everlasting by an Ordinance What duâ—l unleâ—rned men as he goes on were Sir Edward Cooke Phillips Elliot Digges c. that could never find or devise this knack of forging new Laws in former Parliâ—ments Fourthly were it Law whatsoâ—ver the two Houses declared then could they enact new Laws without the King and so the well tempered and admirably ballanced Government of this Kingdome wherein all the three Estates are shâ—rers after a sort and in the râ—ine order might at the pleasure only of two of them be dissolved But it is not equall that two of the Estates should judge by no Rule sâ—ve their own Votes or that they should be allowed to be the sole arbitrary Judges both of Justice and Policy without the third this must of necessity make the third to stand for a Cypâ—er That the two Houses are distinct parts of the Parliâ—ment is acknowledged but that they have the power of the whole in right though it hath been executed upon us in fact must be denyed unlesse we will grant that they can make an Act of Parliament without the King In former Ages and ever since Parliaments were in use if I be not misinformed for I am no studied Lawyer the Jus Statutorium or Statutory Lawes were constituta setled and established by the King and both Houses of Parliament in which the reasons of making those Laws were most in the debâ—ting and voting of both Houseâ— and the Royâ—ll Assent to them was left to the King with a Le Roy veult or his dissenting from them not peremp ory but with a modest answer Le Roy s'avisera which modest dissâ—nt was of sufficient authority to make a Bill of both Houses invalid And how the King hath lost that right and what new Lawes are found out destructive to that Prerogative I never yet reâ—d nor ever shall unlesse some new Ordinance or bare Vote can pretend to such an unwarrantable poâ—er Fiftly if their bâ—re Votes be more binding and of greater Authority then the King Proclamâ—tions then are their words above the Kings and their power and authority above His and not His above theirs and then Saint Peter was mistaken in telling uâ— that the King is Supreame 1. Pet. 2.13 And we are all forsworne in taking the oath of Supremacy to the King and noâ— unto them and so are they for it wâ—s enacted Anno 5 Eliz. That every Knight Citizen and Burâ—esseâ— in Parliament should take the same oath and unlesse thâ—y took it they should not be admitted Parliament men or have any voyce there Either then the House of Commons hath taken it or not if they have not taken it they are not Parliament men nor have any voyce if tâ—ey have taken it unlesse they will forsweâ—re themselves and deny God they must continuâ— subjects sitting in the Parliament Housâ— and be undâ—r the King as suprâ—â—me and â—onsequently either their wordâ— nor auâ—â—â—rity câ—n be â—bove Hiâ— nor can they Enact any Law wiâ—â—â—â—uâ— Hâ—â—â—ssent But sâ—condly If they pretend the formâ—r Thâ—t they have an Expâ—â—sse Law to wâ—rrâ—nt all tâ—â—ir Dâ—clâ—â—ations Votes and O dâ—â—â—nceâ— to be â—egall thâ—y doâ— vâ—â—y â—ll tâ—â—t they doe not sh w â—â— uâ—to the King wâ—o proâ—â—ssâ—th tâ—â—t the very shâ—wiâ—â—â— oâ—â—â— should satiâ—fiâ—â— him anâ—â—â—at he â—â—nnot be sâ—tiâ—fiâ—â— till tâ—ey sheâ—â—y will tâ—â—y rather then shew such a Lâ—w dispâ—â—â—se tâ—â— King hazard tâ—eir Râ—ligion the Peace of the Kingdom and the Lives and Souleâ— of many in a bloody Watre Briefly Either thâ—râ—iâ— such a Law and they will endâ—nger King Kingdom Lives Gooâ— Religion bâ— a Bâ—oody Civill Destructive unnaturâ—ll Warre râ—ther tâ—en shew it which would argue them extreamely uncharitâ—blâ— or else indeed there is no such Law for them tâ— declare and then their Dâ—clâ—râ—tions are not Legall and by consequence we are not bound to obey them I will conclude this point with some Observable passages out of His Majesties Answers to the Declarations and Remonstrance of the two Houses of Parliament 〈◊〉 fiâ—st out of that Answer of His to the Declaraâ—ion of both Houses touching the Militia wherein they pretend thâ—t they were necessitated to mâ—ke such an Orâ—inance for setling the Militia warranted thereunto by the Fundamentall Lawes of the Land They may doe well saith His Majestie to tell Our good Suâ—jects what those Fundamentall Lawes of the Land are and where to be found and to mention one Ordinance from the first beginning of Parliaments to this present Parliament which endeavoured to impose anâ— thing upon the Subject without the Kings Consent for of suâ—h all the inquiry that We can make could never produce Vs one instance and if there be such a secret of the Law which hath lyen hidden from the beginning of the World to this time and now is discovered to take away the just legall Power of the King We wish that there be not some other secret to be discovered when they please for the Ruine and destruction of the Liberty of the Subject for no doubt if the Votes of both Houses have any such authority to make a new Law it hath the same authoâ—ity to repeale the old Then what will become of the long established Rights and Liberties of the King and Subject and particulaâ—ly oâ— Magna Charta will be easily discerned by the most ordinary understanding Secondly out of His Majesties Answer to the Declaration of both Houses concerning Hull Mâ—y 4. 1642. The power of Parliaments is great and unlimited but it is onâ—y in that seâ—se as we are a part of the Parliament witâ—oâ—t Vâ— or against Our Consent the Votes of either or both Hâ—â—â—es together must not cannot shall not if We can helpe it for Our Subjects sake as well as Our Own forbid any thing that is enjoyned by the Law or enjoyne any thing that is forbidden by the Law In what a miserable insecurity and confusion must we necessary and inevitably be if the Soveraigne Legall Authority may be despised by Votes or Orders of either or both Houses Thirdly Out of His Majesties Answer to a Book Entituled The Rememâ—rance of the Lords and Commons May 19. 1642. There cannot be imagined a greater Violation of our Priviledges the Lâ—w of the Land the Liberty of the Subject and the Right of Parliament then the Votes past in the House March 15.16 One of which Votes wâ—s and there need no other to destroy both King and People That when the Lords and Commons shall declare that the Law of the Land is the same must be assented uâ— to â—nd obeyed that is the Sence in fâ—w words Where is every Mans Property Eâ—ery Mans Liberty If the major part of bothh Houses declare that the Law is the younger Brother shall inherit what is become of all the Families and Estates in the Kingdom 〈◊〉 they Declare that by the Fundamentall Law of the Land such a raâ—… a 〈…〉 unadvised Woâ—d ought to be punished by perpetuaal 〈…〉 is noâ— the Liberty of the Subjeâ—… durâ—nte bene 〈…〉 dilesse
the Land entrust Subjects with the Sword against their Soveraigne for by the Law of the Land all we that be Subjects above the age of eighteen yeares are bound to sweare Allegiance to our Soveraigne Lord the Kiâ—g There was an O th enacted Anno 3 Jacobi wherein â—e that t keâ— it sweâ—reâ— That he will bear Faith and true Allegiâ—nce to His M jâ—sty Hâ—â— Heâ—res and Successors c. And Him â—nd them will deâ—enâ— to the utmost of hiâ— power against all Conâ—pâ—â—icies and Aâ—â—mpts whatsoever whiâ—h shall be made agaiâ—st Hâ—â— or tâ—â—r Persons their croâ—n dignity c. Aâ—d it was furâ—â—â—r enacted by Parliament 7 Jacobi That alâ— and â—very Pâ—rson and Pâ—â—soâ—s as well Ecclesiâ—sticall â—s Câ—vill of whâ—t Staâ—e Dignity Quâ—lity or Dâ—gree â—oâ—ver â—e oâ— they bâ— above the age of eighteen yeares in that Act mentioned shall take the said Oath And if all the Subâ—ects in the Land above eighteen yeâ—res old have as by Law they are bound taken the sâ—id Oâ—th unlesse they will wittingly and willingly forsweare themselves they must with all their power defend the Kings Person and Dignity and by consequence they may not oppose either or doe such things as may endanger His Person and lessen His Authority and Dignity Neither may they be Newters and sit still suffering others to wrong him but they must stand up to maintaine his right and to vindicate his wrong And they must defend him by purse bodily service or what way soever they can else they are forsworne Eristes But may we not sometimes lawfully deny obedience to the Kings verball or Personall Commands Irenaeus Yes in some cases it is not only lawfull but necessary to disobey the command of the King as when God commands one thing and the King in a menacing and threatning way commands another then that Speech is seasonable Da veniam Imperator tu carcerem ille Gehennam minatur Give leave O Emperour thou threatnest my body with imprisonment but God can cast both my Soule and Body into Hell the worst and most darkesome Prison of all others In such a case we may and must neglect our duty to our Prince rather then forget our duety to God Nam Regum timendorum in proprios Greges Reges in ipsos Imperium est Jovis For Kings though they be Superiours in regard of their Subjects yet are they inferiour unto God Omne sub regno graviore regnum est Every Kingdom on Earth is under a greater in Heaven And the Apostolicall Canon Rom. 13.1 which wills us to be subject to the higher powers before the lower amongst men doth by Analogy instruct us to be principally subject to that highest power by whom the Powers on Earth are ordained and set in Order one above another When Pharaoh King of Egypt commanded the Hebrew Midwives to strangle the Hebrew Male Children in the birth they feared God and did not the command of the King Exod. 1.17 When Nebuchadnezzâ—r having erected a Golden Image commanded all people to fall down and worship it under penalty of being cast into the hot fiery â—â—rna â— â—hadracke Mâ—sech and Abednego refused to dâ—â— the command of the King because the Law of God forbad them to doe it Dan. 3.18 When Darius had signed a Decree That none should make any Petition to God save only to him for certaine dayes Daniel notwithstanding the Decree went into his House and his Chamber Windowes â—eing opened towards Jâ—rusalem kneeled upon his knees three times a day and prayed to his God contrary to the signed Decree and expâ—esse command of the King Dan. 6.10 The seven Brethren though Antiochus Epiphanes or rather Epimanes threatned to torment them with scourges and whippes yet they would not by all the threatnings and exquisite tormentâ— that â—e could use be compelled to taste of Swine flesh because it was against the Law of their God 1 Maâ—ab 7.1 And Julians Christian Souldiers though they readily sought his Bâ—ttells and obeyed him when he commanded thingâ— lawfull yet Quando veniebatur ad causam Christi Aug in Psa 124. non agâ— osâ—ebant nisi illum qui in Caelo erat quando volebat ut Idola colerent aut thurificarent praeponebant illi Deum When they came to the cause of Christ they would acknowledge no Lord but him that is in Heaven when he commanded them to worship Idolls â—o sacrifice and burne Iâ—cense to his Idoll gods they preferred God before their Prince And thâ— case was clearly resolved long since by the Apostles That when the Kings command câ—osseth the command of God then it is absolutely better for us to obey God than man Acts 5.29 Yet here we must take heed first that we be not led by fancies and groundlesse imaginations but be sure that what the King commands is against Gods Law Secondly That denying obedience we doe it in all humility without scandall and contempt Thirdly That yet we be content to obey passively without resisting the higher power For even then when we cannot with a safe Conscience obey the command of the King because we have received a couâ—ter-command from God we must be subject to him notwithstanding and not dare to rise up against him Nam qui iâ—sâ—rgit in Châ—istum Domini Psal 2.1 insurgit in Dominum Christi For he that riseth up against the Lordâ— Anointed riseth up against the Lord by whom he was Anoynted The least Injury Numb 16.11 1 Sam. 8.7 Indignity Affront of Disgrace that is done to the King whom God hath appointed his immediate Deputy and Vicegerent on Earth to Rule and Governe in his place doth in the reflex extend and redound â—o God himselfe the Author of all Rule and Government and by consequence it must needs be an hainous and hatefull sinne in the sight of God for Subjects to rise up against their Soveraigne though a Nero a bloody persecuter of the Faith much more against a Charles a gracious Defender of the Faith Amb. lib 3. epist 33. Sâ—int Amâ—rose highly commended the people of Millâ—in wâ—en there was hot persecution in the City for the Vâ—yce they then used Rogamus Auguste non pugnamus We omâ—â—nt O Emperour we sight not perhaps you will say tâ—ey durst not yes Non tiâ—emus tamen rogamus We seâ—â— not the Emperours Forces yet we entreat The like Speâ—ch Sâ—int Bernard useth in an Epistle of his to Lewis the French King Stabimus pugnahimus usque ad mortem si ita oâ—oâ—tuerit pro matre nostra Ecclesia Bern. Epist 221. sed Armis quibuâ— licet non scutis gladiis sed precibus fletibusque ad Deuâ— We will stand and sight for our Mother the Church if need be unto death with such Armes and Weaponâ— as lawfully we may not with Sword and Tarâ—et but with Prayers and Teares unto God Tertul. Apol. cap. 37. And Ter◠〈◊〉 in his Apologetick tells uâ— That the Ancient Churâ—hes 〈◊〉 time when they had Heathen and Persâ—â—â—ng Empâ—â—â—rs
potestate Kings are safely guâ—rded by their Imperiâ—ll power from the penalty of humâ—ne Law Ambrose Enarâ—at in Psal 51. Rex etsi Leges in â—otestaâ—â— bâ—â—et ut impune delinquat Deo tamen subditus est suâ—â—icit illi in â—aenam quod Deâ—m expectet ultorem A King 〈…〉 the Laws so farre in His power thâ—t He is not puniâ—h 〈◊〉 by them but may brâ—â—ke them witâ—out 〈…〉 yet he is subject to God and it mâ—y â—uffiâ—◠〈◊〉 He hath Goâ— to take vengeâ—â—ce of him to whosâ— wâ—â—tâ—â— by tâ—e â—buse of His power He mâ—kes himselâ—◠〈…〉 â—â—â—â—sâ—â—â—â—m in Psal 118. O 〈◊〉 17. Nemo lege◠〈…〉 Reges iâ— quiâ—â—â— prevaâ—iâ—tioâ—â— i◠〈…〉 enim dectâ—um est impium◠〈…〉 agâ—â— None may break the Laws oâ— Kinâ—â—â—◠〈…〉 punishmâ—nt but Kings themselves wâ—om 〈◊〉 â—â—arged with the traâ—sgression of their own Law 〈◊〉 it wâ—s wiâ—ely sâ—iâ— that he is an uâ—godly man that say 〈…〉 King Thou â—od wickedly Cyrill Eccles 8.4 This w then tâ—ughâ—â—or gooâ— Diâ—inity by the Aâ—cient Fathers anâ— yet they were nâ— Courâ— Paraâ—iteâ— â—astly be it so that Salus Pâ—â—uâ—i sâ—â—rema Lex the safety of the People is tâ—e Supâ—â—mâ— Lâ—w yet experience tells us that it is safer for a pâ—opâ—â— not to resist then to resist their Prince by force of Ann for what mischiefe is not Civill Warre accompanied with it never comes alone but is accompanyed with Rapine Spoyle Robbery Plundring and all imâ—ginary evill whereas due subjection to the Prince is the causâ— of tranquility peace order prosperity and happinesse in the State and the onely way to preserve the Common-wealth in safety Theopompus King of Sparta speaking to one of hiâ— Domestick servants who told him that the Spartan affaires did prosper well because they had Kings who knew how to governe well nay rather saith he because the People know well how to obey imputing the long continuance and flourishing of the Spartan Sate not so much to the skilfull Government of their Kings as to the ready subjection and willing obedience of the People And so long as we demeaned our selves as Loyall Subjects God blessed us with abundance of Peace and temporall felicity even to the envie of all other Nations round about us But since some out of an humour and desire to be Subjects without subjection have turned disloyall to their Soveraigne and risen up in armes against Him our treâ—sures have been exhatisted our Lands mightily impoverished by the expensive oppression of Warre and this once flourishing Kingdom and Nation is in danger to be brought unto utter ruine and desolation if God doe not timely cease these seditious Tumults and Commotions by instilling Loyall and Peaceable affections into the hearts of those who have occasioned or abetted those Tumults Eristes But did not the people of Israel resist Saul their King by force of arms when they rescued Jonathan out of his hand 1 Sam. 14.45 Did not David take up defensive armes when hâ— gathered six hundred Souldiers together to defend himselfe against the violence and fury of Saul his Liege Lord and Soveraigne and when as may be supposed he would have kept Saul out of Keilah by forcible resistance if the Keilites would have stood to him 1. Sam. 23.12 Nay doth not the Scripture sâ—y expresly that he came with the Philistins against Sauâ— to Battaile 1. Sam. 12.19 Did not Elisha the Prophet bid the Elders of Israel use the Kings Mâ—ssenger roughly and hold him fast at the doore 2. Kings 6.32 Did 〈◊〉 Azariah the High Priest and fourâ—score Priestâ— oâ— tâ—e Lord that were valianâ— men violently thrust King Vâ—â—â—â—h out of the Temple af er he became Leprouâ— 2 Cron. 26.17.20 who in that they are commended for â—ithout Men saith Bridges it shewes that their worke was not only reproofe but resistance Lastly have we nor warrantable Examplâ—â— and â—â—â—â—dents from the reformed Churches to justifie at 〈◊〉 up Arms in our own defence to be lawfull Irenaeus To all these alledged Exâ—mples I may answer in generall that we Christians oâ—ght to folloâ— no mans â—o Churches example further then they follow Christ 1 Cor. 11.1 But Christ 〈◊〉 â—â—â—ght us either by prâ—ctise or precept to resist the higher power he both by Exâ—mple and Precept taught the contrary for he left us an example of patient suffering from Autâ—ority not of resisting Authority 1. Pet. 2.21.23 and when Authority caused him uniustly to be apprehended and after condemned he would â—oâ— suffer Peter to defend â—im against the present Autâ—ority â—ith the sword buâ— bad him put up the sword which formâ—â—y he hâ—d 〈◊〉 â—wn in his defence telling him that he that takes 〈◊〉 sword without deputation from Authority or against authority though unjustly abused shall pâ—rish by the Sword Mat. 26.52 admit then that your Testimâ—nies and Exâ—mples out of the old Testament did prove it in some case to be lawfull under the Law to take up defensive arms agaiâ—st Persons inâ—ested with Sovreaigne Power can you shew it to be lawfull uâ—der the Gospell where suffering is commandeâ— and commended rensting forbidden and condemned and where Christ's meeke Spirit not Eliahs revengefull spirit is to guide us if we would not be misguided Luke 9.55 But to answer your allegations more punctually as you have no proofe out of the new so you have none out of the old Testament to legitimate and warrant your offensive defensive Weapons To begin with your first example Though the People were then in arms by Sauls owne appointment when they rescued Jonathan out of his hands yet they did not rescue him out of Sauls hand by force of arms Eristes How then did they rescue him Irenâ—eus Not with offensive weapons but with perswasiue words Shall Jonâ—than dye say they who hath wrought so great salvation in Israell as the Lord liveth there shall â—â—t an haire of his head fall to the ground Or as Junius and Tremelius two famous Interpreters translate the words by way of interrogation more agreable to the originall An tadere debet ullus e capillis ejus ought their to fall any haire of his head to the ground They appeale to Saul himselfe say these learned Interpreterâ— whether in Conscience he ought it just and reasonable that Jonathan should dye by whose meanes they were all then alive charging his Conscience before God that he should rather have respâ—ct to Equity then his rash oâ—th Thus then they rescued Jonathan not by arms but by arguments as Aâ—â—gal did Nabal her Huâ—band and the rest of her Houshold out of the hand of David who had in like manner sworne to cut them all off 1 Sam. 25. or if the People here pressed violently upon Saul in making a mutiny they cannot be excused saith Peter Martir in locum and so the example is either impâ—rtinently alledged or else bâ—ing in it selfe inâ—xâ—usâ—ble it cannot excuse much lesse justâ—fie your doâ—â—gâ— Your next example oâ— testâ—mony is as 〈◊〉 to the purpose as the former for Dâ—vid did not â—â—stâ—r
Calvin Institut lib. 4. cap. 20. Sect. 29. If we be cruelly oppressed by a cruell Prince if we be polled and pillaged by a covetous or luxurious Prince if we be negligently governed by a carelesse Prince if for godlinesse we be as God be thanked we are not persocuted by an Impious and sacrilegious Prince let us in the first place remember our sins which no doubt are corrected by God with such scourges this will be a means to bridle our impatience with humility then let this thought come into our minds that it is not in our power without Gods help to mend or remedy such evils and therefore in the last place it remaines that we should implore the help of God in whose hands are the hearts of Kings and inclinations of Kingdoms Have you any other coulourable pretâ—nces which may in some sort seemingly excuse though in no sort justifie your taking up Arms to resist the King who is the highest power in this Kingdom next under God and therefore cannot be resisted without perill of damnation Rom. 13.2 Eristes You mistake Irenaeus we doe not resist the King or his legall power but only his verball personall illegall command which we may doe without danger of incurring the penalty threatned by the Apostle to such as resist the higher power Rom. 13.2 Irenaeus The Apostle in that Chapter commands all who live under authority to be subject to the higher power and proves by five perswasive convincing reasons that they ought to be subject First ab Authore from the Author of all power quiâ— non est potestas nisi a Deo because there is no power but of God Secondly he proveth that all must be subject to the higher power a bono ordinis from the good of order quia potestates quae sunt a Deo ordinatae sunt beâ—â—use the powerâ— that be are ordeined and set in order by God one above another and we should be Authors of confusion and perverters of that comely order which God who is the God of order and not of confusion hath ordeined if we should refuse to live in subjection unto him whom he hath appointed to rule over us Thirdly that we are to be subject to the higher power he proves a malo culpae because it is a sin to resist the Supreame Magistrate or the higher power for he that resisteth the power resisteth the Ordinance of God vers 2. Beware then how thou resist thy Prince upon any pretence or take pâ—rt with such as doe resist him by force of Arms for his Person is sacred his ordination divine and cannot without sin be resisted Fourthly that we must be subject to the higher power the Apostles proves a malo panae fâ—om the evill of punishment bâ—â—â—use they that resist and will not be subject shall unavoidably and deservâ—â—ly receive to themselves crimâ— juâ—gement if not temporâ—ll in this world yet most certainly eternall in the world to come unlesse they repent Lastly be proves that we must be subject to the higher powers a bono seâ—ieâ—atis from the good of Society because we that live in a civill Society receive and reape much good by their government they are the Ministers of God for our good Were there no King appointed to rule over uâ— we should soon see a generall Arâ—xy Disorder and Confusion in all estâ—tes in the Church such abuses as would mâ—ke us to abhorre the Sanctuary of the Lord in the Common-wealth such haiâ—ous enormities and impieties aâ— would vex our Soules to see and behold them In the 17. 18. 19. Chapters of the Booke of Judges there â—â—e may read of disorder upon disorder and still in the close this is alledged as the chiefe cause of all those disorders That there was no King in Israel to curb and restraine the insolent unruly passions of men but every one was permitted to doe what seemed good in his own eyes and no wonder that all things in the Church and State were then out of order when there was no King or no authority in the Supreame Magistrate to keep men in due order by all which it evidently appeares that Praestat sub malo Principe esse quam sub nullo It is better to live under the government of an evill or Tyrannicall Prince then to have none at all to govern uâ— Wherefore because all power is of God because the powers that be are tetagmenai ordained and set in order by God because it is a sin to resist the higher powers because judgement both temporall and eternall is the punishmenâ— of that sin lastly because they are the Ministers of God for our good therefore as the Apostle infers we must of necessity be subject unto them not only for feare of the temporall sword or inâ—uâ—ring their wrath and displeâ—suâ—e who cannot but be angry and much displeased witâ—â—hose that resist them but alâ—o for Conscieâ—ce sake towâ—rdâ— God who hath â—id a â—ye upon the Coâ—science of all â—nferiouâ— o pâ—rsorâ—â— tâ—e Dâ—â—y of Subjection to their Supâ—â—â—ours yâ—â— tâ—ougâ— tâ—ey be such aâ— tâ—â— higâ—er poweâ—â—â—en werâ— Tyrâ—â—t to their own Suâ—â—â—â— and Perseâ—meâ— of Christian Pro-fessour and proseâ—â— Enemies of the Câ—ristian faith He that waâ— Empeâ—our when Saint Paul wroâ—e that Epistle to the Romans was Nero a Tyrant a vâ—le anâ— violent opposer of Christâ—â—n Reâ—â—gion Nero saith leâ—â—ed Moulin was a Monster in nature the shame of humane â—â—â—d alâ—â— first Emperour that began to persecute the Church neverthelesse the Apostle Rom. 13. speaking of that power which was then in being saith that it was ordeined by God and that whosoever resisted the same resisted the ordinance of God and by their resistance did deservedly pull upon themselves damnation and if in the Apostles judgement it was a sin deserving damnation to resist Nero a bloody Tyrant and cruell persecuter of Christians what a haynous sin are they guilty of and what a judgement doe they deserve that resist His sacred Majesty our Soveraigne Lord King Charles who is the most gracious and religious King in Christendom Eristes I tell you we neither resist the King nor His Legall power but only His illegall will and command Irenaeus First are you sure that all or any of the Kings commands which you withstand are illegall if they be not then Boroughs your chiefe Advocate freely grants That there is no help left you but either to fly or passively to obey them though he command you to obey such Laws as be sinfull If they be every way illegall neither agreeable to the Law of God nor the Laws of the Land then you may doe well to enforme us how you may with a safe and satisfied Conscience resist them and neither resist the King nor His Legall power that you may resist them by a bare deniall of obedience unto them if such a deniall may be termed a resistance is formerly granted but may you resist them with armed violence will you cut his illegall commands in peeces with your Swords or beat them back with your Cannons doe not alter the state of the question and the point is cleare That the resistance which you make is not only against the verball commands of the King but against the King himselfe who gave those commands and by consequence against that Legall Kingly power or Royall Authority which can never be divorced from His sacred Person while He remains a King for though his authority may by Delegation or Commission be in His Courts where His Person is not ever present yet that His person can be any where or at any time without His Royall authority is such a sublime point such an hidden mistery of State such a new peece of Divinity that my faith is not strong enough to beleeve it nor yours or any other mans wit sufficiently able to prove it Surely the Primitive Christians were dull and stupid who poore simple ignorant Soules out of meer simplicity suffered so much because they were not capable of this subtle nice distinction which were it once admitted for currant and Canonicall Subjects might resist the Prince and lay violent hands up in His Person and yet be neither Traytors nor Rebells but canonized Saints And what can the poore Kingdom expect where the Person of the Prince is not held inviolable and sacred but combustion and confusion The Jews have a proverbiall saying Migrandum est ex illo loco uhi Rex non timetur That men should haste out of that place Country or Kingdom where the King is not feared thereby intimating that doubtlesse some great and fearfull judgement doth hang over it Oh then let me exhort you who have taken up Armes against your Soveraigne noâ— to turn Religion into Rebâ—llâ—on patience into violence fidelity into perjury subject 〈◊〉 into sedition and you London Lecturers that have been t e chiefe Trumpetters to this desperate unnaturall bloody irreligious Warre turn not your spirituall Militiae into that which is carnall doe not exhort men in the fear of God to fight against the King for that feare of God which doth not strengthen but abate the feare of the King and shrinke 〈…〉 obedience it is 〈…〉 a 〈…〉 â—ented devised â—oâ—â—â—â—â—ted by mâ—â— and taught or approved by God the true Religion fearâ— of God â—â—â—heth 〈◊〉 feare and honour the King to be subject 〈◊〉 him and not to resist Him I will conclude with a Prayer THen that art the God of Peace settle the Peace of this disâ—…ed Kingdom by casting faction out of the State and Schismâ—â— of the Church and by undeceiving the minds 〈◊〉 that have been seduced into open rebellion under a preâ—â—â—â—â— of Piety and Religion that so we may come once more to live a quiet peâ—ceable life in all godlinesse and honesty under the Religiouâ— Governmeâ—â— of our gracious Soveraigne â—hom doe thou O Lord long preserve to raigne over us an happy King of many blessings Errata Paâ—… 〈◊〉 â—ine to after the second word the adde Laâ—oâ— and. p. 9. l. 2. after 〈◊〉 â— or p. 11. l. 15. for secondly r. thirdly p. 28. l. 3. for there r. hir p â—4 l. 22. for unlawfullnesse r. lawfulnesse l. 24. for ordinances 〈◊〉 ordnances other literall fruits I leave to the correction of the inteâ—…igent Reader FINIS
A VULGAR OR POPVLAR DISCOURSE SHEWING That the Warre raised by the two Houses fomented chiefly by the Londoners abetted for the moâ—… 〈…〉 and others notoriously disaffected to Monarchiall Government Is not as Boroughs pretends in defence of the Protestant Religion His Majesties Person the Laws and Liberties of the Kingdom and Priviledges of Parliament but rather destructive to them all Written Dialogue wise By Irenaeus A Lover of Peace against Eristes A Lover of Contention Prov. 24.21.22 My Sonne feare God and the King and meddle not with them that are given to change for their calamity shall rise suddenly Tertul. Apolâ—… câ—…â—… In Majesâ—…tis 〈…〉 When Majesty is wronged every 〈…〉 to maintain the Right and 〈◊〉 the 〈◊〉 of His Soveraigne Printed at York by Stephen Bulkley 1643. To His Excellence WILLIAM Earle of NEWCASTLE Viscount Mansfield Lord Ogle Baron of Bolsover Bothall and Hepple Governour of the Towne and County of Newcastle Generall of all His Majesties Forces in the North Parts of this Kingdome and in the Counties of Nottingham Lincoln Rutland Derby Stafford Leicester Warwick Northampton Huntington Cambridge Norfolke Suffolke Essex and Hertford One of His Majesties most Honourable Privie Councell Right Honourable I Make bold in all humblenesse to present this Treatise to your Honours acceptance the candid construction which your excellence hath often been pleased to give of my Sermons delivered to the Eare hath encouraged me by a bold tender to offer this to your judicious Eye If it obtain your Lordships approbation it will not repent me that I have exposed it to the criticall View of this censorious age by so open a Publication your Countenance it begges that your Greatnesse may protect it And daigne Noble Lord to vouchsafe it your Honourable Patronage for it justifies that cause with the Pen which your Excellence maintains with the Sword it pleades for Loialty and to whom can a Treatise of Loialty in these Parts more fitly make it's addresse for shelter then unto his Excellence William Earle of Newcastle who as one of our Davids most excellent Worthies hath approved himselfe a most Renowned Heroick Magnanimous protector of Loialty in these Northern Counties to the perpetuall Honour of his Name and Noble Family Goe on still most Noble Lord with Heroick Magnanimity and prosper till all the Kings Enemies that have risen up against Him be cloathed with shame and my Lord the King return home to His Pallace at White-Hall in Peace Which is the Loyall the earnest Prayer of Your Excellencies in all humble Observance Service and Duty Y. A. A Vulgar or Popular Discourse Written Dialogue-wise By Irenaeus A Lover of Peace against Eristes A Lover of Contention IRenaeus Why do you fill the Church with Schisme and the State with Faction can you tell Eristes what is it you contend for or what warrant have you to lift up your hands against your Lawfull Soveraigne the Lords Anoynted Eristes Are you a Straâ—ger Irenaeus in this our Israel and know not these things the mâ—tters for which we contend are mâ—tterâ— of importance for we take up Arms in defence of the true Protestant Religion His Majesties Person the Liberties of the Kingdom the Priviledges of Parliament and that by Warrant and Commission from the two Houses of Parliament Irenaeus Surely Eristes you meane to put a gull upon me as you have done upon many others and by these fait plausible Pretences would seduce me to take part with you in a wretched Quarrell and to hazard my Life in this World and my Soul in the next by bearing Arms against my Soveraigne Eristes What doe you hold it an unlawfull and damnable act to take up Arms against your Soveraigne in Defence of the true Protestant Religion His Majesties Sacred Person the Lawes of the Land the Libertyes of the Subject and the undoubted Priviledges of Parliament Irenaeus First you take for granted that which will be denyed and go about to render your Prince odious to His People under the hatefull notion of a Tyrant as if he meant to subvert the true Protestant Religion the Laws of the Land c. which are sad charges but how groundlesse God and the World knowes Secondly were your Pretences as true as they are specious yet it is contrary to the Law of God the Doctrine of the Apostles the perpetuall Paâ—ience of Christs Church that Princes may be resisted by their own Subjects this is a Conclusion drawn noâ— from Divinity but Conspiracy and whosoever teâ—ch Resistance of the highest Power or Supreme Mâ—gistrate their doctrine is wicked and their proofes must needâ— be weak let us heare then orderly and distinctly what you can alledge to Justifie your forcible Resistance of Soveraignty Eristes You mistake Irenaeus we who side with the two Houses of Parliament do not arme our selves to fight against the King but for the King Irenaeus There are no Rebells but pretend somewhat to justifie their unlawfull Acts of Rebellion do you not take up Arms against the King when you oppose him by Force of Arm and in an Hostile manner seize upon his Force Ammunition Ships Revenues when you make a General of your own and give him Power to Kill and Murder the Persons to burne and plunder the Houses of His Leige People when you discharge your Ordnance against Him and his Army to the endangering of his Sacred Person this is a strange defence to shoot at the King in his own defence I believe if this be to defend his Person you would not be a King to be so defended Consider it well and if this be not to take up Arms against the King I seriously confesse I know not what is nor know I what any Rebells can do more Eristes But we doe it to make him a glorious King to defend preserve and maintaine his true Regall Power Honour and Dignity to rescue him out of the hands of the Malignant Party who are his greatest Enemies Irenaeus You tell us that you will make him a great and glorious King whilst you use all possible â—kill to reduce him to extream want and indigency and that you will make him to be honoured at home and feared abroaâ— whilest you indeavour by an unusuall way of Remonstrancing to make him Person contemptible to Forraigne Princes and his Government odious to his good Subjects You set a worke seditious Sectaries and Schismaticks like so many Catalinâ—s the Firebrands of their Country to perswade the People that what you do is to defend preserve and maintaine his Honour when as appears by the nineteen Propositions you intend nothing lesse for to instance in some of them Is it for his honour to have all his Counsellours and great Officers displaced for no other fault but because they have approved themselves most loyall and faithfull to him Is it for his Honour that he shall never choose any Officer of State but accept such as the two Houses of Parliament shall be pleased to nominate and appoint You would
1. They Vote the Kingdom is in diâ—…e thâ—… 〈◊〉 Vote that by the Fundamentall Law of the Land the ordering of the Militia must be left to their disposall 2. They Vote That the King intends to levy Warre againt His Parliament and then they Declare That whosoever shall assist Him is guilty of high Treason We admonish both Houses of Parliament to take heed of enclining under the specious sheâ—…s oâ— necessity and danger to the exercise of such an Arbitrary power they before complained of the advise will do no harme and We shall be glad to see it followed Eristes But Our Libertyes and Estates are entrenched upon and We must not be so basely degenerous aâ— to suffer them to be betrayed but we are bound to defend our lawfull Lâ—berâ—ies and Estates even against the King himselfe which we inherit as truly from our Ancestours as the King inherits any thing he hath Irenaeus What hath the King denyed which concernes our Liberties and are the undoubted securityes of our safety freedome and happinesse under the Regiment of a just and unquestionable Monarchy Are not our Rights and Propertyes already established this Parliament by such Acts of Grace as could never find Presidents from his Ancestourâ— are not Monopolies upon what pretences soever Projâ—â—ts all illegall Taxes tâ—ose arbitrary Courts of Justice High Commission Star-Chamber Marshalseyes â— â—â—erly â—â—mâ—'d and exâ—irpated and doth not His Majesty in His Message to both Houses March 1. 1643. move them That they would with all speed fall into a serious consideration of those particulars which they should hold necessary for the present and future establishment of their Priviledges the free and quiet enjoying of their Estates and fortunes and the Liberties of their Persons And in His Majesties Answer to the Persoâ— of the Commons Jan. 18. 1641. doth he not call God to witnesse That the preservation of the Law and Liberty of the Subject is and shall alwayes be as much His Majesties care and Industry as his Life and the lives of His dearest Children And in His Majestyes Speech to the Committee March the ninth 1641. doth he not thus passâ—â—nâ—â—ely expâ—â—stâ—â—â—te with them What would you have â—â—ve I deâ—â—ed to passe any Bill for the ease and Security of 〈◊〉 Subjeâ—â—s there is a judgement from Heaven upon this Kingdom if these Distractions continue God so deale with me and mine as all my thoughts intentions are upright for the preservation of the Lawes of the Land And are not these pledges sufficient to dissolve all jealousies if ever we meanâ— to be saâ—tiâ—fied and to â—ssure us that we may live safe and frâ—e undeâ— the Govâ—rnment of so just gracious and Religious a Princeâ— if working heâ—ds quibus quieta movere magna est mercâ—s â—â—o love to sish in troubled waters and think the distâ—â—bâ—nce of the publique Peace a sufficient hire to set them on work did not purposely for their owne advantage and by-ends labour to cast the mist of causelesse feares and jealousies before the People meerely to startle them into a posture of warre As that printed relation of the Taylors in Moorefield of the Stable of horses under ground of the Dâ—nish Fleete thâ—t was discomfited by Van Trump long since besides otâ—er strange horrid treasonable discoveryes and Letters which came God knowes from whence that were purposely feigned and devised to hinder a right understanding between the King and his People and to embroyle the Kindome in a Civill Warre Whereas we feele to our just griefe and hope we may truly affirme withour danger of being branded with the blacke Stigmaticall name of Malignants that there was nothing formerly suffâ—red by us the free borne Subjects of this Land which hath not upon the same pretences but with lesse colour been since acted and exceeded by those who were called together to ease us of the like sufferings for our Estates have been taken away without our consent in defence of our Property our Persons have been imprisoned without just cause in defence of our Libertyes and our condition as one observes at this present is so farre from being bettered that 't is grown extreamely worse as if all the evills of former times had been Epitomized into the volume of two yeâ—res last past and the Quintissence of ours and the former Ages grievances had been extracted and given us at one draught See the Complaint to the House of Commons Eristes But may not the two Houses of Parliament who are the representative body of the Kingdom summon and authorize all the able freeborn Subjects of the Land to take up Arms against the King in maintenance of them and their Priviledges when they are deserted and their Priledges infringed by the King which is just the case of the two Houses of Parliament at this present Irenaeus First the King hath not deserted His Parliament but was forced to leave His Pallace at White Hall and to take shelter elsewhere because His sacred Person could not there be safe from the danger-threatning uproares and â—umults of a heady misguided masterlesse multitude and it was not fit to mâ—ke Majesty so cheape and despicable as to expose it to the base and barbarous affronts of a sedit ouâ— huddle Seconâ—ly so farre is His Majesty from infringing any just or undoubted Priviledge of Parliament that in his answer to a Booke intituled a Remonstran e of the Lords and Commons May 19. 1642. He desires his actions may no longer prosper then they shall be directed to the maintenance of all the Rights and freedome of Parliament in the allowance and protection of all their just Priviledges And let the two Houses of Parliament exhibit a list of the Priviledges not only belongâ—ng to the being and efficacy of Pâ—rliaments but to the honour also and complement of them and clearely declare them to be true just and undoubted Priviledges and I am confident they shall have His Majesties allowance and approbation â—ea I dâ—re be bold to say they shall have observâ—nce alâ—o from those that are nick-named Malignants but till â—â—ey be declared by them how can they bâ— observeâ—â—â—y uâ— reason ought to be sati fied before obeâ—ience mâ—y be expected especially in pointâ— of such high â—oâ—ceâ—â—ment wherein our Laws Liberties Estates yea even our very soules are interessed and though we be falsely Christened the Popish Army for discharging our Loyalty and duty to our Soveraigne yet thuâ— farre at least we are Proâ—â—stants that we will not resigne up our understâ—ndings to tâ—eir infallibility and in a Popish way yeeld blind obedience to all their Votes befâ—re we know them to be just and legall which we have more reason now to suspect then ever First because the two Houses of Parliament now sitting have disclaimed the legall way of proceeding in former Parliaments according to the wa ranted rule of the Law beside that which is recorded in their owne breasts 2. Because we see that a number the farre greater number of approved able men
whose Ability Wisdom Moderation Judgement and Sufficiency were the only inducement of their Countries Elections have withdrawn themselves as unusefull Members of that Body out of a dislike of such disorderly unwarrantable proceedings and for that they were debarred of those two grand Priviledges which conduce to the very being of Parliaments viz. Liberty of Speech and Liberty of Accesse thâ—t they could neither freely come nor freely Vote being from without menaced affronted assaulted by the Rabble and within censured fined imprisoned or banished for discharging their duty to God their King Country by such of their own fellow-Members who make wit and the Kings favour hainous crimes Loyalty Treason and Conformity Popery Eristes But they are the representative body of the Kingdom and we whom they represent are bound to be in a readinesse upon their summons to secure their actions from neglect and contempt Irenaeâ—â— Suppose one whom we Elect a Burgesse of Parliament or a Knight of the Shire speak or endeavour to enact Treason doth our Election bind us to secure him or will future Parliaments blamâ— us hereafter for giving up so great a Delinquent to tâ—e Justice of the Law I presume they will not The Commons doe not represent the People in any thing which the Law hath not trusted to them but neither the Law of God nor the Law of Nature nor the Law of the Land have trusted the Subject with the Sword or with a power of making Warre against their Soveraigne in whose name and by whose authority onely the Sword is to be drawn therefore if the representative body attempt any such law lesse and unlawfull Act we may not second or abet them in it but must mainely oppose them to the utmost of our power Non tribuamus dandi regni atque imperii potestatem nisi Deo vero qui dat regnum caelorum solis pâ—is regnum vero terreâ—um peiâ— impiis sicut ei placet cui nihil injuste placet Aug. de Civit Dei lib. 5. cap. 21. Et paulo post qui Mario ipse Caio Caâ—â—ari qui Auguâ— o â—â—se Neroni c. regnum dedit First the Law of God that teacheth us to feare God and the King and nor to fight against Him Prov. 24.21.30.31 And it tells us That all who live under a Monarchicall Regiment ought to submit unto the King as Supreame 1 Pet. 2.13 And â—t puts no difference between good and bad Princes in point of subjection for God saith Saint Augustine that gave the Empire to Augustus a milde and gracious Prince gave it to Nero a very monster of men He that gave it â—o Constantine a most worthy Christian Emperouâ— gave it to Julian a most damnable Apostata And be the Magistrate Jew or Gentile Christian or Heathen good or bad he hath his authority of Government from God the supreame Moderator and Governour of the whole World In respect whereof we are bound for Conscience sake towards God to be subject unto him Must Masters be submitted unto notwithstanding their curstinesse 1 Pet. 2.18 And may Princes be oppugned it too sharpe Israel rose not against David in the cause of Vriah nor against Solomon in a worse câ—use Idolatry nor against Saul though a Murdering and Massacring King All the Kings of Israel were open Idolaters Jehu not excepted and the greater pâ—t of the Kings of Judah fourtâ—en of them were likewisâ— pl â—n Idolaters yet no Priest or Prophet taught the People to râ—sist one of them God hath expresseâ—y commâ—nâ—ed all Inferiours to be subject to the Supâ—riâ—ur Mâ—gistrâ—te Now subordinate Mâ—gistrate thâ—ngâ— they be Supâ—riour to otâ—ers yet in a Monarchy theâ— are â—ll inferiour to the King for as in Logick that Geâ—uâ— which is câ—lled sâ—â—alteâ—num though it be Genuâ— in respâ—ct of those Sâ—e â—â—s tâ—â—t â—r◠〈◊〉 â—er it â—et in regard of the Genuâ— â—bove iâ— is but a Species Evâ—n so Subordinate Mâ—gistrates wâ—at pâ—â—ce soever â—â—ey â—oâ—d in relâ—tion to their infâ—riâ—u in respect to their Soverâ—igne they are but meere Subjects and owe subjâ—ction to Him aâ— far â—s any other and no Earâ—â—ly Court can lâ—cense inferiours of what rank or quality soever to violate or frustaâ—e that Heavenly precept which commands them to be subject to their Superiour Rom. 13.1 and not to resist Him veâ—s 4. Be the Cause never so just if the Person be not authorized by God to drâ—w the sword they be no just and lawfull Warres but barbâ—rous and rebellious uproâ—res For say when Malefactors are put to death may private men put them to death without the Magistrate certainly they may not and if they doe be they not Murderers though the crime which they revenge be worthy of death doubtlesse they be then if in private punishments men may not presume without his autâ—ority that beareth the Sword much lesse may they venture upon open Warres except they be directly warranted from him that hath the sword from God to take vengeance on the wicked least of all may they beare Armes against their Soveraigne Princes they beare the sword oâ—er others not others over them Subjects may be punished by them they by none but God whose place they supply And as the Law of God doth not trust Subjects with the sword against their Soveraigne no more doth the law of Nature for though the law of Nature teacheth us to defend our selves from violence and wrong as Boroughâ— objects though it be the most naturall thing in the world for every thing to preserve it selfe naturall for a man to preserve himselfe naturall for a community as Bridges alledges to justifie the Lawfullnesse of that Warre which the two Houses of Parliament sitting have raised and levyed against the King yet by the dictateâ— of nature neither Man not Communities of men are taught to defend and presâ—rve themselves in a disorderly and unnaturall way now it is against Order and a Monster in nature and policy for a Child to chastize his Father for a Sâ—rvâ—nt to punish his Master for a Souldier to fight against his Generall Colonell or Captaine no lesse disorderly and unnaturall is it for a Subject to fight against his Soveraigne who is Parens â—atriae the Father of the Common-wealth he that faith the Law of Nature gives power to Inferiours over or against their Superiours though for selfe preservation is fitter to be purged from Frenzy then answered by Divinity If the case were so that either the Parent must kill the Childe or the Childe the Father no man I suppose in his right wits but would think it becommeth the Childe who hath his being from his Father rather to suffer then to destroy the Fountain whence he originally sprang and yet Parents have not so great power over their Children as Kings over their Subjects Kings have power of Life and Death which Parents have not and the Mâ—sters power over his servants is lesse then the power of Parents over their Children Lastly Neither doth the Law of
to rule over them yet they choose rather to suffer then to â—â—ke â—â—sâ—stance by force of Armes though they lacked â—either 〈◊〉 strength to withstand the Emperours Forces And that the doctrine of resisting Priâ—â—◠〈…〉 taught by the ancient Father you shall he 〈◊〉 â—onsiâ—â—â—ly averred by some Learned Divinâ— of our Câ—uâ—ch who were best seen and verst in their Writings No Oâ—thoâ—oâ— Father did by Word or Writing 〈◊〉 resis◠〈◊〉 foâ— the space of a thousand yeares after Christ â—eâ—lâ—â—◠〈◊〉 cap. 19. Sect. 19. The worthy Fathers and Bishopâ— of the Church perswaded themselves that they owed all duty â—o Kings though Infidels and Heretickes Feild lib. 5. cap. 45. The Doctrine which teacheth resistance of Princeâ— is wicked having neither Scripture Councell nor Father which avowed it for a thousand yeares Bilsons true diffâ—renâ—â— between Christian Subjection and Unchristian Râ—bellion part 3. in whom we often meet with these or the like paâ—sages Whether Princes be with God or against God either we must obey their Commandement or abide the â—â—nishment if we will be Subjects Princes must be obeyed or endured Either obedienâ—â— to their Wills or submission to the Sword is due by Goâ— Law God is not served with resisting the Sword but with dutifull obedience to Magistrateâ— when their commands agrâ—â— with his and in case their Wills be dissonant from his thâ—â— is he served with meeknesse and readinesse to beare 〈◊〉 abide that which earthly powers shall inflict this was the cause why the Church of Christ alwayes rejoyced in the Blood of their Martyrs patiently suffering the cruell rage both of Pagans and Arrians and never favoured any tumults of Rebells assembling themselves to withstand authority That conceit then of Bridges is fond foolish and unwarrantable who thinks that many Christian Martyrs in the Primitive Church would so farre have resisted the Roman Emperours that they would have saved their own Lives if the Senate of Rome or the People of the Roman Empire would have joyned with them Tertullian disclaimed this fancy with an absit God forbid that we Christians should defend our selves against our Emperours by humane force There can be no Warre made against us but we are fit and sufficient for it if we would seek revenge of our persecutors but our Christian discipline and profession is rather to be slain then to slay Tertul Apologet cap. 37. Saint Cyprian expresseth the same Christian profession Cyprian ad Demetriad nos laesos divina ultio desendet inde est quod nemo nostrum se adversus injustam violentiam quamvis nimius copiosus sit noster populus ulciscatur We leave vengeance to God and hence it is that none of us doe seek to revenge our selves against unjust violence although our number be exceeding great more then the number of our persecutors Erisles But what if the Kingdom see it selfe in imminent danger most likely to be ruinated by the King and His Cavaliers may it not stand up to defend it selfe by force of Armes Is not Salus Populi Suprema Lex The safety of the People the Supreme Law The preservation of the Kingdom and of the Religion Laws and Liberties thereof to be preferred before subjection to the King Irenaeus First God be thanked that is not our case for as that Gentleman of quality who wrote the Review of the Observations upon some of His Majesties late Answers and Expresses well Observes No King of this Realme hath granted more for the good ease benefit and behoofe of His Subjects then His Majesty hath done had we thankfull hearts to acknowledge it witnesse His damming of Ship-Money Monopolies c. And His yeelding to the regulation of whatsoever further grievance should be found in the Commonwealth What more gracious motion could be made by a Prince to His People then that which His Majesty made in His Message to both Houses of Parliament Ian. 20. 1641. Wherin He moved them with all speed to fall into a serious considerations of these 〈◊〉 whiâ—h they should hold necessary for the present and future establishment of their Priviâ—eâ—…es the free and quiet enjoying of their Estates and fortunes the Liberties of their 〈◊〉 the security of the true Religion now professed in the Church of England and the setling 〈◊〉 Ceremonies in such a dâ—s ent aâ—… câ—…ly manner as might take away all just oâ—… offence Is this the grâ—tious motion of a King that intends the ruine and subversion of His Kingdom God be Judge between Him and them that would fasten so false anâ— foule an aspersion upon a Prince unparalelled for clemency and piety Secondly Though the King should in a Violent and Tyrannicall way goe about to oppresse His People though really and truely there were such dangers threatned both to the Church and State as is pretended yet unlawfull means such as is resisting the Supreme Magistrate in a free Monarchy to defend our selves from unjust violence and oppression ought not to be used Suffering is commanded and commended unto us in the Scripture resisting is forbidden Rom. 13.2 Our Saviour foreshewing his Disciples that they should be brought before Kings and Rulers and be cruelly entreated saith not and he that first Rebells but he that endureth to the end shall be saved Mat. 10. And again not with violence resist them but in patience possesse your Soule Luke 21. This is the way for all Christian Subjects to conquer Tyrants not to resist the Supreme Power though Tyrannically abused least we be damned but rather to suffer that we may be Crowned When either we cannot escape by flight or abate stop the fury of Tyrants by our Teares and Prayers to God The Ancient Fathers allowed no other Weapons to Christian Subjects against persecuting Tyrants but only these foure Preces Lachrymas patientiam sugam Prayers and Tears Patience and Flight And it is observed by the Learned that the Churches never more flourished then in the Primitive times when they used these defensive Weapons only Vide Field l. â—0 c. 45. reserving vengeance unto God to whom only it belongs to take order with wicked Kings since he alone is above them and therefore he alone hath power to punish them The royall dignity of Kings is so inseparably annexed to their sacred Persons that although they doe offend in Person yet no vindictive power can be exercised against their persons without violation of their Royall Dignity which although it be not transcendent to all Laws of Justice to be done yet it is transcendent to all Lawes of Justice in respect of punishment by man when Justice is not done And in that respect David a King truely said to God against thee only have I sinned Psal â—1 4 he had sinned against others yet so as none might take vengeance of him for his sinne but only God This I am sure was the Divinity of Saint Ambrose Chrysostome and others of the Ancient Fathers Reges nullis ad paenam voâ—antur legibus tuti imperii
oâ— gather fix hundred Souldiers together they resortâ—d aâ—â— câ—â—â— to him of their own accord 1 Sam. 22.1 Neitâ—â—r dâ—◠〈◊〉 mâ—ke usâ— of their help to defend himselfe agâ—inst tâ—e Vâ—oâ—ence aâ—â— Fury of Saul but his way of defenâ—e waâ— by flyâ—â—g and hâ—ding himselfe from Saul not by resistâ—â—◠〈◊〉 opposing him And produce if you â—â—n one syllâ—â—â—â—e 〈…〉 Sacred Story to shew that ever David mâ—de offer to râ—â—st Saul when he câ—me â—o inâ—â—de him Eriâ—tes It iâ— more then probable tâ—at he would have resisted Saul if the men of Keilah would have stood to him otherwise bâ—ing in Keilah why did he enquire whether Saul would come there to seek him and heâ—ring that Saul would not faile to come down why did he further enquire whether the Keilites would deliver him into the hand of Saul Dâ—e not these Qâ—aâ—â—es more then probâ—bly argue That David had a minde to râ—main in Keâ—â—aâ— â—nd tâ— defend the City agâ—inst Saul as Sir Joâ—n Hotâ—aâ— did Hâ—â— against His Mâ—jâ—sty would the men of Kâ—ilah have stuâ—k close to him Irenaeus No finely the râ—â—son in all likâ—liâ—ood and â—ppearance why Dâ—vid wâ—s thuâ— solicitous to know the purposâ— of Saul and the Keilites was bâ—cause â—e suspâ—cted treacherous deceit in the men of Keilâ—â— Thâ—t if â—e stâ—yâ— till tâ—e King came they would shut thâ— Gâ—â—â— and keep him in till the King should come anâ— apprâ—â—end him and not suffeâ— him to escape by sâ—â—â—◠〈◊〉 hiâ— usuâ—ll mâ—nnâ—r was For he enquires of God â—ill the â—â—n of Keâ—â—â— delivâ—◠〈◊〉 Or as it is in the Marginall reading of the Bible agreeable to the Originall Will they shut me up Will they take advantage of the Gâ—tes and Barres of this walled Ciâ—y â—nd closely shut me up that I cannot have liberty to fly from Saul when he commeth His purpose was to fly out of Keilah and not to defend it if Saul came this made him carefull to enquire whether the men of Keilah would shut the Gates upon him and so hinder him that he could not fly from Saul according to his wonted Custome There is not then here the least shadow of a proofe for defensive Armes unlesse we will by an improbable conjecture make Davids purpâ—se in this plâ—ce to thwart his constanâ— practise and profâ—ssion in all other places of the sacred Story where his dutifull submissiâ—e bâ—haviour â—umble carriage and speeches full of Loyâ—ll respect towards Saul are Recorded Eâ—istes Buâ— doth not the Scriptuâ—e in plain termes say that David went with the Philistines against Saul to Battell 1 Chron. 12.19 Ireâ—aeâ—â— It doth yet he that will peruse the 1 Sam. 29 may there reade that David went not to Bâ—ttell against Saul he only went a little way with the Philistines that weâ—t to battell agâ—inst â—im and the Princes of tâ—e Philistiâ—es had so little coâ—fidence of Davids good affâ—ction to that câ—use that they were earnest with Aâ—hish their Kiâ—g to â—â—d him back as a mâ—n â—or to be confided in sâ—yiâ—g verse 4. Make this fellow returne and let him not gâ—e down withâ—â— to Battell least in the Battell he prove an Adversary to Vs for wherewith should he reconcile himselfe to his Master Saul should iâ— not be with the heads of these men and howsoever he seemed unwilling to be sent back yet therein saith Oziander he did but dissemble and spake otherwise then he thought he was glad of the opportunity given to returne sayth Peter Martyr though he flatteringly glozed with the King by pretending the contrary and to think that David had any cogitation or purpose to serve a Forraign King in a Battell against his own King People and Nation is to make him an apparâ—nt transgressor of the Law sayth Willet which forbad all kind of Confederacy with uncircumâ—isâ—d Nations by this time then I hope you see that Davids Exâ—mple is impertinently produced to shew the lawfulnesse oâ— making an hostile defensive war against your Soveraigne Eristes Whâ—t sâ—y yâ—u to the third Example of Elisha the Prophâ—t who hâ—d tâ—e Elders of Israel to shut the doore agâ—inst tâ—â— Kings Mâ—ssenger that came to take away his head and tâ—â—â—â—ld him fâ—st Irenaeuâ— I s y tâ—â—t it is no more to the purpose then the former for what câ—n you inferre from thence more then this thâ—t it is lâ—wfull to hold the doore fast shut against a Messenger who shall in a violent illegall way come to assaul◠〈◊〉 in our houses though he come from the King thiâ— no doubt m y be done cum moderamine inâ—ulpate tâ—tâ—lâ— But what if the King should come in Person to assâ—ult you will you doe mâ—re then shut the doore will you tâ—ke pâ—â—â—s of Orâ—nâ—â—ce Guâ—s Pâ—kes and Pistols anâ— bid him be â—oâ— or else you will set him away with a pâ—wâ—er should the Kiâ—g in a violâ—nt illegall way offâ—r to smite you on the head you mâ—y hold up your hand and awaâ—d the blow But if you strike him again there is no Law I think either of God or man that would not condemne you for a Traytor in so doing though you should doe it in your own defence and how can you be sure when you come with Mu kets and Cannons into the open Field against the King that you shall not doe more then smite him horreseo referens even that which I tremble to speak mortally wound his sacred Person unlesse you can command your Musquets and Cannons that they should not hurt him as well as any other Doe not then palliate your opposition with the name of a meere defensive resistance which may prove so hainously offensive and contract that guilt of blood upon your Soules and the whole land as would draw down Gods vengeance both upon them and it and will you wrest the command of so great a Prophet as Elisha was to countenance such a defence as might in event prove so horridly offensive Quod Omen avertat Deus Eristes What say you to the last example of Azariah the high Priest thrusting Vzziah the King after he became Leprous out of the Temple being assisted with 80 of his Brethren who are commended for their valour in so doing 2 Chron. 26.17.20 Irenaeus I say that I am sorry to see you go down to the forge of the Papists there to sharpen your Weapons of defence for your hostile defensive Warre The Papists say that the high Priests thrust the King out of the Temple when he usurped the Priests Office Ergo the Pope is above Kings The reason of their inference is because no Inferiour hath power to lay hands on a Superiour and by co-active power to compell or repell him You say the same in effect with a little change of the persons The high Priest thrust the King out of the Temple therefore it is lawfull for the People to resist Kings And you can give no reason of this inference except you acknowledge the Peoples Superiority above the Prince and then you must dispence with the oath