so must be a precedent example for judges and Magistrates in all time coming and by this example any member of the Council might lawfully rise up and execute judgment on this wicked wreatch and his cursed fraternity who have brought by their apostasy and defection from the Covenant and cause of God the wrath and curse of God upon the land 2. That Phineas was the High Priest's sone we know and that he was afterward High priest himself is truth but that he was at this time a publick Magistrate or a member of the great Sanhedrin we see not It is true there were some Princes of the tribes men of renowne Numb 1. ver 16. but he is not mentioned among those neither were these the great Sanhedrin So these princes of the assembly Numb 16 2. were not the Sanhedrin which did consist but of 70 Members Numb 11. Nor was Phineas one of them And that congregation of the children of Israel mentioned Numb 25 6. amongst whom Phineas was ver 7. was not the Sanhedrin which we never finde as I remember so called but the whole body of the People who were then mourning partly for the sin commited and partly for the execution when the heads of the People vvere hanged up and a thousand moe killed by the judges at Moses his command for Paul 1 Cor. 10 ver 8. sayes there died of the plague tvventy three thousand and here vve finde there fell in all tvventy foure thousand Againe it is remarkable that this single act of Phineas in killing two persons is so much rewarded and taken notice of by the Lord yea more then the many who were killed by the judges ver 5. So that it seemes he was no publick Magistrate and that he did it with the approbation of Moses is probable but that Moses did command him we see not only we finde that the Zeal of God moved him and therefore is he highly rewarded though he was but the son of Eleazar the son of Aaron Yea that which the Surveryer citeth out of Deodat rather confirmeth this for Deodat calleth it an act of extraordinary zeal motion of God's Spirit and he addeth that Moses the Supreme Magisstrate did approve it but what needed this if he had been a Magistrate seing there was a command given to the Magistrates ver 5. and a command is more then an approbation Aquinas and Gerhard call him it is true a judge but we see no proof unlesse they could evince that he was a member of the Sanhedrin of which Gillespy speaks in his Aarons rod. lib. I. c. I. The Dutch Annotat. on Psal 106 31. Suppose him to have been no Magistrate but say that this fact was beside his ordinary calling His 2. answere is Pag. III. That suppose he had been a meer private person yet it could prove nothing because he did it with the approbation and good liking of Moses and so he is but the executor of that unanimous sentence Answ But not only is this not written but the scripture giveth another ground of his fact then any warrand or command of Moses And so his answere in rebus facti a non scripto ad non factum non valet consequentia is not to the purpose Now I say the scripture giveth another ground viz. his zeal for his God which is not spoken of the other judges who ver 5. were commanded of Moses to execute judgment yea that word Psal 106 30. then stood up Phineas and executed judgment clearely hinteth at more then his being a meer satelles Magistratus and the ample reward which was given him and the Lord 's counting it to him for righteousnesse speak some other thing then that he had a call of the Magistrate and was his executioner In the 3 place he sayes The cases are different for then was horrible idolatry and villanous whordome committed avowedly and with a high hand in the sight of the Sun and in way of open doing despite to God but it is not so now Answ Prudence might have taught him to have concealed this for it were easy to draw such a parallel as would make him afrayed if any did intend to follow that example For I am sure what ever he account of the present apostasy and how ever he mince it as no doubt zimri would have minced his uncleannesse when he justified the fact before the Council as he told us Iosephus said yet the apostasy and perjury is open avowed abhominable and villanous committed in the sight of the Sun in despite of God and maintained as right and lawful howbeit it be such as the very heavens may be astonished at For such open avovved malapert vvickednesse defection and perjury all things considered vvas never heard of in any generation Hovv our reformation aud confession of faith is maintained vve have heard and albeit he make all the change to be only a change of the exterior forme of Church government yet when he is before his judge he shall finde in the cup of this iniquity manifest avowed perjury overturning of the work of God destroying of the interest of Christ blasphemy near unto that unpardonable sin if not the very same in fathering the works of the right hand of the Most high on Satan open and avowed persecution of godlinesse opening of a gap to all licentiousnesse horrid iniquity increase of idolatry villanous and avowed whordome Sodomy atheisme and devilry and more wickednesse then tongue can tell or pen can paint out but is on clear record before the Lord. 4. Sayes he Let it be so that he was a meer private man and had no warrand from the Supreame Magistrate to do what he did his fact cannot warrand Men to attempt the doing of such acts unlesse they can shew as good warr and and approbation from God as he could Answ That he had God's warrand and approbation vve do not doubt but that it was such an approbation as was peculiar to extraordinary un-imitable acts is the thing in question we grant with him That God is the Lord of all Magistrates and of all men's lives can when it pleaseth him crosse ordinary rules and apppoynt some to execute his judgments extraordinariely but the question is whether every thing which the Surv. accounteth extraordinary is so indeed He may sayes he send Moses to kill the Egyptian Eglon to kill Ehud he should say Ehud to kill Eglon Elias to destroy companyes of men with fire from heaven or to kill Baal's Priests He may command Abraham to kill his sone Isaac he may excite David to a bloody duëel Sampson to murther himself Ans Will the Surveyer account these instances alike extraordinary and unimitable Sure Royalists will think that Ehud's killing of Eglon may warrand any private person now to kill a tyrant without title But I lay more weight upon Iohn Knox his distinction in this matter in his debate with Lithingtoun hist. of reformation Pag. 390. edit in fol. And as touching sayes Mr.
13 v. 10. Unto which he answered That as these places do enjoyn either patience when the clear call and dispensation of God do inevitably call unto suffering without which patience were no patience but rather stupidity of c. So thence to inferre that Men should give way to all violence and sacrilege to the subverting of Religion and righteousnesse is after the manner of Satan to cheat and abuse men by the holy Scriptures The Surveyer replyeth thus I meddle not with his impertinent reflections and scurrile jibes nor vvith his groundlesse inferences vvhich vve have so oft met vvith in the former part The scope is to shew the unlawfulnesse of private revenge for injuries done to us and the place will condemne plainely enough violent retaliating the Magistrate when we think he doth us wrong Answ The scope of the place is obvious and doth no more condemne private persons retaliating the Magistrate then Magistrats retaliating privat Subjects unlesse Magistrates be exempted from this precept and consequently be not to be reckoned among Christ's followers And as from this place it will not follow that one independent King may not make war against another and thereby defend his rights nor that one private person may not defend his rights and just possessions against an invader no more will if follow that Subjects may not defend themselves and their Rights Libertyes and Religion against the violent oppression and Tyranny of Magistrats Next sayes the Surveyer Pag. 269. That every Man in his calling ought to withstand violence and Sacrilege to the subverting of Religion and Righteousnesse is granted Yea privat Men may resist the unjust violence of private Persons and being under the conduct of the Magistrate may resist any that offereth violence in lesser concernments then these are But we still maintaine that this text forbids all revenge or violent retaliation upon the Magistrate though he abuse his power Answ The question is not what he will still maintaine that this text doth forbid but what he can evince that this text will prove against us How will he prove that this text doth more forbid private persons to resist the unjust violence of Magistrats then to resist the unjust violence of privat persons or to resist the unjust violence of any having Magistrats to conduct them Is there any exception in the text Doth not the text speak to all in reference to all To wit that they should resist none out of a Spirit of private revenge Againe though the text forbid all revenge or violent retaliation upon the Magistrate though he abuse his power will it therefore forbid privat Subjects to defend themselves by force in case of necessity from manifest and unjust violence and Tyranny No no more then because the text doth forbid even Magistrats to revenge or retaliate from a Spirit of revenge wicked Malefactors It doth therefore forbid them to execute justice upon them Naphtaly did add that this was grosly to exceed that signal rule mainly in these places intended to wit that we should be perfect even as our Father which is in Heaven is perfect Who though he filleth the Earth with his goodnesse yet doth he love righteousnesse and helpeth and delivereth the oppressed and commandeth the Zeal of his owne glory wherein he himself doth often eminently appeare by the hand of his people to take vengeance on his adversaries To this the Surveyer replyeth What strange argueing is this that because God Almighty executeth vengeance upon his adversaries therefore private persons should follow his perfection in doing the like albeit they have not his warrand or command Answ Naphtaly's Argument ran mainely upon helping and delivering the oppressed Neither doth he conclude what private persons may do without God's warrand or command This he supposed because he had evinced it Then Naphtaly closeth saying Let us therefore in the consideration of what is said Rev 13 v. 10. He that leadeth into captivity shall goe Into captivity He that killeth with the sword c. Both possesse our souls in patience under all the former sufferings and hope and rejoyce in the faith of the succeeding delivery there subjoyned Upon this sayeth the Surveyer he would found the consolation and patience of his party in all former sufferings and his hope and joy in the succeeding delivery Answ And why might he not That word sayes he Rev. 13. toucheth not nor threatens the Magistrate in the executeion of justice but rebels who use the sword without God's warrand against the Magistrate may read their reward in this text Answ We say not that it threatens the Magistrate executing justice But let such see to it who instead of executing justice pervert justice and execute the innocent people of God And after the manner of the Beast there spoken of maketh war with the Saints And so may all rebels against God who use the sword without his warrand But as for privat subjects defending themselves by the sword of innocent self defence against unjust violence and intolerable tyranny and oppression we have proved that they want not God's warrand and therefore they may look for another reward And as for his hope and confidence after expressed we let it passe as not worth the mentioning for when the hope of the Hypocrit perisheth his is like to give up the Ghost Having thus answered all which this surveyer hath said whether in his first part or now in his second against the truth which we have maintained we may saifly say that these valient worthies were basely and unworthyly murthered that there was no just cause to take their lives This man pag. 260. c. Will not have them justified and adduceth for the most part such reasons as make me doubt whether he can be the same man that drew up the first part of this Survey because they are the very same things we heard before in the first part and is it possible the man could have forgotten himself or think that we could so soon have forgotten what we heard in the first part and had answered And if he be a distinct person I wonder what the man meaned to give us the same thing over againe did he ever read these in the first part or had he forgotten that ever he saw them Or thought he that they would have the weight of gold coming from his Mouth while they had not the weight of stuble being uttered by his collegue He beginneth that discourse with palpable untruthes saying That they suffered not upon the account of owneing the covenant Whereas the maine Argument of their indictment was That all convocations and riseing in armes or subjects entering in leagues without or against the King's authority are treasonable Then he tels us That all which they can say for their riseing was that the Magistrate by moderat penaliyes according to law was pressing them to attendance upon the ordinance of God which is an indispensible duty This we heard before and is answered Chap. XVI
this even in Beasts His next restriction is this A man justly condemned to death both according to a just law and by a just process according to law may not use violent self defence against the Magistrate with re-offending him Ans It is granted what then will it therefore follow that this principle of selfe preservation is so restricted as that a whole Land or a considerable part thereof being unjustly condemned both by an unjust law and by an unjust processe according to or without that unjust law may not defend themselves against the Magistrate's Emissaries sent to destroy without respect had either to law or conscience Then he tells us That Lex Rex is too bold and cometh too neare to blaspheme God by saying That it were a mighty defect in divine providence that men should not have as large a liberty to defend themselves violently as Beasts have and that men were in a worse condition then beasts if as Beasts have alwayes power to defend themselves violently with their horns heels teeth c. So men should not have as large a liberty in every case to use violence upon Magistrates putting them to vexation or perhaps troubling them in life states c. But where findes he these words in Lex Rex The author of Lex Rex sayeth Pag. 334. It were a mighty defect in providence to man if dogs by nature may defend themselves against Wolves Bulls against Lyons doves against haukes If a man in the absence of the lawful Magistrate should not defend himself against unjust violence but one man might raise armyes of papists sick for blood to destroy innocent men but this is far from as large a liberty in every case and cometh no way near to blasphemy but is a real truth Suppose Lex Rex had said so which I finde not it had not been apposite to his poynt now while he is speaking of opposeing Magistrates not puting to vexation or perhaps troubling in life state c. but rightly executeing a just law against a malefactor which the worthy author of Lex Rex would never have owned but would have said That the Magistrate was bound to execute Gods Law against men-sworne Apostats such as he and his fraternity are that they were bound to submite to the stroke of justice Thridly he sayes Pag 16. may not the exercise of selfe defence and violent resistence be restrained by the grace of God and the power of his command for submission abiding upon a mans spirit as in Isaac's case who did not resist his aged father going to sacrifice him Ans Whether Isaac made any forceable resistence or not we know not scripture is silent but it tels us his father bound him we acknowledge God is Lord of life but no man is and he may restraine by his will and working on the spirit so as a man who lawfully might flee and save his life shall not have power to do so but abide and glorify him by giving a faithful testimony unto his truth when questioned But thinks he that such instances are binding precedents Sure then he shall contradict his owne doctrine Cap. 4. Or thinks he that a Body of a people or a considerable part thereof shall not exercise lawfully this privilege of self defence violent resistence when neither the Law of God nor such extraordinary force or restraint of God on the Spirit but the vaine pleadings of Court Parasites would have it restrained Fourthly Pag. 17. He sayes May not the defence of our temporal life in some case cease for the preservation of the eternal life of our Neighbour when it comes to that that the defence of the one shall be the certane losse of the other Ans True and therefore He and the rest of the perjured clergy should much more cease from the preservation or ratherusurpation of their places livings and dignities when so long as they domineer there is certane ruine to Religion and to the souls of many thousands And againe if a man may lay downe his natural life for the preservation of of the soul of his Neighbour much more may he with others hazard the same in opposeing unjust violence for the defence of the pure Religion whereby thousands of soulls may be eternally preserved But doth he think that a Nation or a whole countrey-side is to give up their lives to the sword of the Kings mercylesse Emissaries for to preserve the vaine pompe and to fill the bellyes of a few drons whose God is their belly though they should account that their eternal life and all their felicity Fiftly sayes he doth not this obligation cease for the publick good and preservation of the Commonwealth Answer What then doth it follow That Men should renunce their priviledge of self defence when their doing of that shall be so far from promoving the publick good and preservation of the Commonwealth that upon the contrare their doing so shall tend directly to the ruine of the publick good and destruction of the Commonwealth Sure if this be true that a man should lay down his life for the good of the commonwealth It is also true that moe should hazard their lives for the good of the Commonwealth and violently resist violence And doct Ames case mentioned Cas Consc Lib. 5. c.. 31. q. 3. would sute the Prelates well and their adherents so that if he and they loved the good of the Church and Kingdome of Scotland they should give up their necks to the stroke of justice that the wrath of God may be turned away from the land for till these be removed we can not expect any thing but judgement upon judgement from the Lord till we be destroyed Neither doth Naphtaly crosse D. Ames for Naphtaly only speaks of a mans suffering intolerable and inevitable injuries under pretext of the good of the Commonwealth which indeed for a man to do would be for the delusion of an empty name only for the lust of others really to deprive himself of his whole share and interest therein neither would he have ground of hope of getting a better share seing it vvere a great question and doubt if in that case he vvere in the vvay of his duty What he addeth Pag. 18. of a souldiers going to a dangerous post at the command of his General is utterly impertinent Natures instinct vvil teach some dog to stand in the gap to keep out the Bare His last restriction is this That it must cease to preserve the King the Head of the Commonwealth when the case is so that the King must either lose his life or the private man his Ans I grant Lex Rex sayeth I think that a private man should rather suffer the King to kill him then that he should kill the King because he is not to preferre the life of a private man to the life of a publick man But I doubt that it is so agreed among the learned Sure P. Voetius de Duellis Cap. 20. Pag.
tells us That Naphtaly Doth let fall such tenets as smell too rankly of the foul scum of the high flown Anabaptistical and Enthusiastical way while he sayes Pag. 21. c. That meer privat men may now a dayes take their impulses of Zeal as a sufficient call to pull downe all Magistrates from their seats which they abuse to execure judgment upon them and to place themselves in their roomes But of what spirit this man who is of his father the devil who was a lyar from the beginning is vve have seen And this particular will abundantly discover to such as look the place and consider what we have said And no better is the next particular which he citeth out of Pag. 105. Where the author is opposeing that notion of an external call not unto lawful ordination which presupposeth it but unto such a mock ordination whereby such are put into the ministry who have no visible evidence of the call of Jesus Christ as in reason or charity can oblige any to receive such as truely sent Thereafter he draweth the parallel in five particulars The first is this That the Anabaptists laboured to overthrow Magistracy and deny them to have any power in Church matters But can he or dar he say that we do so do we say with them that the office of the Magistrate is not necessary among Christians Do we say that Magistracy is not the ordinance of God Do we say that Kingly government is unlawful as they said abuseing that place 1 Sam. 8 7. Do we say that a Christian may not exerce the office of a Magistrate Do we say that a heathen may not be a Magistrate Do we say that an ungodly Magistrate is no Magistrate Do we presse that place Luk. 22. The Kings of the gentiles c. Any otherwayes then against superiority among Church men With what face then can be draw a parallel here The next is That they studyed to overthrow the ordinance of the ministry declaiming most bitterly against all in that function as Hirelings Thieves Wolves c. But can he say that we cry dovvne a ministery as no ordinance of Christ or as not necessary can he say that we affirme an external call to the ministery needlesse Is it our work to exclude faithful ministers from the esteem of Gods people Hovv can the impudent man alledge this of us Be like because we cry out against him and his fraternity and their reptilia profane wretches of the second-order as no lawful ministers of Chriist being perjured profane apostates never called of God to that functction nor duely and orderly called of Man But in this he and his party come nearer to the Anabaptists then we The. 3. Is that they work division in the Church of God and move people to forsake Church meetings and to follow them in private conventicles But then it seemeth all protestants Who presse Papists to forsake their Masse Assemblies and Masse Priests and rather meet with the Orthodox and that in conventicles are Anabaptists And it seemeth this man would not presse Heathens to leave their publick idol worshipe and serve God in secret conventicles such a publik and peacable Man is he lest he should be accounted an Anabaptist But wee see no connexion betwixt our being Anabaptists and pressing People to forsake Their assemblies and to hear the true and faithful servants of Christ in private who cannot have liberty to preach in publick The 4 is That they were above all men arrogant and proud dispisers of such as were not of their way as being men without God in the world reprobate and wicked denying to them even common civilities But doth not he and his party the most proud and arrogant persones imaginable deal with us all as cursed fanaticks knipperdolians c. What is the 5. When any of theirs were punished for errors fellony or rebellion they cryed them up for martyres and complained tragically that truth and godlinesse was oppressed and that men who would have all things done according to Gods Word were persecuted But might not Heathens and Papists have objected so against the true Christians and protestants who said and did all this when they were persecuted and some of them murthered massacred And were or are all who call account such as die for the Testimony of Jesus martyres persecuted to the death Anabaptists I feare that in so saying he shall be found to befriend the Anabaptist more then we desire to do If he hath no more to say He shall never make it appeare that either Naphtaly or the Apology do approach unto the manners of that odious sect in any particular peculiar to that Sect or wherein that Sect deviateth from truth Then he addeth Pag. 17. When the Spirit that stirreth in these furious writtings especialy in Naphtaly is considered how much confusion may be seen to be portended to Church and State if hearts be infected with the doctrines therein held forth By whom I pray shall these evils be seen to be portended by any thing that is said in these writtings Sure by no rational sober understanding person but only by such who consult the oracle at delphos and minde their belly and worm-eaten carcases more then they consult the oracle God and of sound reason and minde the reall good of either Church or State For there are no doctrines there of any malignant quality but all of them anti-Malignant Solide Plaine Sure and immoveable truthes having a direct tendency unto and necessary influence upon the solide and sure establishing of Church and State upon a firme and lasting basis And therefore if it were right applyed his following wish were good viz. That the Lord would give his people such understanding that they be not ignorant of the wiles of Satan who driveth a deeper designe against this poor Church and Land then the subversion of this or that exteriour forme of Church government For indeed the designe that Satan hath now on foot reacheth furder even to the utter overturneing of all the precious interests of Christ in the Land of destroying not only the outward Libertyes and Privileges of the People which have cost them no small expense of blood to the end they may be made perfect slaves But to the overturning of the whole work of God of banishing the Gospel and of introduceing Atheisme and all sort of profanity and wickednesse that we should no more become the People of the Lord but a visible Kingdome of Satan And all the People Subjects and Slaves to him But we know what his meaning is and therefore he addeth The controversy rests not in matters touching a Bishope or a Presbytery But what thinks he of this controversy He sayes If mens passions or prejudices might permit it might be for the advantage of the gospel well consolidated by their mutual paying of due respects one to another the Episcopal inspection not abrogating but strengthening the due right of presbyters and presbyters not