devills and their Tyranny and oppression is onely the sinne and enormity of the Governours themselves not of the government A truth granted by all men Therefore they are not within the compasse of this Text and may lawfully be resisted without any violation of it Secondly that which is no point of the Magistrates lawfull power ordained of God but diametrally repugnant to it cannot be within the meaning of this Text and may lawfully be resisted but the tyranny oppression rapine and violence of lawlesse Kings and Magistrates are such as all must and doe acknowledge Ergo they are not within the verge and compasse of this Text and may lawfully bee resisted Thirdly all powers intended in the Text are not only ordained but ordered of God that is Paraeus with others observe they are circumscribed bounded with certain Rules or Lawes of justice and honesty within which they must containe themselves else they exorbitate from Gods ordinance when they passe beyond these limits and become none of Gods This the Greeke word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which Arias Montanus and others render ordinatae and the Margin of our English Bibles are ordered of God doth sufficiently warrant being coupled with the subsequent limitations For rulers are not a terrour to good workes but to evill c. they are Gods Ministers attending continually on this very thing Now the Tyranny and oppression of Kings and other Rulers are meere exorbitances arbitrary illegall actions exceeding the bounds of justice and honesty prescribed by the Lawes of God and men Therefore not within the limits of this Text and resistible Fourthly it is generally accorded by all Commentators that though the lawfull power of Princes or other Magistrates degenerating unto Tyrants be of God and not to be resisted yet the Tyranny it selfe and abuse of this power is of Satan not of God and the vice of the persons onely not of the Power it selfe whence they conclude that Tyrants are not within the meaning of this Scripture So Origen Paraeus Willet with most others on this Text and Zuinglius most expresly Explanatio Artic. 41. Tom. 1. f. 82. 83. where he complaines that many Tyrants cheate steale rob slay plunder and attempt any thing against their subjects to oppresse them assuming a pretext and vayle of their malice from this Text of Paul Yea Dominicus Soto Cajetan Pererius and other Popish commentators on this place observe that Paul addes this Epithet of higher or excelling powers omitted by him in other parallel Texts of purpose to exclude Tyrants who are no excelling Lords nor lawfull Powers reigning oft times by Gods permission for the peoples punishment not by his ordination for their good and blame Bueer for saying that Tyrants power is from God as if he were ths author of sinne and Tyranny This then fully answers that absurd errour of Doctor Ferne wherein all his force is placed That the Power in Pauls dayes which he here prohibits to resist were subverters of that which was good and the Roman Emperors Tyrants where he sottishly confounds the tyranny lusts and vices of the Emperors persons which were detestable with their power it selfe which was good and commendable as if the Imperiall power it selfe was ill because Nero was ill and was therefore justly condemned to death by the Roman Senate as a publike enemy to the Roman State though they approved and continued his just Imperiall principality which lasted in succession for many hundred yeares after his censure death To which I shall onely adde that though Nero himselfe were a Tyrant yet the Roman Senate and all their Inferiour Offices were not Tyrants many of them no doubt being just and upright Magistrates The Precept therefore being thus in the generall and the plurall number Let every soule be subject unto the higher powers nor personall let them be subject to Nero or speciall to the Roman Emperour whom Paul no doubt would have specified had he specially intended them as our opposites fondly dreame we may safely conclude that the Apostle intended it onely of lawfull powers and Magistrates not of Nero or other Tyrants And writ this to Christians onely to whom he dedicates this Epistle witnesse Ch. 1. V. 7. To all that be at Rome beloved of God called to be Saints c. not to Pagan Romans as the Doctor dreames to whom he writes not much lesse to the Roman Senate who were then the soveraigne power and therefore could bee subject to no other but themselves Precepts of obedience to children and Servants concerne not parents and masters as such in point of submission or obedience For the fourth Quere Whether Kings and Kingdomes be Gods ordinance or an institution Jure divino not a humane ordinance instituted Jure humano or how farre divine or humane Is a necessary considerable question grounded on this Text and very needfull to be discussed to cleare the present controversie Some of our opposites are so intoxicated with the divinity of Monarchy as they confidently determine hat the efficient cause of royall Monarchicall power is onely God not the people That Kings receive no power or regall Authority from the people but from God alone That the power of Kings is not a humane but a divine power of which God onely is the efficient cause That the people doe not make the King but God properly and absolutely this power right and authority he hath from God That the King hath no dominion and power from his Subjects by way of trust but from God from whom he hath his kingdome and power so that by Idolatry and oppression he breakes not the trust reposed in him by his Subjects because the people HAVE COMMITTED NOTHING TO HIS CHARGE but God onely c. For proofe whereof they produce Prov. 8. 15. By me Kings reigne Dan. 2. 21. God removeth Kings and setteth up Kings Dan. 4. 17. 25. The most
to be of God by way of permission and of Ordination too in reference to the peoples punishment Job 34. 30. Hos 13. 11. 1 Sam. 8. 18. In these regards common to all other Governours and lawfull Governments as well as Kings and Monarchies Kings and Kingly Authority are and may be said to be of God and Gods Ordinance yet not immediately or properly in the first acception here refuted but so as that still they are really the institutions and ordinances of men of humane not divine right and authority As for the objected Scriptures to prove Kings jure Divino as Prov. 8. 15. By me Kings Reigne c. Ergo they are of immediate divine institution and have all their authority from God not from the people and may in no case be resisted censured deposed or put to death for any misdemeanours the consequences thence inferred I answer First That this Text speakes onely of the promotion or Reigne of Kings not of the erections and power of Monarchies and so doe Daniel 2. 21. c. 4. 17. 25. c. 5. 26. 28. with the other objected Scriptures Secondly If it be meant of the rule of Kings then true it is that good Kings Reigne by Gods direction according to his word executing justice and judgement as he enjoynes them But then it is not true of wicked Kings and Tyrants who though they Reigne by Gods Providence or permission yet they rule not by his word and will as he prescribes them Thirdly If it be meant of the meanes and manner of Kings comming to their Kingdomes as I conceive it is and the Texts of Daniel perswade True it is first That some Kings Reigned and came to the Crowne by Gods immediate nomination and designation as Saul David Solomon Jeroboam Jehu and Hazael did But that all or most did heretofore or now doe so especially in Pagan Kingdomes is a notorious falshood Secondly it is true That most lawfull Kings in hereditary or elective Kingdomes come to their Crownes and Reigne though not by Gods immediate nomination yet by his ordinary or speciall providence though it be untrue of Vsurpers and Tyrants who come to Reigne by Treason Murther or other unlawfull meanes and so by Gods permission onely rather than his providence and then the sense of the place is but this That Kings receive their Crownes and Reigne by Gods generall or more speciall providence Which I thinke is the full and proper sense of the place In this sense C. Plinius Secundus a heathen in his admirable Panegyrio to the Emperour Trajan a Pagan Rhetorizeth thus of him Quid enim praestabilius est aut pulchrius munus Deorum quam castus sanctus Diis simillimus Princeps Ac si adhuc dubium fuisset sorte casuque Rectores terris an aliquo numine darentur Principem tamen nostrum liqueret DIVINITUS CONSTITUTUM Non enim occulta potestate fatorum sed ab Jove ipso coram ac palam repertus electus est c. Which Tertullian thus seconds speaking even of the Roman Pagan Emperours Inde est Imperator unde homo antequam Imperator inde Potestas ei unde spiritus Per Deum tantus est So Irenaeus Cujus jussu homines nascuntur hujus jussu Reges constituuntur And Diodorus Siculus of the AEgyptians Existimant non SINE DIVINA QUADAM PROVIDENTIA pervenisse ad summam de omnibus Potestatem So the Esses hold this opinion Non obtingit cuiquam Imperium sine Dei cura speciali So Vitigis Omnis provectus maxime Regius ad Divinitatis munera referendus est and Clemens Romanus too Regem timeto sciens Domini esse electionem Which Grotius de Jure Belli l. 1. c. 3. sect 8. confirmes with other Authorities all concurring in this That Kings and Emperours are such onely by the selfe-same PROVIDENCE OF GOD by which they were men before they were Emperours which gives them no greater Prerogative in respect of irresistibility in unjust exorbitant actions then their being men by the selfe-same providence of God gave them before they were Emperours as Tertullians words most clearely prove But what priviledge this alone should yeeld to Kings more than to any other Magistrates Men or Beasts for my part I cannot yet discerne For doth not the same Text say of Nobles Princes Judges as well as of Kings Prov. 8. 15 16. By me Princes put as contradistinct to Kings decree justice By me Princes Rule AND NOBLES YEA ALL JUDGES OF THE EARTH Doth not David say of all kinde of Promotions whatsoever Psal 113. 7 8. The Lord raiseth the poore out of the dust and lifeteth the needy out of the dunghill that he may set him with Princes even with the Princes of his people And Psal 75. 5 6. Promotion commeth neither from the East nor from the South but God is the Judge he putteth downe one and setteth up another Nay doth not Christ informe us That the very haires of our head are all numbred That two sparrowes are sold for a farthing and yet one of them shall not fall on the ground without our Fathers providence Yea doth not every man yea every Bird Beast Fish Raven and living creature whatsoever as the Scripture expressely resolves receive enjoy their Lives Honours Offices Estates food rayment being preservation by Gods generall and speciall providence as well as Kings their Crownes Honours Lives Estates And is not the providence yea are not the very Angels of God who are all ministring spirits sent forth to minister to them who shal be heirs of salvation as vigilant over every pious Christian though never so mean despicable as over the greatest Monarch in the world If so as all men must necessarily acknowledge there being no respect at all of persons with God who accepts not the persons of Princes regards the rich no more then the poor for they are all the work of his hands then kings reigning by the Providence of God can of it self no more exempt them from resistance censures deprivations for their detestable publike crimes then it exempts any other Nobles Princes Iudges Magistrates Christians or the meanest subiects whatsoever which I shall make good by one more unanswerable demonstration There is not one of our Antagonists but will acknowledge that Priests under the Law and all Ministers under the Gospell if rightly qualified are not made only such by Gods speciall Providence but likewise by Divine institution from God himself Nay Tollet Willet and many others on this very Text of the Romanes make a difference between the civill and Ecclesiasticall Regiment and Powers for the first say they is so from God that yet the institution thereof may be devised and altered by man and therefore Peter calls it the Ordinance of man but the spirituall Power is immediatelly instituted by God and no wayes alterable or determinable by man And therefore the Apostle saith Ephes 4. 11. He gave
relates principally to the Soule and Spirit For as corporall forced obedience against a mans will which still holds out is no true obedience in the esteem of God or men and as the very essence life of all outward obedience consisteth principally in the cheerfull submission or activity of the soule or will So a forced corporall resistance against the mind or conscience is in a manner no resistance and the very malignity quintessence of all inward or outward resistance disobedience rests only in the mind soule will and is here principally forbidden as is evident by the 5. verse Wherefore ye must needs be subject not onely for wrath which relates only to the body which mens wrath can only harm in case of disobedience Mat. 10. 28. but also FOR CONSCIENCE SAKE which principally if not wholly relates unto the soule of which the conscience is a chief-overruling part This then being altogether irrefragable gives our Antagonists with Dr. Fern an eternall overthrow and unavoidably demonstrates the resistance of the Higher Powers here prescribed to be only of iust lawfull powers in their iust commands or punishments which we must neither corporally verbally nor so much as mentally resist but readily submit too with our very soules as well as bodies not of Tyrants or ungodly Rulers uniust oppressions Forces proceedings to subvert Religion Lawes Liberties which all our Opposites all Divines whatsoever grant we are bound in conscience passively to resist and disobey yea with our Tongues to reprehend and our Souls and spirits to oppose detest abhorre hate in the very highest degree of opposition notwithstanding this inhibition And therefore by like reason are no wayes prohibited but authorized by it even forcibly to resist to our utmost power have we meanes and opportunity so to doe as the Parliament now hath That power and proceedings which Christians may lawfully with good conscience yea and are bound to resist with all their souls minds tongues they justly may and must likewise resist with all their corporall might and strength especially if they have good opportunity publike encouragements and meanes to do it as Deut. 6. 12. 1 Pet. 5. 9. Iude 3. 4. Phil. 1. 27 28. 1 Cor. 16. 13. compared together and with the premised Scriptures fully evidence But Christians may lawfully with good conscience yea must resist with all their souls minds tongues the fore-named violent proceedings of kings Oppressors ill Counsellors and Cavaleers and no wayes submit unto them with their souls minds tongues lest thereby they should approve and be partakers with promoters of their execrable designes therefore they may and must with safe conscience resist them with all their corporall might and strength having now opportunity a Parliamentary publike command and sufficient meanes to execute it And thus have I now at last not onely most clearly wrested this sword out of the hands of our great opposite Goliahs but likewise cut off their heads and so routed all their forces with it as I trust they shall never be able to make head againe Yet before I wholly take my leave of this Text to gratifie our Prelaticall Clergy I shall for a parting blow adde this one observation more That all our Popish Clermen herâ—tofore and many of them till this day notwithstanding the universality of this Text Let every soule be subject to the higher Powers c. not only pretended themselves to be of right exempted from the jurisdiction censures taxes of Emperours Kings and aâ— Civill Magistrates Which priviledges some of our late Prelates began to revive as the late cases of Mr. Shervill the Maior of Arundel and some others evidence censured for punishing drunken Priests but likewise held it lawfull to censure excommunicate depose even Emperours and Kings themselves and interdict their Kingdomes witnesse not only the Popes excommunications of many Emperours and Kings by apparant usurpation and injury but of sundry Prelates excommunications of their own Soveraigns as of right and putting them to open penances as K. Suintilla Sancho Ramir in Spain and others elswhere of which you may read divers presidents in my Appendix The History of St. Ambrose his excommunicating the Emperour Theodosius for the bloody murther of those of Thessalonica is so commonly known that I need not spend time to recite it nor yet the excommunications and censures of our King Iohn or Henry the 2. and 3. Suano King of Denmark as Saxo-Grammaticus records was not onely sharply reprehended but excommunicated in a most bold and solemn manner by one of his Bishops for his uncleannesse and murthering some eminent persons of whom he was jealous whiles they were at their devotions in the Church This Bishop instead of meeting this King when he came to enter into the Church with accustomed veneration clad in his Pontificalibus with his Crosier Sâ—affe kept him from entring so much as within the Court thereof calling him not by the name of a King which he suppressed but a shedder of mans blood and not content to chide him he fixed the point of his Staffe in his brest preferring the publike scandall of Religion before private society not being ignorant that the Offices of familiarity were one thing the rights of Priesthood another thing that the wickednesses of Lords as well as servants ought to be revenged nor are Noble-mens crimes to be more partially censured then ignoble ones And not content thus to repulse him he added an execration therunto and denounced a sentence of damnation against him in his presence so as he left it doubtfull whether he repulsed him more valiantly with his hand or voyce Hereupon the King considering this Act to proceed from zeale and publike severity against wickednesse and being confounded with the blush of his guilty conscience forbad any to resist his violence and patiently underwent heard both his repulse and reprehention After which this King laying aside his royall Robes put on old course apparell desiring rather to testifie his sorrow by the deformity of his habit then his contempt by the splendor of it And struck with so sad a sentence of the Bishop he would not indure to carry about the ornaments of Royall Magnificence but casting away the ensignes of Regall Majesty he put on sack-cloth the badge of penitence putting off his power likewise together with his vestment and of a sacrilegious Tyrant became a faithfull reverencer of holy things For returning bare-foot to the Church-porch he cast himselfe prostrate in the entrance thereof and humbly kissed the ground suppressing the griefe which is wont most sharply to be inflicted from contempt with shamefac'tnesse and moderation redeeming the fault of his bloody reigne with shame and penitence After which confessing his fault and craving pardon with teares of the Bishop he was absolved and then putting on his Royall Robes admitted into the Church and brought up to the Altar to the exceeding joy of the people who applauding the kings humiliation and modesty plus
poenitentia pium quam imperto scoelestâ—â—m 〈…〉 confessus A memorable story of a zealous stout Prelate and of a penâ—tent submissive wild Prince I shall only adde to this some few domestick presidentâ— of our Welch Kings Teudur king of Brecknock for his periury and murther of Elgistiâ— another King of that Countrey was solemnly excommunicated by Gurcan the 10. Bishop of Landaffe and his Clergy in a Synod assembled for this purpose by uncovering the Altars casting the Crosses and Reliques on the ground and depriving him 〈◊〉 Christian communion Whereupon Toudur unable to undergoe this malediction and rigorous iustice with a contrite heart and many teares powred forth craved pardon of his crimes and submitted himselfe to the penance imposed on him according to his quality and greatnesse King Clotri slaying Iuguallaun treacherously contrary to his League and Oath Berthgwin the 14. Bishop of Landaffe hearing thereof assembled a Synod of his Clergy at Landaffe and solemnly excommunicated the King with all his Progeny and Kingdom by uncovering the Altars casting down the Crosses on the earth and depriving the Countrey both of Baptisme and the Euchâ—rist Whereupon the King unable to endure so great an excommunication with great deiection submitted himselfe to the Bishop and leaving his Kingdom went on pilgrimage into forraign parts for a long space after which returning by the intercession of king Morcant he obtained absolution from the Bishop to whose enioyned penance he submitted himself conferring divers Lands upon the Church And in another Synod at Landaffe under this Bishop King Gurcan for living incestuously with his Mother-in-law was solemnly excommunicated in form aforesaid whereupon he craved pardon resolved to put away his Mother-in-law promised satisfaction by K. Iudhail his Intercessor upon which he was absolved upon promise of amendment of life with fasting prayer and almes after which he bestowed divers Lands on the Church Houell king of Gleuissig contrary to his Oath League trecherously circumverring and slaying Gallun hereupon Cerenlyir the 18. Bishop of Landaffe calling a Synod solemnly excommunicated him by laying all the crosses on the ground overturning the Bells taking the Reliques from the Altar and casting them on the ground depriving him of all Christian communion under which excommunication he remained almost a whole yeers space After which this king came bare-foot to the Bishop imploring his absolution from this sentence with many teares which he obtained after publke penance enoyned Not long after the same Bishop and his Clergy in another Synod for the like crime in the self-same former excommunicated Ili sonne of Conblus till he came bare-footed with teares and prayed absolution which upon performance of enjoyned penance promise of future reformation with prayers fasting almes and the setling of some Lands on the Church was granted him by the Bishop So Loumarch son of Cargnocaun was in a full Synod excommunicated by Gulfrid the 20. Bishop of this See for violating the patrimony of the Church and king Brochuail with his family convented before a Synode threatned Excommunication enjoyned Penance and satisfaction by the Synode for some injuries offered to to Ciueilliauc the two and twentieth Bishop of Landaffe Mauric King of of Glamorgan was excommunicated by Ioseph the eigth and twentieth Bishop of Landaffe for treacherously putting out the eyes of Etguin during the truce between them After which he was again publikely excommunicated in a Synode for violating the Sanctuarie of the Church of Landaffe and hurting some of this Bishops servants and not absolved till he made his submission and did his Penance and gave some lands to the Church for satisfaction of these offence Thus Calgucam King of Morganauc and his whole family were solemnly excommunicated by Herâ—wald the nine and twentieth Bishop of Landaffe in a Synod of all his Clergy onely because one of the Kings followers being drunk laid violent hands upon Bathutis the Bishops Physitian and Kinsman on Christmas day Anno 1056. Whereupon all the Crosses and Reliques were cast to the ground the Bells overturned the Church doors stopped up with thorns so as they continued without a Pastor and Divine Service day and night for a long season till the King though innocent submitted himself to the Bishop and to obtain his absolution gave Henringuinna to him and his Successors for ever free from all secular and royall services in the presence of all the Clergie and people So Richard the tenth Bishop of Bangor excommunicated David ap Lhewelin Prince of Wales for detaining his brother Griffith prisoner contrarie to his Oath repairing to him upon the Bishops word for his safe return who never left vexing him till he had delivered him up to to the King of Englands hands Many such presidents of Prelates censuring and excommunicating their Kings occur in Storie which for brevity I pretermit onely ' I shall inform you that Iohn Stratford Archbishop of Canterbury in the 14. year of K. Edw. 3 contesting with this King and excommunicating divers of his followers and all the infringers of the Churches Liberties presumed to write thus unto his Soveraign There are two things by which the world is principally governed The sacred Pontificall authority and the royall power of which the Priesthood is by so much the more weighty ponderous and sublimâ— by how much they are to give an account of kings themselves at the Divine audit And therefore the kings Majesty ought to know that you ought to depend on their judgement not they to be regulated according to your will For who doubteth that the priests of Christ are accounted the FATHERS AND MASTERS of Kings Princes and all faithfull Christians Is it not known to be apart of miserable madnesse if the son should endeavour to subjugate the Father the servant the master to himself The Canonicall authority of Scriptures testifieth that diver Pontiffs have excommunicated some of them Kings others Emperours And if you require somewhat in speciall of the persons of Princes Saint Innocent smote the Emperour Archadius with the sword of excommunication because he consented that Saint John Chrysostom should be violently expelled from his See Likewise Saint Ambrose Archbishop of Millain for afault which seemednot so hainous to other priests excommunicated the Emperour Theodosius the great From which sentence having first given condigne satisfation he afterwards deserved to be absolved and many such like examples may be alleaged both more certain for time and nearer for place Therefore no Bishops whatsoever neither may nor ought to be punished by the secular Power if they chance to offend through humane frailtie For it is the duty of a good and religious Prince to honour the Priests of God and defend them with greatest reverence in imitation of the Pious Prince of most happy memory Constantine saying when the cause of Priests was brought before him You cannot be iudged by any to wit of the secular judges who are reserved to the iudgement of God alone according
to the assertion of the Apostle very ill applied saying The spirituall man is iudged of no man 1 Corinth 2. 15. Not meant of Bishops or Clergie-men but Saints alone endued with Gods Spirit not of judging in courts of iustice but of discerning spirituall things and their own spirituall Estates as the Context resolves Thus and much more this Prelate who notwithstanding this text of the Romanes pleads an exemption of all Bishops and Priests from the kings secular power by Divine Authority and arrogates to Priest and Prelates a iudiciary lawfull power over Kings themselves to excommunicate and censure them for their offences And to descend to later times even since the the Reformation of Religion here Iohn Bridges Dean of Sarum and Bishop of Oxfort even in his Book intituled The supremacy of Christian Princes over all persons thorowout their Dominions in all causes so well Ecclesiasticall as spirituall printed at London 1573. p. 1095. writes thus But who denies this M. Saunders that a godly Bishop may upon great and urgent occasion if it shall be necessary to edifie Gods Church and there be no other remedy flee to this last censure of Excommunication AGAINST A WICKED KING Making it a thing not questionable by our Prelates and Clergie that they may in such a case lawfully excommunicate the King himself And Doctor Bilson Bishop of Winchester in his True difference between Christian subiection and unchristian Rebellion dedicated to Queen Elizabeth her self printed at Oxford 1595. Part. 3. Page 369. to 378. grants That Emperours Kings and Princes may in some cases be Excommunicated and kept from the Lords Table by their Bishops and grants That with Hereticks and Apostates be THEY PRINCES or private men no Christian Pastor nor people may Communicate Neither finde I any Bishop or Court Doctor of the contrary opinion but all of them readily subscribe hereto If then not onely the ill Counsellors and Instruments of Kings but Kings and Emperours themselves may thus not onely be lawfully iustly resisted but actually smitten and excommunicated by their Bishops and Clergy with the spirituall sword for their notorious crimes and wickednesses notwithstanding this inhibition which Valentinian the Emperour confessed and therefore desired that such a Bishop should be chosen and elected in Millain after Auxentius as he himself might really and cordially submit to him and his reprehensions since he must sometimes needs erre as a man as to the medicine of souls as he did to Ambrose when he was elected Bishop there why they may not likewise be resisted by their Laity in the precedent cases with the temporall sword and subjected unto the censures of the whole Kingdoms and Parliaments transcends my shallow apprehension to conceive there being as great if not greater or the very self-same reason for the lawfulnesse of the one as of the other And till our Opposites shall produce a substantiall difference between these cases or disclaim this their practice and doctrine of the lawfulnesse of excommunicating Kings and Emperours they must give me and others liberty to conceive they have quite lost and yeelded up the cause they now contend for notwithstanding this chief Text of Romaves 13. the ground of all their strength at first but now of their ruine The tenth Objection is this that of 1 Pet. 2 13 14 15 16. Submit your selves to every ORDINANCE OF MAN for the Lords sake whether it be to The King AS SVPREAME or unto Governours as unto them that are sent by him to wit by God not the King as the distribution manifests and Rom. 13. 1 2 3 4. For the punishment of evill doers and for the praise of them that doe well c. Feare God Honour the King wee must submit to Kings and honour Kings who are the supream Governours therefore we may in no case forcibly resist them or their Officers though they degenerate into Tyrants To which I answer that this is a meerin consequent since the submission here injoyned is but to such Kings who are punishers of evill doers and praisers of those that do well which the Apostle makes the Ground and motive to submission therefore this text extends not to Tyrants and oppressours who doe quite contrary We must submit to Kings when they rule well and justly is all the Apostle here affirms Ergo wee must submit to and not resist them in any their violent courses to subvert Religion Lawes Liberties is meet non-sence both in Law Divinity and common Reason If any reply as they doe that the Apostle vers 18 19 20. Bids servants 〈◊〉 subject to their Masters with all feare not onely to the good and gentle but also to the froward For this is thank-worthy if a man for conscience towards God endure griefe suffering wrongfully c. Ergo this is meant of evill Magistrates and Kings as well as good I answer 1. That the Apostles speaks it onely of evill Masters not Kings of servants not subjects there being a great difference between servants Apprentices Villaines and free borne subiects as all men know the one being under the arbitrary rule and government of their Master the other onely under the just setled legall Government of their Princes according to the Lawes of the Realme Secondly this is meant onely of private personall iniuries and undue corrections of Masters given to servants without iust cause as vers 20. For what glory is it if when yee be BVFFETED FOR your faults c. intimates not of publike iniuries and oppressions of Magistrates which indanger the whole Church and State A Christian servant or subiect must patiently endure private undue corrections of a froward Master or King Ergo whole Kingdomes and Parliaments must patiently without resistance suffer their kings and evill Instruments to subvert Religion Lawes Liberties Realms the proper deduction heen is but a ridiculous conclusion Secondly This Text enjoynes no more subjection to kings then to any other Magistrates as the words Submit your selves TO EVERY ORDINANCE of Man Or unto Governors c. prove past all contradiction And vers 6. which bids us Honour the King bids us first in direct tearmes HONOVR ALL MEN to wit All Magistrates at least if not all men in generall as such There is then no speciall Prerogative of irresistability given to kings by this Text in injurious violent courses more then there is to any other Magistrate or person whatsoever God giving no man any Authority to injure others without resistance especially if they assault their persons or invade their Estates to ruine them Since then inferiour Officers and other menmay be forcâ—bly resisted when they actually attempt by force to ruine Religion Lawes Liberties the republike as I haue proved and our Antagonists must grant by the self-same reason kings may be resisted too notwithstanding any thing in this Text which attributes no more irresistability or authority to Kings then unto other Magistrates Thirdly Kings are here expresly called AN ORDINANCE OF
MAN not God as I have formerly proved them to be If so I then appeal to the consciences of our fiercest Antagonists whether they do beleeve in their consciences or date take their Oathes upon it That ever any people or Nation in the world or our Ancestors at first did appoint any Kings or Governours over them to subvert Religion Laws Liberties or intend to give them such an unlimited uncontroulable Soveraignty over them as not to provide for their own safety or not to take up Arms against them for the necessary defence of their Laws Liberties Religion Persons States under pain of high Treason or eternall damnation in case they should degenerate into Tyrants and undertake any such wicked destructive designe If not as none can without madnesse and impudence averre the contrary it being against all common sence and reason that any man or Nation should so absolutely irresistably inslave themselves and their Posterities to the very lusts and exorbitancies of Tyrants and such a thing as no man no Nation in their right sences were they at this day to erect a most absolute Monarchie would condescend to then clearly the Apostle here confirming onely the Ordinances of men and giving no Kings nor Rulers any other or greater power then men had formerly granted them for that had been to alter not approve their humane Ordinances I shall infallibly thence inferre That whole States and Subjects may with safe conscience resist the unjust violence of their Kings in the foresaid cases because they never gave them any authority irresistably to act them nor yet devested themselves much lesse their posterity whom they could not eternally inslave of the right the power of resisting them in such cases whom they might justly resist before whiles they were private men and as to which illegall proceedings they continue private persons still since they have no legall power given them by the people to authorize any such exorbitances Fourthly The subjection here enjoyned is not passive but active witnesse ver 15. For so is the will of God that by WELL DOING to wit by your actuall cheerfull submission to every Ordinance of man for the Lords sake c. you put to silence the ignorance of foolish men as free and not using your liberty c. If then this Text be meant of active not passive obedience then it can be intended onely of lawfull Kings of Magistrates in their just commands whom we must actually obey not of Tyrants and Oppressours in their unjust wicked proceedings whom we are bound in such cases actually to disobey as our Antagonists grant and I have largely evidenced elsewhere Wherefore it directly commands resistance not subjection in such cases since actuall disobedience to unjust commands is actuall resisting of them And that these Texts prescribing resistance tacitely should apparantly prohibit it under pain of Treason Rebellion Damnation is a Paradox to me Fifthly This Text doth no way prove that false conceit of most who hence conclude That all Kings are the Supream Powers and above their Parliaments and whole Kingdoms even by Divine institution There is no such thing nor shadow of it in the Text. For first This Text calls Kings not a Divine but Humane Ordinance If then Kings be the Supreamest Power and above their Parliaments Kingdoms it is not by any Divine Right but by Humane Ordination onely as the Text resolves Secondly This Text prescribes not any Divine Law to all or any particular States nor gives any other Divine or Civill Authority to Kings and Magistrates in any State then what they had before for if it should give Kings greater Authority and Prerogatives then their people at first allotted them it should alter and invade the settled Government of all States contrary to the Apostles scope which was to leave them as they were or should be settled by the peoples joynt consent It doth not say That all Kings in all Kingdoms are or ought to be Supreame or let them be so henceforth no such inference appears therein It speaks not what Kings ought to be in point of Power but onely takes them as they are according to that of Rom. 13. 2. The Powers that ARE c. to wit that are even now every where in being not which ought to be or shall be whence he saith Submit to the King as supreame that is where by the Ordinance of man the King is made supreame not where Kings are not the supreamest Power as they were not among the ancient Lacedemonians Indians Carthaginians Gothes Aragonians and in most other Kingdoms as I have elsewhere proved To argue therefore We must submit to Kings where the people have made them supreame Ergo All Kings every where are and ought to be supreame Jure divino as our Antagonists hence inferre is a grosse absurdity Thirdly This Text doth not say That the King is the supreame soveraigne Power as most mistake but supreame Governour as the next words or Governours c. expond it and the very Oath of Supremacie 1. Eliz. Cap. 1. which gives our Kings this Title Supreame Governour within these his Realms Now Kings may be properly called Supreame Magistrates or Governours in their Realms in respect of the actuall administration of government and justice all Magistrates deriving their Commissions immediately from them and doing justice for and under them and yet not be the Soveraign Power as the Romane Emperours the Kings of Sparta Arragon and others the German Emperours the Dukes of Venice in that State and the Prince of Orange in the Nether-lands were and are the Supreame Magistrates Governours but not the Supreame Severaigne Powers their whole States Senates Parliaments being the Supreamest Powers and above them which being Courts of State of Justice and a compound body of many members not alwayes constantly sitting may properly be stiled The Supreame Courts and Powers but not the Supreame Magistrate or Governour As the Pope holds himself the Supreame Head and Governour of the Militant Church and the Arch-Bishop of Canterbury stiles himself the Primate and Metropolitane of all England and so other Prelates in their Provinces yet they are not the Soveraigne Ecclesiasticall Power for the King at least Generall Councells or Nationall Synods which are not properly tearmed Governours but Power are Paramount them and may lawfully censure or depose them as I have elsewhere manifested To argue therefore that Kings are the highest Soveraign Power because they are the highest particular Governours and Magistrates in their Realms as our Antagonists do is a meer Fallacie and Inconsequent since I have proved our own and most other Kings not to be the highest Powers though they be the Supreamest Governours Fourthly This Text speaks not at all of the Romane Emperour neither is it meant of him as Doctour Fernâ— with others mistake who is never in Scripture stiled a King being a Title extreamly odious to the Romanes and for ever banished their State with
an Oath of execration by an ancient Law in memory whereof they instituted a speciall annuall Feast on the 23. of February called Regifugium the hatred of which Title continued such that Tully and Augustine write Regem Romae posthac nec Dii nec Homines esse patiantur And Caesar himself being saluted King by the multitude perceiving it was very distastfull to the States answered CAESAREM SE NON REGEM ESSE which Title of Caesar not King the Scripture ever useth to expresse the Emperour by witnesse Matth. 22. 17 21. Mark 12. 14 16 17. Luke 2. 1. chap. 20. 22 24 25. chap. 23. 2. John 19. 12 15. Acts 11. 28. chap. 17. 7. chap. 25. 8 10 11 12 21. chap. 26. 32. chap. 27. 24. chap. 28. 19. Phil. 4. 22. Which Texts do clearly manifest that no Title was ever used by the Apostles Evangelists Jewes to expresse the Emperour by but that of Caesar not this of King Therefore Peters Text speaking onely of the King not Caesar cannot be intended of the Romane Emperour as ignorant Doctors blindly fancie Fifthly This Epistle of Peter the Apostle of the Jews was written onely to the dispersed Jews thorowout Pontus Galatia Cappadocia Asia and Bythinia 1 Pet. 1. 1. over whom Herod at that time reigned as King by the Romane Senates and Emperours appointment who had then conquered the Jews and made them a tributarie Province as is evident by Matth. 27. 17 21. Mark 12. 14 16 17. Luke 20. 22 24 25. chap. 23. 2. Acts 17. 7. chap. 25. 8 10 11 12 21. chap. 27. 24. chap. 12. 1. to 24. compared together and by Josephus the Century writers Baronius Sigonius and others The King then here mentioned to be supreame was Herod or King Agrippa or some other immediate King of the Jews who was their supreame Governour not absolutely but under the Romane Senate and Emperours and made so by their appointment whence called in the Text an Ordinance of man not God Now this King of the Jews as is evident by Pauls Appeal to Caesar from Festus and King Agrippa as to the Soveraign Tribunall Acts 25. and 26. by Josephus Philo Judaeus de legatione ad Caium and the consent of all Historians was not the absolute Soveraigne Power but subordinate to the Romane Emperour and Senate who both created and bad power to controll remove and censure him for his misdemeanours yet Peter calls him here Supreame because the Highest Governour under them as we stile our Kings Supreame Governours under Christ Therefore having a Superiour Governour and Power over him to which he was accountable and subordinate Supreame in the Text cannot be meant of a King absolutely Supreame having no Power Superiour to him but God but onely relatively Supreame in respect of under-Governours there actually residing whose Supremacie being forcibly gained onely by conquest not free consent and the ancient native Kings of the Jews being inferiour to their whole Senates and Congregations and to do all by their advice as Josephus Antiq. Jud. lib. 4. cap. 8. 2. Sam. 18. 3 4. Jer. 38. 45. 1. Chron. 13. 1. to 6. attest will no way advantage our Opposites nor advance the Prerogative of Kings since it extends onely to the King of the Jews that then was who was not simply Supream but a Subject Prince subordinate to the Romane State and Empire and one appointed by a Conquerour not freely chosen and assented to by the people So as all the Argument which can hence be extracted for the absolute Soveraigntie and irresistibility of Kings over their whole Kingdomes and Parliaments is but this The King of the Jews was in Peters time the Supreame Magistrate over that Nation by the Romane Senates and Emperours appointment to whom yet he was subordinate and accountable the Romanes having conquered the Jewes by force and imposing this government upon them without their consents Therefore the Kings of England and all other Kings are absolute Soveraigne Monarches Superiour to their whole Parliaments and Kingdomes collectively considered and may not in point of conscience be forcibly resisted by them though they endeavour to subvert Religion Laws Liberties How little coherence there is in this Argument the silliest childe may at first discern From these Scriptures I descend to Reasons deduced from them against resistance which I shall contract into three Arguments The first is this Kings are the Fathers Heads Lords Shepherds of the Common-wealth Ergo They ought not to be resisted in any their exorbitant proceedings it being unlawfull unseemly for a Son to resist his Father the Members the Head the Vassals their Lord the Flock their Shepherd To this I answer First They are Fathers Shepherds Lords Heads onely in an improper allegoricall not genuine sence therefore nothing can thence be properly inferred They are and ought to be such in respect of their loving and carefull affection towards their Subjects not in regard of their Soveraigne Power over them Therefore when their Tyrannie makes them not such in regard of care and affection to their people their people cease to be such in regard of filiall naturall and sheep-like submission When these Shepberds turn Wolves these Fathers Step-fathers the Subjects as to this cease to be their Sheep their Children in point of Obedience and Submission Secondly If we consider the Common-weal and Kingdom collectively Kings are rather their Kingdoms children then Parents because created by them their publike servants ministers for whose benefit they are imployed and receive wages not their Soveraigne Lords their subordinate Heads to be directed and advised by them not Tyrannically to over-rule them at their pleasure Therefore Paramount and able in such cases to resist them Thirdly Parishioners may no doubt lawfully resist the false Doctrines and open assaults of their Ministers though they be their Spirituall Shepherds Citizens the violent oppressions of their Maiors though they be their Politique Heads Servants the unjust assaults of their Masters though their lawfull Lords who may not misuse their very Villaines by Law And if Parents will violently assault their naturall children Husbands their Wives Masters their Servants to murther them without cause they may by Law resist repulse them with open force Fourthly A Son who is a Judge may lawfully resist imprison condemne his naturall Father A Servant his Lord A Parishioner his Pastour a Citizen his Major a meer Gentleman the greatest Peer or Lord as experience proves because they do it in another capacity as Judges and Ministers of publike Justice to which all are subject The Parliament then in this sence as they are the representative Body of the Realm not private Subjects and their Armies by their authority may as they are the highest Soveraign Power and Judicature resist the King and his Forces though he be their Father Head Shepherd Lord as they are private men Fifthly This is but the common
exploded Argument of the Popish Clergy To prove themselves superiour to Kings and exempt from all secular Jurisdiction because they are spirituall Fathers Pastors Heads to Kings who ought to obey not judge and censure them as Archbish Stratford and others argue But this plea is no ways available to exempt Clergy men from secular Jurisdiction from actuall resistance of parties assaulted nor yet from imprisonment censures and capitall executions by Kings and Civill Magistrates in case of capitall Crimes Therefore by like reason it can not exempt Kings from the resistance censures of their Parliaments Kingdoms in case of tyrannicall invasions We deride this Argument in Papists as absurd as in sufficient to prove the exemption of Clergy men I wonder therefore why it is now urged to as little purpose against resistance of Tyrants and oppressing Kings and Magistrates The second reason is this The Invasions and oppressions of evill Kings and Tyrants are afflictions and punishments inflicted on us by God Therefore we ought patiently to submit unto them and not forcibly to resist them I answer First The invasions of Forraign Enemies are just Judgements and punishments sent upon men by God as were the invasions of the Danes Saxons and Normans in England heretofore of the Spaniards since Ergo we ought not to resist or fight against them The present rebellion of the Papists in Ireland is a just punishment of God upon this Kingdom and the Protestant party there Ergo Neither we nor they ought in conscience to resist or take Arms against them Every sicknesse that threatens or invades our bodies is commonly an affliction and punishment sent by God Ergo We must not endeavour to prevent or remove it by Physick but patiently lye under it without seeking remedy Injuries done us in our persons estates names by wicked men who assault wound rob defame us are from God and punishments for our sins Ergo We may not resist them Yea Subjects Rebellions Treasons and Insurrections against their Princes many times are punishments inflicted on them by God displeased with them as the Statute of 1 Ed. 6. c. 12. resolves and the Scripture too Ergo Kings ought not to resist or suppresse them by force of Arms If all these Consequences be absurd and idle as every man will grant the objection must be so likewise I read That in the persecution of the Hunnes their King Attila being demanded of by a religious Bishop of a certain Citie who he was when he had answered I am Attila the scourge of God The Bishop reverencing the divine Majesty in him answered Thou art welcome ô Minister of God and ingeminating this saying Blessed be he that cometh in the Name of the Lord Opened the Church door and let in the persecutor by whom he obtained the Crown of Martyrdom not daring to exclude the scourge of the Lord knowing that the beloved sonne is scourged and that the power of the scourge it self is not from any but God Will it hence follow That all Christians are bound in conscience to do the like and not to resist the barbarous Turks if they should invade them no more then this Bishop did the bloudy Pagan Hunnes because they are Gods wrath I trow not One Swallow makes no Summer nor this example a generall president to binde all men The third reason is this Saints forcible resistance of Tyrants begets civill warres great disorders and many mischiefs in the State Ergo It is unlawfull and inconvenient I answer First That this doctrine of not resisting Tyrants in any case is farre more pernicious destructive to the Realm then the contrary because it deprives them of all humane means and possibilities of preservation and denies them that speciall remedy which God and nature hath left them for their preservation Laws denyall of Subsidies and such like remedies prescribed by Doctor Ferne being no remoraes or restraints at all to armed Tyrants Wherefore I must tell thee Doctor Theologorum utcunque dissertissimorum sententiae in hac controversia non sunt multo faciendae quia quid sit Lex humana ipsi ignorant as Vasquius controvers Illustr 81. .11 determines Secondly The knowledge of a lawfull power in Subjects to resist Tyrants will be a good means to keep Princes from Tyrannicall courses for fear of strenuous resistance which if once taken away there is no humane bridle left to stay the Inundation of Tyranny in Princes or great Officers and all Weapons Bulwarks Walls Lawes Armes will be meerly uselesse to the Subjects if resistance be denyed them when there is such cause Thirdly Resistance only in cases of publike necessity though accompanied with civill warre serves alwayes to prevent farre greater mischiefs then warre it self can produce it being the only Antidote to prevent publike ruine the readiest means to preserve endangered to regaine or settle lost Liberties Laws Religion as all ages witnesse and to prevent all future Seditions and Oppressions Fourthly Desperate diseases have alwayes desperate remedies Malo nodo malus cuneus When nothing but a defensive warre will preserve us from ruine and vassalage it is better to imbrace it then hazard the losse of all without redemption Ex duobus malis minimum All Kingdoms States in cases of necessity have ever had recourse to this as the lesser evill and why not ours as well as others The last and strongest Objection as some deem it is the sayings if some Fathers backed with the examples of the primitive Christians to which no such satisfactory answer hath hitherto been given as might be The first and grandest Objection against Subjects forcible resistance and defensive warre is that speech of Saint Ambrose Lib. 5. Orat. in Auxentium Coactus repugnare non audeo dolere potero potero flere potero gemere adversus arma milites Gothos Lachrymae meae arma sunt talia sunt munimenta sacerdotum A LITER NEC DEBEO NEC POSSVM RESISTERE This chiefe Authoritie though it makes a great noise in the world if solidly scanned will prove but Brutum fulmen a meer scar-crow and no more For first Ambrose in this place speaks not at all of Subjects resisting their Princes or Christians forcible resisting of the persecuting Romane Emperours but of resisting Valentine and the Arms and Souldiers of the Gothes who at that time over ran Italy and sacked Rome being mortall Enemies to the Romans the Roman Emperours Saint Ambrose and Millain where he was Bishop This is evident by the expresse objected words I can grieve I can weep I can mourn to wit for the wasting of my native Country Italy by the Invading Enemies the Gothes against Armes Souldiers GOTHES marke it my tears are Weapons c. If any sequell can be hence properly deduced it must be that for which the Anabaptists use it from whence our Opposites who tax the Parliaments Forces for Anabaptists when themselves are here more truly such
and fight with this their weapon That it is unlawfull for Christians to fight or make so much as a defensive warre against invading Forraign barbarous Enemies of whom this Father speaks And then if the Irish Rebels Danes Spaniards French should now invade England both against the Kings and Kingdoms Wills we must make no forcible resistance at all against them with Arms in point of conscience but onely use prayers and teares This is the uttermost conclusion which can properly be hence deduced which our Antagonists will confesse to be at least erronious Anabaptisticall if not Hereticall Secondly You must consider who it was that used this speech Ambrose a Minister then Bishop of Millain who by reason of this his function being an Ambassadour of Peace had his hands bound from fighting with any other weapons even against invading forraign Enemies but only with the sword of the spirit prayers and tears and that his calling only was the ground of this his speech is infallible by the latter clause thereof which our Opposites cunningly conceale Prayers are my Armes For such are the Defensive Armour OF PRIESTS Otherwise I NEITHER OVGHT NOR CAN RESIST Why so Because he was a Minister a Bishop and Paul prohibites such to be STRIKERS Tit. 1. 7. 1 Tim. 3. 3. and because Priests under the Law did but blow the Trumpets and never went out armed to the warres Josh 6. Upon which ground Divers Councells Decretalls Canonists expresly prohibit and exempt Priests and Bishops from bearing Arms or going to Warre though many of them have turned great Souldiers and been slain in warres Hence Anno 1267 in a Parliament held at Bury K. H. 3 d. and Ottobon the Popes Legat demanded of all the Bishops and Clergy men holding Barronies or Lay-fees that they should go personally armed against the Kings enemies or finde so great service in the Kings expedition as appertained to so much Lands and Tenants To which they answered That THEY OUGHT NOT TO FIGHT WITH THE MATERIALL SWORD no not against the Kings Enemies But with the spirituall to wit with humble and devoute tears and prayers using these words of Ambrose And that for their benefices they were bound to maintain Peace NOT WARRE Hence our King Richard the first taking the Bishop of Beauvoyes in France his great Enemy armed from top to toe prisoner in the field commanded him to be strictly kept in prison in his arms and would by no means suffer him to put them off for which hard usuage he complained to the Pope and procured his letter to King Richard to free him from his arms and restraint in which Letter the Pope sharply reproves the Bishop for preferring the secular warfare before the spirituall in that he had taken a Speare insteed of a Crosier an Helmet in liew of a Miter an Habergion insteed of a white Rochet a Target in place of a Stole an Iron-sword insteed of a spirituall sword After which the King sent his Arms with this Message to the Pope See whether this be thy sonnes Coat or not Which the Pope beholding answered No by Saint Peter It is neither the apparell of my sonnes nor yet of my Brethren but rather the vesture of the sonnes of Mars And upon this ground Our Bishops anciently when Members of Parliament departed the house when Cases of Treason or Felony came in question because they might not by the Canons have their hands in bloud This then being Ambrose his direct words and meaning That he neither ought nor could use any other Weapons against the invading Gothes and their forces but prayers and tears because he was a Minister not a Bishop a Lay-man The genvine Argument that our opposites can thence extract is but this Priests must use no other Defensive Arms but prayers and tears against invading forraign Enemies Ergo The Priests and Ministers in his Majesties Armies who bear Offensive Arms must now in conscience lay them down and use no other resistance but prayers and tears against the Parliaments forces where as their former inference against resistance Ergo It is altogether unlawfull for the Parliament or any Lay-Subjects by their command to defend Religion Laws Liberties against his Majesties invading forces who intend by force to subvert them is but ridiculous nonsence which never once entred into this Fathers thoughts and can never be extorted from his words Ministers of the Gospel must not use any Arms but prayers and tears to resist a forraigne Enemy Ergo None else may lawfully use them to withstand an invading adversary Is a conclusion fitter for Anabaptists then Royallists who may now with shame enough for ever bid this authority adieu with which they have hitherto gulled the ignorant World And henceforth turn it against the Commission of Array enjoyning Bishops and Clergy men to array and arme themselves as well as other men as the Presidents cited in Judge Cooke his Argument against Ship-money in the Parliaments two Declarations against the Commission of Array and in the Answer published in the Kings name to the first of them plentifully evidence Finally Hence I infer That Clergy men may and must fight against their invading Enemies with prayers tears the Weapons which they may lawfully use as proper for their callings Ergo Lay-men may and must resist and fight against them with corporall Arms since they are as proper for them in cases of needfull defence as these spirituall Arms are for Priests The second Authority is that of Nazienzen Oratio 2. in Julianum Repressus of Julianus Christianorum lachrymis quas multas multi profuderunt HOC VNVM or Solum as Grotius translates it adversus persecutionem medicamentum habentes To which I shall adde by way of supply this other passage Nos autem quibus NVLLA ALIA ARMA nec muri nec praesidia praeter spem in Deum reliqua erant Vtpote OMNI HVMANO SVBSIDIO PRORSVS DESTITVTIS ET SPOLIATIS quem tandem alium aut precum auditorem aut inimicorum depulsorem habituri eramus quam Deum Jacob qui adversus superbiam jurat From whence they conclude that Christians must use no other weapons but prayers and tears against Tyrants and oppressors To which I answer First that it is cleare by this that Christians may use prayers and teares against Tyrants and oppressors Secondly that these are the most powerfull prevailing Armes both to resist and conquer them This the opposites readily grant Therefore by their own confession Christians both may and must resist tyrants by the most powerful effectual means that are Tyrants therefore are not the higher Powers Kings Rulers which Paul and Peter in the fore-objected texts enjoyne men under paine of damnation to be subject and obedient to for conscience sake and no waies to resist since they may resist them with the powerfullest armes of all others prayers and teares Thirdly if they may be lawfully resisted with these most prevailing armes notwithstanding
rabble if made had been onely singly for defence of their Religion then practised but in corners publikely condemned no where tolerated Our present war is not onely for defence of our Religion established by Law and to keep out Popery but for the preservation of Laws Liberties the very essence of Parliaments the safety of the Realme and that by authority of Parliament the representative body of the Realme The Parliaments defensive warre therefore upon these politicke grounds is just and lawfull though the Primitive Christians perchance in defence of Religion onely as its case then stood would not have been so even as the Roman Senators and States resisting of Nero or any other Tyrannicall Emperors violations of the Laws Liberties Lives Estates of the Senate people were then reputed just and lawfull though the Christians defence of Religion would not have been so esteemed in those times And thus I hope I have satisfactorily answered this objection without shifts or evasions and rectified these mistaken Fathers meanings with which our Opposites have seduced the illiterate over-credulous vulgar I have now through Gods assistance quite run through all Obiections of moment from Scripture Reason Fathers against the lawfulnesse of the Parliaments present defensive war and discovered divers grosse errors yea Impostures in our Opposites writings wherewith they have perverted many mens Consciences and cheated the ignorant seduced world I shall therefore here advise them in the presence of Almighty God as they will answer the contrary before his Tribunall at the Day of Iudgement seriously to consider these my answers and publikely to retract those their Errors false grosse mis-interpretations perversions of Scriptures Authors which I have here discovered And since they pretend nothing but their satisfying and keeping of a good Conscience in by others concerned in this Controversie to shew a syncere ingenuous Conscience therein themselves where they have been mistaken since the contestation pretended is not for Victory Time-serving or Self-seeking but for Truth Gods glory and the publike weal and if I have over-shot my self in any thing I shall promise them a thankfull acknowledgement and ready palinedy upon their information and conviction of any apparent oversights I may casually fall into Now because they shall not deem me singular in my opinion concerning the lawfulnesse of subjects defensive Arms against their Soveraigns bent to subvert Religion Laws Liberties the Republike or deem it is a late upstart Novelty I shall conclude this discourse with such personall naturall and publike authorities as they shall not be able to balance with counter-resolutions in which I shall be as brief as I may be For personall Authorities I shall not be ambitious to remember many especially Papists whose common constant received opinion and practise hath alwayes been and yet is That Subjects upon the Popes command alone and absolution of them from their Soveraigns allegiance may and ought to take up even offensive Arms against their owne naturall Princes excommunicated interdicted deposed or onely declared contumacious Schismâ—ticall or Hereticall by the Pope without yea against their Kingdoms Parliaments privities or consents much more then with their approbation What Papists have determined and practised in this very point you may read at large in Gratiau himself Causa 15. Quaest 6. and Causa 23. in the very Oath of Supremacie and Statut. of 3. Iacobi ch 4. which prescribes it in Bishop Iewels view of a seditious Bull in Doctor Iohn White his Defence of the way Chap. 6. 10. in Abbas Vspergensis Sabellicus Valateranus Grimston and others in the Lives of the Roman and German Emperours in Aventinchis Annalium Boyorum the Generall and Particular Histories of France Spain Germany Italy Sicily Hungary England in Bishp Bilsons third part of the True Difference between Christian Subjection and unchristian Rebellion In sundry Sermons on the fift of November to which I shall refer you In Pope Paschal his letter to Robert Earl of Flanders about the year of our Lord 1107. exorting him to war against those of Leige Henry the Emperour and his Assistants wheresoever he should finde them excommunicated and deposed as an Heretike and enemy to the Church telling him that he could not offer a more gratefull sacrifice to God then to ware against them concluding Hoc tibi Militibus this in peccatorum remissionem Apostolicae sedis familiaritatem praecipimus ut his laboribus triumphis ad Coelestem Hierusalem Domino praestante pervenias Which Letter was excellently answered by those of Leige And in the Councel of Towres in France under Lewes the twelfth Anno 1510. it was unanimously resolved by the Church of France That if the Pope did make war upon temporall Princes in lands which they held not of the patrimony of the Church they might lawfully by force of Arms resist and defend both themselves and other not only repulse this injury but likewise invade the lands of the Church possessed by the Pope their notorious enemy not perpetually to retain but to hinder the Pope from becomming more strong and potent by them to offend both them and theirs And that it was lawfull for such Princes for such notorious hatred and unjust invasion to withdraw themselves from the Popes obedience and with armed force to resist all censures denounced by the Pope against them their subjects and Confederates and that such sentences ought not to be obeyed but are mear nullities in law which obliege no man Yet I must inform you further in brief that Iohn Maior a Popish Schoolman in Lib. 4. Sentent as Grotius writes affirms That the people cannot deprive themselves of the power not onely of resisting but deposing Kings in cases which directly tend to their destruction and that Iohn Barclay a late Scottish Priest though a strenuous defendor of Princes Prerogatives expresly averres That if a King will altenate and subiect his Kingdom to another without his subiects consents or be carried with atrue hostile minde to the destruction of all his people that his Kingdom is thereby actually lost and forfeited so as the people may not onely absolutely resist and disobey but depose him and elect another King to which Hugo Gortius a Protestant freely subscribes and Iohn Bodin alloweth of Subjects resistance yea deposing kings insome Kingdoms absolutely and in some cases gener allyin all De Repub. l. 1. c. 10. l. 1. c. 5 l. 5. c. 5. 6. For Protestant personall authorities we have Huldericus Zuinglius Explanatio Articuli 40 41 42 43. Tom. 1. fol. 82. to 86. who allows not only Subiects actuall resistance but deprivation of Kings Where Princes set themselves to subvert Religion Laws Liberties and that by the common consent of the States in Parliament from whom Kings originally receive their Royall power and authority Martin Luther Bugenhagius Iustus Ionas Ambsdorfius Spaelotinus Melancthon Cruciger and other Divines Lawyers Statesmen Anno 1531. who published a writing in justification of
of them did Or any other of their company or of their ayde or of their adherents or of any of them or touching the Assemblies Ridings Appeales and Pursuites aforesaid * As a thing made to the Honour of God Salvation of the King maintenance of his Crowne and also of the Salvation of all his Realme therefore doubtlesse no Treason Rebellion nor any offence in point of Law and also to Ordaine and Stablish that the said Duke of Glocester Earles of Darby Arundell Warwicke and Marshall nor none of them nor none of such as have beene of their returne or company force ayde or councell or any of them in the things aforesaid nor none other person for any thing aforesaid shall be impeached molested or grieved at the suite of the king nor of the party nor in other manner because of any assembly riding beating levying of Penons or of Banners discomfiture death of a man imprisonment of any person taking leading away or detinue of any horses or of any other beasts taking or carriage of goods harnesse armour cattle and other â—ovable goods breaking of houses or of other possessions or goods assault battery robberies thefts comming or tarrying with force and armes or armed in the Kings presence at the Parliament or Councell or else where Raysing of people or exciting the people to rise forcibly against the peace by letters commissions or any other deeds or of any other thing that may be furniâ—hed by them or any of them or ought or purposed to have beene done from the beginning of the world touching any of the said matters before the end of this present Parliament by any imagination interpretation or other colour but shall bee quit and discharged for ever except that the King be answered of all the goods and cattels that were to them which be attainted in this present Parliament or to any of them and which goods and things were taken by any person the first day of January last past or after hitherto We considering the matter of the said Petition to be true and the request of the said Commons in this party to be to the honour of God and the profit of us and our Realme of the assent of the Prelates Dukes Earles Barrons and all others of this present Parliament doe garnt the requests of the said Commons in all points after the forme of the said Petition And moreover of the assent aforesayd we will and grant for the greater quietnesse of our said Realme though that the said Duke or Earles appellants or any other of their company retinue force ayde councell or adherents or any of them have taken led away or withholden any of our Iusticers or any other of our ministers in disturbance of execution of the Law of our Realme of England or in other manner or that they have taken any manner of person as Traitors to Us or to our Realme or other person and the same have voluntarily suffered to goe at large or escape beyond the sea from the 14 th day of Novemb. last past till the end of this present Parliament that they nor any of them be for this cause impeached molested nor grieved any manner of way at the suite of us our heires nor none other party but thereof they shall be quit and discharged for ever nor that they nor any of them be in any wise molested grieved nor impeached at the suite of us our heires or other party for any thing done at any time for to attaine to their purpose against the said appealers or any of them or against any other person for this cause nor for any other thing or deed to affirme the same purposes till the end of this present Parliament but thereof shall be acquitted This Act with others made the same Parliament continued inviolable without dispute for 10 yeers space during w ch there were 8. more Parliaments held w ch approved it but in 21 R. 2. the King having violently seised upon the Duke of Glocester the Earles of Warwicke and Arundell and packed a Parliament to his minde by not summoning any Lords thereto but those oâ— his party by causing divers Knights and Burgesses of his own nomination never chosen by the people to be returned in divers places and overawing the rest with a guard or 4000. Cheshire Archers caused these Lords to be illegally attainted of Treason upon fained pretences out of this old grudge and the Acts of this Parliament to be reversed yet not this Act as I conceive which is part of it being specially saved by 21. R. 2. c. 13. But however by the statute of 1 H. 4. c. 3. 4. the Parliament of 21. was wholly repealed reversed revoked voyded undone and anulled for ever with all the Acts circumstances and dependants thereof and this Parliament of 11. R. 2. Enacted to be firmely holden and kept after the purport and effect of the same as a thing made for the great Honour and common profit of the Realme and ch 5. It is ordained and assented that the Lords and other which were forejudged in the Parliament holden the said 21. yeare or by Authority of the same which now be in life and the heires of the Lords and others that be dead shall be wholly restitute and restored to their names all manner of inheritaments and possessions reversions fees reversions offices liberties and franchises as intirely as the said Lords and others which be in life or the Lords and other which be dead ancestors of the heires or the feoffees of the said Lords or other aforesaid or other feoffees to their use were at the time of the judgement given against them the said 21 yeare by entrie without other suite thereof to be made or livery to be had of the same And all the goods and chattels which were the said Lords or the other persons aforesaid so forejudged whereof the king is not answered and be in the hands of the Sheriffes Escheators or other Officers Ministers or any other and concealed by them the king wills and granteth that the same Lords and other which now be in life and the Executors and administrators of them that be dead shall have thereof delivery and restitution and that the Sheriffes Escheators Officers and Ministers so occupying the said goods and chattels by such concealment bee punished for the same concealement So that by the expresse resolution of these two severall Parliaments these Lords and Commons taking up defensive Armes and making war against those wicked Councellours of this King which sought their ruine and endeavoured the destruction of the Realme though they had the kings presence and commissions to countenance all their actions and proceedings of this nature and the Lords wanted the Ordinances of both houses to authorize this their arming and war was solemnely declared and adjudged to be no Treason nor Rebellion at all nor levying of warre against the king within the statute of 25. E. 3. but contrarywise a thing done to
high ruleth in the kingdome of men and giveth it to whomsoever he will and setteth up over it the basest of men with Hos 13. 11. 1 Sam. 10. 1. Jer. 27. 5 6 7. Isay 45. 1 2. and other Texts To answer this question distinctly and dissipate these grosse erroneous Paradoxes we must distinguish First betweene Government it selfe in generall and kingly or other kindes of government in speciall as our opposites distinguish betweene a Sabbath and the Sabbath the first they say is morall and of divine institution the later not Secondly betweene the Regall power of Kings the persons invested with this power the manner of obtaining and the administration of their power Thirdly of Gods manner of instituting and ordaining things which is twofold immediately by himselfe mediately by others And these institutions of both kinds are either universall extending to all places Nations or particular concerning some Countries and Nations onely and not others Perpetuall for ever or temporall onely for some set time Immutable not capable of the least alteration or mutable and that either at the pleasure of God onely or at the will of men when they shall see just cause either in part or in whole Fourthly in what severall senses things may be said to be of God First in respect of his owne immediate institution Secondly of his generall or speciall commands Thirdly of his generall or speciall disposing providence without any speciall institution or command Fourthly of his approbation of assent unto and blessing on the meere institutions of men Fiftly of his permission onely To apply these distinctions to the present occasion First it is cleare that power and government in generall are Gods owne institution who as he hath appointed in the great fabricke of the world a certaine constant forme of government and subordination of one creature to another so he hath for the good of mankinde appointed that there should be some forme of government or other among men in the world which in respect of families hee hath specially and universally decreed as that the wife should be subject to the husband the children to the parents the servants to their masters but in regard of Commonweales or Nations hee hath left it arbitrary and indefinite leaving every Nation and Country free liberty to elect such a publike politike forme of government as themselves should judge most expedient for their publike good and that mutable since all humane things are so as they should see just occasion not prescribing any sempiternall immutable forme of government to any particular Nations Regions much lesse to all the world Secondly government in generall being thus of God but the kindes of it thus left arbitrary to mens institution and free election the particular governments instituted by any Nation for the better regulating of their lives the preservation of humane society and advancement of Gods glory may be truely said in some sense to be of God though instituted invented by men Not because God himselfe did immediately ordain or prescribe them by speciall command to all or any one people or because God himself did immediately ordaine or prescribe them by speciall command to this all or any one people but because hee by his generall or speciall providence did direct this Nation to make choyse of such a government or gave them wisedome to invent and settle it as most commodious for their republike till they should see cause to alter it or because he blessed and approved it when invented and received by them Thirdly Kingly powers Kingdomes Kings the things now in question are and may be said to be of God and ordained of God in no other manner or sense then all other particular Governments or Magistrates are For this Text of the Romans speaking onely of the higher powers the powers that are and of Rulers as doth that place of Titus 3. 1. And the Text of Prov. 8. 15 16. so much relied on by the objectors extending as well to all subordinate Rulers as Kings witnesse the subsequent words By me Kings reigne and Princes decree justice by me Princes rule AND NOBLES yea ALL THE JUDGES OF THE EARTH that is all Magistrates whatsoever it cannot but be yeelded that all and every lawfull kinde of government all lawfull Rulers and Magistrates of what fort soever are of Gods ordination and his ordinance as farre forth as Monarchies are and what is truely affirmable of the one is of the other too These generalls thus premised as indubitable I say first of all That Monarchy or regall power is not of God nor yet Gods ordinance by way of immediate divine institution or speciall command from Gods owne free motion as our opposites affirme it For first God himself never immediately instituted a royall Monarchicall government in any Nation whatsoever no not among his owne people whose government was at first Paternall and Patriarchicall next Aristocraticall then Regall not by Gods immediate institution and voluntary designation but by the peoples earnest importunity contrary to the good liking of God and Samuel as is evident by 1 Sam. c. 8 and 9 and 10 and 11. Hos 8. 4. and the Appendix Secondly All Politicians and Historians grant that the originall crection of all Monarechies was either by the peoples free consent and ordination or by Tyranny and usurpation or be conqest none by divine institution or speciall command from God And it must needs be so because most kingdomes were primitively erected either among Pagan Nations and States who knew not God nor his Word or among Christian States since speciall commands and Revelations from heaven ceased which if our opposites deny I shall desire them to instance in any one Monarchy in the world instituted immediately by God himselfe or by speciall command from his owne free motion Till this be done all their asseverations will be accounted fabulous Thirdly if Regall power be Gods ordinance by way of divine immediate institution and command then this institution of Regall Monarchy with the severall Prerogatives and boundaries of it would appeare in some Text of Scripture and this government would be specially and perpetually prescribed either to all or some particular Nations by God himselfe But this institution with the generall Prerogatives and bounds of Regall Authority are no where extant in Scripture neither this forme of government therein prescribed but left arbitrary to all or any Nation in particular for ought any man can demonstrate Those Texts which concerne the Kings of the Israelites in point of soveraignty and Prerogative being judiciall onely and peculiar to that Nation nor morall or extending unto others Therefore it is not Gods ordinance by way of divine immediate institution or command Fourthly if it were of divine ordination in this sense then the Regall power and authority of all Kings and Monarchs in the world should bee equall yea the very same and there should be no different kinde of Kings as the divine authority of