of the Catholick cause as they call it attempt any thing however unjust even to the destruction of Kings that are set over them this blindnesse is Popish and practice Jesuiticall Lastly examine your hearts if you be not confirmed in your way by the number of your Professour like as they are by the Universality of their Church resting upon the person of men not trying the Cause it selfe by the touchstone of divine Scripture and rectified Reason I know it prevails with many thousands of you because you see as you thinke and use to say All good people that have sense of Religion and Conscience of their wayes do go along with you and you cannot beleive that God would suffer them to be so generally deluded let me tell you you do hereby very uncharitably conclude upon all those that run not with you to the like excesse and I may say without breach of Charitie they that appear with you in the Cause would not all be found such as you conceive them to be if they were examined by the true marks of Christian profession that is by the true doctrine of faith by their charitie honestie obedience meeknesse of Spirit and the like without which your Religion is vain whatever your exercises or performances of duties be the Pharisees righteousnesse will exceed yours and his frequency and length of prayer will be as sure a mark as yours nay the Anabaptist at this day will out-do you in any of your forms of godlinesse I do not speake this against the frequent and sincere performance of holy duties God forbid I should Nor do I speak it of you all I know there are many good and Conscientious men that go your way in the simplicitie of their hearts as those did that followed Absolom whom the just God suffers hitherto to be deceived that even by their example this power of Resistance may gather strength to the just punishment of this sinfull land and that they themselves when their eyes shall be opened which I hope will be ere long may see their own weaknesse and be so much more humbled for it In the meane time you are according to the blindnesse of a Popish way in all the former respects carried on against all rule of Conscience for you have neither certain knowledge of your Princes heart to resolve for resistance upon a supposall of such intentions in him nor have you any certain rule to warrant the lawfulnesse of resisting upon such supposall and to secure you against the Apostles prohibition and damnation laid upon it nor have you any judgement of Charity in concluding such intentions in your Prince against His deepest Protestations made in such times of His distresse and without that all is nothing though you lay down as you think your life for Religion How much safer would it be for you to be guided by the sure Rules of Conscience and if it should please God to bring upon you what you fear to suffer unjustly then in the unwarrantable prevention of it to do unjustly To this purpose shall you have this Treatise speaking to you for the direction of your Consciences If you think it strikes too boldly upon any thing concerning the Parliament I desire yours and their favourable interpretation fain would I silence every thought and word that may seem to reflect upon that high Court but what is necessary I must speak for truth and conscience sake from which neither King nor Parliament should make us swerve We are taught that Kings must not be flattered and the people ought to learn that Parliamens must not be Idolized that has been often charged as a fault upon the Clergy and This I fear is that sinne of the People which together with the licentiousnesse indulged back again to them ha's moved God to blow upon that wish'd for fruit we might have reaped by this so desired a Parliament For when I see Man is more sensible of every breach of his own rights and priviledges then of those unparallel'd breaches so frequently made upon Gods publike Worship I cannot but think the Lord will require it of this Land and when I see right and just subverted property and liberty exposed to the will and power of every one that is pleased to conceive his Neighbour a Malignant and able to make him so by commanding his Goods and Person I cannot but complain with the Psalmist The foundations of the Earth are out of course and appeal to Heaven Arise O God judge thou the Earth And I trust that albeit this Spirit of seduction may prevaile a while and this way of resistance prosper for the great but just punishment of this sinfull Land the Lord will look downe from Heaven and make Truth and Peace again to flourish out of the Earth will look upon the Face of His Anointed and by this Affliction as by a loving correction make him great Great to the maintenance of Gods true Religion and to the restoring of the Peace and prosperity of this Kingdom And Let all the People say Amen The Contents Sect. I. THe explication of the Question and generall Resolution of it Sect. II. The Principle or Ground on which they goe for Resistance examined by Scripture Their chief Examples to which should have been added Libnah's revolt answered now in the last Sect. Scriptures against them especially that of the 13. to the Rom. urged and cleared where shewed The King is that higher Power That all are forbidden to resist even the Senate which by the fundamentalls of that State might challenge as much as our great Councell can That prohibition concerns all times and was good not onely in that State because they were absolute Monarches but in all States because of the preservation of Order which should be in all and was good not onely against the Christians because their Religion was enected against by Law but also against the Senate and People though they were enslaved Sect. III. Their principle examined by reason Of Fundamentalls their ground-work according to the pleaders for resistance is the originall of Power from the People and their re-assuming it when the Prince will not discharge his trust The Power it selfe distinguished from the designing of the Person and the Qualification of it in severall forms of Government is from God as an ordinance or constitution under that providence whereby God rules the whole World Creatures reasonable as well as unreasonable Sect. IV. That Power cannot be forfeited to the People or re-assumed by them They cannot prove it by vertue of the first election or by any capitulations or covenant or the Oath between Prince and People Sect. V. Nor can it be proved by that necessity of means of safety which should be in every State to provide for it self but greater dangers and inconveniences would follow by such means of safety as are pretended to by resuming the Power Sect. VI The Examination of the Resistance now made Where shewen that it is
and Parliament fill all with rapine and confusion draw all to a Folkmoot and make every Shire a severall Government These are Dangers and Evils not conceived in the phansie but such as reason tells us may follow and experience hath often and this day doth shew us do arise upon this Power of resistence and for the preventing of which the Apostle gave his reasons against resisting even of abused powers as we heard above Lastly therefore Seeing some must be trusted in every State 't is reason the highest and finall trust should be in the higher or supreme Power with whom next to himself God hath intrusted the whole Kingdom all other that have power and trust having it under him as sent by him Good reason I say that the supreme Power which is worth 10000 of the Subjects should have the best security on its side for as much as Order the life of a Commonwealth is so best preserved and not so endangered by Tyranny as by factions division tumults power of resistence on the Subjects part and this is according to the drift of the Apostles reasons against resistence as before they were laid down Well now unto all that hath hitherto been said from Scripture and Reason let Conscience adde the oath of Supremacy and Allegiance also the late Protestation and consider what duty lyes upon every subject by the former to defend the Kings person and Right against what Power soever and how by the latter he hath protested and undertaken before Almighty God in the first place to defend the same and then what can Conscience conclude from the Premises that the Prince hath his Power for the good of his people true but that Power cannot be prevalent for the good and protection of his people unlesse it be preferved to him intire unlesse he hath the Power of Deniall and the chief command of Arms or that the Prince hath a limited Power according to the Laws established true but if Conscience be perswaded he does not hold himselfe within those bounds so fixed can it be perswaded also that the people may reassume that Power they never had or take that sword out of his hand that God hath put into it No Conscience will look at that Power as the Ordinance of God and the abuse of that Power as a judgement and scourge of God upon the people and will use not Arms to resist the Ordinance under pretence of resisting the abuse but cryes and prayers to God petitions to the Prince denialls of obedience to his unjust commands denialls of subsides aids and all faire means that are fit for Subjects to use and when done all if not succeed will rather suffer then resist so would a truly informed Conscience resolve were the Prince indeed what he is supposed to be and did he do indeed as the people are made to fear and believe he will do Hitherto we have been in the examination of the Principle upon which they go that plead for resistence and we have found both Scripture and Reason speak plainly against the resisting even of abused Powers professed enemies to Religion actuall subverters of the Peoples Liberties how much more against the resisting of a Prince that professeth the same Religion which we freely enjoy promiseth the maintaining of that and our Liberties onely upon a supposall He will not stand to His word will overthrow all This however it may seem lesse reasonable to the Statist in the way of Policie permitting as little as he can to the goodnesse of the Prince or the providence of God for the safety of the State yet ought it to satisfie a Christian in the way of Conscience which when it comes to a desire of being safe will not rest till it have a sure ground which here it hath against resistence laid downe by Scripture and Reasons even the Apostles reasons so powerfull against resistence The summe of all is this Conscience hears the Apostle expressely forbid all under the higher Power to resist finds no other clear Scripture to limit it finds that the limitations given will not consist with it for the reasons of them that are drawn from the election of the People and the Covenant supposed therein from the necessity of means of safety in every State to provide for it self were as strong in the Romane State as any nay are supposed by those that urge them to be the fundamentals of every State and so resistence is forbidden as well here as there in the Romane State which is also cleared by the Apostles reasons shewing the Power of resistence cannot be the meane of safety but strikes at Order and Power it self though made against tyrannicall and abused Powers as before often insinuated Therefore Conscience will not dare to go against the Apostles expresse prohibition lest it fall into the judgement denounced by him But if there shall be any Conscience as strongly carried away with the name of a Parliament as the Papists are with the name of the Church and thinking Religion may be defended any way that upon supposall that their Prince is minded to change it which is another humour of Popery will not be perswaded that the resistence made upon the present supposall is unlawfull against Gods Word and reason I am sure such a Conscience cannot be truly perswaded it is lawfull but must want that clear ground it ought to have especially in a matter so expresly against the Apostle and of such high concernment as damnation must needs runne blindly and headlong by a strange implicit Faith upon so great a hazard SECT. VI NOw we come to the Application of their principle to the present where we must enquire according to the second and third Generalls whether the resistence now made be such as is pretended to by them in such a case as they supposed and then whether Conscience can be truely perswaded the King is such and so minded as in the case He is supposed to be The chief considerations of these two Generalls are matters of fact The principle was examined by Scripture and Reason these admit the Judgement of sense and are cleared by what we heare and see which Judgement of sense is not so easily captivated by an implicit Faith as that of Reason is insomuch as Conscience here cannot be so blinded but it may see that were the principall good on which they rest yet this resistence which they make is not such as they pretend to and that this King whom they resist is not such as in the case they supposed him to be not such as ought to be resisted according to their own grants The second generall was That the Resistence now made is not such as is pretended to by them that plead for it and therefore Conscience cannot be truly perswaded it may lawfully bear part in it or assist them that in the pursuit of it pretend one thing and do another It was premised at the beginning that such a resistence should be
places of Scripture so it is also suitable to Reason Because God doth govern all creatures Reasonable as well as Unreasonable the inferiour or lower world he governs by the heavens or superiour bodies according to those influences and powers he ha's put into them and the reasonable creatures Men he governs too by others set up in his stead over them for which they are called Gods because in his stead over the people and the powers are said to pe ' apo theou tetagmenai Rom. 13. 1. not only ' apo theou from God but also as orders ranked under him too subordinate to that providence by which all creatures are governed These his Ministers he sometimes designed immediately by himselfe as Moses the Judges Saul David c. Now he designes his Vicegerents on earth mediately as by election of the people by succession or inheritance by conquest c. To conclude the Power it selfe of Government is of God however the person be designed or that Power qualified according to the severall forms of government by those Laws that are established or those grants that are procured for the peoples securitie Thus much of the originall of Power SECT. IV. NOw we come to the Forfeiture as I may call it of this Power If the Prince say they will not discharge his trust then it falls to the people or the two Houses the representative body of the people to see to it and reassume that Power and thereby to resist This they conceive to follow upon the derivation of Power from the people by vertue of election and upon the stipulation or covenant of the Prince with the people as also to be necessary in regard of those meanes of safety which every State should have within it selfe We will examine them in order and shall find the Arguments inconsequent Concerning the derivation of Power we answer First if it be not from the people as they will have it and as before it was cleared then can there be no reassuming of this Power by the People that 's plain by their own argument Secondly if the people should give the power so absolutely as they would have it leaving nothing to God in it but approbation yet could they not therefore have right to take that power away For many things which are altogether in our disposing before we part with them are not afterward in our power to recall especially such in which their redounds to God an interest by the donation as in things devoted though afterward they come to be abused So although it were as they would have it that they give the power and God approves yet because the Lords hand also his oyl is upon the person elected to the Crown and then he is the Lords anointed and the Minister of God those hands of the people which were used in lifting him up to the Crown may not again be lifted up against him either to take the Crown from his head or the sword out of his hand This will not a true-informed Conscience date to doe Thirdly How shall the Conscience be satisfied that this their argument grounded upon election and the derivation of power from the people can have place in this Kingdome when as the Crown not onely descends by inheritance but also ha's so often been setled by Conquest in the lines of Saxons Danes and Normans In answer to this they looke beyond all these and say the right is still good to the people by reason of their first election I answer So then that first election must be supposed here and supposed good against all other titles or else this power of resistence falls to the ground It is probable indeed that Kings at first were by choyce here as elsewhere but can Conscience rest upon such remote probabilities for resistence or think that first election will give it power against Princes that do not claime by it We tell them the Romane Emperours were not to be resisted Rom. 13. 2. They reply as we had it above that they were absolute Monarchs But how came they of Subjects to be absolute Monarchs was it any otherwise then by force and arms the way that the Saxons Danes and Normans made themselves Masters of this people and was not the right of the people as good against them for the power of resistence by vertue of the first election as well as of the people of this Land against their Kings after so many Conquests This I speak not as if the Kings of this Land might rule as Conquerors God forbid But to shew this slender plea of the first election can no more take place against the Kings of this Land then it could against the Romane Monarchs especially according to their argument that hold all power originally from the people and that as we observed above to be the Fundamentall of all government Therefore whether Kings were in this Land at first by election or no we acknowledge what belongs to the duty of a Prince in doing justice and equitie what Grants also Laws Priviledges have since those Conquests been procured or restored to the people unto all those the King is bound But yet not bound under forfeiture of his power to the people which now comes to be examined in that capitulation or covenant he is said to enter with the people In the next place therefore That Capitulation or Covenant and the Oath which the Prince takes to confirme what he promiseth are so alledged as if the breach or non-performance on the Princes part were a forfeiture of his power But we answer The words capitulation or covenant are now much used to make Men believe the Kings admittance to the Crown is altogether conditionall as in the meerly elective Kingdomes of Polonia Swedeland c. whereas our King is King before he comes to the Coronation which is sooner or later at his pleasure but alwaies to be in due time in regard of that security His People receive by his taking the oath and he again mutually from them in which performance there is something like a covenant all but the forfeiture The King there promises and binds himself by oath to performance Could they in this covenant shew us such an agreement between the King and his People that in case he will not discharge His trust then it shall be lawfull for the States of the Kingdome by Arms to resist and provide for the safety thereof it were something If it be said that so much is imployed in the first election We answer We examined that slender plea of the first election above as it was thought to be a derivation of power Now as it is thought to have a covenant in it we say That usually in all Empires the higher we arise the freer we find the Kings and still downwards the People have gained upon them for at first when the People chose their Rulers they did as Justine in the beginning of his History observes resigne themselves to be
two of them without the third which as it is for the securitie of the Commonwealth for what might follow if the King and Lords without the Commons or these and the Lords without the King might determine the evills of these dayes do shew so is this power of denying for the security of each State against other of the Commons against the King and Lords of the Lords against them and must the King trust onely and not be trusted Must not he also have his securitie against the other which he cannot have but by Power of denying This is that Temper of the three Estates in Parliament the due observing whereof in the moderate use of this power of denying is the reasonable means of this States safety but now not onely the name of Parliament which implyes the three Estates is restrained usually to the two Houses but also that Temper is dissolved I need not speak it the distractions and convulsions of the whole Commonwealth as the distempers in a naturall body do sufficiently shew such a dissolution and what 's the cause of it If it be replyed as it is for the reasonablenesse of these meanes of safety through that Power of resisttence and the final trust reposed in the representative body of the people That many see more then one and more safety in the judgement of many then of one Answ. True But 1. Conscience might here demand for its satisfaction Why shovld an hundred in the House of Commons see more then three hundred or twenty in the Lords House more then sixty that are of indiffereent judgement and withdrawn 2. Reason doth suppose That the Prince though one sees with the eyes of many yea with their eyes who are of different judgement from him for which his Houses of Parliament are his great Councell to present to his eyes the differences of things with the reasons of them and albeit he sometimes dissents from the Major or Prevailing part because he is convinced in his own judgement they seek themselves nor his or the Publike good or for other reasons that may perswade him against their Vote yet have all times thought good to have Kings and to reduce the judgement of many unto one The Government which God made choice of to set up among his people was Monarchicall still first in Moses then in the Judges then in the Kings yea generally all Authors yeild and experience ha's taught it That Monarchy is a better government then Aristocracy because the Tyranny and Miscarriage of one sometime happening in a Monarchy is nothing so dangerous as Oligarchy Faction and Division usually incident to Aristocracy or the Government by many equalls Again as all times have thought it reasonable to have Monarchy which settles the chief power and finall judgement in One so will there be alwayes sufficient reason to withhold the King from a wilfull deniall of his Consent to the free and unanimous Vote of his Houses he cannot but see there will alwayes be some necessary good accrewing to him by his Parliament that will keep him in all reason from doing so and no cases can be put or inconveniences feared upon his Power of denying but greater and more eminent will appeare upon his not having it as ha's been insinuated and now do follow Fourthly therefore and lastly we answer Such power of resistence would be no fit means of safety to a State but prove a remedy worse then the disease This is very plain by the drift of the Apostles reason which he gave against resistence in the 3 4 5 6. v. of the 13. to the Rom. in which we may consider that although the Powers then were altogether unjust tyrannicall subverters of true Religion nothing answerable to the end for which the Governing Power is ordained yet doth the Apostle draw his reasons against the resisting of them from that good that justice that order for which God hath set up the higher Powers to insinuate that the resisting of the higher Powers even when they are so does tend to the overthrow of that order which is the life of a Commonwealth and this not onely because there is still order under tyranny but chiefly because if it were good and lawfull to resist the power when abused it would open a way to the people upon the like pretences to resist and overthrow even Powers duely administred for the executing of wrath upon them that do evill I enter this dicourse not to cast the least blemish upon Parliaments which are an onely remedy for distempers of the Kingdome not to reflect upon the intentions of those that are yet resident in that high Court unto God the judge of all they stand or fall not to raise jealousies but to settle Conscience and in the way of reasoning to shew according to the Apostles reasons what dangers and evills may ensue upon this power of resistence For first of all This power of resistence if admitted and pursued may proceed to a change of Government the Principles that now are gone upon and have carried it so farre as we see at this day may also lead it on to that greatest of evils And I have heard and seen it defended by the example of the Low-countreys how they excuse it throughly I examine not but this I am sure they can say That their Prince succeeding in the right of the Duke of Burgundie was admitted upon other conditions then the Kings of England are also that a contrary religion was enforced upon them by a terrible Inquisition whereas they that do resist the higher Powers here do freely enjoy their religion and have the Princes promise and protestation for it Secondly This Power of resistence when used and pursued is accompanied with the evils of Civil warre Former times shew it and how little was gained by it beside the expence of bloud as when all was referred to the rule and disposing of the 12 Peeres how long lasted it what security had the State by it and at this day we feel and groan under the evils brought upon us through this power of resistence the Law silenced the Property and Libertie of the subject every where invaded and the Lord knows when or how we shall be restored to them or better secured in them by this way Thirdly We see the danger if as it is now said for the justifying of this power of resistence The King will not discharge his trust and therefore it fals to the representative body of the people to see to it so the People being discontented and having gotten power shall say The Members of the two Houses do not discharge the trust committed to them they do not that for which they were chosen and sent for then may the multitude by this rule and principle now taught them take the Power to themselves it being claimed by them and say to them as Numb. 16. Ye take too much upon you or as Cade and Tylar boast themselves Reformers of the Common-wealth overthrow King
not so much as they themselves pretend to who plead for it either for the generall and unanimous consent of the Kingdome for it was not so agreed upon or for the defensive way of it because the King is upon the defensive For He was not first in Arms and the Contentiom must needs appeare to be for something the King hath right to hold or is bound by oath to maintain Also because to any Mans Conscience it will appeare to he an oppugnation rather then a resistance or meere defence Sect. VII The case is not in being No Conscience can conclude the King to be what they would have him supposed because the jealousies are groundlesse The King hath done sufficient to clear them by Promises Protestations acts of Grace And Conscience if it hold the rule of Charity will not against all those conclude contrary intentions in him upon them to ground resistance but will if it will not not be partiall judge the King hath offered such reasonable meanes of securitie to this State as ought to have been apprehended rather then this Kingdom embroyled in a Civil war and Ireland neglected Lastly a Conscience that concludes for resistance wants the perswasion of faith and the judgement of charity in an high measure and cannot appeare safely at Gods tribunall The Resolving of Conscience Touching the unlawfulnesse of the War and Resistance now made against the KING LAmentable are the distractions of this Kingdome and the more because they gather strength from the name and authority of that which as it is of high esteeme with all so should it be a remedy to all these our distempers a Parliament and from the pretended defence of those things that are most dear unto us Religion Liberties Laws Whereupon so many good people that have come to a sense of Religion and godlinesse are miserably carried away by a strange implicit faith to beleive that whatsoever is said or done in the name of a Parliament and in the pretended defence of Religion Liberties Laws to be infallibly true and altogether just But he that will consider men are men and would seek a surer rule for his Conscience then the Traditions or Ordinances of men taken hand over head shall upon reasonable examinations find upon what plausible but groundlesse principles upon what fair but deceiving pretences upon what greivous but causelesse imputations laid upon Majestie it self poore people are drawn into Arms against the duty and allegiance they owe to their Prince by the Laws of God and man For directing the Conscience in such an examination this ensuing Discourse is framed as briefly and plainely as the matter will permit SECT. I COnscience in resolving upon a question first layes down the Proposition or Principle or Ground on which it goes then it assumes or applyes to the present case then it concludes and resolves as in this question affirmatively for Resistance thus Subjects in such a case may arm and resist But that case is now come Therefore now they may and doe justly resist Or negatively against Resistance either by denying the Principle Subjects may not in such a Case arm and resist therfore now they do not justly resist Or by admitting the Principle and denying the Case Subjects in such a case may arm and resist But that case is not now Therefore now they do not justly arm and resist What it is that Conscience is here to admit or deny and how it ought to conclude and resolve this ensuing Treatise will discover which that it may more clearly appeare we will premise First That in the Proposition or Principle by the word Resistance is meant not a denying of obedience to the Princes command but a rising in arms a forcible resistance this though clear enough in the question yet I thought fit to insinuate to take off that false imputation laid upon the Divines of this Kingdome and upon all those that appeare for the King in this cause that they endeavor to defend an absolute power in him and to raise him to an Arbitrary way of government This we are as much against on his part as against Resistance on the subjects part For we may and ought to deny obedience to such commands of the Prince as are unlawfull by the Law of God yea by the established Laws of the Land For in these we have his will and consent given upon good advice and to obey him against the Laws were to obey him against himselfe his sudden will against his deliberate will but a far other matter it is to resist by power of arms as is in the question implyed and as we see at this day to our astonishment first the power of arms taken from the Prince by setting up the Militia then that power used against him by an army in the field Secondly we must consider that they which pleade for Resistance in such a case as is supposed do grant it must be concluded upon Omnibus ordinibus regni consentientibus that is with the generall and unanimous consent of the Members of the two Houses the representative body of the whole Kingdome also they yeild it must be onely Legitima desensio a meer defensive resistance and this also Conscience must take notice of Thirdly it is considerable that in the supposition or case it is likewise granted by them that the Prince must first be so and so disposed and bent to overthrow Religion Liberties Laws and will not discharge his trust for the maintaining of them before such a Resistance can be pretented to And although the question is and must be so put now as that it seems to straiten the Case and make it depend upon the supposall of the people yet it so much the more enlarges the falshod of the Principle for it plainly speaks thus If subjects beleive or verily suppose their Prince will change Religion they may rise in arms whereas all that have pleaded for Resistance in case of Religion did suppose another Religion enjoyned upon the subject first We will therefore endeavour to cleare all for the resolving of Conscience in these three generalls I. That no Conscience upon such a case as is supposed can find clear ground to rest upon for such resistance as is pretended to but according to the rules of Conscience What is not of faith is sinne and In doubtfull things the safer way is to be chosen Conscience it will find cause to forbeare and to suffer rather then resist doubtfull I say not that a Conscience truly informed will not clearly see the unlawfulnesse of this Resistance but because no conscience can be truly perswaded of the lawfulnesse of it and so that Conscience that resolves for it must needs run doubtingly or blindly upon the work II. That the resistance now used and made against the Prince is not such as they pretend to either for that generall and unanimous consent that should precede it or that defensive way that should accompany it according to their own grants